so he managed to break his leg without endangering his opponent? if you slide in from behind and break someones leg it's a red card whether you mean it or not,, ffs it's a red card by the rules even if he doesn't break his leg …. not breaking his leg would have endangered him , but breaking it has done more don't you think
you can get a red for sliding in even if you get the ball it's whether the challenge could injure the player and I don't think that's even in question .. it was a sliding tackle from behind and he endangered his opponent.. easy red card.
Hard to understand how Gomes can have the worst outcome actually happen to him but he wasn't "endangered". His leg would have spontaneously snapped even without the tackle?
it was a sliding tackle from behind that endangered his opponent.. whether he breaks a leg or not is irrelevant.. it was a red even if he got up ok
The reason it’s not working in the PL is down to the ego of the twats using it, a cynic might suggest they don’t want to see it work. Not me like.
We'll agree to disagree mate but I don't think the outcome affects the level of foul. It wasn't Son who actually injured him anyway. If that's classed as endangering an opponent then you can probably class all tackles as potentially endangering an opponent.
If the player had not been unlucky and Son got a red no one would have said it was deserved. That kind of challenge happens in most matches and is never a red. His foot got caught in the turf and that caused that terrible injury. It's very interesting that every pro on sky disagree with the red card. Tim Cahill described himself as being "as blue as they come" but insisted that it should not of been a red. TBH I do not wanna come across like I don't give a **** about the injured guy but the ref clearly thought the challenge was a yellow cos that is what he gave. He then changed it to a red after seeing the injury...but the injury was from his foot getting stuck in the turf. I ain't complaining about the result cos TBH I kind of think it's irrelevant after such a bad injury...felt the same after the Lloris one a few weeks back.
To the letter of the law it could have been the first tackle in history that saw 2 of them walk, as Aurier ploughed into him and broke his leg, after Son had endangered him with a reckless challenge.
[QUOTE="remembercolinlee, post: 13299043, member: 1016185"]If the player had not been unlucky and Son got a red no one would have said it was deserved. That kind of challenge happens in most matches and is never a red. His foot got caught in the turf and that caused that terrible injury. It's very interesting that every pro on sky disagree with the red card. Tim Cahill described himself as being "as blue as they come" but insisted that it should not of been a red. TBH I do not wanna come across like I don't give a **** about the injured guy but the ref clearly thought the challenge was a yellow cos that is what he gave. He then changed it to a red after seeing the injury...but the injury was from his foot getting stuck in the turf. I ain't complaining about the result cos TBH I kind of think it's irrelevant after such a bad injury...felt the same after the Lloris one a few weeks back.[/QUOTE] firstly some would and secondly whether you or anyone else complains doesn't mean it's not a red card offence . my side has had two reds for way les than that and when thy actually got the ball , but there was no doubt the tackled endangered the opponent and they saw red as per the rules anyway I hope the lads ok .. whether people on here can read rules isn't exactly very important
mentioned it to PNP earlier but i think it could be a red or a yellow but i have to agree with you in that Atkinson was going to give a yellow and he changed his mind because of the injury which imo is wrong and incorrect Do i think Son meant to injure him, nope. Was it malicious nope. Was their a lot of contact nope. However, it's sliding and from behind and no where near the ball. It catches gomes but not very forcefully. Maybe it doesn't look so bad from other angles but from the youtube vid i reckon it could be either yellow or red because of the above.
hmmm I wonder If when he noticed his leg was on the wrong way that Atkinson decided he must have endangered the opponent afterall.
