First red card...

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Maurice Maurice said:
The ref took a dislike to Tanganga because he questioned his decision, mardy little bastard couldn't hack that and the speed with which he got the card out said it all.

Danny Hall is to commentary what he is to reporting and book writing, enough said.
Click to expand...
Danny Hall is the biggest weapon we have reporting on our club in years. Is he still on here?
 



Guaranteed if Soumaré had pulled out of the challenge 90% of this forum would be up in arms calling him a nesh little cnut. It was 50/50 but the Charlton player was starting to slide in and got his ankle stood on, just unfortunate. What baffles me on this forum is the amount of posters who can't wait to pile in on one of our players, some of you lot pile on faster than the ref getting the red card out. You can bet too if Jack Robinson had done it then it would have been a great old school tackle .......... weird.
 
Houston_Blade said:
1st minute of the game he’s pulled Tanganga up on an attacking corner. Then he’s not sent their player off or awarded a penalty for a blatant foul on Bamford.

He’s also given them a goal kick when the defender clearly slide tackled Seriki in front of the linesman.

The Soumare one was on a par with the challenge on McCallum. Tanganga was sent off because the ref was given the opportunity after he’d accused the ref of pushing him (Tanganga was clearly telling Langford not to put his hands on him after the Soumare red).

Overall it was a complete clusterfuck of a refereeing performance and it completely killed the game. I’d be going nuts if I were Wilder.

That said if we were 3 or 4 nil up like we should have been none of that would have happened.
Click to expand...
Exactly as i saw it texted a mate on 15m=
ref is giving nothing today expect more dodgy pen decisions
have you watched CW's post match iterview again spot on
 
de g. said:
I've only seen the clips on Twitter, but it certainly looks like he leads with his forearm into the back of Carey's head. VAR upholds the decision (or overturns if it had been let go).

Agree with you on Soumaré, clumsy but not malicious. The unfortunate thing is both will be serious foul play so 3 match bans.
Click to expand...
I think that might be his last game he plays for us. Pity, cause today apart, he's started playing better.
 

Serious foul play​

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.


Come on, for those who think it wasn't a red (or even not a foul lol), please justify how Soumare putting his foot on the guys ankle didn't endanger the safety of his opponent.
 
Agreed. This fits with a challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent.
But there are occasional (not necessarily saying this is one) when you can make a challenge and seriously endanger someone, but it wouldn’t be red carded, for example if both players jumped for a high ball, both looking at the ball, and as they came down one ended up landing on the other’s ankle as shown in the image you posted, should that be treated the same?

I’ve regularly wondered about every time a keeper goes to punch a ball as hard as he can inches from an opponent’s head - is that not endangering?
 
Klaatu Barada Nikto said:

Serious foul play​

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.


Come on, for those who think it wasn't a red (or even not a foul lol), please justify how Soumare putting his foot on the guys ankle didn't endanger the safety of his opponent.
Click to expand...
Ok, watch the one on McCallum and tell me it's not basically the exact same thing. Not even a yellow.
 
I've only seen it a couple of times. I don't find such injuries pleasant to watch over and over.

It seemed to me to be a freak of timing combined with a stud getting stuck in the turf.

The type of challenge is executed regularly, not quite in full control of the ball, slightly on the stretch with little control over where your leading foot will get planted - but it's coming down with momentum and a lot of weight behind it.

It's usually completed without incident, often without contact or minimal contact. At worst, studs scraped down the calf or catching the heels of an opposing player. You'd say it was clumsy but never describe it as dangerous play in these situations.

If the timing was a fraction of a second different, Soumare's challenge would have had a totally different outcome and probably wouldn't have been given a second thought.

If it had passed without incident nobody would have been describing it like 'he flew into that challenge' or 'a bit reckless but got away with it'

The outcome has determined the red card. Some will disagree, but injuries happen and in my opinion it doesn't have to automatically mean that a foul was committed or that the play was reckless.
 



Klaatu Barada Nikto said:

Serious foul play​

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.


Come on, for those who think it wasn't a red (or even not a foul lol), please justify how Soumare putting his foot on the guys ankle didn't endanger the safety of his opponent.
Click to expand...
My earlier post offers some justification as to why i didnt think it was a foul. He hasn't gone to make contact with Knibbs. His action was purely to rectify his poor first touch and play the ball across to McCallum, which (when you view the footage and look at the stills provided above posted by Bergen) he effectively does prior to both players momentum bringing them together and, in unfortunate circumstances for Knibbs, with his apparent attempt at a partial slide tackle results in his leg being in a position where it ended up exactly where Soumare's foot landed. Soumare never actually enters into a "tackle" or "challenge. He plays a pass of a ball that was 12 inches off the floor. He didnt use excessive force or brutality.

