Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 21,267
- Location
- North Yorkshire
Agreed totally
UEFA Champions League/Europa League 5/6/7 March *** Spoilers ***
- Thread starter Cosimo
- Start date
Agreed totally
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I think you should read the rules.
FA rule book on what constitutes serious foul play and punishable by a red card.
Yeah, lets play the stupid game. Breathing is dangerous the air could be filled with toxic gas. There are levels of danger, players agree to a certain risk when they play football, the most dangerous types of tackles are punishable by red cards because you shouldn't do them. There is acceptable risk, and not, lunging tackles, two footed tackles and Nani's tackle the risk is because you are off the ground, in no control and the full weight of your body and all the momentum can go straight into the other player.
Where have I argued that everything should be outlawed? Where did I saw "normal" tackles have no danger, where did I saw it should be no contact, when did I bring up overhead kicks as being fine, no where, for any of these things.
You can tell when people have a point, when they argue against a point you didn't make, rather than the logical argument you did make that has no comeback to it.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 1,763
- Location
- Hokkaido
The first part wasn't necessarily directed at you. And United had no problem getting forward at the end because a) Madrid eased off completely allowing United more space and b) United had no other choice than to go for it.
I think that's what I just said. I would use a certain emoticon right now but I consider them to be rude.
Why does a 2 footed tackle imply intent? You see plenty of two footed tackles where there's no intent to injure the opposition player. When Gerrard got sent off at OT for a 2 footed challenge on Carrick, I think it's safe to say that there was no intent on his part to hurt Carrick. He was going for the ball. The same as Kompany's red vs Utd.
The above is why intent doesn't matter. Gerrard didn't intend to injure Carrick but because of the way he went into the challenge he could have, therefore he was sent off. Nani didn't intend to injure Arbeloa but in the refs opinion, because of the way Nani went into the challenge, he could have injured Arbeloa.
I don't even think you know what your point is.
In my opinion Nani has tried to control the ball, in that sense it isn't a tackle - let alone a dangerous one - just a coming together of players that happens.
If he was staring straight at the player and went flying in you'd have more of a point, but as it stands you don't. You're just babbling on as usual. If it was your beloved van Persie I think your story would be a bit different, Nani is one of 'those' players on your little blacklist.
Feel free to disagree (in a thousand words as per).
I don't understand this. Are you saying that the ref should know exactly what Nani's seeing? The ref sees Nani and Arbeloa running towards each other at pace, with Nani then going on to catch Arbeloa in the ribs with his raised foot.
Only Nani knows whether he knew Arbeloa was coming, the ref can't make that decision. The ref can only make the decision as to whether Nani's challenge put Arbeloa in danger.
Gotta love the deluded Man utd fans the English media. Everyone is blaming the referee, but in all fairness for me it was a red card. He caught him in the ribs with his foot and both where running fast. It could have easily resulted in Arbeloa doing some damage to his ribs, either bruising or worse case breaking a few ribs, yet they are saying that it only deserved a yellow card.
People need to be asking what was Nani doing by making that sort of a challenge in the middle of the pitch, a long way from any danger to their goal.
Man utd fans and the media, also seem to have short term memory at the Rafael handball which prevented the ball going in the goal or the very soft foul conceded to man utd when madrid scored that goal which was disallowed.
All in I find it funny that everyone seem to be saying great misjustice has been done. They played for 180 minutes and Man Utd only scored 1 goal, even today's goal was a total gift by Ramos. Ref could have easily gave away a penalty for Madrid and maybe even the disallowed goal.
People need to be asking what was Nani doing by making that sort of a challenge in the middle of the pitch, a long way from any danger to their goal.
Man utd fans and the media, also seem to have short term memory at the Rafael handball which prevented the ball going in the goal or the very soft foul conceded to man utd when madrid scored that goal which was disallowed.
