OK two similar fouls then but it doesn't change my point. Red cards are supposed to be given for reckless challenges that endanger the opponent. Son's wasn't reckless, it was unfortunate. You can't just change the rules because the ref (wrongly) gave him a red card for it once he saw the injury.
Are Spurs the dirtiest club in the league?
- Thread starter Runner
- Start date
Don’t bother, he can’t see that very simple argument unfortunately
It's not. Like I said, pushing the ball on the pitch is not same a pushing the player to the post or on to the concrete next to the pitch. You can't come up with 'He just pushed the player excuse'
It was reckless which endangered the opponent.
And VAR saw the replay and came to the conclusion that Son's tackle was the cause for the injury so red was correct decision.
But Sons wasn’t that. It was just a standard run of the mill foul that’s occasionally given as a yellow. That’s it. No one would have been crying for a red unless there was an injury afterwards right?
Therefore no red card should be awarded
Son's was exactly that, he deliberately tripped the player who then crashed into other player which resulted in the injury.
Funny how you said to someone else to not bother with me but you can't stop replying.
Ah come on, it wasn't reckless. It was a typical foul to bring the opponent down to stop them. The follow through on to Aurier is what caused it and we all know that.
Where in the rulebook does it say that if a tackle results in an injury then it should be upgraded from yellow to red?
Well you know it’s unfair for other posters to be caught up in this illogical argument..Son's was exactly that, he deliberately tripped the player who then crashed into other player which resulted in the injury.
Funny how you said to someone else to not bother with me but you can't stop replying.
Even if I grant you that Son deliberately tripped the player it is still in no way a red. Son was not to know what would happen. It’s a yellow at worst.
Otherwise we could end up giving reds for the slightest of touches just because it starts a chain reaction which leads to a serous injury..its not fair to give Son a red when 99.9% of other players for the exact same foul don’t.
Rulebook says 'endangering the safety of the opponent' is a red card offense and it was that. Nothing to do with 'harmless foul' 'just a trip'. His deliberate foul/tripping the player was the cause of the injury, which is endangering the safety of the opponent.
The follow through was again because of Son tripping Gomes. It's not as if he just lost his balance, he was tripped which resulted in him crashing into Aurier which resulted in the injury.
Anyways I made my points, you think it's not a red card, fair enough. For me it's a clear red card and glad that VAR didn't change the decision.
I find it highly amusing that fans of a club that Rojo plays for pontificate about another club being dirty.
I wouldn't call them dirty but Spurs definetely is a team that likes to defend tight and tackle the player if he doesn't give away the ball. It's certainly a big part of their success and how teams fail to play their game against them.
Now Son's challenge although was vengeful it clearly had no intention to injure Gomes. He's taking the blame but what about Aurier? Asked to be subbed but didn't look particularly upset much less injured.
Now Son's challenge although was vengeful it clearly had no intention to injure Gomes. He's taking the blame but what about Aurier? Asked to be subbed but didn't look particularly upset much less injured.
Even if I grant you
fecking hell you want video proof that Son deliberately tripped the player? Again I will ask the same thing, do you believe player pushing someone in the middle of the pitch with no one around is same as player pushing the player on to the other player or onto the post? Both fouls are same, players pushing other player but the context is not.
Going by your logic, everything is same as it's player pushing other player.
I disagree because Son's tackle alone didn't do that, it was the fact that he ended up colliding into Aurier which you can't really predict as a player. A terrible, unfortunate incident all round but not a red. My main issue is that when other players in the future make these yellow card challenges then this incident will probably be brought up to try and say "well if it was a red, how is this?".
But fine, we disagree, so I'll leave it at that.
What now? It seems to me you're arguing for the sake of it now.
Well Son could say it was a mistimed tackle, I don’t know I’m not in his head. That’s beside the point anyway to the main discussion on this
Even if I grant you
Again I will ask the same thing, do you believe player pushing someone in the middle of the pitch with no one around is same as player pushing the player on to the other player or onto the post? Both fouls are same, players pushing other player but the context is not.
