CoopersDream
Full Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2021
- Messages
- 812
If you come in that high with studs up you're always risking getting a red. It's a stupid challenge first and foremost.
If that's a red, how's this not a foul?
Took me to the reverse angle to even work out who committed the foul. Thought it was the player in blue catching the guy on the ground similar to pogba against arse a few years agoThe only reason I can see he might give a red (and I disagree if that was why) was around 45 seconds, there’s an angle where DCLs boot doesn’t get the ball, maybe nicks the player (who seems to dive) and the ref deems that dangerous.
I get you can raise your studs and it be deemed dangerous play without contact (in theory) but that’d have to be head height style stuff and not this one.
https://x.com/nocontextfm1/status/1743027025680511311?s=61&t=ZvGzfV2Qafn11jKrPfufuA
We need to make a formal complaint to the FA now like Liverpool and Arsenal have done. It's a joke that for the past month we have had decision after decision decide the fate of our games and VAR is at the head of them making bad decision after bad decision.
We need to make a formal complaint to the FA now like Liverpool and Arsenal have done. It's a joke that for the past month we have had decision after decision decide the fate of our games and VAR is at the head of them making bad decision after bad decision.
Was it very little force in the tackle? I have only seen a replay of the VAR call in slow-motion and it looks a clear red. Clyne pulls out of the tackle which is the only reason DCL hasn't caught him more. He's not in control of the tackle and is endangering another player. Potential leg-breaker if Clyne doesn't minimize the contact. It should not be judged based on the outcome of the tackle.
There is your problem. Not in slow mo you can see that the rest of your post is wrong.
That's why I asked if it was very little force in the tackle, so was it? What would happen if DCL's straight legged shin-high tackle hits a planted leg? (Which only doesn't happen because Clyne minimizes the contact in the last second)
Was it very little force in the tackle? I have only seen a replay of the VAR call in slow-motion and it looks a clear red. Clyne pulls out of the tackle which is the only reason DCL hasn't caught him more. He's not in control of the tackle and is endangering another player. Potential leg-breaker if Clyne doesn't minimize the contact. It should not be judged based on the outcome of the tackle.
Maybe you should just watch it not in slow mo.
No idea why you're making up a situation that hasn't happened.
Maybe you should just watch it not in slow mo.
No idea why you're making up a situation that hasn't happened.
I agree.
However, this isn't the practice the refs have been following all season, where they've more or less only looked at where the studs end up. Nketiahs tackle attempt on the Tottenham goalkeeper was about 5 times worse than this. Havertz in the newcastle match. Kovacic on Ødegaard? It's a bit weird to go from that and suddenly concluding that DCL's tackle is serious foul play
Because that's how the referee's judge the situation. It's not judged based on the outcome of the tackle. You should probably learn the rules
The point is that serious foul play takes into consideration if you are endangering the safety of the opponent or not, and it's fairly obvious that in DCL's case it's fine fecking margins between barely missing the opponent and hitting him straight on, we're talking a few cm's.. It's a bit like drunk driving and arguing you shouldn't be punished because you didn't end up in a crash.
Bizarre analogy to make.
How so? you just quoted a tweet highlighting that DCL missed the opponent, as it's some sort of excuse, It's irrelevant. DCL is cm's away from planting his studs halfway up Clynes leg but due to pure coincidence he missed.
The problem is that the referees seem to be completely incapable of applying that logic consistently, as shown by the amount of nasty tackles this season where the player has received only a yellow card on the basis that he missed the opponent.
I agree with you. It's a major issue that it's zero consistency. Makes it difficult for the players and also creates discussion when fans and pundits don't know/understand the rules.
Explained why. Because it's not reckless. There is no excessive force and it's a clean tackle. Choosing to drink drive is a reckless decision, this tackle was not.