That is my view/analysis of it and it is fine for others to have differing views. I can respect and understand their viewpoint and reasoning without agreeing to it.

I remember (unfortunately) the Newcastle Prem home game a few seasons ago where they destroyed us. Jack Robinson was pulled up for a "foul" whilst making a tackle/clearance. It was similar in some ways in that he made clear contact with the ball, sending it 40 metres away. Their player, making an attempt to intercept the ball, coming from the opposite direction, was caught by Robinson's follow through. the referee gave a foul, yellow card and they scored from the resulting free kick. At the time, I argued that it was not a foul as he clearly sent the ball to safety, well before any contact was made with their player. it is impossible to do something like this and then stop any further forward motion to prevent any risk of contact with another player in a coming together.
 
Slim Man said:
It's completely relevant. How is it not?

Same game, same ref, foul no card.
Click to expand...


The rules of the game don't say the ref needs to take into account fouls committed by other players during the game when assessing whether to send someone off.
 
Klaatu Barada Nikto said:
The rules of the game don't say the ref needs to take into account fouls committed by other players during the game when assessing whether to send someone off.
Click to expand...
You set a precedent in a game, and you can't just change how you're reffing the game mid way through. If you're letting one go, you have to let them all go.

It's a piss take. The ref is a wanker.
 
Slim Man said:
So then the refs look bent or look like they're favouring a particular team.

It's bang out of order.

He didn't like us from the minute the whistle blew.
Click to expand...


The idea that if you let one dangerous tackle go, then you have to let them all go is absurd. The ref would quickly lose control of the game.

The ref will be constantly course correcting throughout the game.
 
Klaatu Barada Nikto said:
The idea that if you let one dangerous tackle go, then you have to let them all go is absurd. The ref would quickly lose control of the game.

The ref will be constantly course correcting throughout the game.
Click to expand...
It is also entirely possible that the referee made a bad mistake (Knibbs on McCallum) and got the next major decision correct (Soumaré on Knibbs).
 
Slim Man said:
You set a precedent in a game, and you can't just change how you're reffing the game mid way through. If you're letting one go, you have to let them all go.

It's a piss take. The ref is a wanker.
Click to expand...

The ref is showing bias and has done a few times with us. Souza got elbowed good and proper away at Blackburn last season, this ref no red card. That was worse than Tanganga's foul.
 
Soumare’s is 100% a red card, all day every day. He may not have meant it but he’s put a lad on a stretcher and reading online it’s a suspected broken ankle. Intentional or not there’s no way a tackle should put someone on a stretcher

BUT…

The tackle on Mcallum earlier was similar and the lack of consistency is astounding. That one’s a red too.

Then there’s the blatant shove in Bamford’s back for a penalty.

If the silly twat gets those two decisions correct we are 1-0 up at least against 10 men and cruising. Soumare doesn’t make his tackle and then Tanganga doesn’t dive into that header either.

I don’t think the Tanganga ones a red for me. It’s a committed attempt to head the ball. Probably a bit silly on his part as the ref is obviously a cunt and pulses were racing but still. Yellow for me.

Ref clearly did not like Tanganga questioning his decisions, put his hands on Tanganga and didn’t like being told to remove them. Imagine if it was the other way around and Tanganga was putting his hands on the ref?
 
Klaatu Barada Nikto said:
The idea that if you let one dangerous tackle go, then you have to let them all go is absurd. The ref would quickly lose control of the game.

The ref will be constantly course correcting throughout the game.
Click to expand...
Maybe it's absurd, but if you set a precedent in a game for one side, is it right to then go against it for the other side?

You've let one go, let the other one go. Whether the lad has got injured or not makes no odds, it doesn't make it any more or less of a foul.

The second red is an utter joke.

For some reason you're sticking up for a ref that was giving just about everything in their favour. I don't understand it 😂
 



Mojo said:
So basically soumares only option to avoid being sent off is to not go for the ball?

Once he has played the ball where is he supposed to put his foot? How can he possibly avoid what happened. Collisions happen in football it's unavoidable.
Click to expand...
It was reckless. He took an action that showed no regard for the welfare of the opposition player. Intent isn't required
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Maurice Maurice
Tom Cannon's Resurgance
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
GKhantRebel
GKhantRebel
Maurice Maurice
Nowt to do with Flu
Replies
20
Views
2K
Bobby b
Bobby b
Maurice Maurice
First game this season...
Replies
1
Views
749
ATL Recs
A
Maurice Maurice
A few thoughts.
Replies
20
Views
2K
MadDad38
M
Maurice Maurice
He's going nowhere!
4 5 6
Replies
160
Views
14K
ATL Recs
A

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom