Whilst I agree that you invite a bad decision, as in this case, it doesn't make it right
English League Football [26th Feb - 2nd Mar 2010] **spoilers**
- Thread starter red11
- Start date
Whilst I agree that you invite a bad decision, as in this case, it doesn't make it right
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 13,279
- Location
- London
to be honest has many people seen the tackle ,considering there were no replays? , only fans at the ground may have got a better look
Don't worry about it, we see it differently. You're like a lot of people who I don't quite see eye to eye with on issues like leg breaks, I think they're terrible and always affect a players entire career negatively, they're basically a disaster. Whether the tackle was on purpose or not, he's just ruined Ramsey's progression for a year at least, it's not ok.
Whilst I agree that you invite a bad decision, as in this case, it doesn't make it right
The ball was going through to Walcott who had a few yards of space right in front of goal and was stopped through illegitimate means, has to be a foul.
That said, the one of Ramsey was much more obvious.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Feb 2007
- Posts
- 13,279
- Location
- London
still a red if its a serious injury , you cant keep a player on after breaking someones leg
Whatever happened to it being a man's game?
And following on from what you said there's also line between being physical and dangerous and that line is not crossed anymore against you then it is against any other team in the world
These leg breaks are few and far between in any country and just as Shawcross' tackle was freak accident it's a freak coincidence that the two most recent leg breaks have been against Arsenal players
I watched it again two or three times and you can clearly see it was his shin or maybe even his calf that made contact with Ramsey
On paper that shouldn't really be the case to be honest
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,338
- Location
- Cornwall
I hope that's a joke!
You can play a 'man's game' without leg breaks. It happens most weeks. What needs to stop is the lack of judgement when going into a potentially dangerous challenge, if you're a bit late, don't shove your studs through somebodies shin.
It looked like a clash of shins from what I saw.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 41,338
- Location
- Cornwall
Carragher, Baros (2003) and Cisse (2004) all suffered broken legs away to Blackburn. It happens.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,085
- Location
- Surrey
The only way we could get rid of these, is by getting rid of tackling completely. In the end in any contact sport like this, there will be accidents.
My feelings come from when I play football and go into a 50/50, I know what I can get away with that doesn't injure the other players. You know when you're doing something irresponsible and it's easy to avoid.
You can easily differentiate commitment and dangerous play
You can easily differentiate commitment and dangerous play
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 15 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 28,140
- Location
- Liverpool
No but can you not see that it's far more likely to have happened because of that attitude? And that it will continue to happen. Right after Eduardo's occurred we all knew that it was only a matter of time. After the previous matches against Stoke it isn't really surprising - had we played against a different side with a different footballing philosophy (against us) I wouldn't have had any thoughts like this and would have easily and only rued our luck.
Last edited:
This post will be ignored unfortunately.
iirc they weren't all horrible challenges though? Even still, that's terrible and you have to hope that things could have been done to avoid it.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I don't think Arsenal need any more safety, a freak tackle is a freak tackle, Shawcross isn't a weekly risk of ending a career. But players like Cana tackle the way he caught Eboue, against all teams, they ARE a weekly risk for ending someones career and the lack of punishment against him, and the few that foul like he does, is risking players health.
You can't ever stop freak accidents, but you really can stop the habbitual dirty and nasty tackles from being a risk, to everyone. I haven't seen a replay of Shawcrosses, and haven't seen enough of him doing awful challenges to make me think he's a dirty player, maybe this was a disgraceful tackle, maybe not, it doesn't really matter.
Complaining about Arsenal players/manager for asking for protection after one of their friends just got horribly injured infront of their eyes is truly pathetic, its a completely natural reaction and when the last two horrific injuries have both happened to you, after a tiring and draining game do you really expect completely logical arguments, or for people to feel slightly victimise, and maybe you could cut them some slack.
AS for the penalty, again Gilly, yes it was a penalty, you've got this idea that not deliberate = not a foul, however, thats simply wrong. Non deliberate handball is given as a foul all over the pitch every single week and is rarely complained about, its normally given when it changes the posession or outcome of a play. IN this case it did that, had his hand not been there, it was going towards goal and towards a dangerous area, it was a penalty, intent has NOTHING to do with the argument and shouldn't be discussed. Its a handball, his hand wasn't by his hip with nothing he could do about it, it was out very high and he moved the hand towards the ball, maybe unintentionally, but it changed the direction of the ball away from a goal scoring chance....... penalty every single game ever played.
Again, we should have had without question 2 other penalties, I fail to see how getting 33% of penalty decisions in our favour, and 66%, incorrectly, in Stokes favour, makes the referee biased to us.
You can't ever stop freak accidents, but you really can stop the habbitual dirty and nasty tackles from being a risk, to everyone. I haven't seen a replay of Shawcrosses, and haven't seen enough of him doing awful challenges to make me think he's a dirty player, maybe this was a disgraceful tackle, maybe not, it doesn't really matter.
Complaining about Arsenal players/manager for asking for protection after one of their friends just got horribly injured infront of their eyes is truly pathetic, its a completely natural reaction and when the last two horrific injuries have both happened to you, after a tiring and draining game do you really expect completely logical arguments, or for people to feel slightly victimise, and maybe you could cut them some slack.
AS for the penalty, again Gilly, yes it was a penalty, you've got this idea that not deliberate = not a foul, however, thats simply wrong. Non deliberate handball is given as a foul all over the pitch every single week and is rarely complained about, its normally given when it changes the posession or outcome of a play. IN this case it did that, had his hand not been there, it was going towards goal and towards a dangerous area, it was a penalty, intent has NOTHING to do with the argument and shouldn't be discussed. Its a handball, his hand wasn't by his hip with nothing he could do about it, it was out very high and he moved the hand towards the ball, maybe unintentionally, but it changed the direction of the ball away from a goal scoring chance....... penalty every single game ever played.
Again, we should have had without question 2 other penalties, I fail to see how getting 33% of penalty decisions in our favour, and 66%, incorrectly, in Stokes favour, makes the referee biased to us.
Doesn't matter who it was going to.
Eh? You can break your leg, if unlucky enough, just turning and catching your studs in the turf. Do you send the pitch off?
Indeed. Neither was the Eduardo incident, and neither was the Ramsey incident.
In fairness the challenge today looked as though it was honest, but it was still a dangerous challenge and he must have known that when he jumped in. I don't think Shawcross is dirty and the one at Birmingham was a worse challenge.