What action would you take here?

Gelio

3 game ban (as per red card)

Clumsy challege imo. Nothing more. Wow he must have come down hard to break it like that

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

How on earth are poeple here stating there was no malice, and it was just a bad tackle, no intention etc etc???

Did you people even look at the video??


Here clearly stares straight at the other player, lunges in full force, studs up, and get nowhere near the ball.

There was as much intention and malice in that tackle as I have ever seen. There was no even sign of remorse from the man.

He should be punished SEVERELY for his actions. Disgraceful.

Gelio

3 game ban (as per red card)

He didn't mean to break the guys leg in two!
The weird bit was how he didn't seem worried about the guy on the ground but maybe he didn't realise how bad it was

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

ajeffares wrote: »

He didn't mean to break the guys leg in two!
The weird bit was how he didn't seem worried about the guy on the ground but maybe he didn't realise how bad it was

He stares straight at the guy, not at the ball. He jumps in with studs up, intending a hard tackle, nowhere near the ball, then smirks as he gets the red card????

That was as intentional as you're gonna get for a bad tackle. He meant to do your man in, whether he knew he was gonna snap his leg in two or not is irrelevant.

Unearthly

I can't believe he looked shocked when he got the red card.

Gelio

3 game ban (as per red card)

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

He stares straight at the guy, not at the ball. He jumps in with studs up, intending a hard tackle, nowhere near the ball, then smirks as he gets the red card????

That was as intentional as you're gonna get for a bad tackle. He meant to do your man in, whether he knew he was gonna snap his leg in two or not is irrelevant.

Fair point I just can't believe a person would do that

General Zod

In slow motion it looks alot more like intent, at full speed it looks like a clumsy tackle.

3 game ban is enough.

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

General Zod wrote: »

In slow motion it looks alot more like intent, at full speed it looks like a clumsy tackle.

3 game ban is enough.

You mean because he's running at the guy, not the ball? Because he lunges straight at the player, studs up, with standing leg fulling supported?

If they don't start punishing these guys appropriately for tackles like that, they'll happen again and again.

He deserves at LEAST a 10 game ban, with possible charges and a massive fine.

General Zod

He's running straight at the ball, he put his foot out to try and trap the ball, the other guy gets in first.

Don't get me wrong, it's a terrible tackle, but I doubt he went for the guys leg.

therecklessone

dannydiamond wrote: »

Keane got a 5 match ban and a £150,000 fine.
Sickeningly lenient considering this was dealt with at an FA hearing.

Incorrect.

He got a 3 match ban and a very small fine for the sending off.

After this:

I'd waited long enough. I fúcking hit him hard. The ball was there (I think). Take that you cúnt. And don't ever stand over me sneering about fake injuries.

He was charged with bringing the game into disrepute, and banned for a further 5 games plus a £150K FINE.

Mr Maroon

Punishement is known, he's banned until 23/11, that makes it 10 league matches and 1 cup match.
Uefa might also take action so he might miss some CL matches.

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

General Zod wrote: »

He's running straight at the ball, he put his foot out to try and trap the ball, the other guy gets in first.

Don't get me wrong, it's a terrible tackle, but I doubt he went for the guys leg.

Did you look at the same tackle? Its quite clear he's staring straight at the player (straight ahead) and not the ball (on the ground). He's not even looking for the ball when he makes the 'tackle'. He sneers at the ref when being handed the red card, and smirks as he walks away.

To think he made an honest attempt to go for the ball is extremely naive. He meant to hurt the player, and he succeeded, and looks quite happy with himself afterwards.

That is one of the most intentional attempts to injure another player I have seen in recent times.

Punishement is known, he's banned until 23/11, that makes it 10 league matches and 1 cup match.
Uefa might also take action so he might miss some CL matches.

And at least he's being punished accordingly for it.

I would imagine a hefty fine, and a case brought against him by not only the player, but his club also.

Aidric

Des wrote: »

He should be fúcked out for life.

He should actually be jailed tbh.

8-10 facepalms.

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

Aidric wrote: »

8-10 facepalms.

Why???

I think Des obviously saw the same tackle I did.

Theresalwaysone

The player in question in undeniably stupid and a harm to himself and others.

How did he expect to control the ball in the tackle with that stamp? If he lands on the ball he is just going to injure himself. If he misses the ball and get his legs caught in the ground he is going to have his own leg broken... and like what happened in the vid, he could break the other players leg.

There is literally NO reason for a tackle of this kind. None.

10 game ban, massive fine. Villified by the media etc.

Chucky the tree

I'm sorry but Uefa/Fifa/FA and all the other assocations are a sham. This is the second time in a week the UEFA only seem bothered to act on something because of the consequence. Also anyone who thinks that challenge is the OP is bad need to watch a lot more soccer. He goes in with 1 foot over the top and makes sure his second foot is going to be well grounded and away from the player. For me this tackle by michael Brown is a million times worse, even his other challenge on giggs is a million times worse. The comical thing is Brown basically got off scot free for the tackle on giggs because he got a yellow card and was deemed to of been "punished" already. I really wish they'd spend more time fixing the rules so this type of thing doesn't happen rather then only bothering to do it when the media make a fuss about and they feel they have to act for PR purposes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4n3Nutns0I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNugWnNjwwg

Peyton Manning

5 game ban

X-Ray scan of Marcin Wasilewski's leg (apparently):



Also, there was a very similar, albeit worse tackle on Ronaldo in Real Madrids friendly against Juventus a few weeks ago. Imagine the press had it been a similar outcome!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkn8iCMoMi4

Chucky the tree

There goes his career.

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

Archimedes wrote: »

Also, there was a very similar, albeit worse tackle on Ronaldo in Real Madrids friendly against Juventus a few weeks ago. Imagine the press had it been a similar outcome!

Ronaldo - the wimp. That was a little leg scraper, nothing more. Easily a yellow, but there was little or no force behind it.

Brown - he should have had lifetime bans about 4 times over, the dirty *&%*£@.

Any of those other tackles do not take away from how disgraceful the OP tackle is. He should be punished to the maximum they can do him for. (and yes, I am aware the punishment has been posted).

Y2J_MUFC

5 game ban

I'd go with 8-10 games. Maybe 12.

Wreckless? Yes. Intentional? No.

Calls for lifetime bans are completely excessive.

anplaya

meh,seen worse tackles than that in junior league footie.
just the player was unlucky to get caught in that way and break his leg,50-50 tackle to me both went in for the ball.

Tom10

10 game ban

I think he intended to catch the man for sure - no way anybody ever means to break a leg like that. But I think you punish the outcome in this situation, and I'd imagine that player will be lucky to run again never mind play football. So with that I'd say a season ban, because these tackles can't be allowed in football (and I agree it wasn't the most blatant or worst attempt to do somebody but the outcome was the worst leg break I've seen).

I feel for the kid cos I'd see them making an example of him.

Warper

I can't believe that was given as a foul.

Mr Maroon

His club are appealing. We'll know the outcome on Friday.

8-10

CHD wrote: »

8-10 games imo

Good number.

gimmick

Season long ban

Not for the easily offended.

Surprised this has not been posted here. if it has, lock



The guy in red fúcking done the guy in blue. No way should he ever play football again. He got a 3 month ban.

zAbbo

We had this a few days back.

Nasty

orourkeda

Did the injured player recover?

Xavi6

Threads merged

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

orourkeda wrote: »

Did the injured player recover?

Unless his bones happened to reset, he rehabilitated, and got fit again since last weekend - no, he has not recovered.

Leixlip_Red

3 game ban as per the straight red!

Just because the outcome is a lot worse than usual doesn't change what the punishment should be.

gucci

http://football.uk.reuters.com/european/news/L1295019.php

BRUSSELS, Sept 1 (Reuters) - Standard Liege midfielder Axel Witsel has been suspended until Nov. 23 for a foul that resulted in Anderlecht's Polish defender Marcin Wasilewski suffering a double fracture of his right leg on Sunday.

Witsel, who won Belgium's "Golden Shoe" for best player in 2008, will be ineligible for the next 10 league matches and a round of the Belgian Cup. He was also fined 2,500 euros ($3,590) by the Belgian FA on Tuesday.

Witsel, 20, could additionally miss Standard's first four Champions League matches should European soccer's governing body UEFA extend the ban to their competition.

Wasilewski, 29, was sent off for stamping on Witsel in the 25th minute of Anderlecht's 1-1 draw at home to Standard.

The incident has been the lead item on television news and pictures of Wasilewski's contorted lower leg have been splashed across Belgian newspapers.

Witsel has received emailed death threats, which the police are taking seriously, according to Belgian media.

Xavi6

Wasilewski, 29, was sent off for stamping on Witsel in the 25th minute of Anderlecht's 1-1 draw at home to Standard.

Surely that's the wrong way round?

ullu

Leixlip_Red wrote: »

3 game ban as per the straight red!

Just because the outcome is a lot worse than usual doesn't change what the punishment should be.

I disagree. For example, if, unprovoked, I was to punch a stranger a few times in the head and he either a) dusted himself down with a few bumps or b) lapsed into a coma and dies, I should be charged accordingly (assault and manslaughter respectively).

Even if Witsel totally regrets what he has done, he is still resopnsible for his actions, regardless of whether it was a freak result or not.

If Pepe can be banned for ten games for what he did last season, Witsel deserves a lengthier ban. I haven't voted as I'm not sure what that should be.

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

Xavi6 wrote: »

Surely that's the wrong way round?

Evidently a case of Reuters Block

Epic Tissue

Ban for duration of victim's injury

What was his plan with the tackle? Looking at the second replay it shows that even if he had hit the ball he wouldn't have had it after since he basically jumped towards it.

He smirks when he gets the red card, complete thug..

Dublin_Gunner

Ban for duration of victim's injury

Epic Tissue wrote: »

What was his plan with the tackle? Looking at the second reply it shows that even if he had hit the ball he wouldn't have had it after since he basically jumped towards it.

He smirks when he gets the red card, complete thug..

Exactly. IN the clip, not once do I see him even looking at the ball. He had no intention whatsoever of doing anything other than injuring the other player. Sure, he got a pretty shocking result, but from looking at it over & over, the intent was there for all to see.

Thug is a little soft for a player willing to make 'tackles' such as those.