Match Day Thread Athletico Madrid v Liverpool

Discussion in 'Liverpool' started by Solid_Air 2, Oct 16, 2021.

  1. moreinjuredthanowen

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    96,024
    Likes Received:
    20,375
    The rule has no mention of the word deliberate or accidental. You cannot have the excuse of "I didn't mean it" with serious fouls play as he has endangered his opponent, it is reckless and excessive force

    Greizmann fall foul of the endangering an opponent clause. There is no accidental excuse in it.

    BTW at this point I can't believe mane has not been sent off for elbows. He is constantly at it and will get done in Europe some day.

    You need to view your keita question the same way. Show me a picture of where an opponent is endangered mate <ok>
     
    #401
    DivockMcFerrin likes this.
  2. Sir Barrington Womble

    Sir Barrington Womble GC Spam Champion

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    21,258
    Likes Received:
    9,833
    This overhead kick or raising your foot to head height malarkey - could there be a redder herring? Serious foul play is not like offside, where you are or you are not, or like the technology if the ball crosses the line: it's subjective, and the ref's decision. The clue is in the framing of the rule including :

    SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

    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.

    From Law 12.

    So Bale doing an overhead worldie yards from anyone in the CL final (****) is fine: Mane sticking his foot six foot in the air just as Emerson goes to head it is not. There's shades of grey in between, but that is down to the judgement of the ref. Griezman stuck his boot in Bobby's face, and even if intent is questionable (or impact) it's the very definition of the above. A kick to the head by a raised foot at that height COULD endanger an opponent, even if the result is no injury. Same as a two-footed lunge, even if no injury is caused. That's more by luck than judgement.

    Can it go to bed now? :biggrin:
     
    #402
    saintKlopp and DivockMcFerrin like this.
  3. johnsonsbaby

    johnsonsbaby Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    17,380
    Likes Received:
    7,805
    It's sort of similar ... maybe ... to two players coming together and clashing heads. There's a difference between the two coming together simultaneously and one heading and one not. The former is accidental, the latter could or couldn't be which is where context comes in.
     
    #403
    DivockMcFerrin likes this.
  4. Zanjinho

    Zanjinho Boom!
    Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2014
    Messages:
    36,566
    Likes Received:
    21,121
    You're not supposed to go into a challenge with your studs showing, that in itself a dangerous play that can warrant a red card. It's impossible not to show studs if your foot is at head height. Only thing left is whether it endangers an opponent; judgement call if there is no contact, if there is contact than you're bang to rights.
     
    #404
  5. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    The Naby thing is hypothetical mate was saying just imagine a defender blindsiding him on that strike coming in a millisecond late with his foot at its highest point and getting smashed on the follow through in the mush and it resulting in a massive gash (which timing wise is pretty much what happened with Mane he was trying to control the ball not knowing edersons head was enroute)
    Would he go - even though he was focussed on his strike and someone ran in on him
    And it is possible

    So no pic lol
    Even if there was I wouldn’t have a clue How to get it on here lols

    I know I am not explaining myself right cause of the answers I am getting
    Lmao
    But it doesn’t matter
    Not looking to change views - I just disagree with everyone lmao (Tbf I know others with my view but not many lols)
     
    #405
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2021
  6. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    No lol
    Cause the mane one at no point did he see Ederson coming and he was in an area of the pitch where Emerson’s head should not have been
    And ederson definitely bowed down

    but yet he got red

    same incident almost identical that weekend with Swansea not even a free kick

    This is definitely the topic which hits my button lmao

    I just can’t resist it lol
     
    #406
    Sir Barrington Womble likes this.
  7. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    Bugger lmao
     
    #407
  8. Sir Barrington Womble

    Sir Barrington Womble GC Spam Champion

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    21,258
    Likes Received:
    9,833
    Do you realise just how wrong that statement is on so many levels? :embarrassed:
     
    #408
    saintKlopp and DivockMcFerrin like this.
  9. moreinjuredthanowen

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    96,024
    Likes Received:
    20,375
    then naby gets sent off. I think there's an example of that but i cant recall who. getting the ball is irrelevant to excessive force.

    say a guy blasts his foot into a ball the keeper is diving on . he'd be called for it too.

    please log in to view this image

    in the end mane went high with a boot but could have gone with the head maybe and he's off the ground with a straight leg. Its also excessive force.

    IMO firmino got off easy as he didn't get cut.

    please log in to view this image


    We have an example here. a tragic incident

    please log in to view this image


    the poor fella just got his in the wrong area and it crushed the arteries. these are life and death injuries potentially if you get a guy with a bladed boot i nthe wrong place.
     
    #409
    Sir Barrington Womble likes this.
  10. Sir Barrington Womble

    Sir Barrington Womble GC Spam Champion

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    21,258
    Likes Received:
    9,833
    The problem here is that Emerson has no right to head the ball. I think? <whistle>
     
    #410
    DivockMcFerrin likes this.