All in I find it funny that everyone seem to be saying great misjustice has been done. They played for 180 minutes and Man Utd only scored 1 goal, even today's goal was a total gift by Ramos. Ref could have easily gave away a penalty for Madrid and maybe even the disallowed goal.
I would, yes, you see it all the time. Its a referees job to see everything or rely on his assistants to help. One recent case was Mark Clattenberg didn't give a penalty for handball because the player didn't see the ball coming as he was blindsided and called it unintentional. Most would agree that Nani did not see Arbeloa and in my opinion (being a qualified referee) a yellow card for dangerous play should have sufficed. However, I also would agree that if the referee has seen it as serious foul play then he had no option, even if IMO he was wrong to do so.
Maybe they are boring because they are the truth? It baffles me when people say it wasn't a red, the speed both were running at, Arbeloa could have easily done some damage to his ribs and the surrounding area.
You could also tell by Nani faking an injury for 2 minutes laying on the ground, like he had been shoot, just after the challenge. He knew he screwed up and then tried to play the victim.
Contextually, it's very important. Nani was watching the ball come down and was attempting to control it, unfortunately he hit a player. There was no malice in it, and it wasn't intentionally dangerous, it was a 'normal' thing to do. It happens every few minutes in a regular match.
It was a yellow card at best really, it was a ridiculously harsh red, even though I can see why it was given - that doesn't make it any less of a joke.
Anyway, what's done is done. No going back now.
It's completely unreasonable to expect the officials to be able to see everything on the pitch let alone know what players are seeing or thinking too.
I think most would agree that there was no malice on Nani's part but as I've said already, that doesn't matter. What the official needs to decide is whether Nani's challenged for the ball in a reckless (which would be a yellow card) or a dangerous way (a red card). The ref doesn't know what Nani's seeing, he only sees Nani going into a challenge at pace with his studs raised chest(ish) high. I accept it's a harsh red but it's not that outrageous.
Dude...it's not a challenge. The ref would have seen giggs clear it, look down at where the ball was going, see nani jumping to control it and then see Arb go past him. Its a footballing incident, football is a contact sport, Its a yellow any day of the week.
The ref should have taken Nani to the side and said.. your foot was high there mate, keep it down, yellow card... jobs a good un.
The rules of football are there for interpretation..
This would have applied more if he really didn't have much of a chance of getting the ball, but he did, he was following it right down onto his foot and Arbeloa was in the way.
So the ref has basically not seen it properly, and gambled and sent him off. Which is equally stupid but happens a lot.
I also don't think it was a challenge, he just didn't see the other guy until it was too late (when he was expecting the ball to hit his foot). I don't think a coming together constitutes a challenge.
It was a 'insert word here' - in your case harsh - red that cost us a game we were fairly comfortable in to that point. I think the ref made a very bad mistake.
Still, the performance was very good up to that point so that's a positive.
It is? (genuine question)
And of course it's a challenge. He didn't have possession of the ball and was challenge for possession with Arbeloa, whether he intended to or not.
This is what you're getting completely wrong. It makes no difference whether Nani was going for the ball, has a good chance of getting the ball or not. By trying to control the ball he has studded Arbeloa in the chest - that's black and white, you can't argue with it. The ref needs to decide whether that was reckless or dangerous, there's no right or wrong answer, it's his opinion.
Last edited:
No one had control of the ball..if anyone had right to the ball it was Nani, passed by a Man U player to him (clearance even)
People can argue til the cows come home but all the ex pros believed it was a yellow as well bar Keane, ironic!
Last edited:
You missed the point. Whether Nani is simply trying to control the ball or not, it's ended up becoming a challenge between him and Arbeloa because Arbeloa's got there before him. He studs him in the chest which is a foul in anybody's book. The ref has to then decide whether Nani's raised foot (if you don't like the term challenge) was simply reckless or whether it was dangerous. By trying to control the ball in that fashion, has Nani put Arbeloa in danger? In the refs book, he did.