Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [9th - 11th May 2015]

At least MOTD mentioned it. The challenge was terrible but given that Marriner booked (although he actually showed a red at first) Mikel to begin with maybe his eyesight isn't the best.

Not to give him the 2nd yellow was pathetic though. His bottle went.
 
I've just noticed how many goals Spurs have let in this season. Jeez, if they get a decent defense they could be top 4.

There only 3 (just) teams that have let in more in the entire league!
 
How often do players get a red within the first few minutes of a game?

Definitely worthy of a red but commentary is frequently mentioning X player was saved a red because it was so close to the start of the game

Whether its right or wrong it happens all the time so it seems its more an unwritten rule than anything about the ref "bottling" it

Liverpool were pretty lucky Chelsea's passing was so suspect in the final 1/3 yesterday, certainly showed they had 1/2 the week off in that area of their play yesterday
 
Last edited:
An unwritten rule? Lol.

He bottled it. Just like he bottled the second yellow for him as well. Fabregas being sent off within a minute changes the game heavily in Liverpool's favour. Chelsea have got far too many decisions like that against us in recent years it's becoming a joke. Referees are a laughing stock again this season.
 
Fabregas should've been off at the start of the game, what crap referreing.

Purdy said:
If its an unwritten rule someone should've rescinded that red McAuley got against City a month ago
Click to expand...

And the card for captain fantastic against Man United, I mean he'd only been on the pitch 30 seconds. :D
 
FrankJH said:
How often do players get a red within the first few minutes of a game?

Definitely worthy of a red but commentary is frequently mentioning X player was saved a red because it was so close to the start of the game

Whether its right or wrong it happens all the time so it seems its more an unwritten rule than anything about the ref "bottling" it
Click to expand...

I just don't think he saw it as a red card, I didn't at the time and am still not convinced after replays. He didn't go over the top, he didn't stamp and he certainly did not go to 'do' him. He just happened to catch is ankle. For it to be red it has to be dangerous and have some indication of intent. He was beaten to the ball by a split second. Slow motion replays always make these things look worse. Players know when there has been a bad challenge and no-one took exception.

However Marriner did bottle the second yellow.
 
Frankiemac said:
For it to be red it has to be dangerous and have some indication of intent.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't.

He's lunged in, straight legged, studs first and caught Sterling above the ankle. He could have easily broke Sterling's leg. It's a clear red card and Marriner was looking straight at it.

The same thing happened when we played Chelsea away last season. After 2-3 minutes Eto nearly broke Henderson's leg and Webb bottled it too. Refs are too scared to make big calls generally and even more so right at the start of the game. They don't want to be seen to have ruined the game just in case they're wrong and take the easy option.
 
BaZ87 said:
No it doesn't.

He's lunged in, straight legged, studs first and caught Sterling above the ankle. He could have easily broke Sterling's leg. It's a clear red card and Marriner was looking straight at it.

The same thing happened when we played Chelsea away last season. After 2-3 minutes Eto nearly broke Henderson's leg and Webb bottled it too. Refs are too scared to make big calls generally and even more so right at the start of the game. They don't want to be seen to have ruined the game just in case they're wrong and take the easy option.
Click to expand...


There has to be intent. He made no attempt to injure the opponent, he was beaten to it by a fraction of a second. Tackling hasn't been outlawed (yet !).

Straight legged ?? How else are you supposed to slide tackle then ?

He was stretching for the ball. Where he caught him is pretty much irrelevant. He didn't go over the top of the ball, he went to where the ball was a split second before.

I have seen broken legs occur without there even being a foul. Any injury sustained is irrelevant, its how the tackle was made.
 
Frankiemac said:
There has to be intent. He made no attempt to injure the opponent, he was beaten to it by a fraction of a second. Tackling hasn't been outlawed (yet !).

Straight legged ?? How else are you supposed to slide tackle then ?

He was stretching for the ball. Where he caught him is pretty much irrelevant. He didn't go over the top of the ball, he went to where the ball was a split second before.

I have seen broken legs occur without there even being a foul. Any injury sustained is irrelevant, its how the tackle was made.
Click to expand...

No there does not have to be intent. Read the laws of the game.

And yes you can make a sliding tackle with your leg bent. Fabregas didn't slide though, he lunged with his full body weight going into the challenge. Had he slid into the challenge his body weight would have been grounded and there would have been less force.

Where he catches Sterling is very relevant because where he caught him could have easily injured him. I agree that whether Sterling was injured or not doesn't matter, it's the likelihood of a challenge injuring the opponent (as the laws say) that matters.

When you lunge into a challenge like Fabregas did and you catch the opponent anywhere from the ankle and above you're seriously risking injuring them, and when you're in danger of injuring a player it's a red card according to the laws.
 
