Was it a red?

[Lyricist]

Comes in from behind at speed, gets the ball but also lands on the attackers planted ankle/foot with half his body weight + additional force from sprinting and jumping into the challenge with both feet of the ground.
The tackle was almost clean. But with the amount of force that he hit the planted leg with, it's no wonder the kid suffered a serious injury from it. It's the defender's duty to not jump into someone's ankle with over half his body weight while tackling them. One especially shouldn't do that to a planted foot while otherwise both players are moving.

It's a clear red card for me, despite it almost being a great tackle. The fact is, it quite obviously was not a great tackle in the end as otherwise he wouldn't have made such an impact on the attacker. The way he hit him, and yes the ref may not have realized that at first, he endangers his opponent, and in this case ended up seriously injuring his opponent.

Hope the kid gets better soon, gets through the pain quickly, and that it doesn't hinder his playing time and development for the future.

 

[wise_old_man]

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.

If only Luke Shaw against PSV had the same treatment and sympathy from the referee. After that horrific tackle, we didn't even get a penalty. Then Moreno scored and celebrated like crazy. 6 years already and I can't still get over that.

 

[Wibble]

Seems odd that it went from not even being a free kick to a straight red without reference to VAR. The suspicion is that it was reaction to the extent of the injury and not necessarily a rational decision based on the actual tackle itself.

 

[smi11ie]

I have seen red cards given for less. In the circumstances I think the ref made the correct decision. It is only a red card, not the end of the world.

I have never heard of a dislocated ankle before but it sounds painful. I am sure there is ligamet damage too, maybe even a bone fracture. Does anyone know how long his recovery might be?

 

[hobbers]

If only Luke Shaw against PSV had the same treatment and sympathy from the referee. After that horrific tackle, we didn't even get a penalty. Then Moreno scored and celebrated like crazy. 6 years already and I can't still get over that.

That was sickening. Moreno is absolutely vile.

This one on Elliott is a lot like the Valencia one in terms of looking innocuous, not being malicious and just massively unlucky. The Rangers player didn't even get a card for it and you couldn't even really complain about it.

 

[RedBanker]

That was sickening. Moreno is absolutely vile.

This one on Elliott is a lot like the Valencia one in terms of looking innocuous, not being malicious and just massively unlucky. The Rangers player didn't even get a card for it and you couldn't even really complain about it.

And that was the CL mind you. A competition where you get a straight red when a play acting opponent rushes into your raised foot and a Turkish ref with the face of one legged gimp theatrically brandishes said red card.

 

[Gums]

The outcome of the challenge is horrible, and I hope the player recovers quickly and manages to overcome the injury.

But the amount of uninformed medical guesswork is something I feel the need to comment on. I’m not here to educate, but an ankle injury doesn’t mean the tibia was “smashed” or “snapped in half”, to quote a few specialists here. Just google tibia, fibula, and talus, and you can easily understand what our ankle joint looks like and that it is not an indestructible construct that needs MMA skills to be destroyed. Add leverage and finally ask yourself, does a body in motion generate more or less force than a motionless body?

A few things came together and caused a horrible injury, but it was unlucky that it happened, and you’d probably struggle to recreate it without trying over and over again. It was the kind of challenge that repeatedly happens week in week out. None of us have started a thread for a similar challenge that hasn’t led to an injury. So, I’ll assume we’re just as guilty as the ref, for reacting to the injury instead of the challenge.

In my opinion, not a red card.

 

[giorno]

It's not a red card challenge, it's just awfully bad luck.

His studs or toe catch on the grass and the weight of the trailing leg twists the ankle.

Nope. He *lands* with his knee on Elliot's ankle

 

[Anustart89]

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent

Because of it being an injury you can easily argue that it was a challenge that endangered the opponent.

So you’d give a red every time someone is tackled with the shoulder which makes him lose balance and hit the ad boards off the side of the pitch? Even if the player doesn’t get injured? Or is it just if an injury occurs?

Every tackle is a potential danger to the opponent, so if you’re going to be that literal about the law then every tackle is a red card. Every tackle can, under the wrong circumstances (planted foot at an angle etc) lead to a broken leg, rib or arm if unfortunate because of the forces involved (extremely fit and strong players weighing 75-80kgs exerting forces upon each other).

 

[Cutch]

Exactly my thoughts, FFS the poor kid is going to miss the rest of the season.

You don't know that. Andre Gomes was back playing after a similar injury in 4 months

 

[arnie_ni]

But hit the player with the other leg, making it a poweeful strike that created enough pressure to break a bone as hard as a tibia.

It wasn't a powerful strike. His trailing leg rolled over the Liverpool players leg that got caught in the ground

 

[Dunkelheit]

It is a red card in my opinion:
- tackle comes from behind, player cannot see it coming and is thus extremely injury prone
- the player was already gone, the tackle was more than desperate
- he tackles with both feet and thus is whole body weight, multiplied by his speed

I think you guys in the UK have a different view on this, because you all really like physical football, but if this tackle was no red and allowed, there would definitely a lot of ugly injuries in one season. If in doubt, you need to protect the player anyway.
Up to the 90s, this would have been a straight red in every single case. But after 2k I feel that the referees have got some additional baggage from their managers, like "don't give a red" and disrupt the game.

