Chris Foy does it again.

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
The reason two footed and off the ground is a straight is because you have no control as soon as you leave the ground. It doesn't have to hurt someone or be intentionally going for the man, because it's totally reckless. If Nani had stuck out a leg, to shield the ball there is nothing Kompany could've done to adjust his challenge and if he hits Nani's leg with that challenge he will do some damage. If the FA rescind the red card for this decision it will be a disgrce, particularly after the Milijas appeal that was turned down.

Personally I think a yellow card and a strong warning would be enough as he's not really too close to making contact with Nani but as I said the rules are there to protect players and justifiably carry a big punishment.
 
The Hatem-Bomb said:
Hes reffing our game with QPR at the weekend im led to believe <wah>
Click to expand...

You should be alright, Hatem.
He's a bit of a homer most of the time and he owes QPR a dodgy decision or two, as his performance in their game against Chelsea upset the away side.
 
lennypops said:
What actually IS the wording of the rule? Does it talk about feet being raised? Does it use the words "malicious" or "dangerous"? Anyone able to post a link?
Click to expand...



The offence comes under the rule for either or both of "serious foul play" or "violent conduct." The Referees Association has deemed that a sliding tackle where both feet are off the ground and studs are showing constitutes the use of excessive force and is reckless, both of which bring it within either of the two rules.
 
Hoddle Is A God said:
The offence comes under the rule for either or both of "serious foul play" or "violent conduct." The Referees Association has deemed that a sliding tackle where both feet are off the ground and studs are showing constitutes the use of excessive force and is reckless, both of which bring it within either of the two rules.
Click to expand...

If you look at it again, his studs weren't showing, always had his boots down. Both feet were off the ground, but way before he was anywhere near Nani. The clincher for me was that Nani didn't even appeal (or play dead/dying) and he has been tackled by a blade of grass in the past.
 
HarrysDisciple said:
If you look at it again, his studs weren't showing, always had his boots down. Both feet were off the ground, but way before he was anywhere near Nani. The clincher for me was that Nani didn't even appeal (or play dead/dying) and he has been tackled by a blade of grass in the past.
Click to expand...



The ref would still be acting within the spirit of the rules to send the player off if he felt that the tackle used excessive force or was otherwise reckless, whether or not the studs were showing.

I really don't see how Foy can be faulted for his decision, and I am confident that most refs would have produced a red card for that tackle, in today's game. There really can be no excuse for any player to go leaping into tackles with both feet off the ground, not in today's climate.
 
Depends on who they were playing for and against and what their reputation is like, HIAG.
Joey Barton? Yep.
Fat Frank, St Stevie of the Scouse or Shrek? Not so much.
 
Yid Vicious said:
The reason two footed and off the ground is a straight is because you have no control as soon as you leave the ground. It doesn't have to hurt someone or be intentionally going for the man, because it's totally reckless. If Nani had stuck out a leg, to shield the ball there is nothing Kompany could've done to adjust his challenge and if he hits Nani's leg with that challenge he will do some damage. If the FA rescind the red card for this decision it will be a disgrce, particularly after the Milijas appeal that was turned down.

Personally I think a yellow card and a strong warning would be enough as he's not really too close to making contact with Nani but as I said the rules are there to protect players and justifiably carry a big punishment.
Click to expand...

This
And the only reason why I think it was this was due to the time and nature of the tackle. No one wants to see a game played 11-10 for 80 minutes and since the tackle was a very good one, albeit two footed, the referee should have used some common sense and given Kompany a yellow card and a stern warning. Alan Green said it perfectly on 606 when he said that ref should have whispered in his ear "I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt on this one. But you have been warned". The problem with giving referees the discretion to make their own decisions is that consistency then comes into question, which is a massive problem. A ref might decide that one foul warrants a yellow card whilst another ref might give a red for a near identical foul in another situation. This is why I can understand why there is a blanket rule.

I remember that when he went off the ground with two feet I thought it could have been dangerous, but got the ball cleanly. When I heard the whistle it was inevitable what was to happen. I sort of know that it was the correct decision, but don't really want to admit it because it just seems like such a silly decision given the circumstances.

Of course I understand what HIAG and LDL are saying when they say that the Foy should not be faulted because the "rules are the rules". And I also understand that a red card offence is a red card offence regardless of what time it is. In the same way that a foul is a foul whether it is in the penalty area or not.

However, would anybody have booked Billy Sharp for taking off his shirt to reveal the message "This is for you Son"?
 
We had a similar situation here in our A-League.
Perth Glory player Billy Mehmet (Some spammers and "Arry know him) went into a tackle right on the touchline started with right foot slide that turned into a two foot ball and all tackle. The player concerned saw him coming and jumped out of the way but landed awkardly. The incident happened near the linesman and both benches. The opposition players went berserk, but the linesman only signaled for a foul. The ref didn't see it clearly, but still produced the red card without consulting his assistant.
Replays showed that he won the ball cleanly, but because of the reaction of the players the emotion got to him.
It was a no win situation.
However we too have had a problem with refs too quickly giving a red card,instead of settling everyone down and consulting with his assistants first.
 
HarrysDisciple said:
If you look at it again, his studs weren't showing, always had his boots down. Both feet were off the ground, but way before he was anywhere near Nani. The clincher for me was that Nani didn't even appeal (or play dead/dying) and he has been tackled by a blade of grass in the past.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry mate you're wrong, in this vid, his right boot is studs up all the way through the challenge.

[video]http://www.caughtoffside.com/2012/01/08/video-vincent-kompany-sent-off-for-nani-tackle-in-manchester-derby/[/video]

Dickhead Townsend was saying because his feet were low and not over the top, ie. shin high, so according to him, not so bad...bollocks, that was an ankle snapper had Nani's been there. At the time Kpmpany lifted both feet, he would have had no idea where Nani would plant his next step...reckless...straight red...fuk off Kompany you dirty Belgian basstud!

Its all good, he won't be doing that to Bale! :D
 
Watch that link that Notso's helpfully provided.
Foy doesn't even blow for a foul, at first.
He only reacts when Rooney runs up to him, raving like a loon.
There's about a 2 second gap between the tackle and the whistle going.
 
I cannot understand posters thinking leniency should be applied to any footed challenges, under no circumstances should one be excused, players should not be given reason to think one might be ok, they're not, end of story.
 
Foy giving himself two secs to process his decision in his mind seems fair,no? He also makes the gesture of two feet pointing up. I must add that Nani's reaction, or lack of is baffling.
 
Sorry, but I still believe that if that tackle is a red card, then there's something seriously wrong with the laws of the game. As to refs not having discretion, thet certainly do in other situations, whether a defender prevented a goalscoring opportunity, or not. Whether a goalkeeper should receive a red or yellow card for bringing down an opposing striker in the box, etc. so why can't they be allowed a little discretion and common sense on this?
 
notsosmartspur said:
I cannot understand posters thinking leniency should be applied to any footed challenges, under no circumstances should one be excused, players should not be given reason to think one might be ok, they're not, end of story.
Click to expand...

as a general rule,yes id go with this.

it was 2 footed so yes he got srnt off..im not complaining as it means hes likely to miss the tottenham match.

however i do think that rules also state that you cant onbstruct etc etc in the box during corners...im sure we could see at least 3 pens per team per match if this rule was applied

plus i think..off topic i know..but i think goalkeepers get too much protection.
 
notsosmartspur said:
Foy giving himself two secs to process his decision in his mind seems fair,no?
Click to expand...

Two seconds to decide whether or not it was a foul? I don't think so.
If he believes that it's a red card, without having to consultant his assistants (bar Rooney), then surely he knew it was a foul straight away?

He seemed to come to the decision because of Rooney's reaction.
It may well have been the right decision in the end, but it just seems to be how Foy does things.
If a team or a crowd make enough noise, then they'll get the decisions from him.
 
Trouble is there's a big difference between going in two-footed where both feet are forward and going for the ball and one where your other leg just happens to be in front rather than trailing behind. Sometimes you can end up challenging where both feet are forward but only one is actually going for the ball. Sometimes you just can't adjust your body to make it so that one leg is forward and the other is sliding behind.

I dunno - it just seems absurd that such a clean tackle, such a safe tackle (all tackles carry some risk) should be deemed a straight red card offence just cos one of his legs, which makes no contact with the player, happens to be ahead of him rather than behind him.

Rooney absolutely should have got a yellow card on the spot for his card-waving gesture. Why can't players be given cards retrospectively for such things? It's THIS sort of thing that's wrong in football - not where players' legs happen to be when they make clean challenges.
 
I wonder what Dave Mackay,Tommy Smith and Ron Harris would say after watching the tackle.......?

" You dropped your handbag,dear?"
 
notsosmartspur said:
I cannot understand posters thinking leniency should be applied to any footed challenges, under no circumstances should one be excused, players should not be given reason to think one might be ok, they're not, end of story.
Click to expand...



<applause>
I happen to agree with this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back