thisGRAEME Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 23 hours ago, MJC said: Typical nonsense from McGhee to claim that the red card changed the game and blame the loss on that. That would maybe have been fair enough had he actually tried to win the match but yet again he set us up for damage limitation against another bang average side. It's almost as if he is trying to prove a point about how little resource he has at this tinpot outfit like Motherwell, and given his previous comments, that wouldn't surprise me. I've said it all along, McGhee should be nowhere near Fir Park in any capacity as he is no good for us. We need a manager with at least some degree of passion for the job at hand, not some egotistical nugget like this guy who, let's face it, has had one good season at any club he's been at in the last decade. Well, as good a job as he did in 2007/08 with us he cannot dine out on that forever and we as a club need to break the habit of a lifetime and look forward and not backwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 It's an absolute stick on red card. How on earth can folk say otherwise? Quote Law 12: 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 and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play. A player who is guilty of serious foul play should be sent off and play is restarted with a direct free kick from the position where the offence occurred (see Law 13 – Position of free kick) or a penalty kick (if the offence occurred inside the offender’s penalty area). That's from the 15/16 FIFA rules. I doubt it's changed much for the most recent revision. EDIT: A quick look at the 16/17 version and it's even more clear that it's a red card. Quote A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Again, how was that excessive force??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 What is excessive force? Where is the line between force and excessive force? If we're heading down the road of that challenge may injure the opponent, then there will be numerous red cards in every game up and down the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 What is excessive force? Where is the line between force and excessive force? If we're heading down the road of that challenge may injure the opponent, then there will be numerous red cards in every game up and down the country. Excessive force is surely going into a challenge harder than you need to to win the ball, ie knowing that you can win the ball but choosing to go into the tackle harder than required, that never happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insert Amusing Pseudonym Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 8 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said: Again, how was that excessive force??????? Because the referee judged that the Mass of the Player x his acceleration were in excess of the required Newton value he had in mind. Rudimentary physics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Read the rules. Excessive force doesn't even have to come into it so I don't know why you are placing so much reliance on it. Quote A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. The use of 'or' here is important. The tackle endangered the safety of the other player, is therefore considered to be serious foul play and therefore is punishable by a red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 1 minute ago, Insert Amusing Pseudonym said: Because the referee judged that the Mass of the Player x his acceleration were in excess of the required Newton value he had in mind. Rudimentary physics Nonsense. The referee was Andrew Dallas, FFS! The boy struggles to tie his shoelaces without help from Daddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Just now, RiG said: Read the rules. Excessive force doesn't even have to come into it so I don't know why you are placing so much reliance on it. The use of 'or' here is important. The tackle endangered the safety of the other player, is therefore considered to be serious foul play and therefore is punishable by a red card. That's completely subjective. Cowie was running about 30 seconds later. So how do you define the part in bold? So, again, if we're going down the that may injure the opponent, then a lot of tackles in the game would fall under the red card category. Until a rule comes into play that any slide tackle results in a red card, you're going to have this debate every time someone is sent off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Read the rules. Excessive force doesn't even have to come into it so I don't know why you are placing so much reliance on it. A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. The use of 'or' here is important. The tackle endangered the safety of the other player, is therefore considered to be serious foul play and therefore is punishable by a red card.So that's basically every tackle where players make contact then????Only allowed to tackle sideways on now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 1 minute ago, Desp said: That's completely subjective. Cowie was running about 30 seconds later. So how do you define the part in bold? So, again, if we're going down the that may injure the opponent, then a lot of tackles in the game would fall under the red card category. Until a rule comes into play that any slide tackle results in a red card, you're going to have this debate every time someone is sent off. Of course it's subjective but that's the call the referee has to make weighing up what he has seen. I'd imagine he might well have been swayed by the fact that the Well player came lunging in and caught Cowie on the ankle thus 'endangering his safety' which prompted him to produce the red card. Don't get me wrong, Andrew Dallas is a woefully incompetent referee, but on this occasion I think on balance he got this one right. Just now, 1320Lichtie said: So that's basically every tackle where players make contact then???? Only allowed to tackle sideways on now. No it isn't and yeah, that's exactly what I've suggested, sideways tackles only from now. If you're going to start hurling out reductio ad absurdums then there isn't much point in discussing this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 I'm happy to admit I was wrong. That's a shocker of a tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 start hurling out reductio ad absurdums And it is though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamle1874 Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 If Cowies foot is planted he's not running around 30 seconds later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnHearts Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 7 minutes ago, jamle1874 said: If Cowies foot is planted he's not running around 30 seconds later If Cowies foot is planted, his season is finished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 The tackle was made, red given. I think the debate is finished with regards to that. However, my point is more surrounding that if we're now entering a time in the game where red cards are getting dished out for what if scenarios, the game will be heading down a slippery slope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 If Cowies foot is planted, his season is finished. What that photo fails to show is the fact that McHugh has just cleanly won the ball with the side of his foot, he cannot just stop at a standstill after it and with the angle Cowie was coming in that was the result, why do players wear shin pads again???? Again, no intent, no malice, no excessive force. Sending off completely unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desp Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 If McHugh had won the ball, and then didn't make contact with Cowie (if he'd shat out the challenge, for example), is it still a red card? McHugh has still gone in with apparent excessive force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LincolnHearts Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 1 minute ago, 1320Lichtie said: What that photo fails to show is the fact that McHugh has just cleanly won the ball with the side of his foot, he cannot just stop at a standstill after it and with the angle Cowie was coming in that was the result, why do players wear shin pads again???? Again, no intent, no malice, no excessive force. Sending off completely unfair. Shinpads cover shins, not ankles, but If you keep telling yourself that mate, you'll convince yourself you're right. Thought you'd still be chugging over Celtic and Lustigs Rabona tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted February 6, 2017 Share Posted February 6, 2017 Shinpads cover shins, not ankles, but If you keep telling yourself that mate, you'll convince yourself you're right. Thought you'd still be chugging over Celtic and Lustigs Rabona tbh. That's not his ankle. And a lot of shin pads do actually cover ankles m9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.