Man City v Liverpool, 12.30pm live on Sky Sport

CalamariFritti

Had it been 2 inches above ground and he met his ankle it would still be a red card. This was 5 foot above ground and in the head. 50:50 I don't care what you call it you cant go into a challenge like that.

kingshankly

Lads seriously thinking that's not a red need to have a wee chat with themselves

BorneTobyWilde

Salah tripped and stayed up there !

tayto lover

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

He could have caused serious damage to a player doing that and yet some say the goalkeeper was at fault for lowering his head!

That's pretty comprehensive there. Clear red card.

4 man panel on Bein Sports saying 100% correct decision

Sugarlumps

Otamendi is garbage. Salah should be up his hole.

Cantona's Collars

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

He could have caused serious damage to a player doing that and yet some say the goalkeeper was at fault for lowering his head!

I applaud the keeper for making the most of it,even got stretchered off with an oxygen mask.Serious commitment.
Some of the comments here outdo Trump for fake news.

citytillidie

Knex. wrote: »

Hmm. That doesn't look great now, in fairness. Ref has perfect view too.

Doubt very much that'll be rescinded, lads.

Still images never look good

jamesbere

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

He could have caused serious damage to a player doing that and yet some say the goalkeeper was at fault for lowering his head!

It's a least a millimeter lower than it should be, desperate from the keeper

upandcumming

Solomon Pleasant wrote:

Does anyone remember Nani's tackle on Arbeloa when United played Madrid in the champions league a few years ago? It was a similar situation except Nani tackled arbeloa's side rather than his head. Loads of people argued that was a red card. If that was a deserved red card, then Mane's tackle was 100% a red card.

No I'd say no one remembers that.

Crimson King

Harry Palmr wrote: »

and that had nothing to do with being a man down.

I'm clearly a fantasy football guru. Swapped de bruyne n Jesus for Pogba and firminho (-4 points to boot)

edgecutter

Nev has dug himself a deep hole with his defence of Mane. Clear red, regardless if Mane didn't mean to hit him.

martyos121

That latest picture on the thread is pretty damning tbf. Really hate to say it, but it's the correct decision and the 3 game ban will probably stand.

adox

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Nani didn't kick the player in the head adox

But that's irrelevant really. It's the same sort of challenge. Th card is always for the offence, not the resulting injury or impact.

It looks like a horrible injury to the keeper and I hope he makes a speedy recovery but injury level doesn't dictate the card.

blueser

Sugarlumps wrote: »

Otamendi is garbage. Salah should be up his hole.

I'm hoping Pep subs him. Maybe stick Dinho in as a makeshift CB. Ota is an accident waiting to happen.

BorneTobyWilde

Otamendi tripped Salah on line of box, and he stayed up when it was a certain second yellow and penalty.
Salah really annoying me in his decisions !!!

Cantona's Collars

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Salah tripped and stayed up there !

I was wanting him to go down,Fantasy Football points are a serious business.

adox

adox wrote: »

But that's irrelevant really. It's the same sort of challenge. Th card is always for the offence, not the resulting injury or impact.

It looks like a horrible injury to the keeper and I hope he makes a speedy recovery but injury level doesn't dictate the card.

A red for dangerous play and an out of control tackle. It's clearly the case here. Sorry man but can't agree with you here.

kingshankly

If mane wins the ball with his foot there he probably still gets a yellow for dangerous play

Rekop dog

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Perhaps you should read the post I quoted then.

Yano, cause it's kind of relevant.

You're trying to say that you can see beyond your club allegiance and make an impartial decision. But whoever you support it doesn't matter. Your view that it's not a red is just plain wrong by the laws of the game. Mane was reckless in the very extreme.

edgecutter

Watch Nev try and pretend that he watched it a number of times at half time and now agrees with Moss decision.

Shanotheslayer

M!Ck^ wrote: »

A red for dangerous play and an out of control tackle. It's clearly the case here. Sorry man but can't agree with you here.

It wasn't a tackle. He went to take down the ball

niallo27

kingshankly wrote: »

If mane wins the ball with his foot there he probably still gets a yellow for dangerous play

No way the keeper gets a red if mane gets a touch.

Unearthly

Carragher admitting he was originally wrong. Others should take note

eagle eye

upandcumming wrote:

No I'd say no one remembers that.

Are you being serious, it's hard to tell. I remember it and remember thinking it was very harsh as was the one today.

