Pickford's tackle on VVD: What should be the punishment?

DixieDean

Everton Fan
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
3,177
Location
Liverpool
Supports
Everton
People who argues that there should be no punishment for this, in theory, doesnt that mean players can intentionally try to injure each other as long as a call is made for something else just prior?

Im not at all saying Pickford did this on purpose btw, just that if you want no punishment for this, players can actually start abusing the system.
He should be punished. However, I'm not sure if it can happen if the VAR refs have already seen it. Not sure on that one.
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
He should be punished. However, I'm not sure if it can happen if the VAR refs have already seen it. Not sure on that one.
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.
 

DixieDean

Everton Fan
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
3,177
Location
Liverpool
Supports
Everton
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.
Fair enough. It normally takes a rare event for them to do that, though. So, I doubt it would happen.
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
Punishment? I was thinking more of a knighthood ;-)
I personally believe it should be a yellow card for VVD for simulation.
Statue outside Old Trafford
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.
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
2,049
Location
Twitter...searching #Sancho
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.
The jokes went right over your head.

Secondly, we need to calm down here. There was absolutely no intent from Pickford. Yes it’s still a red card for a clumsy reckless tackle endangering the opponent. But let’s chill out and realise it was stupidity more than malice.
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
2,049
Location
Twitter...searching #Sancho
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.
What rule would you need to adjust? Under the current rules it’s still a red card. Nothing needs adjusting. The officials just missed it and applied the rules wrongly.
 

buckooo1978

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
13,100
it was dangerous but I don't think Pickford set out to injure VVD

In terms of retrospective action where does that stop?

Fair enough if the referee reviews the decision and gives a ban of some sort

What about Mane's antics for example. He simulated injury at least twice in that game - should he get 2 yellows

I think we need to understand that referees make mistakes. If it seemed that Pickford went out to injure VVD or he regularly was this reckless then fair enough but I think this was more an unfortunate misjudgement
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
The jokes went right over your head.

Secondly, we need to calm down here. There was absolutely no intent from Pickford. Yes it’s still a red card for a clumsy reckless tackle endangering the opponent. But let’s chill out and realise it was stupidity more than malice.
They didn't go over my head, I just didn't find them very funny.

How can you say with any degree of certainty there was no intent from Pickford?
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
What rule would you need to adjust? Under the current rules it’s still a red card. Nothing needs adjusting. The officials just missed it and applied the rules wrongly.
I'm not fully aware of the rules on retrospective punishments to tell you the truth. I was merely replying to a poster who suggested a retrospective punishment may not be possible.
 

pratyush_utd

Full Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
1,964
Nothing. The match is over and it was just a tackle. Just because it's Liverpool doesn't make it any different than many other tackles that hasn't been punished. It's not an assault
 

Morty_

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
133
Nothing. The match is over and it was just a tackle. Just because it's Liverpool doesn't make it any different than many other tackles that hasn't been punished. It's not an assault
Okay, so free for all to jump into players if the ref blows the whistle for something else, got it!
 
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
6,690
People who argues that there should be no punishment for this, in theory, doesnt that mean players can intentionally try to injure each other as long as a call is made for something else just prior?

Im not at all saying Pickford did this on purpose btw, just that if you want no punishment for this, players can actually start abusing the system.
Ive not read every post.

I would suggest anyone saying he shouldn’t be punished, is saying so, on the presumption that the ref saw the incident - and deemed it not actionable.

if that’s the case, then no he should be punished - because then you are going down the line of judging every decision the ref makes, and potentially taking retrospection action all the time.

the only time retrospective action should take place is if the ref has missed the incident. Not when we disagree.

the misconception that you can do anything to a player once the whistle has blown was cleared up very quickly. As an example James got sent off after the end of the match in midweek, and that happens all the time.

either the ref missed it, or he saw it and didn’t take action. At no point did he not take action due it it being offside or gabbing blown the whistle.
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
2,049
Location
Twitter...searching #Sancho
They didn't go over my head, I just didn't find them very funny.

How can you say with any degree of certainty there was no intent from Pickford?
Are you a Liverpool fan by any chance?

If you’re trying to use the narrative that Pickford intended that, then it’s just bizarre.
 

SadlerMUFC

Full Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
3,140
Location
Niagara Falls, Canada
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.
Of course I would think differently. That's because I'm obviously a hypocrite. Or maybe...just maybe...I wasn't really serious and you need to turn on your sarcasm detector and stop taking everything so literally...
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
Are you a Liverpool fan by any chance?

If you’re trying to use the narrative that Pickford intended that, then it’s just bizarre.
I don't see how my view on the incident could be related to which club I support, but no, I'm a United fan for what it's worth.

What narrative? It was an awful challenge, intended or otherwise, and fully deserving of retrospective punishment.

There is no way to determine if Pickford meant to cause harm.
 

Pretzels81

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
262
Punishment? He wasn't even booked. Blame it on the ref and VAR. Leave the lad alone. It was a clumsy action but obviously he didn't want to destroy him on purpose.

If DDG had done this, there would be already a scouser petition to eject him to Spain/ban him from ever returning to England.
 

Matthew84!

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
89
Nothing, just because he's a well liked guy doesn't mean pickford should get a ban, get a grip people,
 

elmo

Can never have too many Eevees
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
8,233
Location
AKA: Slapanut Goat Smuggla
If vvd is out for 6 months the only proper punishment for Pickford should also be a 6 month ban. It was clearly a reckless tackle and should be punished harshly. Last season Romelu also tried to badly injure Greenwood. Tough punishments are required.
That'll give Ancelotti and Southgate an excuse to finally drop Pickford.
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
97,368
Location
Dublin, Ireland
Pickford needs an extended ban for that challenge, no question.

The FA would be setting a dangerous precident by ignoring it.
No he doesn’t need an extended ban. But it does need to be a retrospective red card and automatic 3 game ban.

under the current rules you can’t ban him for longer than that as you can’t prove intent
 

Jippy

Sleeps with tramps, bangs jacuzzis, dirty shoes
Staff
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
47,114
Location
Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams
It should be a three game ban for reckless play. Those calling for longer bans of whatever arbitrary length, how would you grade these?
A potential legbreaker 5 games? Draw blood 6 games?
 

pratyush_utd

Full Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
1,964
Okay, so free for all to jump into players if the ref blows the whistle for something else, got it!
The VAR checked it and didn't deem it worthy of any action. You can agree or disagree, but that's the rule. Match is over so its closed case now. If Pickford is punished then there are lots of tackles that should get punished retrospectively.

Laws are clear on this one. It can only be punished if it was missed. Since they saw replay before offside call, it wasn't missed. Case closed.
 

Fridge chutney

Full Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
6,180
I've thought this for awhile but this incident highlights my belief that for challenges like this, punishment needs to be greater than standard. When you endanger the safety of your opponent and cause them injury by being reckless, 3 matches isn't enough. For example, if I punched someone on the street, I would get a sterner punishment if they died.

The fact that Pickford will go unpunished is a joke.
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
The VAR checked it and didn't deem it worthy of any action. You can agree or disagree, but that's the rule. Match is over so its closed case now. If Pickford is punished then there are lots of tackles that should get punished retrospectively.

Laws are clear on this one. It can only be punished if it was missed. Since they saw replay before offside call, it wasn't missed. Case closed.
Fair enough.

As long as there is some form of retrospective punishment then I guess that's all that matters.
 

Random Task

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
22,073
Location
Chester
I've thought this for awhile but this incident highlights my belief that for challenges like this, punishment needs to be greater than standard. When you endanger the safety of your opponent and cause them injury by being reckless, 3 matches isn't enough. For example, if I punched someone on the street, I would get a sterner punishment if they died.

The fact that Pickford will go unpunished is a joke.
It would be outrageous.
 

Idxomer

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
1,705
On a side note, I always felt goalkeepers get a lot of leeway being thuggish.

Remember this

 

UncleBob

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
3,281
On a side note, I always felt goalkeepers get a lot of leeway being thuggish.

Remember this

The margin between that ending badly and ending well is quite small, if he plants his knee in his head it's going to be bad
 

shahzy

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
503
It should be a three game ban for reckless play. Those calling for longer bans of whatever arbitrary length, how would you grade these?
A potential legbreaker 5 games? Draw blood 6 games?
Well seeing as Martial got 3 games for tapping that pussy Lamela on the face and this has potentially ruptured VVD's ACL I'd be leaning more towards 6+ frankly. I hate seeing thuggish shit on a pitch no matter who is playing