 

[HisNameIsEarl]

Kinda reminds me of the Harry Wilson foul against Denmark in the Euros. Can't find the thread though, but we had the same discussion there, it would be interesting to read and compare.

The injury was bad luck in my oppinion. I still tend to see the red card as justified, as the tackle was too forceful. The risk of collateral injuries is too high and therefore rightfully disallowed.

 

[12OunceEpilogue]

If only Luke Shaw against PSV had the same treatment and sympathy from the referee. After that horrific tackle, we didn't even get a penalty. Then Moreno scored and celebrated like crazy. 6 years already and I can't still get over that.

Yeah what a prick. At least Shaw has come back strong and realised his potential, but Shaw lost a key period of development thanks to that fecker.

 

[Hastar]

Wasn't a red. Wasn't malicious. Just terribly unlucky for the young lad.

 

[Ananke]

I think you guys in the UK have a different view on this, because you all really like physical football, but if this tackle was no red and allowed, there would definitely a lot of ugly injuries in one season.

The thing is this tackle would have been allowed if the unfortunate injury hadn't have happened. You see these every week in the premier league. If the injury doesn't occur, 100% the game plays on.

It's an unfortunate accident. They will inevitably happen, because it's a physical game which we in the UK like to see pushed to the limits. If incidents like this occur, personally I think it should be a forced substitution as opposed to a red card.

 

[Physiocrat]

Surely footage must exist somewhere? It's ridiculous that it's hidden like a fecking state secret.

Truth. Obviously it will be an unpleasant watch and some people will unfortunately revel in that, but how on earth are we supposed to judge whether it was a correct decision if we can't see the footage. This is especially annoying as VAR gave the red. I might feel differently if it actually happened to me but if my leg was broken in a tackle I wouldn't want the footage supressed like this.

 

[Becks_VII]

Remember when Maguire got injured against Villa at the end of last season? Would it have been a red for the Villa player had Harry snapped his leg? I know it's not exactly the same, but these things can happen

 

[Green_Red]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Never.

That's a red. Not only is he lunging at the ball, both of his feet leave the ground. He gave Eliott no chance. Completely reckless by the Leeds player. 3 match ban would be more than deserved.

 

[Xaviesta]

Not a red, just dreadfully unfortunate for Harvey Elliot. The ref didn't deem the tackle a foul.

 

[sullydnl]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[MackRobinson]

Doesn't like the great challenge you guys are all describing from this angle :

You can argue if it was a red or not (even though I understand giving it) but that's a clear foul. I'm assuming those saying it wasn't, haven't seen the image above. Good find.

 

[Chief123]

Based on the fact his trailing leg was "out of control" as it landed on the back of his leg and broke his ankle, then it's a red card. Similar to when a player has his studs showing and is not in control of the tackle and catches a players leg.

I think because of the limited camera angles, it is difficult to assess but it took a number of watches before I thought it was a red card.

 

[LazyGoal]

Is there other angles that have been showed yet? I only seen the live shot and then the photo someone showed above.
I think it was a very unfortunate incident and poor Elliot came out of it the worst.

Theres a picture straight in front of the tackle. If you do a two footed tackle, one hits the ball the other hits the leg. This is the same thing. He did’nt do it on purpose, but still he did not controll his tackle properly.

We will see Elliot back on the field, but I doubt he will ever be what he could have been.

 

[simplyared]

Definate red! Elliot was passed him. The tackle wasn't on from the beginning. It was a desperate lunge. Thus the serious consequences for the young lad on the end of it.

 

[Becks_VII]

Theres a picture straight in front of the tackle. If you do a two footed tackle, one hits the ball the other hits the leg. This is the same thing. He did’nt do it on purpose, but still he did not controll his tackle properly.

We will see Elliot back on the field, but I doubt he will ever be what he could have been.

I definitely don't agree about it being the same as a two footed lunge, as they usually have a lot of intent behind them. But looking at it repeatedly over the last few hours he was a bit out of control in winning the ball back, along with the intensity in the tackle. In real time looked a great tackle and still 9.9 times out of 10 that injury doesn't happen, very unfortunate

 

[Oly Francis]

Seems odd that it went from not even being a free kick to a straight red without reference to VAR. The suspicion is that it was reaction to the extent of the injury and not necessarily a rational decision based on the actual tackle itself.

If I remember correctly, you could see the ref talking to the VAR after they stopped the play.

 

[SoCross]

I immediately thought of the moment Alan Smith got injured.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Nobody posted the Elliot instagram post?

Say's it was a pure accident, shouldn't have been a red card. A very mature response from the kid.

https://www.joe.co.uk/sport/harvey-...ame-pascal-struijk-for-horrific-injury-288747

 

[Oldham]

Sensible boy and agreed not a red card...

 

[arthurka]

Nobody posted the Elliot instagram post?

Say's it was a pure accident, shouldn't have been a red card. A very mature response from the kid.

https://www.joe.co.uk/sport/harvey-...ame-pascal-struijk-for-horrific-injury-288747

And I agree with him. Unlucky yes, malicious not a chance. Football is a competitive sport and the kid got really unlucky that his ankle got stuck under the trailing leg. Klopp got him that red without a doubt. Hope the kid recovers well and gets back up again soon like Gomes did.

 

[Adam-Utd]

And I agree with him. Unlucky yes, malicious not a chance. Football is a competitive sport and the kid got really unlucky that his ankle got stuck under the trailing leg. Klopp got him that red without a doubt. Hope the kid recovers well and gets back up again soon like Gomes did.

Agreed. Big difference between a malicious tackle aiming to hurt somebody, or a pure unlucky accident.

I get why the ref gave him a red, it's more to cover their own asses half the time in the heat of the moment - but I think they should appeal the ban IMO.

It seems like the injury could have been a lot worse (although it looked horrible) I think he will be back playing around Feb/March which will be great.

 

[arthurka]

Agreed. Big difference between a malicious tackle aiming to hurt somebody, or a pure unlucky accident.

I get why the ref gave him a red, it's more to cover their own asses half the time in the heat of the moment - but I think they should appeal the ban IMO.

It seems like the injury could have been a lot worse (although it looked horrible) I think he will be back playing around Feb/March which will be great.

I agree, ref gave it to defuse the situation and save his ass. Leeds should appeal as I think there is a genuine chance to get this overturned. Like I said I really hope he will recover well and get back in the pitch quickly.

 

[bazza3727]

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.

Shaw's break didn't even merit a talking to, so no such influence there. The commentary team, if I remember right didn't think much of it, but replays showed that it was a late and dangerous tackle. Almost ruined his career.

 

[bazza3727]

It is a red card in my opinion:
- tackle comes from behind, player cannot see it coming and is thus extremely injury prone
- the player was already gone, the tackle was more than desperate
- he tackles with both feet and thus is whole body weight, multiplied by his speed

I think you guys in the UK have a different view on this, because you all really like physical football, but if this tackle was no red and allowed, there would definitely a lot of ugly injuries in one season. If in doubt, you need to protect the player anyway.
Up to the 90s, this would have been a straight red in every single case. But after 2k I feel that the referees have got some additional baggage from their managers, like "don't give a red" and disrupt the game.

You never saw Sourness and his ilk get red cards in the 70s or 80s! And they dished out some pretty horrific stuff.

 

[smi11ie]

The red card is of so little importance. I am dissapointed so many of you feel it is worth the arguement. Says alot.

 

[Anustart89]

The red card is of so little importance. I am dissapointed so many of you feel it is worth the arguement. Says alot.

Mate, you’re on an online football forum. Do you think we’d be outside the hospital raising funds for Harvey Elliott if we weren’t discussing the laws of the game in a unique situation where a tackle that happens multiple times per game week (without red cards being brandished) ends up having a bad outcome due to unlucky circumstances.

 

[sullydnl]

And I agree with him. Unlucky yes, malicious not a chance. Football is a competitive sport and the kid got really unlucky that his ankle got stuck under the trailing leg. Klopp got him that red without a doubt. Hope the kid recovers well and gets back up again soon like Gomes did.

Agreed. Big difference between a malicious tackle aiming to hurt somebody, or a pure unlucky accident.

I get why the ref gave him a red, it's more to cover their own asses half the time in the heat of the moment - but I think they should appeal the ban IMO.

It seems like the injury could have been a lot worse (although it looked horrible) I think he will be back playing around Feb/March which will be great.

Whether it was malicious or not has literally zero bearing on whether it's a red card though, because that's not how the rules work. People can argue whether it should have been a red card but intent isn't even a factor for the ref to consider, so lack of intent isn't an argument for it not to be given, unless you want to change the rules.

 

[smi11ie]

You talk about unlucky circumstances. A tackle involves judgement and in this case the judgement was way off. The arguement against a red card is irrational.

 

[Anustart89]

You talk about unlucky circumstances. A tackle involves judgement and in this case the judgement was way off. The arguement against a red card is irrational.

Are you suggesting that he intentionally timed his tackle to ensure that his trailing leg landed on a planted trailing foot exactly when it was at an awkward angle to ensure maximum damage? If so, that’s bloody impressive.

The unlucky circumstances are that the trailing leg (which the player cannot detach upon making a tackle) accidentally made contact with the foot that the player didn’t intend to tackle, and that the foot happened to be 1) planted, and 2) at an awkward angle right at the point of impact.

Any tackle, or contact, can, given unlucky circumstances, end up in a serious injury. Should we ban everything from the sport?
Tiny nudge of the shoulder makes a player roll his ankle and break it. Should that be a red card too?