Going by your logic, everything is same as it's player pushing other player.
Well someone pushing someone into a post is different from Sons tackle.
Like I say treat every foul on its own individual merits. Not what happens after
Yes, they are, but not based on yesterday's accident.
Why? Player pushing is same, what happens afterwards is just on luck, bad luck and nothing to do with the player pushing him.
So every push should result in a red as what happens is just luck after ? Or perhaps it should be nothing as thats the fairest way.
it’s not fair to give Son a red when the exact same foul gets a yellow at most to every other player.
Here is a n example of your logic applied to the real world: oh I didn't endanger Little Tommy by pushing him into the road, he only died because of the oncoming car. I had no way of knowing he would collide with thee car! Therefore I wasn't endangering him by pushing him into the oncoming traffic.
Water tight.
Son is no dirty player and that injury is very unfortunate, having said that he tripped him with intent and that's what's caused the injury which is so serious.
Personally I feel the red was necessary in this case, no further action needed other than that though.
Personally I feel the red was necessary in this case, no further action needed other than that though.
No, every push should result in red, or just a foul is your argument, my argument is each incident should be dealt differently based on context.
The 'accident' of yesterday really doesn't have to do anything with this thread. I don't really follow the Spurs that much, but I have been following Son since the time he has been playing for Hamburger SV. Never seen him as a dirty player, never looked mad and never did dirty fouls. I can't really see why people call him a dirty player. It was a foul, that's true. but the consequense really happened because of bad luck. nothing to do with Son at all. I wish Gomes the best of luck and I hope to god this didn't ruin his career.
You're comparing fouling a player to stop them with the ball to pushing someone on to a road with oncoming traffic?
Think about that one and come back. Or don't come back.
No but your logic is identical
I was only taking your logic and using it in an extreme scenario to show you how unreasonable it is. Logical and principle arguments are based in the, you know, logic of them, and don't differ from case to case.
How in the world can some of you say it wasn't reckless as a defense? It was either reckless or it was malicious. I don't think it was malicious despite it being a case of trying to make a "professional foul".
No it isn't, that's up there with the worst analogies I've ever heard.
How can it be a real world example if it's so extreme? One is done umpteen times in a football match, the other is done.. never.
Idiotic.
That's not a good analogy. Little Tommys generally don't belong in the road, and you would have no reason to push him there. Football is a contact sport however, and professional fouls are accommodated. Thus a collision with another player in the course of a professional foul is par for the course.
Did that happen? I watched the game back last night to see the incident and there was no mention of it being VAR who made the decision. According to the commentary and pundits Martin Atkinson was going to give a yellow and had the card in his hand, glanced over at Gomes and after seeing the injury, changed his mind and made it a red card. VAR wasn't consulted I don't think, as I didn't see anyone mentioning VAR gave their input?
I didn't think it was a red if I'm being honest, and Saha and Cahill said as much too, that the injury is extremely unfortunate and the tackle itself was worthy of a yellow. The injury being afterwards where Gomes leg gets caught in the turf and Aurier collides with him is just very bad luck in my opinion.
Best wishes to Gomes anyway, horrible horrible injury and hope he can make a full recovery.
Your logic is worse.
How is it fair that Son gets a red for that tackle when everyone else who does it gets a yellow at worst?
Logically then you want to see about 10-15 reds a game .
(I’m taking your logic & using it in an extreme scenario to show you how unreasonable it is)
I know this is football forum and not an advanced university level seminar but surely you guys can see the principle of endangering someone else and where the blame would lie in case of potential injury?
Obviously in reality pushing someone in front of a train isn't the same as kicking someone on the field but the principle of doing something to another individual which risks injury is the same.
Since you obviously need extremely similar comparative examples to comprehend (which by the way defeat their entire point) we can just skip the similes.
It's just simple causality. Son was elbowed in the face by Gomes (unintentionally or not is irrelevant) which made him retaliate by going into a late tackle with no intention to get the ball. This action alone is responsible for the injury Gomes suffered regardless of factors like luck and Aurier being in the way because it was premeditated, intentional and CLEARLY, because we have the privilege of hindsight, endangering his safety.
Now whether or not a tackle like this should always be so harshly punished as with a sending off is debatable but he was, undeniably, making an action which put Gomes in danger, which is evident by you know.. A total fracture and dislocation of the ankle which might very well have ended his career.
Feel sorry for Son all you want, and obviously he didn't want to end his career, but it was 100 percent his action that caused it and it is always a risk when you go in for a tackle with zero intention of getting the ball. I'm sure he is distraught and remorseful but that's because he knows he should not have done what he did rather than simply struck by lightning.
No, zero VAR intervention.
He just saw the ankle break and thought "must have been bad enough for a red".
Gomes fell awkwardly and landed on the side of his ankle instead of foot down into the floor. It got stuck under him and the collision with Aurier is what made it bend.
Son's tackle was no worse than any other slide tackle up and down the country. Yes he tripped him, but it has to be a very unfortunate, unlucky accident for that to happen.
If Son gets the blame for that, then slide tackles should be banned completely.
Ok. You might be fine over-speeding on a motorway, and just happened to hit a pedestrian. No bother, if it was a normal day (without incident) it'd be a non-event but hey ho, your actions only caused serious injury to a person, no big deal.
Get a life dude. The point of origination was Son's tackle - end of story. Get your head checked.
That was one game where against a rival team we had messed up, our title dreams were over, and a young squad lost their heads. It wasn’t part of some plan from Pochettino to start terminating players. I can’t think of any game since where anything nearly as bad has happened.
We’ve got/had some players who can make shit tackles. Dier, Rose, Dembele, Alli etc as examples. Combine that with a high energy, aggressive style (back in the day) and in a game that boiled over I’m not surprised at what happened. But the fact you’re still citing a game a few seasons ago says a lot I think.
The current team isn’t that dirty. Most of the worst offenders have calmed down or left. Citing this tackle as an example of our dirtiness would be insane, it was a yellow card challenge that went wrong, from a player who is as innocent as they come. This ‘spurs are incredibly dirty’ thing is just a football myth based on very sporadic evidence, when our disciplinary record over the last few seasons doesn’t back it up at all.
We’re definitely not angels, nowhere close. But standing out as the worst? Nah, not for me.
Even the smallest of fouls (in the box) are checked on VAR, surely red card would have been checked by VAR?
https://in.reuters.com/article/uk-s...d-carded-son-after-gomes-injury-idINKBN1XD0HR
I agree with that. The tackle is a yellow card, not sure you can just decide it's a red as the player has ended up with a very serious injury due to bad luck and circumstance. Feel so sorry for Gomes though.
See I thought it would be checked as I was watching it, but there was no mention at all of VAR being used?
Even afterwards, Dave Jones said Atkinson was following the rule book, not VAR. Therefore I assumed from that there was no VAR intervention, as they said Atkinson took the decision himself.
Fair enough if it was used, but during the game coverage and afterwards, and on Sky Sports News they made no mention of VAR being used to check the decision.
In reality, if refs gave straight reds for those type of cynical fouls (where there is zero intent to win the ball and the aim is to stop a counter attack), you would not have loads of red cards, players would just stop that type of cheating.
Just going by logic,VAR is used as for every decision, so for red card obviously they would have used and good chance it was all missed (Ref's communication) as everyone was focused on Gomes, Son, Aurier.
Yes because speeding and hitting a pedestrian is the same as a football game..got it. What a stupid pointless analogy.
Footbapl is a contact sport & accidents happen. Perhaps you need your head checked as you have no critical thinking or normal logic going on there
This is pretty stupid demagogy. Son didnt do anything extraordinary, it was late tackle and the rest of it was just bad luck. Horrible injury, no question here, but as a player you are not responsible for everything that happens after the tackle, specially when you have absolutely no control of it. Correlation does not imply causation and this is the case.
I.e if you push some player and he accidantly breaks his leg, because he tripped, it is a red card? Hell no.
Last edited by a moderator: