But that's not even close though, this is more like Pickford on Van Dijk. As long as he got the ball then everything else no longer matters? Also it doesn't matter if he didn't intend it to be a tackle, it ended up as one, studs up and like two feet off the ground
Day 17: England vs Germany | Sweden vs Ukraine (Ro16 7&8)
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Don't go off your feet with your studs up unless you are 100% sure there is nobody close enough to get in the way of you.
It's not that difficult. By issuing red cards for it, regardless of intent, we dissuade players from putting other players careers at risk in the future. By not giving red cards, we do exactly the opposite.
Yeah pretty much spot on.
Wouldn't have been a red 10 years ago or even without VAR but one slow motion look and ref had a look. He was going to send him off just looking at first still replay of where the leg was without seeing context of the challenge beforehand aswell.
You could make that argument about every red card challenge (or lack of challenge in this case) but at the end of the day there was only one player left with his studs planted at knee height of the other player, and it is that player that is always going to get punished.
I always enjoy reading the you must never have played football line
The game just isn’t better for all of these petty fouls. Intent should be important but it’s just ignored in the modern game. There’s jugs absolutely no way that should be a red.
So the red is for the outcome rather than the incident
I agree with you cos the guy isn't challenging an opponent for the ball or lunging into a tackle, he's clearing a ball and the opponent ran into him.
I guess thats a red too?
I missed the challenge myself and saw the picture first. It does certainly make it look worse (but I still think it was a red).
So you can now just karate kick the ball and if the opponent is too late to get the ball, and gets hit thigh high with your studs, he's now at fault?
Just as red
Another head injury for Sweden, nasty one from another follow through.
Are they allowed to make another sub?
Are they allowed to make another sub?
shouldnt that be a red as well? a followthrough that means he kicks a player in the head?
Brutal game this! Absolutely beautiful
I don’t understand the solution. I played for 2 decades as a semi pro, some of it in the conference and I don’t know what I could do as the defender there?
Red card for Ukraine follow through there then for example? He left the floor and clearly endangered Berg.
Shouldn’t the Ukrainian get a red for that “challenge”?
I always enjoy reading the you must never have played football line
I got distracted mid post and thought I'd deleted that.Now the Ukraine player should have a red, that was even more wreckless
Should be a red, to be honest. A connection to the chest is far more dangerous than a knee.
So is this a red too?
surely a red?
Should be a red for the ukrainian as he followed through with the knee in his face.
Anyone who has played football at a level other than professional would never be sent off or been get a yellow card for that challenge, who is wrong?I always enjoy reading the you must never have played football line
Knee to the head must be a red as well then?
Very wierd tactics by Ukraine. Man up and playing for pens.Go and freaking attack you idiots.
Both teams trying to win the 'who can stay on the ground the longest' game.
Red card to Ukraine now using same logic.
Precisely
Terrible finish but offside anyway
Do we have a lot of biased Swedish supporters here? Or has this place lost its mind?
Why arent they checking this challenge?
People are exaggerating a bit saying the Ukranian player ran into the challenge... it's 50/50, they definitely meet each other.
Also the Ukranian player isn't miles away, and Danielson isn't in control of the ball... its a challenge and a lunge for a loose ball and frankly you can't challenge that high when an opponent is around. It is dangerous.
Also the Ukranian player isn't miles away, and Danielson isn't in control of the ball... its a challenge and a lunge for a loose ball and frankly you can't challenge that high when an opponent is around. It is dangerous.
So you'd want Rashford to not go after a reachable high ball in a crowded penalty area in the Champions League final because he might hit an opponent?
The ball is not even in the frame. The defender cleared it cleanly well before and attacker comes way late into the challenge. Tough on the defender and sorry for the attacker. I guess it had to be given but it's unfortunate for both.
Honestly it should be a red for the Ukrainian for endangering himself if anything.
Should it have been a red if Danielson cleared with the head first as well? It was the Ukrainian who was late af and should have went a different direction.
So not a penalty then? Or foul play by the Ukrainian by earlier standards?
Can someone explain why that is not a red according to your logic??