Should tackling "studs-up" be an automatic red?

MTF

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,394
Location
New York City
Now, I know the idea sounds silly at first. Everyone who know football knows that leading with the sole of the foot when tackling is pretty common. I'm not sore I'm thinking so much of a sliding tackle while saying this, but rather about "stamping" (like the tackle on Messi).

Last night there was an exposed leg-break in the Copa Sul-Americana (Deportive Tolima x Oriente Petrolero, if you'd like to search youtube. It was very nasty), because of a player coming in over the top, studs first, into an opposing player rushing at him to get a shot on goal.

What I've been wondering about, even before this incident, is whether going in studs first into any challenge should be a red card, even if there's no contact. I'm not for no-contact football or anything like that, people will get hurt anyways, I just see no reason to allow a play which radically threatens the physical integrity of other players. I reckon if refs were giving out automatic reds for it, players wouldn't utilize it.

I think the physical reason why these challenges are so dangerous aren't the studs, but rather the fact that the challenging leg is stiff, and so it carries all the force of the moving body in a small area, meaning its a lot of pressure on any object against it.

So, what do people think about this?
 
If you're sliding into a tackle, stretching for the ball, it's almost inevitable that studs will be showing. This shouldn't be an automatic red, providing your foot is on the ground and aimed at the ball.

Going deliberately over the top of the ball, with studs showing, should be an automatic red. But it already is a straight red. So there's no need to change the rules.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
If you're sliding into a tackle, stretching for the ball, it's almost inevitable that studs will be showing. This shouldn't be an automatic red, providing your foot is on the ground and aimed at the ball.

Going deliberately over the top of the ball, with studs showing, should be an automatic red. But it already is a straight red. So there's no need to change the rules.
Click to expand...

The first part I agree with, which I why I explicitly excluded sliding tackles in the OP.

The second part however, I haven't seen many straight reds, except when there's sole-to-shin contact. What I proposed was players getting a red just for trying to go in over-the-top, even if they get the ball (as you would for trying to kung-fu kick an opponent, but missing). That way we could just get it out of the game completely, because it offers too much of a risk to other players trying to play the ball.
 
Stud's up without hitting the man is automatic yellow and has been for some years now. If you hit the man it should be red. Like Pouge said, there's no need for change.
 
MarceloFalcon said:
The first part I agree with, which I why I explicitly excluded sliding tackles in the OP.

The second part however, I haven't seen many straight reds, except when there's sole-to-shin contact. What I proposed was players getting a red just for trying to go in over-the-top, even if they get the ball (as you would for trying to kung-fu kick an opponent, but missing). That way we could just get it out of the game completely, because it offers too much of a risk to other players trying to play the ball.
Click to expand...

It's in the rule books. The rest is up to the ref
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Going deliberately over the top of the ball, with studs showing, should be an automatic red. But it already is a straight red. So there's no need to change the rules.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see for those tackles that once the red card is issued, Monday morning they look at it and decide on a number of bans, as often three matches just isn't sufficient
 
I'm sorry, I just haven't seen it imposed enough. Last night the guy only got a yellow for what resulted in an exposed fracture. I'd just really like to see it completely out of football.

Like I said in the OP, I'm not promoting a football without hard challenges, and physical play. I think hard tackles should be OK if you get the ball first, its just going in over-the-top which I find too dangerous.

We don't make the rules on football, so it doesn't matter in real terms what we think. I just brought this up to see if anyone had any rationale to present against it, or if everyone thought it pretty reasonable.
 
MarceloFalcon said:
The first part I agree with, which I why I explicitly excluded sliding tackles in the OP.

The second part however, I haven't seen many straight reds, except when there's sole-to-shin contact. What I proposed was players getting a red just for trying to go in over-the-top, even if they get the ball (as you would for trying to kung-fu kick an opponent, but missing). That way we could just get it out of the game completely, because it offers too much of a risk to other players trying to play the ball.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about a bouncing ball?

Again, sometimes the only way to win the ball in that scenario is by using the sole of your foot.

If your foot is too high, you'll get blown up for dangerous play. If you're intending to harm the player, rather than win the ball, you'll probably get sent off. It's all down to the referee's interpretation, the rules are fine as they are.
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Are you talking about a bouncing ball?

Again, sometimes the only way to win the ball in that scenario is by using the sole of your foot.

If your foot is too high, you'll get blown up for dangerous play. If you're intending to harm the player, rather than win the ball, you'll probably get sent off. It's all down to the referee's interpretation, the rules are fine as they are.
Click to expand...

Obviously the best way to control a bouncing ball is to use your sole, and you'd also use your sole to roll the ball in some situations. I have no issue with that.

But if the ball is bouncing in between two oncoming players, if one of them tries to control with his sole, he still offers a risk if the opposing player gets the first and gets any sort of touch to the ball. Because now his leg or foot is where the ball was, and there's likely to be contact.

I wasn't complaining about the rules, I know this isn't allowed in football, you already get an automatic call for dangerous play if you go over-the-top into a challenge and get the ball. I'm just suggesting it should be even harsher, ideally... if I wrote the rules.
 
I found the video I had thought of:



Let it load, then take it to 4:05. Robinho has taken a poor first touch and lunges into the ball studs-up. His opponent comes in to try and just kick the ball against Robinho or away.

Robinho got the ball, in fact they both did. Although it should have been a foul by present rules and the Ref doesn't give it, what I'm saying is that Robinho should be sent off, just for that.

Its no good to say he'd be sent off if the other player gets injured, because then the injury has occurred. In the present scenario, maybe you'll take your chances because you could win the ball. If its an automatic red just for doing something like, there's no benefit to be had, so players just won't try it.


EDIT: I can never get videos to work. I've posted the video address in between the Youtube brackets... what's wrong?

EDIT 2: There we go.
 
MarceloFalcon said:
I found the video I had thought of:



Let it load, then take it to 4:05. Robinho has taken a poor first touch and lunges into the ball studs-up. His opponent comes in to try and just kick the ball against Robinho or away.

Robinho got the ball, in fact they both did. Although it should have been a foul by present rules and the Ref doesn't give it, what I'm saying is that Robinho should be sent off, just for that.

Its no good to say he'd be sent off if the other player gets injured, because then the injury has occurred. In the present scenario, maybe you'll take your chances because you could win the ball. If its an automatic red just for doing something like, there's no benefit to be had, so players just won't try it.


EDIT: I can never get videos to work. I've posted the video address in between the Youtube brackets... what's wrong?

EDIT 2: There we go.
Click to expand...


sorry i dont see anything wrong with that, certainly not a sending off for me.
 
quethenoo said:
sorry i dont see anything wrong with that, certainly not a sending off for me.
Click to expand...

What if Robinho is a quarter of a second late, and is second to the ball? Then his outstretched leg is going sole-first, right at the other player's kicking leg. Its this sort of play that results in this:



That's only the most tragic of consequences, but do we really need this going on in football? The other night it was Leo Messi, and his leg wasn't kicking, but he's still lucky it wasn't a fracture.

Players shouldn't be using their studs in standing tackles and 50-50s.
 
pauldyson1uk said:
thought it was only me , I saw nothing that warrented a red card
Click to expand...

I know that presently its not considered a red card offence, what I'm saying it, don't you think it should, given that this sort of challenge causes some of the worst injuries in football?
 
Spammy said:
No.

End of ridiculous thread.
Click to expand...

Yeah, until its one of our players...

You think its OK that players the world over carry on going into challenges studs first, and they only get a red when someone's leg is shattered?
 
I don't think there isn't an epidemic of over the ball challenges, in fact I'm sure there isn't. You're making up a problem that doesn't exist and proposing new measures to deal with them. Do you work for the Daily Mail?

Also, I hate this phrase 'studs up challenge'. Soon armchair fans all over will be crying out for people to stop running with their studs up, stop passing with their feet off the ground and be cautioned for not gliding across the pitch without lifting their studs.

The other day the co-commentator on sky sports (I think it was Alan Smith) complained about a challenge because the perp had 'lifted his foot off the ground' to make a tackle.
 
Spammy said:
I don't think there isn't an epidemic of over the ball challenges, in fact I'm sure there isn't. You're making up a problem that doesn't exist and proposing new measures to deal with them. Do you work for the Daily Mail?

Also, I hate this phrase 'studs up challenge'. Soon armchair fans all over will be crying out for people to stop running with their studs up, stop passing with their feet off the ground and be cautioned for not gliding across the pitch without lifting their studs.

The other day the co-commentator on sky sports (I think it was Alan Smith) complained about a challenge because the perp had 'lifted his foot off the ground' to make a tackle.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's gone crazy. The game is quicker, more technical and more physically demaning than the good ol' days, so it's no surprise to see a few injuries.

Sometimes a player can't sweep their foot across the grass to win the ball. Often the ball is shin height and the quickest way to get to the ball is to play it/block it down with the underside of your foot, which is where a lot of these injuries happen, often on the follow through. Of course some are just nasty tackles, and those are a straight red.

There will always be bad tackles as long as there are tackles, because you're relying on a group of adrenaline-filled young bloke who can look malicious when they are only a split-second late with a challenge. If we could get to a point where refs didn't feel obliged to punish the outcome rather than the tackle then that would be great too. But sadly the game will be next-to-non-contact pretty soon. Can't wait.
 
Brophs said:
Yeah, it's gone crazy. The game is quicker, more technical and more physically demaning than the good ol' days, so it's no surprise to see a few injuries.

Sometimes a player can't sweep their foot across the grass to win the ball. Often the ball is shin height and the quickest way to get to the ball is to play it/block it down with the underside of your foot, which is where a lot of these injuries happen, often on the follow through. Of course some are just nasty tackles, and those are a straight red.

There will always be bad tackles as long as there are tackles, because you're relying on a group of adrenaline-filled young bloke who can look malicious when they are only a split-second late with a challenge. If we could get to a point where refs didn't feel obliged to punish the outcome rather than the tackle then that would be great too. But sadly the game will be next-to-non-contact pretty soon. Can't wait.
Click to expand...


Me neither. Marry me?
 
Spammy said:
I don't think there isn't an epidemic of over the ball challenges, in fact I'm sure there isn't. You're making up a problem that doesn't exist and proposing new measures to deal with them. Do you work for the Daily Mail?

Also, I hate this phrase 'studs up challenge'. Soon armchair fans all over will be crying out for people to stop running with their studs up, stop passing with their feet off the ground and be cautioned for not gliding across the pitch without lifting their studs.

The other day the co-commentator on sky sports (I think it was Alan Smith) complained about a challenge because the perp had 'lifted his foot off the ground' to make a tackle.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying there's an epidemic, I'm saying its always been an issue with football. To do what I've described in previous posts is already considered dangerous play, and results in an indirect free-kick, so I'm not creating a new rule against something. What I'm suggesting is the punishment should be harsher in an effort to reduce the occurrence.

Tackles from behind are supposed to be straight red cards, and they're hardly as likely to result in serious injury as going studs-up into a standing tackles.

Do you think there's any other play or movement in football which poses a greater risk to an opposing player's physical integrity? (not a rhetorical question).

By the way, I do play real football, I'm used to getting kicked about, kicking back and going home bruised and cut. But everywhere I've played its always been viewed as extremely cnutish to go in hard, studs-first... likely to result in retribution if not followed by immediate apology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.