There was less than 10 minutes between our goal and the sending off and then a further 10 minutes until Modric's goal, with such a short time frame I dont think you can have a pop at the tactics
UEFA Champions League/Europa League 5/6/7 March *** Spoilers ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
There was less than 10 minutes between our goal and the sending off and then a further 10 minutes until Modric's goal, with such a short time frame I dont think you can have a pop at the tactics
IIRC Bendtner had a chance towards the end that RvP would have buried where he ran clear, dunno if it counts as a shot though he kinda tripped over the ball :/
Last edited:
So why are overhead kicks permitted in a crowded box and why are keepers allowed to punch near and over people's head(often catching people as they do) etc?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Why not? 10 minutes is a long time in football, you can't have a pop at the tactics even though, without sitting back the red card would likely not have happened as before that point Real simply looked crap and weren't holding the ball upfront much at all. Real had already completely turned the run of play around before the red card, it merely continued after the red card, and Utd, after the 3rd goal had no problems at all pushing forwards in the final 15 minutes.... so it wasn't Nani that caused them to sit back, it happened before he was sent off and they managed to attack again quite easily after he was off the pitch for ages. It was Fergie's decision to sit back that let Real back into the game.
Also anyone got a good replay, only saw one good one quickly of the Utd goal was RVP offside when was it Welbeck tapped the ball towards goal?
Modric goal was a great hit, and Carrick made a schoolboy error, he was as usual far too deep, Modric got the ball and he rushed out too far, too fast, and was so easy to sidestep, if he'd closed him down carefully and not made it so easy to go around the goal probably wouldn't have happened.
Modric is like that though, doesn't score often, tends to score crackers. Higuain was pretty terrible in and around the goal but pulling out wide he actually had good movement on the right as a wide striker, timed his runs well, got in space and delivered some very very good crosses. Ozil to me looked poor in a big game for the 100th time. Welbeck, keeper down right in the corner, low and half of his body behind the line, anywhere in the goal, anywhere except for that 6 inches square and its a goal, and Welbeck missed... did crack me up.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
Their keeper punched vidic to the face.
By the letter of the law evra was clean through in the first leg but still...
By the letter of the law evra was clean through in the first leg but still...
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 1,763
- Location
- Hokkaido
The law is open to interpretation and thus the referee saw fit to give a red card. Doesn't make it wrong to thing his interpretation was harsh.
The tactics were pretty much spot on before the sending off. United looked the much more dangerous team and I can't remember De Gea having to really make a save? Nani was one of the main outlets going forward, once he was gone United had difficulty getting out of their own half.
Ridiculous to argue the sending off didn't change the game.
The tactics were pretty much spot on before the sending off. United looked the much more dangerous team and I can't remember De Gea having to really make a save? Nani was one of the main outlets going forward, once he was gone United had difficulty getting out of their own half.
Ridiculous to argue the sending off didn't change the game.
Rafael's arm blocked the ball to deny a goal scoring chance
Real had a perfectly good goal disallowed etc etc
So many decisions not given either way yet he decides to give a massive one against United, bit unlucky
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 3,053
- Location
- ireland
United fans need to stop complaining, Nani gave the ref a decision to make,stop saying u cant volley or overhead kick now, if u know a player isn't going to challenge for the ball then by all means put ur stoods out to control it. Players should know if there is a challenge coming.
High foot stoods making contact with the player it is dangerous play, everybody interpret's tackles differently some ref's would give a yellow some would give red, we have seen red cards for similar challenges it happens.
High foot stoods making contact with the player it is dangerous play, everybody interpret's tackles differently some ref's would give a yellow some would give red, we have seen red cards for similar challenges it happens.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
For the same reason many other dangerous tackles are often not given as fouls if no contact is made, when contact is made, refs tend not to overlook it and Nani made some serious contact.
