Lord Duckhunter Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 Does that make it the correct then? just because a pundit said it... It was every single pundit from the BBC and from BT sport. People on here are hardly neutral are they? Lets see if the ref's board give Foy a break next week for missing it.
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 It was every single pundit from the BBC and from BT sport. It was badly timed tackle irrespective of what the pundits say...Brown very very slightly brushed the ball but smashed into Gaston so as its all about opinions, mine is that it was a foul... Why do people always think pundits are right, that have an opinion nothing more
Lord Duckhunter Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 It was badly timed tackle irrespective of what the pundits say...Brown very very slightly brushed the ball but smashed into Gaston so as its all about opinions, mine is that it was a foul... Why do people always think pundits are right, that have an opinion nothing more I'll take the pundit and the professional ref's view over people with red and white coloured spectacles on. My opinion is saints supporters are concentrating on the outcome and the fact they don't like Brown, rather than the tackle. A tackle shouldn't be judged by who made it and for what side the injured party played for. Most neutrals and certainly most people involved in the game (according to Blackmore , this even included Saints players and Manager) thought it fair.
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 I'll take the pundit and the professional ref's view over people with red and white coloured spectacles on. My opinion is saints supporters are concentrating on the outcome and the fact they don't like Brown, rather than the tackle. A tackle shouldn't be judged by who made it and for what side the injured party played for. Most neutrals and certainly most people involved in the game (according to Blackmore , this even included Saints players and Manager) thought it fair. Personally i could`nt give a toss who made the tackle and judged it on its merits without my specs.. Going by the reaction of the players in the immediate aftermath, they like me thought it was a foul
Whitey Grandad Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 The point is, even if it was not judged a foul it was still 'serious foul play'.
Viking Warrior Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 So giving the ongoing debate what is the latest news on their injuries
Whitey Grandad Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 So giving the ongoing debate what is the latest news on their injuries I don't think we'll know for a couple of days, after the swelling subsides a little.
1576 Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 More importantly, can't see a problem with the Benali tackle.
Kenilworthy Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 I can accept that there is a question of opinion on Brown's challenge. But Foy and his officials clearly failed in their duty of care by allowing play to continue while a player was lying seriously injured on the pitch, that is what I condemn him for. And for continuing play even after Lovren was seriously injured. Had Sunderland scored mayhem would have ensued.
redder freak Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 Vidic got a red card today for a similar tackle.
Barry Sanchez Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 No it wasn't. The FIFA directive specifically covered this type of foul. Quote that scenario from the rulebook if you could.
Barry Sanchez Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 I can accept that there is a question of opinion on Brown's challenge. But Foy and his officials clearly failed in their duty of care by allowing play to continue while a player was lying seriously injured on the pitch, that is what I condemn him for. And for continuing play even after Lovren was seriously injured. Had Sunderland scored mayhem would have ensued. There could be something there for the referee to look at himself but not for us to complain about.
GAS Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 I'll take the pundit and the professional ref's view over people with red and white coloured spectacles on. My opinion is saints supporters are concentrating on the outcome and the fact they don't like Brown, rather than the tackle. A tackle shouldn't be judged by who made it and for what side the injured party played for. Most neutrals and certainly most people involved in the game (according to Blackmore , this even included Saints players and Manager) thought it fair.No pundit will change my opinion on this. It was reckless and a foul. Most pundits are clowns, playing devils advocate all the time. As for that clown Jake on BT..
Lord Duckhunter Posted 19 January, 2014 Posted 19 January, 2014 No pundit will change my opinion on this. It was reckless and a foul. Most pundits are clowns, playing devils advocate all the time. As for that clown Jake on BT.. Was the ref a clown as well, what about the saints manager and players are they clowns. What if the pgmo don't stand down foy , are they clowns?
GAS Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Was the ref a clown as well, what about the saints manager and players are they clowns. What if the pgmo don't stand down foy , are they clowns?Yep.
shurlock Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Was the ref a clown as well, what about the saints manager and players are they clowns. What if the pgmo don't stand down foy , are they clowns? If you were at the game, you would have seen the players reacting and surrounding the ref -not just after the incident and during the stoppage but after the final whistle.
