comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 8 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Skipp should not have been on the pitch. He didn't play the ball, Diaz moved it and Skipp nearly broke his ankle. If spotted and reviewed it's almost always a red. Spurs even got away with a foul before one of their goals.
Jota ....I wouldn't have complained if he got a red.
Soft penalty decision for Richardson ...but I've seen them given ..
Your third goal ...mo Salah was 100% being impeded ..yet somehow spurs were given the foul and ye scored from.that ...
And every 50 50 was blown up for a spurs foul .
I'll.say this lads ...you have a collection of the biggest whiners in the Premier league .
Evertime we play spurs ...its klanfield this , penalty decision that , var this, var that .
comment by THE MISSILE (U13008)
posted 2 minutes ago
Jota ....I wouldn't have complained if he got a red.
Soft penalty decision for Richardson ...but I've seen them given ..
Your third goal ...mo Salah was 100% being impeded ..yet somehow spurs were given the foul and ye scored from.that ...
And every 50 50 was blown up for a spurs foul .
I'll.say this lads ...you have a collection of the biggest whiners in the Premier league .
Evertime we play spurs ...its klanfield this , penalty decision that , var this, var that .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When Salah elbowed Davies and he was cut? You aving a laugh?
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Most high boots are considered genuine, instinctive attempts to get the ball. Almost never see reds for them except particularly egregious lunges (like Mane's a few years ago) which Jota's attempt wasn't. Surprised by how many are saying should have been sent off for that.
Was distracted many times in the game, so didn't see the penalty incident with Richarlison.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
comment by ®åρtor ✡ (U1071)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gaffer Pranky (U22336)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 1 minute ago
But c’mon lads it Anfield. What do you expect
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A bit like at your place last season.
No jota pen given for blatant foul, and that foul by Kane.
Both blatant, but thems the breaks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When are you going to grow up and understand what cockney means you prattt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it so obviously winds you right up
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 0 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.“
Apologies Winston I copied the part of the rules below the extract I meant to.
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by THE MISSILE (U13008)
posted 2 minutes ago
Jota ....I wouldn't have complained if he got a red.
Soft penalty decision for Richardson ...but I've seen them given ..
Your third goal ...mo Salah was 100% being impeded ..yet somehow spurs were given the foul and ye scored from.that ...
And every 50 50 was blown up for a spurs foul .
I'll.say this lads ...you have a collection of the biggest whiners in the Premier league .
Evertime we play spurs ...its klanfield this , penalty decision that , var this, var that .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When Salah elbowed Davies and he was cut? You aving a laugh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point was Davies fouled Salah before the elbow, and should have been penalized for it. Was a ridiculous decision not to award Salah the foul and Spurs scored seconds later.
Belfast, I’m sorry but that’s nonsense.
You can believe that to be true, but there’s nothing in the footage that suggests it and I don’t think many people really believe it.
It’s also completely different to what you originally said.
You’re now accusing him of violent conduct, it’s seems.
The excessive force being the part. When a player tries to play the ball mid flight like that it is usually to finesse the ball to get it under control. Not the plodding motion with the studs that Jota applied. Like i said dangerous play or violent conduct. That’s what I meant by it.
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will agree to disagree
That angle of studs with that amount of force anywhere near the knee and it’s a straight red. Why should the head be any different.
Dangerous play is not a red!
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, you've never played football before, but to say Jota know is nonsense. High boot incidents happen instinctively ALL THE TIME - except most times, contact between the boot and head doesn't actually occur. Doesn't mean the player with the high boot is deliberately looking to endanger or injure his opponent. And Jota is certainly not that type of player.
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will agree to disagree
That angle of studs with that amount of force anywhere near the knee and it’s a straight red. Why should the head be any different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With all due respect, jumping from calling it dangerous to accusing him or deliberately kicking him in the head sums up the lack of consistency with your view in line with the rules.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. I used the wrong phrase Winston. Excessive force being how I should’ve phrased. Fact remains similar ‘tackles’ have been deemed as red cards by officials.
comment by Sheriff John Brown - Arteta IN!!! (U7482)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, you've never played football before, but to say Jota know is nonsense. High boot incidents happen instinctively ALL THE TIME - except most times, contact between the boot and head doesn't actually occur. Doesn't mean the player with the high boot is deliberately looking to endanger or injure his opponent. And Jota is certainly not that type of player.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually played at a decent enough level. And was on the end of a few of these types of head height crescent kicks.
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. I used the wrong phrase Winston. Excessive force being how I should’ve phrased. Fact remains similar ‘tackles’ have been deemed as red cards by officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes, and I haven’t said it’s definitely not a red.
I’ve said it’s a matter of opinion, I don’t think it was a red and that people should properly understand the law before criticising the referee.
There’s nothing excessive about trying to kick the ball like Jota did.
It was reckless, and a clear yellow, but I don’t see how anyone can claim it’s more than that, personally.
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will agree to disagree
That angle of studs with that amount of force anywhere near the knee and it’s a straight red. Why should the head be any different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In that case Skipp should have been sent off for nearly breaking Diaz's ankle. Straight red as you said.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. I used the wrong phrase Winston. Excessive force being how I should’ve phrased. Fact remains similar ‘tackles’ have been deemed as red cards by officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes, and I haven’t said it’s definitely not a red.
I’ve said it’s a matter of opinion, I don’t think it was a red and that people should properly understand the law before criticising the referee.
There’s nothing excessive about trying to kick the ball like Jota did.
It was reckless, and a clear yellow, but I don’t see how anyone can claim it’s more than that, personally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I just believe if there is contact with a boot and head with a certain amount of applied force. And if the offending player doesn’t make any contact at all with the ball. Further the player that is on the receiving end has to leave the field due to the injury and needs medical attention for a laceration - it can be deemed excessive.
Like I said a similar motion anywhere around the knee and it’s a red usually. But I just believe it’s football and tackles to the head shouldn’t be overlooked or taken lightly.
Sign in if you want to comment
Questions about decisions
Page 2 of 6
6
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 8 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Skipp should not have been on the pitch. He didn't play the ball, Diaz moved it and Skipp nearly broke his ankle. If spotted and reviewed it's almost always a red. Spurs even got away with a foul before one of their goals.
posted on 30/4/23
Jota ....I wouldn't have complained if he got a red.
Soft penalty decision for Richardson ...but I've seen them given ..
Your third goal ...mo Salah was 100% being impeded ..yet somehow spurs were given the foul and ye scored from.that ...
And every 50 50 was blown up for a spurs foul .
I'll.say this lads ...you have a collection of the biggest whiners in the Premier league .
Evertime we play spurs ...its klanfield this , penalty decision that , var this, var that .
posted on 30/4/23
comment by THE MISSILE (U13008)
posted 2 minutes ago
Jota ....I wouldn't have complained if he got a red.
Soft penalty decision for Richardson ...but I've seen them given ..
Your third goal ...mo Salah was 100% being impeded ..yet somehow spurs were given the foul and ye scored from.that ...
And every 50 50 was blown up for a spurs foul .
I'll.say this lads ...you have a collection of the biggest whiners in the Premier league .
Evertime we play spurs ...its klanfield this , penalty decision that , var this, var that .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When Salah elbowed Davies and he was cut? You aving a laugh?
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
posted on 30/4/23
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/4/23
Most high boots are considered genuine, instinctive attempts to get the ball. Almost never see reds for them except particularly egregious lunges (like Mane's a few years ago) which Jota's attempt wasn't. Surprised by how many are saying should have been sent off for that.
Was distracted many times in the game, so didn't see the penalty incident with Richarlison.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
posted on 30/4/23
comment by ®åρtor ✡ (U1071)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Gaffer Pranky (U22336)
posted 16 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 1 minute ago
But c’mon lads it Anfield. What do you expect
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A bit like at your place last season.
No jota pen given for blatant foul, and that foul by Kane.
Both blatant, but thems the breaks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When are you going to grow up and understand what cockney means you prattt?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But it so obviously winds you right up
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 0 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.“
Apologies Winston I copied the part of the rules below the extract I meant to.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by LukaBrasi COYS (U22178)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by THE MISSILE (U13008)
posted 2 minutes ago
Jota ....I wouldn't have complained if he got a red.
Soft penalty decision for Richardson ...but I've seen them given ..
Your third goal ...mo Salah was 100% being impeded ..yet somehow spurs were given the foul and ye scored from.that ...
And every 50 50 was blown up for a spurs foul .
I'll.say this lads ...you have a collection of the biggest whiners in the Premier league .
Evertime we play spurs ...its klanfield this , penalty decision that , var this, var that .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
When Salah elbowed Davies and he was cut? You aving a laugh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point was Davies fouled Salah before the elbow, and should have been penalized for it. Was a ridiculous decision not to award Salah the foul and Spurs scored seconds later.
posted on 30/4/23
Belfast, I’m sorry but that’s nonsense.
You can believe that to be true, but there’s nothing in the footage that suggests it and I don’t think many people really believe it.
It’s also completely different to what you originally said.
You’re now accusing him of violent conduct, it’s seems.
posted on 30/4/23
The excessive force being the part. When a player tries to play the ball mid flight like that it is usually to finesse the ball to get it under control. Not the plodding motion with the studs that Jota applied. Like i said dangerous play or violent conduct. That’s what I meant by it.
posted on 30/4/23
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will agree to disagree
That angle of studs with that amount of force anywhere near the knee and it’s a straight red. Why should the head be any different.
posted on 30/4/23
Dangerous play is not a red!
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, you've never played football before, but to say Jota know is nonsense. High boot incidents happen instinctively ALL THE TIME - except most times, contact between the boot and head doesn't actually occur. Doesn't mean the player with the high boot is deliberately looking to endanger or injure his opponent. And Jota is certainly not that type of player.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will agree to disagree
That angle of studs with that amount of force anywhere near the knee and it’s a straight red. Why should the head be any different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With all due respect, jumping from calling it dangerous to accusing him or deliberately kicking him in the head sums up the lack of consistency with your view in line with the rules.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
posted on 30/4/23
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
posted on 30/4/23
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. I used the wrong phrase Winston. Excessive force being how I should’ve phrased. Fact remains similar ‘tackles’ have been deemed as red cards by officials.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by Sheriff John Brown - Arteta IN!!! (U7482)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 21 minutes ago
Should Jota have been sent off for a high boot on Skipp? yes, dangerous high boot with studs showing at an unnatural position.
Should Skipp have already been sent off himself by that point for a foul on Diaz? No, yellow card. He played the ball first and the momentum meant he carried through after.
Should we have had a penalty for a foul on Richarlison? Yes but not surprised there was a few penalty shouts today that were rightly rebuffed. But the Richarlison one was clear. Konate had his arms around him and prevented him from maybe contact with the diagonal ball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don’t mean this to be rude, but this comment sums up discussions like this and why people need to spend some time understanding the rules.
Dangerous play isn’t a red.
Unnatural position is of no relevance to the serious foul play law.
If you’re going to call for a red then surely you should do so in accordance with the rules themselves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
“In addition, a player who, when not challenging for the ball, deliberately strikes an opponent or any other person on the head or face with the hand or arm, is guilty of violent conduct unless the force used was negligible.“
Winston Jota knew what he was doing with his studs at that angle. He knew Skipp was trying to play the ball with his head
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps, you've never played football before, but to say Jota know is nonsense. High boot incidents happen instinctively ALL THE TIME - except most times, contact between the boot and head doesn't actually occur. Doesn't mean the player with the high boot is deliberately looking to endanger or injure his opponent. And Jota is certainly not that type of player.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually played at a decent enough level. And was on the end of a few of these types of head height crescent kicks.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. I used the wrong phrase Winston. Excessive force being how I should’ve phrased. Fact remains similar ‘tackles’ have been deemed as red cards by officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes, and I haven’t said it’s definitely not a red.
I’ve said it’s a matter of opinion, I don’t think it was a red and that people should properly understand the law before criticising the referee.
There’s nothing excessive about trying to kick the ball like Jota did.
It was reckless, and a clear yellow, but I don’t see how anyone can claim it’s more than that, personally.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
He was clearly trying to play the ball.
I think any other interpretation of that incident is bizarre.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will agree to disagree
That angle of studs with that amount of force anywhere near the knee and it’s a straight red. Why should the head be any different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In that case Skipp should have been sent off for nearly breaking Diaz's ankle. Straight red as you said.
posted on 30/4/23
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 36 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 34 seconds ago
Dangerous play is not a red!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://youtu.be/4BDfqsyzAyE
Quite a few not too dissimilar. And I’m sure many of these players would argue they were trying to play the ball
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What’s that’s got to do with the fact that dangerous play is not a red card offence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. I used the wrong phrase Winston. Excessive force being how I should’ve phrased. Fact remains similar ‘tackles’ have been deemed as red cards by officials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well yes, and I haven’t said it’s definitely not a red.
I’ve said it’s a matter of opinion, I don’t think it was a red and that people should properly understand the law before criticising the referee.
There’s nothing excessive about trying to kick the ball like Jota did.
It was reckless, and a clear yellow, but I don’t see how anyone can claim it’s more than that, personally.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair enough. I just believe if there is contact with a boot and head with a certain amount of applied force. And if the offending player doesn’t make any contact at all with the ball. Further the player that is on the receiving end has to leave the field due to the injury and needs medical attention for a laceration - it can be deemed excessive.
Like I said a similar motion anywhere around the knee and it’s a red usually. But I just believe it’s football and tackles to the head shouldn’t be overlooked or taken lightly.
Page 2 of 6
6