Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [13th - 15th August 2011]

I think Gervinho being sent off was a bit harsh, while it was technically his own fault Barton really was asking for it. He was incredibly aggressive and manhandled him, I thought that was far worse than a slap that barely even touched him.

It reminded me a bit of Joe Cole for Liverpool last season! :p
 
Pighardia said:
Blah Blah Blah, that's right Arsene, all of your players are angels and you are very hard done by.

Barton and Song should have gone at least, not sure about Gervinho tbh.


Gervinho was definitely tripped
Click to expand...

Still hit him about the head, you can't do that, laws of the game say it's an instant sending off. If it's a punch or a little slap you can't do it.
 
Azza said:
Still hit him about the head, you can't do that, laws of the game say it's an instant sending off. If it's a punch or a little slap you can't do it.
Click to expand...


Certainly, it is the laws of the game so he should be sent off, in that respect i completely agree but i would prefer it if it wasn't so black and white and the incident could be reviewed, and if that happened i would probably say a yellow card and being told to calm down would be sufficient imo.
 
Gervinho should have been sent off, he raised his hand to another player in anger.

Barton should have been off (also shouldn't be on but thats a different debate, should still be in prison really)

Song should have been off and must get a ban now.

Wenger needs to sort it out, sounds like he was watching a completely different game to everyone else. Must be first manager to get fired now
 
My view on the sending off issues that have been raised on MOTD so far:

The Richardson decision was correct I believe, no complaints about that. Song should have been off for the stamp, Barton should have been off for the grabbing Gervinho who's red card was correct, so overall 2/4 of the decision were correct imo.
 
explicit4u said:
There was clear contact in the box, MoTD just clarified that, Barton needs to understand that he's not allowed to take the law into his own hands.
Click to expand...

He barely touched him and he dived, the ref and linesman saw it and saw it for a dive as well. People need to wise up all this "there is contact" stuff is BS and thankfully some refs still see it this way. If there wasn't the stupid "done contact" viewpoint spouted al the time you would see less players waving their legs around for an excuse to dive.

On Barton the guy is a prize prat, a complete moron but It was handbags which happens in at least one game a week in the EPL, especially when you are a **** team lie Newcastle against a "top" team who on not being able to win fair attempt to cheat.

There is only 1 person to blame and that is Gervinho. Just because Barton is a ****** doesn't make it a fair game to slap him about and stamp on him on the football pitch. He made a valid point that if it was him slapping/stamping on people he would already have been hung, drawn and quartered by everyone and sundry.
 
Last edited:
Pighardia said:
...as it could have just been an accidental tangle....
Click to expand...

It was accidental but that makes no difference as to whether it was a red card or not. As you clearly saw from the reverse angle, Suarez had shifted it to the side of the keeper (no wider than the edge of the 6 yard box) and would have got to the ball comfortably before the keeper to slide it into the empty net. It was a straight forward red card in my opinion.
 
BaZ87 said:
It was accidental but that makes no difference as to whether it was a red card or not. As you clearly saw from the reverse angle, Suarez had shifted it to the side of the keeper (no wider than the edge of the 6 yard box) and would have got to the ball comfortably before the keeper to slide it into the empty net. It was a straight forward red card in my opinion.
Click to expand...


I disagree. I would only like to see red cards given where there is intent shown, now there may well have been intent on Richardson's part in this incident(though i don't think there was imo), but it is not clear so i think that in the end, a penalty and a a yellow card(giving him the benefit of the doubt) is probably the right outcome.

For me, the fact that it was accidental makes a lot of difference really.
 
What you would like to see and what the rules state are different things though. In regards to denying a goalscoring opportunity, intent makes no difference.
 
The only reasoning I could think of was that he was heading away from the goal, but that's clutching at straws really.

Otherwise, I don't think the disallowed goal was harsh at all. Clear push, and whistle blown before the shot.
 
Watch Wigan - Norwich and wow, they are both so bad. Hope Norwich ain't thinking they got a point against a PL side because when Wigan go down this year they'll be mid table at best in the Championship.
 
BaZ87 said:
What you would like to see and what the rules state are different things though. In regards to denying a goalscoring opportunity, intent makes no difference.
Click to expand...


Indeed, going by the rules he should have gone. If we are arguing about the technicalities of whether he was in control or going to score then i agree that the ref was wrong and it was a clear goalscoring opportunity, and so a sending off but as i said, in the end i think the outcome was porbably the right one.(in my fantasy world where football is fair this is what would happen anyway;))
 
skippi90 said:
The only reasoning I could think of was that he was heading away from the goal, but that's clutching at straws really.

Otherwise, I don't think the disallowed goal was harsh at all. Clear push, and whistle blown before the shot.
Click to expand...

As Dalglish said, when you're rounding the keeper you have to move away from goal. He was still fairly central though (within the width of the 6 yard box).

And a push? He's barely made any contact with him let alone pushed him. If what Carroll done was a foul then there'd be 20 penalties per game. You won't see a defender in the country that doesn't look to lean into the attacker as they're going up for a header and you'll never see a foul given against them for doing so. Ferdinand just completely ****ed up his jump and got caught under the ball. And the whistle may have gone but the surrounding defenders and keeper played on, so had the foul not been given, it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the strike.
 
BaZ87 said:
As Dalglish said, when you're rounding the keeper you have to move away from goal. He was still fairly central though (within the width of the 6 yard box).

And a push? He's barely made any contact with him let alone pushed him. If what Carroll done was a foul then there'd be 20 penalties per game. You won't see a defender in the country that doesn't look to lean into the attacker as they're going up for a header and you'll never see a foul given against them for doing so. Ferdinand just completely ****ed up his jump and got caught under the ball. And the whistle may have gone but the surrounding defenders and keeper played on, so had the foul not been given, it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the strike.
Click to expand...

Dowd would never make the same decision against a United player. Lets face it. Would be instant red.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom