|
|
So far the arguments ive heard for it not being a red
- Went for the ball not malicious
- Referees follow the letter of the law to hard and spoil games because it was a 50-50 and he didnt mean to do it
- Since it was a 50-50 play what if Edersen was the person that was late (+ Show Spoiler +wouldve been a fucking red duh..
- If a player doesnt go for that kind of high risk high reward play, managers will chew them out.
- England game is physical.
- If that is dangerous play are we going to penalize overhead kicks aswell? + Show Spoiler +If you kick someone in the head, yes?
- Ederson wasnt all that badly hurt.
English pundits... lol.
|
On September 10 2017 01:05 Rebs wrote:So far the arguments ive heard for it not being a red - Went for the ball not malicious - Referees follow the letter of the law to hard and spoil games because it was a 50-50 and he didnt mean to do it - Since it was a 50-50 play what if Edersen was the person that was late ( + Show Spoiler +wouldve been a fucking red duh.. - If a player doesnt go for that kind of high risk high reward play, managers will chew them out. - England game is physical. - If that is dangerous play are we going to penalize overhead kicks aswell? + Show Spoiler +If you kick someone in the head, yes? - Ederson wasnt all that badly hurt. English pundits... lol.
It was a definite 50/50
+ Show Spoiler +
You expect those comments from blind Liverpool fans, but pundits should know better.
|
I think there's a legit point that these don't get called as red as often as they maybe should, but it doesn't by any means make this one a yellow.
As a Liverpool fan I just hope the calls are consistent on these.
|
consistent calls are what every fan wishes but we will never get them with humans
|
On September 10 2017 01:49 Bacillus wrote:
I think there's a legit point that these don't get called as red as often as they maybe should, but it doesn't by any means make this one a yellow.
As a Liverpool fan I just hope the calls are consistent on these.
Usually if nothing happens players will just get away with a yellow. However I wouldn't mind giving reds just for reckless behavior. I'm sure Mane had no ill intentions but that was just reckless as hell.
|
I found this "he had his eyes on the ball" argument always to be quite ridiculous. If you commit to make an action that could potentially injure someone badly if he gets in your way, then it is your reponsibility to make sure no one is in your way.
I mean, imagine someone causes a car crash, but then is like "not my fault! I was looking at my phone, therefore I could not see the other car."... Glad to hear you seem to agree.
|
That argument was complete nonsense. Neville and the lead commentator first tried to argue that and then, as it became obvious that Ederson got seriously injured, tried to argue that its a contact sport and you should expect to occasionally get studded to the face injured.
Meanwhile Bayern played like complete and utter shit and lost 2-0 to Hoffenheim.
|
Guys, let's be real here. No blood - no foul... And obviously his head was still on his shoulders. So play on and better luck next time. EPL is for real men !
|
On September 09 2017 23:54 Pandemona wrote:
Dave crosses > Morata scores, that's 3 times now in 4 games! Wooo
Alvaro Alvaro he comes from Madrid, he ........ what is wrong with your people bro...
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Well we hate Tottenham and we have a basic culture around neo nazism which is at the heart of the club since the 70s and 80s so it's always going to happen.
However that specific chant imo i didn't think was "too bad" like it isn't nice ofc but Spurs call eachother Yiddos and what not. But ofc they should probably stop in today's world for sure!
+ Show Spoiler [The Chant] +
Alvaro, oh(hhhhhhhhhh), Alvaro, oh(hhhhhhhhhh). He came from Real Madrid, he hates the fucking Yids’
|
On September 10 2017 06:57 Pandemona wrote:Well we hate Tottenham and we have a basic culture around neo nazism which is at the heart of the club since the 70s and 80s so it's always going to happen. However that specific chant imo i didn't think was "too bad" like it isn't nice ofc but Spurs call eachother Yiddos and what not. But ofc they should probably stop in today's world for sure! + Show Spoiler [The Chant] +
Alvaro, oh(hhhhhhhhhh), Alvaro, oh(hhhhhhhhhh). He came from Real Madrid, he hates the fucking Yids’
Spurs can call themselves whatever they want ... might aswell start making hissing gas chambers sounds aswell then...but yeah I dont think its that bad.
Im sure Morata had a fun time getting that explained to him.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Yeah he tweeted to ask for respect haha! But i guess we see if we adhere to the rules, hope they do as we need to be PC this day and age!
He is so good btw <3 glad he ended up with us after watching him somehow on the bench for Real behind Benzema! His hold up play is of course not Drogba/Costa level yet but he is strong and he does better than Costa in terms of running at players when he "holding it up" he has great technique. Should be fun watching him vs Arsenal next weekend
|
Norway28797 Posts
haha 'we have a basic culture around neo nazism' isn't the best defense I've heard, but oh well.
|
Pandemona
Charlie Sheens House51493 Posts
Well it wasn't meant as a defence i just meant it that is what the club is kinda "based" around inside of our hardcore "ultra" fans per se. So these chants and racist incidents that happen are probably alot more common with our fans. We have had many documentaries about it and we nearly ruined our first black players career back in the 80s etc. We are not the best!
Morata is though <3 guys a beast!
|
Vaguely on topic but it was mentioned. Overhead kicks have frequently been ruled out for dangerous play. I have mixed feelings about that because we don't want to lose spectacular goals from the game. There is however quite a big difference in the situation. If you go for an overhead you are probably standing stationary facing away from goal. Mane was running at the keeper. It's obviously a lot worse to accidentally get kicked in the face by someone running at you at full speed whilst you are running out than someone stationary.
In the past overhead kicks have been ruled out for dangerous play but to my knowledge players weren't getting yellows for them. This seems reasonable to me. I think players should be aloud to have a crack at the overhead if they think they have room and it's not dangerous. If the ref decides there was a player too close rule out the goal but don't book the player unless somehow there was something malicious about it (seems unlikely that someone could deliberately try to hurt a player and disguise it as an attempt at an overhead kick). Refs discretion whether it was dangerous play or not. Please don't rule out over head kicks just because the foot is high.
Of course this leaves the refs having to make big calls about whether or not it was dangerous. But that’s kind of their job.
The Mane one is so much more dangerous and players should realise the situation is dangerous.
There have been similar one's in the past. Wasn't Dembe Ba knocked out scoring a goal in a similar situation. I guess that goes to show bravery can have it's rewards and it's not just the keeper at risk of been injurred by the striker. Can't find any links to the goal I'm talking about. I just remeber the scene of Ba looking groggy waking up and people trying to tell him he's playing for Newcastle and he's just scored.
I got a couple of things wrong in my posting yesterday, excuse my drunken inaccuracy.
|
i personally dont really agree with fouls for high boots. i get the rules are there in the interests of player safety but in a game where all you can use is your foot, obviously the players who can get their feet up and get the ball first is going to have the advantage. not sure placing restrictions on how high your foot is allowed to go actually improves the sport.
its also why i agree with henry and neville. the looking at the ball argument is there because it is evidence of lack of intent or malice which imo should be the main factor in a 50/50 challenge.
people say mane was stupid for having his foot high up in that scenario but i think ederson was the real idiot and he paid for it. he knows its a 50/50 and any player who wasnt a pussy would have tried to bring that ball down, yet ederson stuck his head there regardless. the end result is he probably prevented a goal so you cant say he made the wrong decision (from a defending perspective), but i dont think its right to simply card the perpetrator when it really isnt their fault.
a kind of similar incident that i remember which didnt result in a card (im pretty sure) is when diaby knocked terry out in front of goal. foot at body height trying to clear the ball and terry dived for it and got his head kicked instead. terry was the idiot, not diaby and a card rightfully wasnt given
|
If it's one thing we learn in football is that you don't jump to conclusions too quickly. After the Super Cup people here were like Real is so strong Barca is doomed. Meanwhile Real draw 1-1 at home to Levante and Barca thrash Espanyol 5-0 :D and now 4 points behind Barca.
|
On September 10 2017 12:48 Dante08 wrote:
If it's one thing we learn in football is that you don't jump to conclusions too quickly. After the Super Cup people here were like Real is so strong Barca is doomed. Meanwhile Real draw 1-1 at home to Levante and Barca thrash Espanyol 5-0 :D and now 4 points behind Barca.
I mean it doesnt change the fact that Barca are not quite as strong in the long run as Real are. The two games Real has drawn one was against a very good Valencia team (this year so far atleast) that will give anyone trouble and the draw today was one of the days where you have like a gazillion chances, dominate the game, do everything you possibly can and beyond and dont score.
Barcelona has it easy against any league team they are able to take leads against because that forces teams to be vulnerable. Its games like the one Real had today happening to Barca more often than to Real is what concerns people. The game today against Espanyol had some monumental doofus defensive moments when the score was 2-0 where Espanyol could have come back in the game. Both of those first 2 goals were also lucky. That having been said I do think criticism of Barcelona's defensive weaknesses is overblown.
Sometimes this string of form/luck can actually just help a team raise its level through the confidence you get aswell.
But if they do what they did today a few timnes week in week out and they will for sure get punished. The last 2 goals were pure window dressing when the game was over.
There is alot of nuance always, point being if one is to take the past 2-3 weekends results as a basis for denying the claim that Real is not clearly superior to Barcelona (and most other teams) at this time then thats pretty much jumping to conclusions aswell. Its hard to make accurate assessments up until the Christmas period anyway so as it stands how teams did the last season and the off season activity leading up to this one is what would be prudent to go off.
|
I do think Barça played pretty well against Espanyol. Without that offsite goal, it wouldn't have been that easy alright, but the attitude of the players was close to perfect. Messi magic, Alba non stop, Deulofeu trying a lot... Semedo is looking good, Dembélé looks to have a lot of confidence, and even André Gomes looked more in shape than he's ever been at Barça (although it's much easier to come in at 3 or 4-0). Only Iniesta is worrying me. He hasn't signed his new contract and he doesn't seem to be able to play a full game. He was good 20 minutes and then disappeared.
That game against Juventus is going to be pretty interesting, as for now all the teams Barça has faced weren't really strong.
|
On September 10 2017 12:28 evilfatsh1t wrote:
i personally dont really agree with fouls for high boots. i get the rules are there in the interests of player safety but in a game where all you can use is your foot, obviously the players who can get their feet up and get the ball first is going to have the advantage. not sure placing restrictions on how high your foot is allowed to go actually improves the sport.
its also why i agree with henry and neville. the looking at the ball argument is there because it is evidence of lack of intent or malice which imo should be the main factor in a 50/50 challenge.
people say mane was stupid for having his foot high up in that scenario but i think ederson was the real idiot and he paid for it. he knows its a 50/50 and any player who wasnt a pussy would have tried to bring that ball down, yet ederson stuck his head there regardless. the end result is he probably prevented a goal so you cant say he made the wrong decision (from a defending perspective), but i dont think its right to simply card the perpetrator when it really isnt their fault.
a kind of similar incident that i remember which didnt result in a card (im pretty sure) is when diaby knocked terry out in front of goal. foot at body height trying to clear the ball and terry dived for it and got his head kicked instead. terry was the idiot, not diaby and a card rightfully wasnt given
Ederson went out to head the ball at head height and Mane jumped in with both feet of the ground and his own foot hit the head of Ederson and you think Ederson is wrong?
As the rules are applied, if the players foot is above hip height he needs to be certain that he does not endanger the opponent. If you go above hip height and hit/endanger your opponent, especially if you hit him in the head, it is a foul and depending on the situation a yellow card.
However if you are out of control (both feet of the ground) and recklessly risk a serious injury then it is serious foul play, regardless if the original intent was to play the ball, this was a 50/50 situation until Mane decided to go for it with his foot instead of his head, if they knocked heads there would have been no card.
Also on the Terry situation you bring up, this should be a foul too. It isn't a diving header, at most it's chest height, so it likely should have been a foul and a yellow, not a red because Diarby wasn't out of control or completely reckless. He played the ball first but had his foot to high in the follow through.
+ Show Spoiler [Terry v Diarby] +
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/u8RJqU7.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/mP6isGt.jpg)