  11. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    Yep it was deliberate <laugh>
     
    #411
  12. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    Okay I understand that as I keep saying
    I understand why the red

    don’t show a picture of a tragic accident and go here look what can happen
    If someone smashes a volley and it hits someone flat in the face 7 yards away untold damage can occur
    People have been knocked out cold like that
    I saw a volley into face and head int metal fence at five a side
    You can’t rid the game of all these possibilities
    You just cant
    So what stop volleys
    Those injuries can happen from someone volleying a ball anytime
    From a goalkeeper punching the ball
    Someone making a back (totally with solid on this - watch replay of how vvd landed 1/2 a foot from a serious injury)
    I understand he studs up bit but as I have said other situations lead to studs up too

    I think we are making these decisions on the oooof factor which if is the case is totally down to opinion

    however no one is really able to put their finger on proving the rule exactly or explaining a difference

    force keeps coming as a defining part and if force is a define part - lucky or not Grez didn’t go in with force and therefore shouldn’t be punished if he had IF force is the key point.

    gerrard got sent off for intent once
    But loads of others haven’t

    when you can explain why Swansea got away with it and countless others nearly every week
    (I went through a phase of counting and posting every week when one happened just on high feet next to players alone)
    When you can post something definitive I will happily listen

    up to now I have heard or read nothing that changes my thoughts of
    By the rule (yet unexplained properly) it’s a red
    But I thought it was harsh as I think he was judged on what might have happened rather than what did

    if force comes into the mane one is a red and grez wasn’t
    But it isn’t just force and the rule certainly isn’t fit for purpose as there are so so so so many examples every week where this kind of thing happens and there isn’t even a free kick let alone a red

    and that is all I am saying
     
    #412
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2021
  13. moreinjuredthanowen

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    96,024
    Likes Received:
    20,375
    And I'd agree with you on decision making in general especially around the heading and such.

    We enable people like suarez and kane trying to injure people by not actively signalling its outlawed and you will be off.

    You are.mixing your drinks on force. Its not exclusively to do with force as the rule is written.

    The rule states endangering opponent.

    I can stand still and raise my foot waiting for someone to run into it and I'm endangering someone.

    Now if you said to me hey keepers are allow smash a knee into anyone the feel like and that's wrong then I'd totally agree. I had a sunday league team mate who didnt just lead with knee for some self protection but put the whole boot straight out and dared anyone to come near. I think keepers are allowed get away with murder.

    The rule covers a multitude of possible offenses from sticking your boot up or sliding in two footed. It's got 3 mini clauses in there trying to cover everything.

    I would prefer they break the rules out in detail and deal with head injury. High boots = off and people would stop raising the boot.

    Elbows etc.

    Head contact should be reviewed by var. We have massively different standards from a hand off type contact to a full on jump in from the side and smash for elbow into your opponent.

    Imo yes they could improve the rule but imo it should restful in even less contact allowed
     
    #413
    DivockMcFerrin likes this.
  14. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    I think we are on common ground
    I am just the other way round lmao i think
    I don’t think you can take the dangers out of the game
    Do I want to see injuries
    No not at all
    Not even a little bit
    I think it’s impossible for the rule to cover the issue satisfactorily
    I mean proper impossible

    I think I said this earlier but my daughter was caught by a flailing hand the other day

    was it dangerous - yes
    Did she swing her arm massively - yes
    Blood everywhere
    Was it intentional- no way
    Did it hurt my daughter - yes
    Her entire previously not wobbly tooth came out
    (If I knew how to do pictures I could show you)
    It was not even a free kick
    With what we are discussing the oppo player should have saw red
    But I don’t think she should
    Just like I didn’t with Grez
    However I absolutely think Suarez should have gone - his was nasty and deliberate
    Just shooting the breeze as you said :)
     
    #414
  15. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    Please stop baiting me on it cause I don’t think I can not reply lmao <laugh>
     
    #415
  16. moreinjuredthanowen

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    96,024
    Likes Received:
    20,375
    Should've sent her to her room for 10mins.

    But seriously this is where we talk workplace and later life injuries and issues.

    If I choose to dive of the edge of a pool into the shallow end and break my neck it's my fault.

    If i am employed and told to jump in head first then it's my employers fault.

    My employer doesn't want me to break my neck but have taken no care about it.

    Football is a workplace. Eventually the concussion thing will come in.
     
    #416
    DivockMcFerrin likes this.
  17. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    <cheers>
     
    #417
  18. sadiosalah

    sadiosalah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2020
    Messages:
    963
    Likes Received:
    348

    Not wanting to prolong the argument, I think that your daughter’s episode provides the key to the issue. If it’s deemed to have been accidental then obviously nothing is done. If however it had been a foul, then the player would have been sent off. Duty of care and all that. Refs have almost no choice if they deem it a foul, accidental injury or not.
     
    #418
  19. DivockMcFerrin

    DivockMcFerrin Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2011
    Messages:
    8,797
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    Aaargggh
    You git
    Lmao <laugh>
    I think greez was accidental and no force so no red - that’s what I thought was harsh - I think a yellow would have sufficed- which is what started all this lmao
    The rule is dangerous play
    So red I get it
    But I think it’s wrong
    You all think I am wrong

    let’s hope nothing like this happens Sunday

    you lot are all gits lmao<laugh><laugh><laugh><laugh><laugh>
     
    #419
  20. sadiosalah

    sadiosalah Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2020
    Messages:
    963
    Likes Received:
    348

    Haha. But that’s the whole point. It’s either not a foul I.e nothing or a red. They are not allowed to give a yellow in these circumstances.
     
    #420

Share This Page