Graffito Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Was the ref a clown as well, what about the saints manager and players are they clowns. What if the pgmo don't stand down foy , are they clowns? Of course they won't stand him down. Did they stand down Clattenburg? It's a refs union. And deference to your betters. Keep tugging the forelock.
Graffito Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Regardless of the fact it's not true, what sort of bellend would ever actually say something like that? http://tui.fansnetwork.co.uk/forum/100038/wes-brown-tackle/#7 The sort that needs reassurance.
Lord Duckhunter Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Of course they won't stand him down. Did they stand down Clattenburg? It's a refs union. And deference to your betters. Keep tugging the forelock. It's nothing do with "tugging the forelock" its to do with my opinion of the tackle. Which was shared by the referee, Alan shearer, Michael Owen, Steve Mac, David James and according to Blackmore ,MP and the players.Perhaps we're all wrong and saints posters on a saints forum are right. If so, the referee will be stood down as mike jones was this weekend. How come some refs get stood down for mistakes but this one won't, it musdt be an anti saints conspiracy !!!
Graffito Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 It's nothing do with "tugging the forelock" its to do with my opinion of the tackle. Which was shared by the referee, Alan shearer, Michael Owen, Steve Mac, David James and according to Blackmore ,MP and the players.Perhaps we're all wrong and saints posters on a saints forum are right. If so, the referee will be stood down as mike jones was this weekend. How come some refs get stood down for mistakes but this one won't, it musdt be an anti saints conspiracy !!! Ok I acknowledge it's your view. He won't be stood down because if he needed to justify his decision he'd do so on the basis of Brown having got a slight touch on the ball. I think that would be spurious but I've made my points on that above. As for the views of players on the tackle, this from Fonte: “That’s another thing that we need to address because it’s becoming repetitive the mistakes against us,” said Fonte, perhaps indicating he feels not enough protection is being afforded to some of the players during matches.
Sour Mash Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 It was a bad foul on Ramirez. Our players obviously thought this was the case as well. Don't really care what a couple of pundits think.
St Jim Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Sorry if this has alredy been covered, havent got time to read all the posts. I can't believe this discussion is still going on. It was a foul regardless of what pundits think (many pundits still think that if the ball is touched by the defending player then it's not a foul, which is factually incorrect). Given the rules state A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: kicks or attempts to kick an opponent trips or attempts to trip an opponent jumps at an opponent charges an opponent strikes or attempts to strike an opponent pushes an opponent tackles an opponent Brown did tackle Ramirez (I still don't think he got the ball but that's beside the point) but in doing so he took out Ramirez ankle which at the minimum is careless (if he wasnt careless he wouldn't have touched Ramirez) and constitutes a foul. The severity of the tackle is of opinion (whether it's careless, reckless or using excessive force). IMO it was just reckless but I certainty think there's a last man issue to consider which I would argue could have given the ref cause to send Brown off.
SOTONS EAST SIDE Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Right he might of got a touch on the ball, but his tackle was un controlled. If it was he would not of followed through on Gaston, thus taking him out(deliberate). As i think Gaston would of had a chance of still getting the ball, as Brown's touch on the ball was so slight.
shirleysfc Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Rafael got the ball yesterday and ended up with a yellow but should have got a red. No one was injured either.
Whitey Grandad Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Quote that scenario from the rulebook if you could. I covered this in post #194. The directive was back in 1998 but if anything the directive has now been extended: The wording was changed later (several times) . The wording of law 12 is now: 'A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play.' Note the word 'tackle' and not 'foul'.
Whitey Grandad Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Right he might of got a touch on the ball, but his tackle was un controlled. If it was he would not of followed through on Gaston, thus taking him out(deliberate). As i think Gaston would of had a chance of still getting the ball, as Brown's touch on the ball was so slight. This is the point. There was no way that Brown could win that tackle without causing Gastón some sort of injury.
Viking Warrior Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Whitley I am aware the general rules are 48 hrs minimum non weight bearing , ice to reduce any swelling . Just trying to find out if it was ligament or just severe bruising
derry Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 In my experience any time a tackler makes physical contact they are nearly always penalised. If the goalkeeper dives for the ball and the follow through takes out the attacker a penalty is the result. If this tackle had happened in midfield Brown would have been penalised. Ramirez was injured by the sole of Brown's boot impacting above his ankle from behind. How can anyone argue that the rule wasn't broken.
studentsaint Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Lovren has literally just tweeted a picture of himself on crutches with his leg heavily strapped up. He says "heading to therapy, be back soon" sounds like he's out for a while.
dellboypete Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 what's the latest news then? (on the injury that is - as I can't be bothered to read through the various arguments on "was it" or "wasn't it" a foul?)
