The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
Did anyone think the Brentford player should have been sent off?

Having seen it, looked like a fairly strong leg, leading with studs, straight into knee, so thought is was a certain red. Franke, as one would expect, says it wasn't. But, Shearer, the other MOTD pundit and Lineker all agreed, definitely not a red. Because it was an accident.

At what point does a red card have to be a player INTENTIONALLY trying to hurt a player? I mean, if there was evidence a player was definitely trying to.injure someone else, it wouldn't be a standard red. It would be a red, huge fine and very long ban
 
Did anyone think the Brentford player should have been sent off?

Having seen it, looked like a fairly strong leg, leading with studs, straight into knee, so thought is was a certain red. Franke, as one would expect, says it wasn't. But, Shearer, the other MOTD pundit and Lineker all agreed, definitely not a red. Because it was an accident.

At what point does a red card have to be a player INTENTIONALLY trying to hurt a player? I mean, if there was evidence a player was definitely trying to.injure someone else, it wouldn't be a standard red. It would be a red, huge fine and very long ban
I think that's a silly argument they've made. Intent to injure makes things worse but of course an accidental bad challenge can be a red. It's still a bad challenge 🤷🏻.

Anyway, how do you decide what is deliberate and what is accidental?
 
I think that's a silly argument they've made. Intent to injure makes things worse but of course an accidental bad challenge can be a red. It's still a bad challenge 🤷🏻.

Anyway, how do you decide what is deliberate and what is accidental?
I'd like to think nearly every red card challenge there was no intent. Just really poorly executed / timed, and endangering an opponent.

Always irks me that Shearer gets paid so much, yet he doesn't even bother understanding the rules.
 
@Swango1980 the number of radio pundits who don't understand the rules is scary. I think all of them should be required to do a basic referees course, as part of their media training, before being allowed on TV or radio.

In recent years in particular, there has rarely been a deliberate nasty tackle. You have to go back to bygone eras to really remember the nasty ones.
 
Superb performance from the Sky TV director virtually missing the goal in the live feed whilst playing a reply of a shot my granny could have hit harder.
 
Superb performance from the Sky TV director virtually missing the goal in the live feed whilst playing a reply of a shot my granny could have hit harder.
I have sympathy, because they must have felt pretty safe there wouldn't be a goal a few seconds later. Then again, it is Southampton, so perhaps they should have anticipated it....
 
@Swango1980 the number of radio pundits who don't understand the rules is scary. I think all of them should be required to do a basic referees course, as part of their media training, before being allowed on TV or radio.

In recent years in particular, there has rarely been a deliberate nasty tackle. You have to go back to bygone eras to really remember the nasty ones.
I suspect most media people are more successful these days if they sensationalise things, and pull the strings of emotional fans.

So, knowing the rules probably doesn't help with that, unless it works in their favour by slamming an official, then they can paste them all over the screen. Otherwise, they can just speak ignorantly and make lazy comments about why they disagree with a decision
 
Top