Arsenal v Man City Emirates Stadium Sunday 13 Jan 4.05pm SS1

efb

Players welfare must come first (Duty of Care) there's no point exaggerating it. And Soccer I'd not an intense physical sport

LuckyLloyd

efb wrote: »

Players welfare must come first (Duty of Care) there's no point exaggerating it. And Soccer I'd not an intense physical sport

It isn't anymore. It used to be a proper sport.

efb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

It isn't anymore. It used to be a proper sport.

I prefer a sport where Skill triumphs thuggery more Barcelona less Stoke

LuckyLloyd

efb wrote: »

I prefer a sport where Skill triumphs thuggery more Barcelona less Stoke

Physical play != thuggery. That's the stupidity of it all. People want a complete non contact sport. The Dutch team of the 70's managed to exist without the ridiculous rules that exist today. We are headed towards futsal on grass. No thanks.

I want a sport where skill exists in tandem with physicality, bravery and athleticism and triumphs without a weighted rule book in favour of the one style of play.

efb

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Physical play != thuggery. That's the stupidity of it all. People want a complete non contact sport. The Dutch team of the 70's managed to exist without the ridiculous rules that exist today. We are headed towards futsal on grass. No thanks.

I want a sport where skill exists in tandem with physicality, bravery and athleticism and triumphs without a weighted rule book in favour of the one style of play.

there is contact involved just requires skill, if you cant tackle- you shouldn't.

the untitled user

Arsenal fan and I'm pretty torn on Kompany's tackle. On the one hand he timed it well and was no where near doing any serious injury to Wilshere. Wilshere has over run the ball and it's clearly a 50-50.

On the other hand, the way he lunges in, he's got both feet off the ground with the studs slightly raised. The main thing here imo is that he can no longer be said to be in control of his motion. Had Wilshere stayed on his feet, the risk of Kompany impacting a standing leg with the follow through is quite high. Indeed, Kompany's overall body position and angle of attack is very similar to Martin Taylor's tackle that broke Eduardo's leg.

I think had I been the ref I would have deemed it 'reckless' but not 'excessive force' (i.e. a yellow, not a red). But I'm not sure. In my own career I've made that tackle hundreds of times, and have been both let away with it and carded for it despite never even touching the opponent. And on the other side, I've been on the end of it plenty of times too, and when they mistime it slightly (i.e. get both a bit of my leg and the ball) they've done me some serious damage.

All in all I think it sums up the need for IFAB to issue more clearer guidelines to referees over what constitutes 'careless', 'reckless' and 'excessive force'. People keep talking about this type of red as being a modern thing but this is a scenario that's been recurring as long as I've been a football fan (i.e. last 20 years).

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Physical play != thuggery. That's the stupidity of it all. People want a complete non contact sport. The Dutch team of the 70's managed to exist without the ridiculous rules that exist today. We are headed towards futsal on grass. No thanks.

I want a sport where skill exists in tandem with physicality, bravery and athleticism and triumphs without a weighted rule book in favour of the one style of play.

The one thing I will say to that is that people keep underestimating how much the increased athleticism in football has impacted the tackling. A player's conditioning today is leaps and bounds above what it was 20 years ago, and with it that means the forces and momentum going into each tackle are getting greater with each passing year. A mistimed tackle 20 years ago might have left a gash, but these days the players are going in with enough force to break legs on a regular basis. This is one of the reasons refs are clamping down on these challenges more than they would have in the past.

There may even be circumstantial stats to back that up btw, at least according to Arsenal physios; for the past few seasons the number of 'breakages' (i.e. non-routine once-in-a-career type injuries including breaks, tendon tears and cartilege damage) has been going up. It's way higher today than it was 20 years ago (around double I believe).

astrofool

efb wrote: »

Players welfare must come first (Duty of Care) there's no point exaggerating it. And Soccer I'd not an intense physical sport

Players are paid extortionate wages on the fact that they may get hurt and not be able to play football again, they also have a union and insurance companies who pay out based on this risk, they are playing a high intensity contact sport and injuries are part of it.

"Health and safety" is trying to take over and ruin lots of sports, the media jump on the bandwagon of the day demanding rules be changed, then same media gives out when the sports get boring, F1 has been through this in an extreme way.

Fuzzy_Dunlop

astrofool wrote: »

Players are paid extortionate wages on the fact that they may get hurt and not be able to play football again, they also have a union and insurance companies who pay out based on this risk, they are playing a high intensity contact sport and injuries are part of it.

"Health and safety" is trying to take over and ruin lots of sports, the media jump on the bandwagon of the day demanding rules be changed, then same media gives out when the sports get boring, F1 has been through this in an extreme way.

They're paid the extortionate wages based on the amount of money they generate for the sport. Also the relatively short career they already have.

I don't really see why limiting the risk of serious injury is a bad thing. <worst case scenario alert> What if Messi or Ronaldo got done by a reckless tackle similar to Kompany's and were out for a year or so? </>

LuckyLloyd

Fuzzy_Dunlop wrote: »

They're paid the extortionate wages based on the amount of money they generate for the sport. Also the relatively short career they already have.

I don't really see why limiting the risk of serious injury is a bad thing. <worst case scenario alert> What if Messi or Ronaldo got done by a reckless tackle similar to Kompany's and were out for a year or so? </>

That's football?

gosplan

I reckon that if City hadn't been so agressive with Wilshire as a team, then he might have gotten away with it but there was clearly an aim to target him. Kompany went for the ball but planned to take the man as well. He insured that there would be contact and in that contact he had his studs up and was off the ground.

It was a great tackle but unnecessicarily physical. If he had kept his feet down and slid in, he could have achieved the same thing.

While I feel it's hard on Kompany, I look at Ramsey, Diaby, Eduardo and think, yeah I've had enough of our players being targetted by overly-physical play which is not in any way concerned with their safety.

tayto lover

I hope Kompany's card is recinded as I saw nothing wrong with the tackle. Wilshere lost control of the ball and actually lost his footing and slipped into Kompany. I watched it several times. I thought there was nothing malicious in it at all and Wilshere actually started protesting to the referee when he saw him take out the red card as he must have thought it was for him.

Xavi6

Rescinded

Mr.Micro

Xavi6 wrote: »

Rescinded

maybe they should rescind Dean as well.....

Roar

The pro Man City bias continues unabated. Jokeshop decision.

Xavi6

Roar wrote: »

The pro Man City bias continues unabated. Jokeshop decision.

Turtyturd

Roar wrote: »

The pro Man City bias continues unabated. Jokeshop decision.

It was the right decision, would have been interesting to see if the FA would have overturned the red if it had impacted upon the result though, somehow I doubt it.

wandatowell

Right decision IMO


At least someone in the FA knows what they are doing

LuckyLloyd

Roar wrote: »

The pro Man City bias continues unabated. Jokeshop decision.

It's an utterly correct decision. Good to see a player not be unfairly punished for an exceptional tackle. Hopefully that will give him the confidence to tackle like that going forward. An unlikely example of justice being done in the end!

Benimar

The correct decision without a doubt.

Darkglasses

Was obviously a good tackle from the start, glad the FA made the right decision.

Jelle1880

Correct decision.

inmyday

Scuba Ste wrote: »

What is this rule?.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2011_12_en.pdf

pages 34 & 111 are the chapters on it. Lot of reading.

Page 120 is Serious foul play.

"A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent 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
and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play"

Xavi6 wrote: »

Rescinded

Looks like I was wrong. So I have to take back the Sh1te I was talking on Sunday.
But Im a ref. And we do get it wrong now and again!!

Scuba Ste

inmyday wrote: »

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/generic/81/42/36/lawsofthegame_2011_12_en.pdf

pages 34 & 111 are the chapters on it. Lot of reading.

Page 120 is Serious foul play.

"A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent 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
and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play"

That's what I was saying. The rules make no mention of two footedness, being in control or not, tackles from behind etc. only excessive force which is subjective.

GLaDOS

Correct decision for me, surprised they actually rescinded it though.

Xavi6

FWIW, it's this angle that makes up my mind. Wilshere takes a heavy touch and loses control which allows Kompany make a strong challenge to win the ball -

DB10

A good tackle, luckily the red card now is meaningless. Red Mike didnt get his way this time.

GLaDOS

Xavi6 wrote: »

FWIW, it's this angle that makes up my mind. Wilshere takes a heavy touch and loses control which allows Kompany make a strong challenge to win the ball -

Wilshere is going down before Kompany gets his tackle in which probably makes it look worse when he does connect.

efb

Xavi6 wrote: »

FWIW, it's this angle that makes up my mind. Wilshere takes a heavy touch and loses control which allows Kompany make a strong challenge to win the ball -

from that view is does look like a good tackle, fairs fair, its no Ryan Shawcross.

wonga77

I never thought they would overturn it but i never had any doubt that it wasnt a red. The more i look at it, especially from that angle above, its an excellent tackle

Xavi6

ScienceNerd wrote: »

Wilshere is going down before Kompany gets his tackle in

:eek: Duuuuuurty

.jacksparrow.

But if you look at it from that angle Jack knocks the ball forward and kompany lunges in,if jack went across the ball he would have went straight through his ankle,was there endangerment?it could be said there is as kompany is not in control of the tackle as soon as he decides to lunge in.

It's a debatable one I think.

