jackal&hyde
Full Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2018
- Messages
- 4,220
Souness: We cant lay all the blame on the Referee, we should be asking ourselves what Pogba should have done in this situation
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.Watching it in real time it didn't look that bad. A red card most likely and a penalty but the keeper was watching the ball and racing out for it with no intent to injure (not that intent is that important).
The FA need to do whatever is necessary to punish the offending player with a ban. If that means adjusting the rules midway through the season to accommodate the ban then so be it.
They cannot be seen to ignore it.
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.You'll likely feel very differently about the situation if/when a United player receives a similarly reckless challenge and is subsequently sidelined for over half a season as a result. Think about it.
The only way to avoid that is the through FA handing out a retrospective ban, which will act as a detterent to future offenses of a similar nature. Whereas ignoring it, allowing Pickford to escape scot-free, only encourages players to do it more, safe in the knowledge that no punishment will come.
Bizarre summary.Uh we see it every game everytime a keeper comes out. Just that players also normally pull out. VVD didn't.
A red card most likelyWatching it in real time it didn't look that bad. A red card most likely and a penalty but the keeper was watching the ball and racing out for it with no intent to injure (not that intent is that important).
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.It was a clumsy challenge which should have see him booked at the time, nothing more.
I dont think retrospective bans for tackles are a thing with VAR?3 game retrospective ban is totally justified. Anything else is nonsense.
More than 3? It's a reckless challenge that's all. People need to calm down this event has become a bit hysterical.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.
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.I dont think retrospective bans for tackles are a thing with VAR?
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
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.
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.
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?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.
This.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.
Agree.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!
Bloody cnut got MOTM award!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
Smacks of the Bravo tackle on Rooney. If it happened anywhere else on the pitch, it would have been dealt with harshly & appropriately.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.
This is all pretty much true.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.
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.
Maybe he didn't injure him intentionally but this tackle was way worse than many intentional tackles have been.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.
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.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.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date