Tyrone Mings stamp on Zlatan | He’s at it again

Ixion

Full Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
15,275
Not sure how they can ban Mings, impossible to prove it was intentional.
How do you prove Ibrahimovic was intentional? Maybe he had a spasm in his arm. I mean how do you prove any bad tackle is intentional.
 

OnlyTwoDaSilvas

Gullible
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
21,649
Location
The Mathews Bridge
Not sure how they can ban Mings, impossible to prove it was intentional.
I'd say looking down at where Zlatan was, leaping over him anyway and then bringing the foot down early instead of comfortably clearing him is reasonable enough evidence. The zero concern or remorse after it happened too. If you accidentally stand on someone's head, you don't trot off and pretend you know nothing of it.
 

ManUchosenbosslvg

New Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Messages
1,933
Supports
Manchester reds
I'd say looking down at where Zlatan was, leaping over him anyway and then bringing the foot down early instead of comfortably clearing him is reasonable enough evidence. The zero concern or remorse after it happened too. If you accidentally stand on someone's head, you don't trot off and pretend you know nothing of it.
He did immediately play the ball but nevertheless I think it was very childish back and forth between the 2 escalating to what happened due to a hapless ref. The irony is that Zlatan immediately bounced up and got back into the game by what should have hurt him but when he got flicked by Surman he dived to the ground like a complete weed.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
49,878
Location
W.Yorks
Stop embarrassing yourself.
He's got a point. You can apply the same "proof" logic to both. If the question is why does Zlatan swing his elbow backwards, then why does Mings bring his foot down below him when trying to jump over someone?

It's irrelevant because they're both forms of dangerous play, thus worthy of punishment.
 

Nighteyes

Another Muppet
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
25,467
Nice to see us accept the ban and move on. That's how you deal with it. Had this been Liverpool you would have had a full statement crying foul followed by printed tshirts already on the way.
 

ManUchosenbosslvg

New Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Messages
1,933
Supports
Manchester reds
Nice to see us accept the ban and move on. That's how you deal with it. Had this been Liverpool you would have had a full statement crying foul followed by printed tshirts already on the way.
Other than Wayne's lies in the media, José's "big man" speech and Zlatan saying that Ming's jumped into his elbow I'd say we've taken it with good grace:D
 

PickledRed

Full Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2008
Messages
5,499
Supports
Liverpool
How do you prove Ibrahimovic was intentional? Maybe he had a spasm in his arm. I mean how do you prove any bad tackle is intentional.
It's more about the balance of probability. The burden of proof isn't equivalent to that of a criminal trial. Zlatan probably meant it.
 

The Outsider

New Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
1,227
Supports
Chelsea
One point about the Mings stamp, he was trying to step over both Rooney and Zlatan and Rooney gets up. Was Mings knockoff balance by Rooney as it looked like he stepped on Zlatan rather than giving an outright stamp (which I agree would have been despicable).
 

ManUchosenbosslvg

New Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2015
Messages
1,933
Supports
Manchester reds
Why they don't just punish the players with heavy €/£ fines like in US? The clubs are the ones been punished not the players.
We usually do punish any player that gets a red card or suspension but decided we aren't going to fine Zlatan as we desperately need him to sign up again for next season so can't risk angering him.
 
Last edited:

VanHaal'sRedArmy

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2015
Messages
2,623
Extend Mings' suspension or not? Tough call.

Extended ban = misses Tottenham, Chelsea, and Liverpool games. If he can take out Mane or Coutinho, it would be better off in the long run for us.
 

top1whoisman

Meet the press(conference)
Scout
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
18,889
Location
Helsinki
Extend Mings' suspension or not? Tough call.

Extended ban = misses Tottenham, Chelsea, and Liverpool games. If he can take out Mane or Coutinho, it would be better off in the long run for us.
I know it kind of sucks that the ”wrong” teams tend to benefit from these retrospective bans. But in this case I’m all for the right club and player to be punished, this kind of stuff needs to be cut out of the game. Don’t think Bournemouth would get any more points from mentioned games with Mings in the lineup. He also might be out for a while with his knee injury anyway.
 
Last edited:

Alabaster Codify7

New Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
6,553
Location
Wales
Was always gonna happen and rightly so, it was a deliberate elbow as far as I'm concerned. Mings should get his desserts too.

Gonna be interesting to see how badly or perhaps well we fare without the big man for 3 games. Let's hope he signs off in style by winning it for us in Rostov this week.
 

Jsquared

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Messages
61
Location
Bahrain
Why they don't just punish the players with heavy €/£ fines like in US? The clubs are the ones been punished not the players.
That makes a bit of sense. I can still see match bans as the manager is supposed to maintain control of his team and is responsible for their conduct on the pitch *to an extent*, but yes, I think there is some merit in monetary fines to players. Especially if the ban/red card is for violent conduct (as opposed to, say, handball or a last-man-back tactical foul).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Penna

Kag

Full Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
18,875
Location
United Kingdom
It's a fair result.

Mings won't get away with it either. The FA should really be extending his supposed ban because it's a very tenuous appeal.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
Not sure how they can ban Mings, impossible to prove it was intentional.
Stop embarrassing yourself.
I think you need to take your own advice.
If you think a guy who takes a good look at who's on the floor, changes stride, jumps on the guy's head, then runs off without even pretending to apologise is in any way unintentional, then it serves the same (foolish) line of reasoning to Ibra's elbow.

Mings will get a huge ban. I hope his injury is very minor, so that he can suck up this ban. Otherwise it's a completely token gesture.

I'm trying to remember when Keane got a ban for the comments about Haaland in his book. I seem to remember he was already injured when he got his ban, so that was similarly token. They can't wait for you to get healed though! Otherwise cynical clubs would just pretend the player was fit to play.

I also vaguely recall a Chelsea player, victim of an appalling challenge got his violent conduct ban reduced due to the provocation.
I wonder if we could use similar with Ibra, as it doesn't get much more provoking than someone jumping on your head when you're prone!
 

J-Stander

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
5,748
It's a fair result.

Mings won't get away with it either. The FA should really be extending his supposed ban because it's a very tenuous appeal.
Definitely. The absolute cheek of the small time bastards.
 

Successful

Owes the Caf £25 (With interests)
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
7,347
Location
On top of the league
A bit sad about the ban. This probably means he will miss out on +40 goals this season. He was really on to something big. A rest when he's got the moment up.... boring.
 

KGBhoy

Full Member
Joined
May 10, 2001
Messages
1,729
A bit sad about the ban. This probably means he will miss out on +40 goals this season. He was really on to something big. A rest when he's got the moment up.... boring.
The reason he will miss out on 40+ is all the chances he's missed.
 

lem8sh

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2006
Messages
9,409
Location
Martinez school of defending
I think you need to take your own advice.
If you think a guy who takes a good look at who's on the floor, changes stride, jumps on the guy's head, then runs off without even pretending to apologise is in any way unintentional, then it serves the same (foolish) line of reasoning to Ibra's elbow.

Mings will get a huge ban. I hope his injury is very minor, so that he can suck up this ban. Otherwise it's a completely token gesture.

I'm trying to remember when Keane got a ban for the comments about Haaland in his book. I seem to remember he was already injured when he got his ban, so that was similarly token. They can't wait for you to get healed though! Otherwise cynical clubs would just pretend the player was fit to play.

I also vaguely recall a Chelsea player, victim of an appalling challenge got his violent conduct ban reduced due to the provocation.
I wonder if we could use similar with Ibra, as it doesn't get much more provoking than someone jumping on your head when you're prone!
Nobody can prove it was intentional, that's just a matter of fact. Only person who knows is Mings himself, I myself find it hard to believe that any player would intentionally stamp on somebody's head.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,004
Nobody can prove it was intentional, that's just a matter of fact. Only person who knows is Mings himself, I myself find it hard to believe that any player would intentionally stamp on somebody's head.
That my redcafe pal is why there's been such revulsion at it. It really was that shocking! If it was accidental, he surely, surely would at least have gone and apologised. He'd have felt a skull under his studs!

Whereas elbows are fairly frequent really. Still out of order, but much more easy to happen.
 

Shane88

Actually Nostradamus
Joined
Jan 12, 2011
Messages
35,173
Location
Targaryen loyalist
I think Kevin Friend was shocking but it definitely maximised our chances of winning the game.

I don't recall a shoulder barge on Jones, was it shoulder to shoulder or in the back or what?

Obviously G Nev believed Zlat throwing Ming's was a red if the officials had seen it.

Surman prob shouldn't have seen any cards nevermind a red.

Ming's and Zlat should both have gone obviously, but I'm sure if Bournemouth had the choice they'd have preferred 10v10 to 11v10 for the rest of the match.

Thought the 2 penalty decisions were correct, ours just about but disagree with G Nev implying it was only given because of home crowd pressure on the ref.

Arter should have gone for a 2nd yellow for the careless slide on Pobga.

Friend has to stop the match for a head injury to Arter after he looked out cold after Pogba's shoulder smashed him accidentally, I mean just look at him. It's not up to the ref to wait for the ball to go out, in the case of a clear head injury he has to stop the match by the rules. Massive failure of his duty here. I don't know if he was worried about the crowd reaction or what but idiotic refereeing.


To add to the above Friend then constantly stopped the game allowing Bournemouth to waste time. He once stopped us taking a quick free kick on the edge of our box after a foul by Afobe who rolled around for a bit.

All round shot performance by Friend, but it should have allowed us to take the 3 points.
Out cold my arse. The replay showed Arter going down clutching his face doing the standard diving twat's scream of agony. The knocked out pose was nothing more than time-wasting.
 

Ban

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2015
Messages
26,022
Location
Zagreb, HR
Ridiculous from Bournemouth to appeal. Hope Mings will get a bigger ban.

Good from Zlatan to take the ban and carry on.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,189
Location
Blitztown
If someone shot at you with a handgun and missed, would you want them to have lesser punishment than if they had hit you in the arm? Idiocy. An elbow, whilst in the air and not able to use leverage against the ground for torso rotation, versus a downward stomp with the extra force of bodyweight and gravity. The first could give you a concussion, the second could kill you. The size of the leg muscles in most people means you can generate something like three times more force with a strike with the leg than with an arm. Martial arts should have taught you that.
The bolded above, yes I would want someone to have a lesser punishment for intent than outcome. That's how the world works. It's not flawless but it's what we have. You can't have the same punishment for discharging a weapon vs shooting someone.

I think the FA has rushed to decisions here. The game ended 1-1, both players handled it pretty well. Nobody will really know how much intent was involved in either incident. They could have been given 3 game suspended bans and sent to a childrens hospital in Bournemouth together for some Premier league community work. Wouldn't have had any issue with that.
 

Ish

Lights on for Luke
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
32,139
Location
Voted the best city in the world
Not sure how they can ban Mings, impossible to prove it was intentional.
I missed the incident, but after the match it only took me to watch the replay once, and I'm pretty convinced it was intentional.

He clearly looks down at Ibra before he "tries to jump over him" and he knows exactly where Ibra's head is. Secondly, it seems he is always use a bit more "force" when he brings his landing foot down, which connects with Ibra's head.

But also, fortunately, I don't think the FA needs to "prove intent". They can just ban him if they view the incident to be malicious.
 

Flying high

Full Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2015
Messages
1,715
If you are trying desperately to get back into position, you will look to make sure that the obstacle on the ground, which you know is there, doesn't impede you.

I really don't see this as an argument though. Of course he meant it. Just look at the ongoing fight between him and Zlatan. A 6 match ban seems about right given no damage was actually done, not to mention Zlatan gave out his own punishment.

However, I don't think you have to be paranoid to think that were it a United player who'd done that, the press would have insantly been asking for a rest of the season type ban. With at least one ex pool or city player explaining in earnest how dangerous this action was and that a lifetime ban is the only way to protect children.
 

Jsquared

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 30, 2016
Messages
61
Location
Bahrain
Mings will get a huge ban. I hope his injury is very minor, so that he can suck up this ban. Otherwise it's a completely token gesture.
Is there not a way for the association to suspend the ban until the physio declares him fit to play?

The bolded above, yes I would want someone to have a lesser punishment for intent than outcome. That's how the world works. It's not flawless but it's what we have. You can't have the same punishment for discharging a weapon vs shooting someone.
That's absurd. It is absolutely not "how the world works". In both situations, the gunman is trying to kill you. Both just suck at aiming to differing degrees. Or you're rewarding luck (lesser punishment for someone when both people attempt the same thing, and one just happens to get closer to succeeding). Attempted murder is attempted murder. If you shoot at someone and miss, or shoot at someone and hit them with a non-fatal wound, you are still charged with attempted murder. I realize I'm rambling about the analogy and not the actual subject at hand, but if I walked up to you on the street and drove an elbow strike into your nose and broke it, or I swung an elbow strike at you but missed and hit you in the collarbone, it doesn't matter. It's still assault, the intent is the same, the punishment should be the same regardless of my luck in aiming. Same with the head stomp. He attempted to STOMP ON HIS HEAD, whether he was "unlucky" (or lucky, depending on perspective) to not connect properly doesn't change the intent, which is the REASON you have bans in the first place! To put it another way: if a player is jogging towards an opponent and trips, and his forehead hits the opponent in the chest as he is falling down, is that a foul? Zidane headbutted Materazzi in the chest with intent, and received a red card. The "outcome" would be the same -- head impact with chest -- but the intent is different. What is being punished *IS* the intent!
 

royboy16

Full Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
8,184
Location
The moon gave me flowers for funerals to come.
Was always gonna happen and rightly so, it was a deliberate elbow as far as I'm concerned. Mings should get his desserts too.

Gonna be interesting to see how badly or perhaps well we fare without the big man for 3 games. Let's hope he signs off in style by winning it for us in Rostov this week.
Wishful thinking but if he could kill the tie over there it would be great.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,189
Location
Blitztown
That's absurd. It is absolutely not "how the world works". In both situations, the gunman is trying to kill you.
It really is. I answered one question and you're now responding as if I answered a different one.

We don't really need to debate an analogy but being shot and being shot at are two wholly different crimes.

We live in a world where all of the following can exist;

- The FA says "We cannot determine intent, but we are imposing a 3 match ban because you showed a lack of care and landed on a players head"

- Had the player been knocked unconscious and hospitalised they could have said "We cannot determine intent but you have severely injured another player due to reckless behaviour and thus give you a 10 match ban"

Circumstances determine outcomes.
 

manutddjw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
3,700
Location
Canada
If he's out for 3 matches I hope we don't play him against FC Rostov on Thursday. We should give Rooney and Rashford a chance and try to determine who we should while Zlatan is out.