Personally think the red card will be rescinded as that sort of tackle are not that unusual just one of those things that the trailing leg trapped Harveys causing the break / dislocation .
Since i drink them not make them how the **** should i know but it is rather pleasant to say the least .
Yeah, you see that type of tackle several times in most games - our players do it. I think the card was a response to the severity of the injury rather than the recklessness of the tackle. At least Leeds can't claim it lost them the game as we were always in control.
Since i've been fairly critical of Thiago in the past should just say i thought he had a really good game today .
This is the thing though. below is the rule for a red card. Surely the fact the tackles endangered his safety automatically makes it a red card whether it was deliberate or not? A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
But that should be determined without knowing (impossible) the outcome of said challenge. Whether a player is actually injured or not shouldn't come into it. It's about intent or recklessness, not the end result. There's plenty of injuries that come from coming togethers that aren't even considered a foul, never mind a booking or red card. Equally, there are plenty of challenges that are dangerous that go unpunished too I suppose.
Maybe it would have been a red without the break? We’ll never know I guess. You say it’s about intent and recklessness not the end result. Well given the end result was a break, does that not mean by default that the challenge was reckless and therefor an automatic red?
