The O'Neill tackle - what are the rules here?

F**k off you c**K...they were both red cards and you know it.

how the hell you ever became a mod with zero knowledge of the game and a completely one sided, biased and uneducated opinion..I will never know

You make me glad we have nines, roller and nuts as mods on this forum. Probably the most respected and trusted mods on any forum. You are absolutely not representitive of the rest of your forum who I have found very knowledgeable and welcoming.

If you wish to post on our board then i suggest you stop lie-ing, admit the truth and show a bit of respect for posters on the board which you post.

Im not bothered about the score TBH ( but would rather we had won obviously) but the lack of class and acceptance you have shown marks you out as a complete cock.
Im not going to get into a slagging match as given your history (or lack of it) you are not worth the time.

I, stupidly; gave you the benefit of the doubt earlier as i assumed anyone who was a mod on this site was deserving of some respect. i clearly see now that i was wrong.

For the game, well done, but make no doubt, even though you beat us, you are not that good.

thanks for your (tedious)input and hope to speak to you come the end of the season when we go up & you have ANOTHER year in the second tier

Nines....how do we allow losers like this on our forum...?

 

They both should have been reds imo. But if I had to choose, I'd say O'Neill's was slightly the more dangerous.

 

The ref wasn't inconsistent here. He gave a yellow each to both offenders for similar offences. Possibly both should have been reds but the ref favoured neither team in these two instances.

 

But by that logic you could have two identical tackles, one of which does damage and results in a red card and one which doesn't and doesn't.

 

Do you have to be so one-eyed about everything?

 

Its not just him. One or two of our own are quite blinkered too. People calling any of those Rangers appeals penalties would be up in arms if they were awarded against us.
I don't know how it can be so difficult to be objective.

AKCJ just stands out because he's an asshole on top of being one-eyed.

 

You do love your Americanisms Swordsie, they're arseholes over here!...

 

Can't say I was particularly convinced by either of our penalty claims, but I who have happily have seen Austin score both of them. As for the two challenges, if one was a red then so was the other, imo.

 

To answer the question in the OP, thought it might save pointless argument to actually look at the rules. So here they are:

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf

Pages 8 and 9 relevant on dangerous play. Work out the difference between careless play, reckless play and excessive force and you have your answer on O'Neil and James.

In my view any studs up tackle is at least reckless (caution) and probably 'with excessive force' (sending off), not to mention downright unsporting, old bean.

 

I'm telling you man, this guy is for the birds. Its time we brought back "Flyerism of the week", what'd you think?

I have an image of Flyer as some kind of mature student who's just finished his Open University agriculture and forestry degree, who lives alone with his old mother and who had a visit from the local Constabulary around 2010 because the bird across the way reported him for nicking her panties of her clothesline. The Judge, recognising he was ultimately a harmless character - just a bit of a loner, went down the lenient route giving him a warning and ordering him to develop an interest in something outside of women's undergarments. But instead of joining the neighbourhood Bowls club or stamp collecting society or something else suitable to his character, some smart arse advised him to start following football. The result of which you see on the pages before you.

So its us who've been lumped with pearls of wisdom like "we should deploy more diagonally directed passes", "goalkeepers should have bouncier stances" and "its the responsibility of the other player to get out of the way if the tackler wins the ball and has a natural follow through". I'm surprised he hasn't come out with Vincent Tan's suggestion to Malky Mackay yet, that the team should shoot from inside their own half more often.

I'm all for doing my bit for society but enough's enough for fu*k's sake

 

Referees are all individuals, therefore they will call it as they see it. There were plenty of tackles on match of the day that could either have been yellow or red.

Remember they have a split second to make a decision, sometimes they get it right, sometimes they don't. Not a job I'd want to do!

 

I was always told when training to be a ref that it didn't matter whether or not the player made contact with the player or the ball, if his feet were off the floor and he was out of control of his body it was a straight red. Both of the tackles yesterday should have been reds, but the ref much like he did with many other decisions throughout the course of the match, bottled it. By only giving O'neil a yellow he set a precedent (an incorrect one) that he had to follow for the rest of the game.

 

Here you go Wats...explains what I'm trying to say much better than I can
it doesnt matter if you make contact with the player or not.

Unless of course you are Flyer, then the guys with the broken leg should have got out of the way......

 

I don't think O'Neill was in control of his body as he was mid air where as James was more a sliding tackle.


Which is why I think the former deserved a red while the latter probably was unlucky to get booked.

 

You honestly couldnt get any more blinkered if you tried, could you mate...?

Seriously

A lot of other days both would be red for intent.

 

I like Flyer, but this is brilliant

 

so you do know him then

 

Dear AKCJ.

That's where the debate ends. Hung drawn and quartered by your own logic. O'Neill was not in control of his body and studs up. I make that reckless. James apparently was - note your the use of the word 'whereas' to distinguish his case with O'Neill's. The context in which you use it suggests that in making a sliding tackle with one or both feet up in the air so that studs show and connect with the foot of the opponent, James was in control. he acted with intent. Well done. In the circumstances, using your own logic I know which is worse You've explained far more eloquently than anybody on this board was able to why one player deserved to be shown a red card and the other did not. Unfortunately you got it the wrong way round. Have you worked it out yet?

You've opened my eyes with your blinkered vision. Everybody on here could see that both deserved to be sent off. Unless the ref was prepared to give the benefit of the doubt in which case both would get a yellow. However I have been persuaded by you. Accident may lead to a yellow. Recklessness should lead to a red unless the ref feels that it's borderline. Intent leaves only one option. O'Neill deserved a yellow and James should have been shown red. We would never have worked that one out without you explaining the difference to us so convincingly.

 

I've just waded through 81 FIFA slides on foul play (see my very helpful and informative post 29 on this thread) and the word 'intent' doesn't appear anywhere. 'Deliberate' does, but only in relation to handball. Its down to whether the challenges were 'reckless' (caution) or used 'excessive force' (sending off). Ref obviously decided the former in these cases.

Actually recommend a quick flick through these, quite helpful. But the reason football is the most popular game in the world is that its so simple any idiot can understand it. Now we seem to be spewing out new rules the whole time, it'll end up like Rugby union, which is totally bewildering and being ruined as a spectacle.

 

IMO O'Neill was reckless and should of went. Knockaert saved O'Neill by not making a big thing of it. Had he rolled around or went after O'Neill then I think O'Neill would have walked

Matty James went in hard and won the ball. Caught Simpson aswell and probably deserved the yellow.

Any player that dives towards another player should be sent off. James slid in but O'Neill dived in. Its all about opinions. I thought the ref had a pretty decent game. Barton being an utter prat as usual and got what he deserved.