But again, a high foot and contact isn't necessarily powerful or extremely dangerous, Nani's contact was off the ground, he was moving at speed and his entire weight + speed was all put straight into Arbeloa, an overhead kick doesn't have the same criteria, there is FAR less power, the weight is moving down, its very rare for a player to be running when he does an overhead kick.
I genuinely don't know if people are being intentionally obtuse to really basic physics/common sense or if people really can't understand it. The power a human can generate with a standing kick, and running, getting up some serious speed and jumping at something is completely different, the direction/action of the kick is also important. Nani hit him dead on, with no where for his weight to go, if Nani had his leg out to his side and jumped 1 metre to the right, he'd still of kicked/caught Arbeloa, but it would have spun Nani around like crazy and little of the power would have gone into Arbeloa.
The basically most dangerous thing you can do is jump into a tackle with your leg out infront with all your weight following, its the least in control and the most likely to do damage.
Overhead kicks are usually given as fouls when contact is made, but you rarely see anyone injured seriously, though there was one only last weekend, it just highlights the point, they are dangerous and should probably be carded more often than they are.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
For one, I didn't argue it didn't change the game, I said something else had a bigger effect, second, Utd had NO problem at all getting forward WITHOUT Nani in the last 15 minutes, ergo, it wasn't Nani missing that prevented Utd getting forwards.
As I mentioned earlier in the thread, supposedly with situations like that (where a big advantage has been gained) it doesn't matter whether there was intent.
You should probably read the rules. Dangerous play is not a red card offence. Serious foul play on the other hand can be. This is the only justifiable reason for tonight's red card, but as it was clearly unintentional and did not cause injury the referee should have given a yellow for dangerous play, which the maximum punishment for dangerous play.
Almost everything that happens on a football pitch is dangerous. Players can break their leg or tear their cruciate just by running or turning. Maybe that should be banned as well.
Again, refs don't give red cards for dangerous play.
What a stupid post. That's like saying driving at 150mph is ok because you could still kill somebody if you hit them driving at just 20mph.
Certain things are more dangerous than others and are therefore more likely to cause injury, therefore are punished. A high boot nearly always results in a free-kick, if you make any noticeable contact you quite often see yellow cards and if it's done at pace or considered even more dangerous, we've seen red cards given.
As I've said, it was harsh but the way people are going on about it is as if we've never seen a red card for that sort of challenge.
Last edited:
Not quite - other road users don't accept that somebody might be driving at 150mph.
Footballers at all levels accept that there will be an element of danger in playing the sport from hard tackles, overhead kicks, headers, etc. These are often given as fouls and occasionally yellow cards. What they don't accept is that another player might set out to injure them, which is why fouls with intent behind them are - by the rulebook - punished more heavily.
The reason two footed tackles tend to be sending off offences is that they imply intent. A player doesn't need to jump into a tackle two footed in most situations, implying that they have intentionally gone into a challenge too hard when they do.
I'm not saying we haven't seen red cards for similar things in the past, but I am saying that that sort of challenge, where there is no intent, should not be a red card.
the referee destroyed the match........simples
it was a bad 50/50 challenge, had Nani at any stage looked at Arbeloa it would have been a deserved red, instead it was utterly accidental.
cant stand these incompetent officials ruining football matches.........when will they be held accountable and sacked for doing poor jobs just like the rest of us
it was a bad 50/50 challenge, had Nani at any stage looked at Arbeloa it would have been a deserved red, instead it was utterly accidental.
cant stand these incompetent officials ruining football matches.........when will they be held accountable and sacked for doing poor jobs just like the rest of us
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 6
not a post about the game...but...
Fergie asked yesterday if he was happy with choice of ref. "I'll tell you tomorrow," he said. Think we know the answer after that!!!
even the non-football fan must be looking forward to his next press conference
Fergie asked yesterday if he was happy with choice of ref. "I'll tell you tomorrow," he said. Think we know the answer after that!!!
even the non-football fan must be looking forward to his next press conference