Souness: We cant lay all the blame on the Referee, we should be asking ourselves what Pogba should have done in this situation
Pickford's tackle on VVD: What should be the punishment?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
Pickford should have received at least a yellow or possibly red for that. But now the time is passed. Refree VAR all had time to react there on the pitch, but they didn't and matter should be closed now. Had VD not been injured and out people wouldn't be discussing this tackle post match like this. Football is not a revenge that you retrospectively punish someone ONLY because the player is injured.
Resteospective punishment is a can of worms. It can be applied when player is injured or not. Dangerous for all teams. Such punishment should be applied exceptionally when refree missed the action. This is not such case IMHO.
Resteospective punishment is a can of worms. It can be applied when player is injured or not. Dangerous for all teams. Such punishment should be applied exceptionally when refree missed the action. This is not such case IMHO.
Nani was watching the ball with no intent in our match against Real Madrid too. Didn't stop Calkir from seizing this opportunity to send him off and earned a fat paycheck from Perez.
I'd have no issue with a retrospective ban of a few games despite it being against liverpool. So i'd say he definitely 100% deserves a retrospective ban because im utterly biased and even i can see its deserved. The premier league is kind of long overdue dealing with tackles that dangerous.
Doubt anything will come of it though and after liverpool kicking up a stink and demanding it its probably for the best. As that would create a pretty terrible precedent.
Doubt anything will come of it though and after liverpool kicking up a stink and demanding it its probably for the best. As that would create a pretty terrible precedent.
Fully agreed. No one can now if Pickford had any malicious intent here, but even if we give him the benefit of the doubt it was still a reckless, moronic challenge, that has no place in football.
Also, take of your United specs for a second here and ignore the fact that its a Liverpool player that went down. If someone mowed down Bruno or Greenwood like that we would have wanted retribution.
Looked at this a few times and I think that's a horrible tackle. It's hard for me to say if it was intentional or just a very panicky challenge with terrible technique. Either way I think an extended ban for some games is in order. Hard to say how long it should be - what does the rule book say?
Bizarre summary.
A red card most likely
It's fine that there's no intent and that goalkeepers have a certain amount of leeway, but this isn't the first time he lunges in like this and the injury potential is high. Watching the replay, at the height and pace that Pickford comes in, i have no idea how Van Dijks leg doesn't snap like a twig there. It ends up being fecking mental, textbook case of serious foul play. If you're a goalkeeper and you find yourself lunging in with your studs up, something has gone badly wrong.
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Clear red card
Not quite sure why there's so much discussion of intent in here. The only difference it makes is whether it's a red card or GBH.
He should get a retrospective ban but that's surely opening a can of worms (surely referee/VAR has seen it and decided no problem). It's like the same thing when Romeu stamped on Greenwood's achilles end of last season (and I think injured him for the next game). Deliberate, excessive force, ball nowhere near... red card not given even on review and nothing done about it.
He should get a retrospective ban but that's surely opening a can of worms (surely referee/VAR has seen it and decided no problem). It's like the same thing when Romeu stamped on Greenwood's achilles end of last season (and I think injured him for the next game). Deliberate, excessive force, ball nowhere near... red card not given even on review and nothing done about it.
3 game retrospective ban is totally justified. Anything else is nonsense.
The fact that both the VAR and FA had reviewed this tacke and failed to produce any punishment is mildly put, fkin mind boggling.
A booking !!!! you are joking, it was a straight red card all day long. If it had been a United player on the end of that tackle I guarantee you would not be saying the same, it was nasty, deserves minimum 3 match ban, I would say more.
I dont think retrospective bans for tackles are a thing with VAR?
There's going to be feck all retrospective action
More than 3? It's a reckless challenge that's all. People need to calm down this event has become a bit hysterical.
Possibly not, no. But it would be totally justified given the situation. VAR screwed this one up big time. But that's all it is. A VAR screw up & an unfortunate injury outcome for those twats.
Van Dijk was "lucky" that Pickford made impact on the formers leg with his leg instead of his studs. If he hits the knee here with the studs he probably fractures the knee cap if not downright shattering it. Then we don´t talk about an injury that ends a season anymore, but rather a career ending one or even one that negatively impacts mobility beyond playing football.A red card most likely
It's fine that there's no intent and that goalkeepers have a certain amount of leeway, but this isn't the first time he lunges in like this and the injury potential is high. Watching the replay, at the height and pace that Pickford comes in, i have no idea how Van Dijks leg doesn't snap like a twig there. It ends up being fecking mental, textbook case of serious foul play. If you're a goalkeeper and you find yourself lunging in with your studs up, something has gone badly wrong.
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
Clear red card
Some people in this thread really downplay the seriousness of the offense here (probably because Liverpool is involved). Neither are these kind of challenges really common (tackles with that height are rightfully frowned upon generally by people who actively play) nor does the level of injury Van Dijk suffered really matter here. The point, why this challenge should always be heavily sanctioned is that the opposing player comes out of this exchange uninjured in only two scenarios:
- the tackling player misses the other one completely, which is pretty unlikely here as Pickford even spreads his legs and increases his reach here
- the impact happens at a moment when the leg of the fouled player is in the air and there is no weigth or tension of his own body put onto it
In all other scenarios the fouled player picks up a serious injury here. Ligaments and joints (especially above ankle height) are simply not build sturdy enough to handle this magnitude of impact stress from a different direction.
Challenges with that high of an injury likelidhood are like playing russian roullette and have simply no place on a football pitch.
'It doesn't look that bad.'
You can watch MMA over a full year and not see worse follow through on a leg than that.
Pickford finally does someone in, as that level of wildly reckless stupidity makes an inevitability, after having form for this exact action a few times now, and people are indifferent.
The nature of what he does, in cannoning himself like that, is whoever he's closing down is supposed to jump out of the way for fear of having their leg snapped.
The conflation in this thread is ridiculous, also. With no reprimand, it could be one of our players laid out when we meet them with his behaviour not put in check.
You can watch MMA over a full year and not see worse follow through on a leg than that.
Pickford finally does someone in, as that level of wildly reckless stupidity makes an inevitability, after having form for this exact action a few times now, and people are indifferent.
The nature of what he does, in cannoning himself like that, is whoever he's closing down is supposed to jump out of the way for fear of having their leg snapped.
The conflation in this thread is ridiculous, also. With no reprimand, it could be one of our players laid out when we meet them with his behaviour not put in check.
Well said for your posts in here @Sphaero
The calls for Pickford to get a huge ban are serious over reactions. There was clearly no intent from him. It was just a stupid attempt at making himself big to block any kind of attempt at goal. It was wreckless in hindsight but nothing more than that.
The truth is if VVD continued playing without needing to come off, this would no longer be discussed. The fact that VVD is out for a significant amount of time is the only reason it is being looked at in greater detail.
The truth is if VVD continued playing without needing to come off, this would no longer be discussed. The fact that VVD is out for a significant amount of time is the only reason it is being looked at in greater detail.
Pickford should have been sent off as it was a very clumsy challenge which could have resulted in ending VVD's career.
Retrospective bans with challenges are very subjective as then Robertson should also get a type of ban for his tackle.
Last year i remember Romeu stamping on Greenwood's achilles and he got away scot free.
Retrospective bans with challenges are very subjective as then Robertson should also get a type of ban for his tackle.
Last year i remember Romeu stamping on Greenwood's achilles and he got away scot free.
There shouldn't be any retrospective action taken, and this witch-hunt against Pickford because the media darlings are been unfortunate to have lost a player for a few months is ridiculous.
These tackles happen every week at every level. And I don't even think it was anything malicious from Pickford, you can't tell me he's charged at van Dijk to intentionally injure him. It's reckless but not malicious.
And all these clown Rawkites calling for legal action etc are probably the same ones that were hurling bricks at the ambulance that was carrying Alan Smith away when his leg was in two pieces.
Like van Dijk has already said - that's football!
These tackles happen every week at every level. And I don't even think it was anything malicious from Pickford, you can't tell me he's charged at van Dijk to intentionally injure him. It's reckless but not malicious.
And all these clown Rawkites calling for legal action etc are probably the same ones that were hurling bricks at the ambulance that was carrying Alan Smith away when his leg was in two pieces.
Like van Dijk has already said - that's football!
I would argue that Pickford's movements there are not in any way goalkeeper-specific. It could just as easily have been an Everton defender making a last ditch block/tackle, in the same manner.Therefore ask, if he had a blue outfield shirt on rather than a green goalkeeper's top and some gloves - would he have got a red card?
'Absolutely' is the unequivocal answer.
The leniency given because it's a goalkeeper is unreal. It is a horror show of a tackle whether it's 2020 or 1970, and should be a lengthy ban.
'Absolutely' is the unequivocal answer.
The leniency given because it's a goalkeeper is unreal. It is a horror show of a tackle whether it's 2020 or 1970, and should be a lengthy ban.
This.
I really don't get the "there was no intent" excuse. If you go into a tackle with no regard for the opponent's safety, you should get serious punishment. Next time, be careful.
The referee's should be doing that though shouldn't they? if they don't do anything then where do you draw the line? Retrospective action on every referee decision?
Let's be honest they massively messed it up and probably didn't want to send pickford off as it would ruin the "derby". I doubt they realised VVD was that badly injured so wanted to just blow over it.
Pickford should have the usual 3 game ban, it was wreckless and dangerous but not malicious. A big difference between somebody making a mistake to somebody trying to purposely injure somebody.
This.
I think it should be a 3 match ban as per the rules state.
However maybe the rules should change considering Martial is currently serving that ban!
What did that animal who snapped Luke Shaw’s leg a few years ago get??? feck all!
That bothered me in a big way given Luke’s age and he was really growing into his role at the time of the assault
That bothered me in a big way given Luke’s age and he was really growing into his role at the time of the assault
Bloody cnut got MOTM award!
Personally I think Pickford meant this, however I think he did it as VVD had be roughing up the Everton forwards in the first five minutes. To be honest, if the ref gives VVD a yellow for the two he committed I do not think Pickford does this as I think it was Pickford thinking that he would lay down a marker on VVD as VVD was doing it to Richardlison and Calvert-Lewin.
We then come to two problems inherent in football. First, is that refs are unwilling to dish out cards in the first 15 minutes. If VVD had wiped two players out in the 35 and 40 minute in the way he did at the start of this game, then he would have a yellow. Second, is that GK's get a lot of protection/leniency that isn't seen with other positions. This is what will and did save Pickford.
As for what should happen to Pickford, I am hoping he gets player of the month. Feck the Dippers.
We then come to two problems inherent in football. First, is that refs are unwilling to dish out cards in the first 15 minutes. If VVD had wiped two players out in the 35 and 40 minute in the way he did at the start of this game, then he would have a yellow. Second, is that GK's get a lot of protection/leniency that isn't seen with other positions. This is what will and did save Pickford.
As for what should happen to Pickford, I am hoping he gets player of the month. Feck the Dippers.
Smacks of the Bravo tackle on Rooney. If it happened anywhere else on the pitch, it would have been dealt with harshly & appropriately.
This is all pretty much true.
Which makes the lack of a red card even after looking at it with VAR even more baffling. The Lo Celso stamp incident was similar to this one, though Azpilicueta was luckily not injured as VVD has been. There was not retrospective action in that case, presumably because not allowed to re-referee games after an event has been seen by VAR and / or by the referee.
VAR and refereeing in the premier league was abysmal last season as well.
Until there is competent management of premier league referees and VAR we won't see competent refereeing and these incidents will continue. Surely Riley will have to be replaced finally?
This wasn't Pickford's first rodeo. I remember his tackle on Alli as well and vaguely remember that there were others.
Maybe he didn't injure him intentionally but this tackle was way worse than many intentional tackles have been.
Seriously, everybody who thinks this isn't absolutely awful should either take care of his biases or watch a different sports. As someone who had an ACL himself I think this should be at least a 10 games ban. You can't fly in like that on this height.
That should have been a straight red. And potentially 5 match ban for Pickford. Van Dijk is a thoroughly good man and wishing him the best in his recovery.
But couldn't have happened to nastier club and fanbase; the likes of Souness, Carragher, Gerrard, Kuyt with their horrible tackles.
But couldn't have happened to nastier club and fanbase; the likes of Souness, Carragher, Gerrard, Kuyt with their horrible tackles.
I find these statements dotted throughout the thread to be the most challenging. You can 'accidently on purpose' have a 50:50 nonchalance to whether you take someone out or not. If nothing happens to that person, oh well and if something does happen, then you were only going for the ball.. knee high, full weight, scissor-spread.
Throwing yourself in their general direction like that is a malicious act - you're going for the ball, but you're also going to take out anything in your path. If it was an honest tackle, with no scissors, at ankle or foot level, that's a hard, no-nonsense, good old-fashioned statement; if it's calf or above, you're not doing that by accident.
Pickford probably didn't mean to smash VVD, but he didn't go in in a way that would avoid it, either, particularly once his own legs were above a certain height.
That's like fighting with your hands open and gouging - you didn't necessarily mean for it to happen, but if you get a good eyeful of someone in that manner, it is, by no means, an unexpected outcome. A secondary intention, if you will.
Surprised he hasn't received any death threats yet
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
And confirmed he's got away with it. Wasn't deemed a red card by VAR