Mikey88 Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 @DejanLovren05·8m Ready for therapy l will be back soon !! pic.twitter.com/IePQp2HbiE
Barry Sanchez Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 It dates back to 1998: http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/footballdevelopment/news/newsid=70380/index.html The wording was changed later (several times) . The wording of law 12 is now: 'A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play.' Note the word 'tackle' and not 'foul'. I've found various later discussions: http://www.bettersoccercoaching.com/soccerforum/Topic26-4-1.aspx http://asktheref.com/Soccer%20Rules/Question/18391/ Is it a tackle if the player touches the ball first?
Essruu Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 I don't think we'll know for a couple of days, after the swelling subsides a little. The club and players know full well what the extent of the injuries are; I guess they are just not wanting to release full details yet. (One is a lot worse than the other, but not as bad as initial thoughts/reactions suggested.)
Barry Sanchez Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 This is the point. There was no way that Brown could win that tackle without causing Gastón some sort of injury. You cant know that Whitey, every game there are challenges for the ball whereby a player puts his leg around the others to get the ball away. That is not illegal, Sunday League might as well pack up and finish.
St Jim Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 (edited) You cant know that Whitey, every game there are challenges for the ball whereby a player puts his leg around the others to get the ball away. That is not illegal, Sunday League might as well pack up and finish. B0110x, If he touches the player in a way that impedes the attacking player (let alone seriously injuring the player), even if the he touches the ball first, the tackle is careless and therefore (per the rules of the game) warrants a free kick. Edited 20 January, 2014 by St Jim
Barry Sanchez Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 As I said its down to interpretation, was that tackle careless enough to warrant that? Should every challenge now if a player gets injured afterwards be a red card? The referee thought it didn't, formers players didn'y and yet the Saints forum think it did, there is a shocker.
Kingsbridge Saint Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 We need to send out Wanyama and a few of our heavies to follow through on tackles and see how far they get.
alpine_saint Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 If Neil Ruddock were still playing for us. Wes Brown would have been dog meat.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 If Neil Ruddock were still playing for us. Wes Brown would have been dog meat. Or Mark Dennis...
Whitey Grandad Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Is it a tackle if the player touches the ball first? Yes, it's a tackle. Did you mean to ask 'is it a foul?'. Yes, it can be if the action is deemed excessive, or dangerous.
bender Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Lovren has literally just tweeted a picture of himself on crutches with his leg heavily strapped up. He says "heading to therapy, be back soon" sounds like he's out for a while. Depends if its just bruising keeping him on crutches.
thefuriousb Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Lovren has literally just tweeted a picture of himself on crutches with his leg heavily strapped up. He says "heading to therapy, be back soon" sounds like he's out for a while. Can you commence therapy 2 days after breaking a leg (if that is the prognosis)? - a genuine question.
Sour Mash Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Can you commence therapy 2 days after breaking a leg (if that is the prognosis)? - a genuine question. He hasn't broken his leg though.
Turkish Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 (edited) *********Turkish exclusive*********** Lovern will be out for a round a week with an ankle sprain Ramirez will be out forup to 10 weeks with a chipped Ankle bone FACT Edited 20 January, 2014 by Turkish
Viking Warrior Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Chipped ankle bone could be less than ten weeks Turkish dependent where it is chipped
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 If my mate went down with an ankle sprain and got carried off on a stretcher with oxygen he'd get an absolute hammering in training and I hope Lovren does too However, fantastic news for both of them as it could have been far far worse.
Saint Charlie Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 We will miss Ramirez, just when he started to come good. Surely need another attacker?
Window Cleaner Posted 20 January, 2014 Posted 20 January, 2014 Chipped ankle bone could be less than ten weeks Turkish dependent where it is chipped Victor has been out for about 8 weeks so far (well 7 and a half) so somewhere between 8 and 10 by the time he's back to full fitness then. It surely depends on the nature of the "chip" and the individual though.
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