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
1. If you watch the incident not in slow mo you'll see that Clyne doesn't pull out of the tackle at the last second.
2. You'll see there is no excessive force.
3. You'll see DCL wins the ball cleanly.
It's an absolutely nonsense decision.
It's a reckless decision to jump in with your foot in such a height that if you do connect with the opponents, it's halfway up his leg with the potential to cause serious injury. The tip of his boot is just below Clyne's kneecap...You can also quite clearly see that DCL connects with him, just enough to the side that the boot slides off so that all the force isn't on Clyne's leg.
Come on. It's by no definition whatsoever a clean tackle, and excessive force is a consideration and not a criteria.
1. I have and Clyne does minimize the contact.
2. Again, you don't know the rules It does not have to be excessive force for it to be deemed a red card offence.
3. Does not matter since he is deemed to be endangering the safety of an opponent.
Just answer the question, what would have happened if his straight legged shin-high tackle hit Clyne's planted leg? (Which was seconds from happening)
It doesn't have any potential to cause serious injury or endanger the safety of the opponent because there is no excessive force or intensity behind the studs up.
If I kick you as hard as I can in the leg with my foot or put my foot on your leg with the lightest touch with studs, which endangers you more? Clearly the former.
You’re inventing scenarios. Calvin isn’t standing still, he’s running (albeit from short distance) to reach the ball ahead of Clyne and there’s enough intensity for him to slide, so obviously it’s going to have the potential to cause serious injury if his foot is 2-3 cm further to the right and Clynes leg is what takes the force from a moving Calvin. How Clyne plants his leg is a coincidence, Calvin barely missing him is a coincidence, going into a sliding tackle with your foot at such a height that the tip of your toe is at kneecap level isn’t.
This, along with tackles like Nketiah’s, Havertz, Udogie on Sterling, Kovacic on Ødegaard, should be red cards
Just because there's enough intensity to slide it doesn't mean there is enough intensity in the challenge or force in it, hence why there is little to no follow through from DCL and he basically stops where the tackle is made. He doesn't go through the player. It's a fair and clean tackle. We will have to agree to disagree as we obviously see it completely differently.
We need to make a formal complaint to the FA now like Liverpool and Arsenal have done. It's a joke that for the past month we have had decision after decision decide the fate of our games and VAR is at the head of them making bad decision after bad decision.
It's weird to look at Udogies two-footed lunge at Sterling, where he came in with more force, and how VAR upheld the decision of a yellow card, only to move over to the DCL tackle and see VAR recommend a red card.
We need to make a formal complaint to the FA now like Liverpool and Arsenal have done. It's a joke that for the past month we have had decision after decision decide the fate of our games and VAR is at the head of them making bad decision after bad decision.
The only dubious decision out of those three was the red card.
Obviously wasn't a red card, but no one cared when it was Casemiro in a similar situation.
The penalty about was farcical, absolute desperation to claim that incident was a penalty, and the Hughes challenge wasn't malicious, just slightly mistimed and not really worthy of much more then a few kick.
I expected Udogie to be sent off for that but I think what saved him was that his feet were low and he won all of the ball and took none of Sterling.
Calvert-Lewin's had less force and was one footed but his foot was high and does connect with Clyne. I don't like it being a red but that's the age we live in.
Just look at the reaction:
Vs
To me they are both not red cards.
Udogie took none of Sterling because Sterling saw him flying in and pulled out, also it’s not a criteria to actually hit the opponent, it was fine margins.. Udogies feet were «low» in the sense that he lunged in more downard, but if he’d connected with sterling it would’ve been ankle height. Absolutely mental decision not to recommend a red card.
I’m pretty sure Kompany got sent off for a tackle on Nani that Nani jumped over.Can you think of any other example though where a player has been sent off for winning all of the ball and taking none of the opponent? You routinely see yellows for it and you see reds where a player has won the ball initially before making contact with the player but I can't recall reds being given when a player hasn't even touched the other.
Just look at the reaction:
Vs
To me they are both not red cards.