Scuba Ste

It's obvious form that angle that Wilshire went in two footed. I hope the FA apply retrospective action.

Turtyturd

Scuba Ste wrote: »

It's obvious form that angle that Wilshire went in two footed. I hope the FA apply retrospective action.

Dunno bout two footed but he does make an effort to lunge at Kompany when he loses control of the ball rather than the normal jumping up over the challenge that most players would do. Pretty low from Wilshere but it seems to have been overlooked.

greendom

Turtyturd wrote: »

Dunno bout two footed but he does make an effort to lunge at Kompany when he loses control of the ball rather than the normal jumping up over the challenge that most players would do. Pretty low from Wilshere but it seems to have been overlooked.

I think that's nonsense. He showed remarkable restraint throughout the match after being brought down on so many occasions. And there was no malice in the challenge on Kompany. Wilshere fell if anything. If there had been significant contact between the 2 players, it would have been Kompany's lunge that would have caused damage.

Scuba Ste

Turtyturd wrote: »

Dunno bout two footed but he does make an effort to lunge at Kompany when he loses control of the ball rather than the normal jumping up over the challenge that most players would do. Pretty low from Wilshere but it seems to have been overlooked.

I'm not at all serious.

tayto lover

Turtyturd wrote: »

Dunno bout two footed but he does make an effort to lunge at Kompany when he loses control of the ball rather than the normal jumping up over the challenge that most players would do. Pretty low from Wilshere but it seems to have been overlooked.

You need to look at it again before you jump to biased judgements..
Wilshere's foot goes from under him and his momentum took him into Kompany.
Neither player committed an intentional foul.

Ed Winchester

M'Vila signing for QPR according to twitter. Deal done.

Ed Winchester

Ed Winchester wrote: »

M'Vila signing for QPR according to twitter. Deal done.

Oops that was meant for the arsenal thread!

the untitled user

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

But if you look at it from that angle Jack knocks the ball forward and kompany lunges in,if jack went across the ball he would have went straight through his ankle,was there endangerment?it could be said there is as kompany is not in control of the tackle as soon as he decides to lunge in.

It's a debatable one I think.

That's why I'm torn on it still. It's a perfect tackle in many respects, but Wilshere clearly pulled out of the 50-50 and goes somewhat to Kompany's left rather than following the ball. If Wilshere had followed the ball the both collide with each other straight on with studs in play (from both players) and that's when serious injuries can happen.

The key for me is Kompany had already lunged before Wilshere had pulled out. That's what makes it reckless for me (i.e. a yellow) because Wilshere was crossing his path... but the fact that Kompany is a good distance from Wilshere (at least 1m) when he lunges stops me from prounouncing it excessive force (i.e. red).

Still think the biggest outcome of this is that IFAB need to be more specific in their definition of 'excessive force'. There's so many ways you can interpret that tackle really.

greendom

I think the ref did the right thing and has been harshly treated by the FA. Both feet off the floor going into a challenge is dangerous, that's straight forward and relatively easy to implement.

This decision is going to make things even more complicated for referees.

LuckyLloyd

greendom wrote: »

I think the ref did the right thing and has been harshly treated by the FA. Both feet off the floor going into a challenge is dangerous, that's straight forward and relatively easy to implement.

This decision is going to make things even more complicated for referees.

Hopefully this will see more aggressive tackles going unpunished.

Scuba Ste

greendom wrote: »

This decision is going to make things even more complicated for referees.

Not necessarily. I don't know if there's any public info on the appeal but for all we know the ref himself had input and decided on the replay footage it wasn't a dangerous tackle. That ref who's always on Sky said as much; in real time it looked a red, in replay from various angles it didn't.

Look at this thread. It's taken various angles and slomo before a consensus is reached. The ref doesn't have that.

DoctorGonzo08

the untitled user wrote: »

That's why I'm torn on it still. It's a perfect tackle in many respects, but Wilshere clearly pulled out of the 50-50 and goes somewhat to Kompany's left rather than following the ball. If Wilshere had followed the ball the both collide with each other straight on with studs in play (from both players) and that's when serious injuries can happen.

The key for me is Kompany had already lunged before Wilshere had pulled out. That's what makes it reckless for me (i.e. a yellow) because Wilshere was crossing his path... but the fact that Kompany is a good distance from Wilshere (at least 1m) when he lunges stops me from prounouncing it excessive force (i.e. red).

Still think the biggest outcome of this is that IFAB need to be more specific in their definition of 'excessive force'. There's so many ways you can interpret that tackle really.

So intention is and excessive force is based on a mathematical relationship between velocity, acceleration, mass and frictional force with respect to distance and time? And this calculation should be done before making any rash decisions by the ref?

Seriously? It's a game of football ffs.