I don't think he will win an appeal but a bit of common sense from the ref is what you need. I don't believe there was any intent to be reckless or do damage and I think a yellow would have been the right colour card there.

I don't support either club so no bias here.

fyfe79

It's a red, lads. I'm positive that it wasn't malicious or intentional, but it was dangerous play so it's a red. Game over anyway, unfortunately.

upandcumming

Stonewall red card. Anything else is delusional.

irishman86

niallo27 wrote: »

No way the keeper gets a red if mane gets a touch.

Wrong! Mane goes in high and dangerous and still gets sent off

niallo27

Watching it in normal play it looks a yellow but when slowed down it looks a red.

Amirani

Carragher fully behind the red card decision at half time. Comments around it far more sensible than Neville's "Ederson is injured because his defenders tried to play offside". Stupid comment. :rolleyes:

Rayne Wooney

Never a red

adox

M!Ck^ wrote: »

A red for dangerous play and an out of control tackle. It's clearly the case here. Sorry man but can't agree with you here.

It wasn't a tackle. It was a challenge for the ball.

We will have to agree to disagree.

Skylinehead

eagle eye wrote: »

intent to be reckless

That's somewhat of an oxymoron. Recklessness tends not to involve intent.

tayto lover

Definitely a RED card --

Fifa's laws of the game for the 2017-18 season contains the following entry...
"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."

edgecutter

No doubt it's a red, just because you are trying to get the ball doesn't mean you can't make a mistake and be reckless. It doesn't make Mane a dirty player, but it is still a reckless challenge. Klopp also should be ashamed with his behavior on the side lines.

niallo27

irishman86 wrote: »

Wrong! Mane goes in high and dangerous and still gets sent off

So if he didn't make contact with the keeper you still think it's a red. Since when is a high foot a red.

Shanotheslayer

Chamberlain must be delighted he might play the next few games

Quandary

Watching the reply in HD slow motion, it is impossible imo to claim that challenge is anything other than a red card. Two feet in the air at running pace with his foot higher than his own head??? Red all day long. No intent to hurt the keeper but thats irrelevant. It was very reckless

Mane didn't even protest it, which says a lot.

jaykay74

eagle eye wrote: »

Are you being serious, it's hard to tell. I remember it and remember thinking it was very harsh as was the one today.

I don't think he will win an appeal but a bit of common sense from the ref is what you need. I don't believe there was any intent to be reckless or do damage and I think a yellow would have been the right colour card there.

I don't support either club so no bias here.

Intent is not relevant

mada999

M!Ck^ wrote: »

A red for dangerous play and an out of control tackle. It's clearly the case here. Sorry man but can't agree with you here.

Otamendi should have went too after his two footed tackle into mane earlier as he was out of control

Sofa Spud

Sod it lads, that's a red that won't get rescinded. He'll be out for Burnley and two against the Foxes, hardly the end of the world and he'll be well rested before the away game in Moscow.

Infuriating stuff, but not the end of the world....

pjohnson

niallo27 wrote: »

So if he didn't make contact with the keeper you still think it's a red. Since when is a high foot a red.

Bicycle kicks must be a straight red.

A Dub in Glasgo

Yes, they are studs and yes they are hitting him in the face

corcaigh07

Terrible decision, ref gave a red based on emotion.

kingshankly

"Went for the ball" is the most meaningless statement in football

irishman86

niallo27 wrote: »

So if he didn't make contact with the keeper you still think it's a red. Since when is a high foot a red.

If in that exact situation he makes contact with the ball yes its a red
If a player makes contact in the way Mane did its always a red buddy, im sorry if i'm the one who had to tell you this

Shanotheslayer

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

It wasn't a tackle. He went to take down the ball

Challenge, tackle, whatever lads
It's was wreckless and out of control
FIFA rules state straight red

dmigsy

kingshankly wrote: »

If mane wins the ball with his foot there he probably still gets a yellow for dangerous play

Not a chance Mane would get booked if he nicked it first. Ederson would have got the red in that scenario.

Foolish challenge from Mane and certainly a red.

martyos121

If we don't completely throw in the towel (which I can't see happening) then I'm fairly confident we'll score given how utterly pathetic City are at the back.

edgecutter

corcaigh07 wrote: »

Terrible decision, ref gave a red based on emotion.

This is a wum, surely.