SiJ Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: If you break a players leg you have no defence of you're sent off. None whatsoever. I don't see what people aren't seeing about that fact. Because it is idiotic, that's why. Have you ever suffered a serious injury? I've has the pleasure of twisting my ankle on a few occasions and dislocating my knee cap. You would be surprised how often these injuries can happen just by virtue of planting your feet slightly wrong. The point is that perfectly innocuous, soft fouls/tackles can lead to serious injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 9 minutes ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: Yes because they've caused a serious injury. I'm not sure what you arent getting about that. Cause a serious injury, take the consequences. The bloke you've injured has too. I think they take that risk when entering the game of play. Any tackle can result in an injury, you can cleanly win the ball and cause an injury - That would be unfair to give the opposing player a red card, no? It's a contact sport ffs, you know the risks when you decide to play the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birley Owl 1867 Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 4 minutes ago, SiJ said: Because it is idiotic, that's why. Have you ever suffered a serious injury? I've has the pleasure of twisting my ankle on a few occasions and dislocating my knee cap. You would be surprised how often these injuries can happen just by virtue of planting your feet slightly wrong. The point is that perfectly innocuous, soft fouls/tackles can lead to serious injuries. I've broken my arms a few times. Not too serious but painful nonetheless Thing is, I accept that he did it accidentally and in the instances you've described the punishment would be deemed harsh, but would still be avoidable actions committed by the other player and it would have to be punishable by red card. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birley Owl 1867 Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Skyline said: I think they take that risk when entering the game of play. Any tackle can result in an injury, you can cleanly win the ball and cause an injury - That would be unfair to give the opposing player a red card, no? It's a contact sport ffs, you know the risks when you decide to play the game. Do you want to see players get injured? If a challenge was legal and fair, then a player wouldn't be injured on 99% of instances, no? Winning the ball doesn't deem whether a challenge is legal or otherwise in today's laws, so your example would be a foul and red card if the referee feels the player had no regard for the opposing players health. That last bit isn't my opinion either btw, that's what a ref would do in their guidelines. Edited November 5, 2019 by Birley Owl 1867 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: Do you want to see players get injured? If a challenge was legal and fair, then a player wouldn't be injured on 99% of instances, no? Winning the ball doesn't deem whether a challenge is legal or otherwise in today's laws, so your example would be a foul and red card if the referee feels the player had no regard for the opposing players health. So what about a legal and fair challenge, and the player then fell awkward and broke his ankle? You can't stop these things from happening - It's a freak injury that happens in all contact sports. Why only a red card if the player gets injured? Should that not mean all tackles that are not fair and can injure a player should be a red card? Which would be 90% of all tackles in a game of football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmontonowl Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 15 hours ago, Whitechapel Owl said: Not everything that happens is someone's fault, there's such a thing as bad luck. If a player nudges a another player off the ball and he falls and breaks his wrist, is that a red card? Bearing in mind you said 'No questions asked' Not even sending it to VAR? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmontonowl Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 6 hours ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: Although you can argue a broken wrist isn't a serious injury. It can be if you're single 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanye West Posted November 5, 2019 Author Share Posted November 5, 2019 Sorry but it was never a red card. Ridiculous from Atkinson too to change from a yellow to a red after he saw he'd broken his leg. Those sort of fouls happen every single game, it was just bad luck he landed awkwardly / got clattered by Aurier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 4 hours ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: If you break a players leg you have no defence of you're sent off. None whatsoever. I don't see what people aren't seeing about that fact. Have you ever thought your view might be the wrong one when everyone in the thread and many involved in the game don't feel it was worthy of a red card due to the fact the injury took place a few steps after the tackle and occurred as a result of how he planted his foot in the turf. Yes the tackle impacted on how Gomes went down but it was not as a result of the severity of the foul, which in itself was not a 'malicious hack' as you called it. Almost every foul that occurs could result in a player planting his foot badly and causing an injury but it is purely accidental when this happens, completely different to an out of control or poorly timed tackle in which the impact of the player directly breaks the opponents leg. No surprise to see the decision has been overturned but I am sure you will continue to argue anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradowl Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 Son's red card has been overturned, right decision for me, hope he gets an hat trick on Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 Often serious injuries occur when very little happens. A player lands badly, turns awkwardly etc. I've seen it numerous times. Remember a friend of man jarring his knee when someone took the ball off him fairly. Not a slide tackle, just a good interception. Problem was my mates momentum was such that he planted all his weight on his knee and it turned out of position. Was out for several months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birley Owl 1867 Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 2 hours ago, hirstyboywonder said: Have you ever thought your view might be the wrong one when everyone in the thread and many involved in the game don't feel it was worthy of a red card due to the fact the injury took place a few steps after the tackle and occurred as a result of how he planted his foot in the turf. Yes the tackle impacted on how Gomes went down but it was not as a result of the severity of the foul, which in itself was not a 'malicious hack' as you called it. Almost every foul that occurs could result in a player planting his foot badly and causing an injury but it is purely accidental when this happens, completely different to an out of control or poorly timed tackle in which the impact of the player directly breaks the opponents leg. No surprise to see the decision has been overturned but I am sure you will continue to argue anyway. A hack from behind is malicious, attempting to stop a counter attack like he was. I find it disappointing it's been overturned, not surprised though but disappointing. Open season now on being able to injure a player, you just have to claim your challenge was an accident. I mean, its not like every player who tackles someone and injures that player meant to do it is it. Every serious injury can be argued an accident either way if we're being honest. We'll see what develops of that. Open season like I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 21 hours ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: He maliciously hacked him down though. His actions indirectly broke a man's leg, he had to go and if they even think of appealing Spurs are disgraces. 20 hours ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: What the fact he purposely hacked him down? He broke a man's leg, whether he meant to or jor it doesn't matter, he deserved to walk and they won't appeal it and if they do they won't win it. 14 minutes ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: A hack from behind is malicious, attempting to stop a counter attack like he was. I find it disappointing it's been overturned, not surprised though but disappointing. Open season now on being able to injure a player, you just have to claim your challenge was an accident. I mean, its not like every player who tackles someone and injures that player meant to do it is it. Every serious injury can be argued an accident either way if we're being honest. We'll see what develops of that. Open season like I say. So yesterday they shouldn't even think of appealing it, they won't appeal it and if they do appeal it they certainly won't win it. Today - not surprised they won their appeal! It won't be open season at all because every right-minded football follower can see it was caused by accident not the impact of the tackle itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birley Owl 1867 Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 43 minutes ago, hirstyboywonder said: So yesterday they shouldn't even think of appealing it, they won't appeal it and if they do appeal it they certainly won't win it. Today - not surprised they won their appeal! It won't be open season at all because every right-minded football follower can see it was caused by accident not the impact of the tackle itself. I'm not surprised because of the media reaction to it, more than the FA themselves. Son's remorse will have got it overturned, but was sure it wouldn't have. It was caused by Son's challenge, had he not hacked him down he wouldn't have stumbled and he'd be still walking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 Make the stupidity stop. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 I've worked out... Someone tackled Birley and he landed on his head. It's the only explanation. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattitheowl Posted November 5, 2019 Share Posted November 5, 2019 20 hours ago, Westfield Owl said: At this point, given what we’ve seen so far in the Premier League, I don’t understand how anyone that actually likes football can be in favour of VAR. This season we’ve seen refs make some laughably bad decisions. Refs have been given all the technology they have requested. And like you say, they’re STILL making erroneous game-changing (goals, penalties, red cards etc) decisions. VAR was brought in with the intention of reducing controversial referee decisions. It’s done the opposite. The argument that other sports rely on technology is a moot point. Football has so many rules that depend on a referee’s interpretation of the law so there will ALWAYS be gray areas. Meanwhile the spirit of the game is being eroded. Fans and players are hesitating before celebrating goals now. I’ve said it all along that I’m against bringing VAR to football. So I’m not surprised that it has been so bad. I'd argue that rugby has more rules that require interpretation from the ref. And they largely have the TMO system working correctly. Just not bothered... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manwithastick Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 16 hours ago, SiJ said: I've worked out... Someone tackled Birley and he landed on his head. It's the only explanation. Leading to a brain injury? I think I've found the flaw in your theory Birley though. Such a try hard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 17 hours ago, Birley Owl 1867 said: I'm not surprised because of the media reaction to it, more than the FA themselves. Son's remorse will have got it overturned, but was sure it wouldn't have. It was caused by Son's challenge, had he not hacked him down he wouldn't have stumbled and he'd be still walking. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. You could say that about anything, from a football injury to a RTA. Doesn't make it any less of a freak accident. He didn't intend on injuring the player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiJ Posted November 6, 2019 Share Posted November 6, 2019 1 hour ago, Manwithastick said: Leading to a brain injury? I think I've found the flaw in your theory Birley though. Such a try hard Always the same. Sets out his position and then, no matter how often he is proven wrong, continues to maintain it. I kind of admire the persistence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now