Last edited:
BaZ87 said:
No there does not have to be intent. Read the laws of the game.

And yes you can make a sliding tackle with your leg bent. Fabregas didn't slide though, he lunged with his full body weight going into the challenge. Had he slid into the challenge his body weight would have been grounded and there would have been less force.

Where he catches Sterling is very relevant because where he caught him could have easily injured him. I agree that whether Sterling was injured or not doesn't matter, it's the likelihood of a challenge injuring the opponent that matters (as the laws say) that matters.

When you lunge into a challenge like Fabregas did and you catch the opponent anywhere from the ankle and above you're seriously risking injuring them, and when you're in danger of injuring a player it's a red card according to the laws.
Click to expand...

I have had to read, and understand, the laws of the game, as required when I a completed a refereeing course. The tackle has to be deemed to be reckless or out of control, and in my opinion he was neither.

There has to be an element of intent considered. You can send a player off even if he missed the opponent.

Farbregas didn't 'lunge' at anybody, he went for the ball and was beaten to it by a quicker oponent. Typical Sky generation kneejerk reaction over a mistimed tackle.

Where did he go over the ball ?

Where did he do anything to indicate he was intentionally trying to injure the player? He didn't leave his foot in when he had the chance to avoid it, he didnt raise his foot off the floor.

A referee can and should take this into account. In my opinion, Marriner got this right but also in my opinion , I think Marriner is one fo the worse referees in the PL and he should have given Fabregas a second yellow.

But also opinions are like a'holes etc... everyone has got one.
 
Frankiemac said:
I have had to read, and understand, the laws of the game, as required when I a completed a refereeing course. The tackle has to be deemed to be reckless or out of control.
Click to expand...

Whether you've read the laws of the game I don't know but you very clearly don't understand them.

A challenge that's considered reckless is a yellow card and there's no mention of 'out of control'. A red card is when the player uses excessive force which is defined as exceeding the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring the opponent. And again, there is absolutely no mention of intent.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/footballdevelopment/refereeing/81/42/36/log2013en_neutral.pdf

Fabregas left the ground and his full force was going down into the challenge. Had he slid into the challenge and caught Sterling then a yellow would have been sufficient as there wouldn't have been excessive force used but once you leave the ground you're using excessive force and in danger of injuring your opponent.
 
BaZ87 said:
Whether you've read the laws of the game I don't know but you very clearly don't understand them.

A challenge that's considered reckless is a yellow card and there's no mention of 'out of control'. A red card is when the player uses excessive force which is defined as exceeding the necessary use of force and is in danger of injuring the opponent. And again, there is absolutely no mention of intent.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/footballdevelopment/refereeing/81/42/36/log2013en_neutral.pdf

Fabregas left the ground and his full force was going down into the challenge. Had he slid into the challenge and caught Sterling then a yellow would have been sufficient as there wouldn't have been excessive force used but once you leave the ground you're using excessive force and in danger of injuring your opponent.
Click to expand...

I understand them perfectly well thank you.

I also understand when someone is being condescending, and not just towards me either.

'Intent' has to be considered. Feel free to take a refereeing course to find this out for yourself.

He wasn't going down, he slid in with a straight leg strecthing to reach the ball. There was no excessive force in my opinion, nor of the referee in this case.

In YOUR opinion there was. That's fine too. Telling other people they don't understand the laws of the game as if it is a fact, isn't fine.

I am drawing a line under this now as quite frankly I can't be bothered to waste any more time on the subject. I am never going to agree with what you have said and clearly you aren't going to with me.
 
Frankiemac said:
I understand them perfectly well thank you.

I also understand when someone is being condescending, and not just towards me either.

'Intent' has to be considered. Feel free to take a refereeing course to find this out for yourself.

He wasn't going down, he slid in with a straight leg strecthing to reach the ball. There was no excessive force in my opinion, nor of the referee in this case.

In YOUR opinion there was. That's fine too. Telling other people they don't understand the laws of the game as if it is a fact, isn't fine.

I am drawing a line under this now as quite frankly I can't be bothered to waste any more time on the subject. I am never going to agree with what you have said and clearly you aren't going to with me.
Click to expand...

I'm not being condescending. Your posts have shown that you don't understand the laws of the game. You said there needed to be intent numerous times which is factually wrong. You claimed that a red card is for reckless and out of control challenges, again this is factually wrong.

Had you simply gave an opinion that Fabregas' challenge didn't use excessive force I'd have disagreed and that would have been that. What you said though wasn't an opinion which is why I corrected you.
 
There's no unwritten rule. It's just a lack of bottle. Making a big call is hard enough, doing it in the first minute makes it 10x harder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom