Was it a red?

PoTMS

Full Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
18,045
Looked fairly innocuous from the one view I saw.

You can't send players off just because of the outcome of the injury. It wasn't even a dangerous challenge. Just one of those seriously unlucky freakish accidents.

Hopefully, Harvey Elliot returns soon. Gutted for the lad.
 
It was for me. Comes in between the man and the ball and leaves a hanging leg, no wonder the lad ended up getting hurt.
 
Not a red, but also a red, in the spirit of the game. Very unfortunate for Elliot.
 
It was just very unfortunate. Looked like a really fair attempt to win the ball.
 
Pawson didn't even give a foul initially. He played on, and only blew up when he saw the reaction. But we are told the ref was always going to be a red? Did he misplace his whistle?

Feel for the lad, but terrible officiating.
 
His left leg was trailing, but it wasn't dangerous or reckless on his part no. I think Elliot was just unlucky that his foot stuck in the ground somehow and ended up that snapping it.
 
Who's Kissing Cameras? said:
Never a red. Not even a foul. Just unfortunate. Officials swayed by the horrific injury.
Click to expand...

I'd say so, and it's such a shame. You'd like to think the level of injury doesn't influence the ref's decision but it clearly does. There's a feeling where a horrific injury shouldn't go unpunished, for better or for worse.

I hope the lad heals fast, the injury looked dreadful from the limited views I've had of the incident.
 
El Zoido said:
It was just very unfortunate. Looked like a really fair attempt to win the ball.
Click to expand...
Fair attempt but completely failed at it. One leg going to the ball is fine, but the other leg kicked into the opponent from behind. Rushing in like that is a red all the time, just looks a bit different because the ball is touched in a correct way in the same action.
Still a red for not controlling the other leg and being reckless and playing dangerously.
 
Ref wasn’t gonna give a free-kick. Will need to see more angles.
 
They'll rescind the red and cancel the 2 match suspension, but it was the correct decision to remove the player from the field of play.

Klopp was disgraceful however. He was more interested in sanctions than the kid's welfare.
 
Complete freak moment. It wasn't a red.

But if a red hadn't been given? Think Liverpool would have reacted so terribly that their wasn't much choice for the ref, harshly enough. Just look how awfully Klopp reacted.
 
This is funny, are you seriously believing you will get an objective verdict on a United-forum for a red card in favor of Liverpool? What is certain is that you have seen one angle once, the VAR have multiple angles and cameras. I guess the bunch in the room have a better view than you do.
 
Christ that’s never a red. I feel for the lad but you can’t just go handing out reds every time someone gets injured. Terrible decision!
 
stefan92 said:
Fair attempt but completely failed at it. One leg going to the ball is fine, but the other leg kicked into the opponent from behind. Rushing in like that is a red all the time, just looks a bit different because the ball is touched in a correct way in the same action.
Still a red for not controlling the other leg and being reckless and playing dangerously.
Click to expand...
If Elliott got straight back up you wouldn't even think it was a yellow, never mind a ref. Indeed Pawson didn't even give a foul initially, and only whistled when he saw the reaction.

Classic case of refereeing the reaction and not the action.
 
I don't think it's a red, and it seems tons of rational Liverpool fans (they exist!?) think the same.

But it seems in any scenario where a player suffers a serious injury, regardless of how innocuous or unlucky it is, it's always a red.

Sad for Harvey Elliott which is the main thing here.
 
No, it seems more the case that it’s very unlucky. Wan-Bissaka makes that tackle two or three times a game. It’s difficult to know for certain without the replay, though.

Hopefully Elliot recovers well from it.
 
Judas said:
Complete freak moment. It wasn't a red.

But if a red hadn't been given? Think Liverpool would have reacted so terribly that their wasn't much choice for the ref, harshly enough. Just look how awfully Klopp reacted.
Click to expand...
Refs are meant to be impartial. Btw just seen the exact same challenge in minute 70. Wins the ball in that one and it’s no foul. Never a red in a million years and that shouldn’t be impacted by emotion, injury or anything except the black and white rules.
 
NotoriousISSY said:
I don't think it's a red, and it seems tons of rational Liverpool fans (they exist!?) think the same.

But it seems in any scenario where a player suffers a serious injury, regardless of how innocuous or unlucky it is, it's always a red.

Sad for Harvey Elliott which is the main thing here.
Click to expand...
Unless Luke Shaw's leg is broken in two.
 
seemed like a freak accident to me, certainly not a red. Struijk seemed distraught too. Just an awful situation all around, but I didn't see any ill intent there.

hope Elliott recovers quickly.
 
We just saw the exact same challenge on Mane that is deemed as a tackle and play going on.
Mane didnt get hurt, so nothing was given.

Elliot was hurt, so play was stopped, otherwise they would have played on, with that challenge.
 
James Peril said:
This is funny, are you seriously believing you will get an objective verdict on a United-forum for a red card in favor of Liverpool? What is certain is that you have seen one angle once, the VAR have multiple angles and cameras. I guess the bunch in the room have a better view than you do.
Click to expand...
VAR didn't make the decision. Pawson did. Well, he did after he saw the reaction, initially he played on. Just seen a near identical tackle on Mane that again Pawson didn't give a foul for. Don't let a little bit of context get in the way of your daily moan though!
 
The type of tackle that was the inevitable consequence of the move to sate the appetites of the 'its a contact sport' crowd.
 
@GifLord show the identical challenge around 70 to 75 mins in that the ref waved play on. It was a tackle on mane.

Never a red and the ref himself waved played on
 
There’s a possibility it was a scissor challenge, very hard to tell from the one angle.
 
Leeds literally just made the exact same tackle a few minutes ago on Mane, no free kick.

Was never a red. Liverpool have been given alot by this ref today.
 
ivaldo said:
If Elliott got straight back up you wouldn't even think it was a yellow, never mind a ref. Indeed Pawson didn't even give a foul initially, and only whistled when he saw the reaction.

Classic case of refereeing the reaction and not the action.
Click to expand...
You might be right, as one is usually focused on the ball, and that part of the action was ok. However I still think it is a red card that is justified. Flying in from behind in that way is just the wrong way to do things. You can do such a tackle, but you should never hit the player during such a tackle. If he stumbles over you that's fine, that happens all the time (for example as mention when AWB does similar tackles), but not in the way it happened here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.