Because it's an ankle and a grown man accidentally stepped on it?
You're so focused on this guy getting hurt that you're completely ignoring the actual laws of the game.
Is it excessive force if an accidental clash of heads leads to a broken nose?
Rashford's red card - correct decision or badly done by VAR again?
- Thread starter Bastian
- Start date
Because it's an ankle and a grown man accidentally stepped on it?
You're so focused on this guy getting hurt that you're completely ignoring the actual laws of the game.
Is it excessive force if an accidental clash of heads leads to a broken nose?
I'll ask you again to quote the serious foul play definition and explain how what Rashford did fits into it.
He knew the player was coming, it's a coming together, not reckless or use of excessive force.
Both are highlighted below.
It's at most a yellow card.
Because an 80kg man accidentally put his full weight on it.
I can see why you think that way seeing as it sounds like you're made of match sticks and tape. And must have always come out the worst.
I've played football my whole life, both GAA and soccer. Taken and dished out many hits along the way and even got my fair share of red cards. But, aside from being knocked out, I've never sustained any serious injury from a tackle in either sport. I've been stood on like that loads of times, I would always accept it as an accident and move on. Even if I didn't get a freekick.
“Careless” means that a player has shown a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution. (No further disciplinary sanction is needed if a foul is considered to be careless)
“Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent. (A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned)
“Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent. (A player who uses excessive force must be sent off)
Of course I'm focused on the guy getting injured because injury prevention is all the rules we're discussing are about.
And an accidental clash of heads is a poor equivalent. A better equivalent would be somebody using his arms to gain more velocity when going for a header and accidentally breaking the nose of another player he didn't see coming (well, Rashford actually did..) and that would be a clear red as well, even without an injury.
This is another thing that happens all the time, definitely isn’t a red, but will 100% be given on a random given day.
Rashford stepped sideways. He didn't wildly leap into the air and come stamping down.
Your take on this is verging on hysterical.
You don't know the laws you're referencing.
It will incorrectly be given as a red on a random given day, but many clashes of heads go by without either party punished.
So if a player is dribbling with the ball and a defender slides, places his foot at the spot the attacker is about to step, the defender's foot is not close to the ball, the attacker steps on the defender, you are saying that is a foul? That's the exact same situation. The player with the ball has right to space and the defender must tackle and get the ball, otherwise it's a foul.
Rashford's leg and body was preventing the defender a chance to get the ball. That's perfectly legal.
Doesn't matter if it is accidentally or not, he put 80 kg on it --> risking an injury --> excessive force. Quite straight forward.
And I'm happy for you that you're such a tough and manly alpha male but I'm pretty confident that you'd have ruptured your ligaments as well because such fouls have nothing to do with injury proneness.
If that were the case you'd have defenders throwing themselves on the ground infront of players running with the ball, knowing that of they get stood on it's a red card.
Its a red , but the whole thing is bizarre. The whole shielding was not needed and the out stretched leg further than normal didnt help. It can be added to the list of "why did they do that "' video when it comes out in years to come when the jinx has finally lifted and we are on the road to health again.
Excessive force is something like jumping or lunging into a tackle not planting your foot to the ground in a natural movement..
I've picked up injuries, never anything too serious like knee ligaments or broken bones. Maybe an ankle sprain, rotator cuff, dislocated fingers.
But never had anything like a serious injury from a bad tackle or a foul, just been extremely lucky I guess.
Ask away... but I'd only be repeating myself - I've literally responded to your posts where you've (helpfully) copied and pasted it.
If you disagree, that's fine. We don't have to restate ourselves endlessly.
That's been a red card ever since VAR came in. Any time a player's studs make contact with an opponent's leg, accidental or not, whether trying to win or shield the ball, it's been a red. We've seen it multiple times this season, so I knew it was going to be a red as soon as I saw the replay, before the ref was even sent to the screen.
What's all this nonsense about "he just placed his foot where the attacker just wanted to drop his" stuff about? I mean, as if that's even possible. In the scenario you describe, the defender would have to process the movement of the attacker and then move his own foot with superhuman speed
I mean, really visualize it. Both players in a running duel and in the fraction of a second it takes a professional athlete at full speed to lift his foot and place it in the ground again, the defender reads that motion, anticipates where the foot will land and then moves his foot so much faster than the attacker is moving his that he has enough time to shove it under the attacker's studs? 
In reality, in a running duel like this the player wins who is able to shove his body between ball and opponent. The one who "occupies the territory" first and puts the other in a situation in which he would have to foul to get past him. In Rashford's case, he wasn't fast enough to block Jelert's way to the ball and actually hit his foot in a pretty nasty manner.
Have to admit, you guys have a very livid fantasy
what you describe is physically impossible.No they won't because no professional footballer wants the weight of a grown man planted on his ankle. There's some weird victim blaming going on in this thread. Rashford was unlucky, but not as unlucky as the person he fouled.
Apart from that time literally this season where Mac Allister had his red card rescinded despite hitting another player with his studs.
I can see arguments both ways. And ultimately it comes down to the level of force and injury risk. There is a reasonable amount of force in Rashford lunging across to protect the ball, but coming from a standing start, it's less than sliding at pace into a challenge. I don't think he gets a free pass just because he is trying to protect the ball in a standard movement - he still has a duty of care there and has lunged a bit further than necessary to protect the ball in anticipation of the challenge. But there is also an element of responsibility on the part of the Copenhagen player, a duty of care to himself that should be factored in.
Problem with VAR is obvious though - freeze-frames and slow motion distorting force (which is a fundamental part of the rules). The two penalties were diabolical decisions in the context of how the rule was originally intended. The Meada red on Tuesday night was even worse, as there was basically no force whatsoever. I'm all for VAR improving player safety, but it's a mess where it's interpreted by refs many of whom haven't played much football themselves and are struggling to grapple with the new norms and new evidence before their eyes.
Problem with VAR is obvious though - freeze-frames and slow motion distorting force (which is a fundamental part of the rules). The two penalties were diabolical decisions in the context of how the rule was originally intended. The Meada red on Tuesday night was even worse, as there was basically no force whatsoever. I'm all for VAR improving player safety, but it's a mess where it's interpreted by refs many of whom haven't played much football themselves and are struggling to grapple with the new norms and new evidence before their eyes.
Have to admit, you guys have a very livid fantasy
Playing football with out getting serious injuries or describing a players movement as natural?
Fans will moan about unjust red cards all the time.
Remember all the crying from Arsenal fans when RVP got sent off for kicking the ball away because he didn't hear the whistle?
It's all part of the game.
To me this is not a red card, it's careless, reckless at worst, both cautionable offences. But it's not a red because there's no excessive force.
I mean, this is so ridiculous
It really has me laughing right now. Just for fun, I just checked and the time between Rashford lifting his foot from the ground and his foot hitting Jelert's ankle is less than a second, probably around 500 ms. I mean, even if it took Jelert only 250 ms to mentally process based on Rashford's motion where he is going to drop his foot, he'd have to move his own foot with twice the speed of Rashford's foot to plant it in the right spot It is really funny that grown men are convincing themselves that this could possibly be a thing, not to mention the injury aspect you mention. But I guess Oranges is just such a tough guy, he could have professional athletes going at 33+ km/h step on his ankle without getting a scratch 24/7.
Even if it would be possible to do so absolutely no player would do that, becsuse they are not stupid and would risk injury for that.
Lads stop engaging with @Zehner . Man literally thinks that Rashford wasn't able to beat Jelert to the ball. He's either blind or trolling (and the amount of green laughing emojis he's used in this thread would indicate the latter).
Actually... Probably both.
Actually... Probably both.
Come on, that's not fair. Don't tell me you didn't have to laugh at the idea of defenders throwing their ankles under the studs of attackerd in running duels. Just visualize it for a second. Not only that it's physically impossible but also the image of professional athletes doing their utmost to get their ankles broken like cannon fodder. Teams would probably burn through 20 defenders a season.
Those challenges weren't quite the same... but McAllister was at least sent off in that game and VAR didn't overrule it at the time. I can't speak to why it was rescinded, probably to appease the Scousers.
But this season top of my head, Curtis Jones of Liverpool and Gusto of Chelsea have been sent off for challenges which would in times past have been yellow, but once the ref is sent to VaR and sees the studs on the shin, they're always giving a red. That's why I knew Rashford was gone as soon as I saw the replay.
Didnt see the game so went to see the highlights to see what was being discussed ITT. Laughed out loud when i saw the red card as it was a pretty damn obvious one, dont really get the point of this thread TBH.
Rashford took a risk when he tried to shield the ball, he could have successfully shielded the ball and everything would be fine, it just so happened that he didnt really shield the ball and he instead almost snaps the guys leg off by stepping on it. It was a very dangerous and reckless action that could have ended up much worse.
Rashford took a risk when he tried to shield the ball, he could have successfully shielded the ball and everything would be fine, it just so happened that he didnt really shield the ball and he instead almost snaps the guys leg off by stepping on it. It was a very dangerous and reckless action that could have ended up much worse.
I’m still salty about this, tbh.
It was a pure accident and not one caused by a high foot, an elbow or two feet. It's never a red.
Completely accidental, but a definite red card.
It's a potential leg-breaker. Intent or not, you can't let the perpetrator continue playing whilst an opposing player is in the back of an ambulance on their way to hospital.
Complain all you want, but if that incident was committed on a United player, everyone would demand a red card.
It's a potential leg-breaker. Intent or not, you can't let the perpetrator continue playing whilst an opposing player is in the back of an ambulance on their way to hospital.
Complain all you want, but if that incident was committed on a United player, everyone would demand a red card.
Much like Utd fans and Nani.
Can add Rashford to the list of unjust reds that will be brought up for years to come.
Would you call for a red card if that challenge was made on Rashford? I think so.
Nope.
This is the problem, consistency. Clearly accidental but just make it either a red or a yellow and stick to it.
Fair enough.
However, if we're saying these sort of challenges shouldn't result in a red, assuming the opposing player gets up and there was no intent by the offender... Then I think we would be seeing a lot more of these no-look lunges which could be planted on an opposition player's leg. If there is no consequence, then players can mask their true intent by placing one on a player whilst looking in the opposite direction. Footballers are crafty. Eventually, it will result in a serious injury if there isn't a zero-tolerance policy to this.
Disagree but, again, it doesn't actually matter what we think, the refs just have to make up their mind. For the sake of the game they should probably say it is a guaranteed yellow and then VAR can upgrade if there is excessive force or your foot is much higher etc. As it stands though, Rashford's was a red.