sunderland v Newcastle United (a) 21/10/2012

[Toonpack 6871]

I'd agree with that too although you could argue that that him making the challenge when he was off balane made it less controlled and more dangerous so he should have pulled out.

 

It was miss-timed and aye maybe he should have pulled out, but given he was being fouled which effected his ability to make the subsequent challenge, was a yellow IMO.

 

A two footed lunge type challenge over the ball should be straight red, he never took his eyes off the ball, no way was he trying to "do" Fletcher.

[sweetleftpeg 0]

No one is saying he tried to do Fletcher. But the challenge, in it's nature, could have caused serious injury.

[ewerk 26441]

No one is saying he tried to do Fletcher. But the challenge, in it's nature, could have caused serious injury.

 

He caught him with the side of his boot rather than went straight through him. It was a glancing blow really, not a leg breaker imo, even if his foot had've been planted.

[David Kelly 1117]

No one is saying he tried to do Fletcher. But the challenge, in it's nature, could have caused serious injury.

I've never seen a tackly like that cause serious injury like. It was just a kick in the shin. That's what shin pads are for!

[ChezGiven 0]

I've never seen a tackly like that cause serious injury like. It was just a kick in the shin. That's what shin pads are for!

Exactly.

 

Also Pardew is on a permanent pipe down this season after starting on that linesman.

[sweetleftpeg 0]

We're going to have to agree to disagree me thinks!

[The Fish 9008]

In a thread called Derby Day is now Boring.

I'm genuinely puzzled as to how you attended back in the days of our absolute shit' date=' witnessing 15 & 19 point seasons but it is only now when you decide to pack in through lack of entertainment.

 

I just don't get it[/quote']

 

I think it's because there was a hope that things would get better. At the minute' date=' it's fairly well agreed that we have reached as far as we can - the 'next level' requires big spending that we can ill-afford and most of the league is decided before a ball is even kicked. If you can't achieve that, then the next best thing is being entertained, which is in very short supply at the minute.

 

I don't know why I've just suddenly realised this - it's probably age, as has already been mentioned. I live in hope though and enjoy the day out with the lads still.[/quote']

 

The latter is spot on for a lot of Premier League fans these days. I think we're fortunate that our seasons generally have talking points. For a period they were mostly embarrassing or depressing points, but interesting none-the-less. We're not going to challenge for the title, but we can at least launch an assault on the European places. I also think our model (scout hard and buy young and hungry) is further proof that you don't need to be Man U or Arsenal to attract good young players and you don't need to spend a fortune to get genuinely top class players. Do your homework and spend within your means and you'll see returns. Even if those returns are simply enjoying entertaining football.

[@yourservice 67]

[The Fish 9008]

 

Hefting a 2-handed axe into battle?

[@yourservice 67]

[@yourservice 67]

[PaddockLad 14621]

We're going to have to agree to disagree me thinks!

 

Heres the FA guidance for refs:

 

Careless, reckless, using excessive force

 

 

“Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or

consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution.

• No further disciplinary sanction is needed if a foul is judged to be careless

 

 

“Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the

danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.

• A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned

 

 

“Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary

use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent.

• A player who uses excessive force must be sent off

 

 

So which one of these does Tiote's challenge fall under?.....

[McFaul 35]

Heres the FA guidance for refs:

 

Careless, reckless, using excessive force

 

 

“Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or

consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution.

• No further disciplinary sanction is needed if a foul is judged to be careless

 

 

“Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the

danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.

• A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned

 

 

“Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary

use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent.

• A player who uses excessive force must be sent off

 

 

So which one of these does Tiote's challenge fall under?.....

I'd say almost snapping someones leg is pretty far in the excessive force zone.

[Toonpack 6871]

Heres the FA guidance for refs:

 

Careless, reckless, using excessive force

 

 

“Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or

consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution.

• No further disciplinary sanction is needed if a foul is judged to be careless

 

 

“Reckless” means that the player has acted with complete disregard to the

danger to, or consequences for, his opponent.

• A player who plays in a reckless manner must be cautioned

 

 

“Using excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the necessary

use of force and is in danger of injuring his opponent.

• A player who uses excessive force must be sent off

 

 

So which one of these does Tiote's challenge fall under?.....

 

Reckless (at worst tbh). Never "using excessive force" he was stretching and leaning back.

[Toonpack 6871]

I'd say almost snapping someones leg is pretty far in the excessive force zone.

 

Were you 8 pints stone cold sober again ???

Edited October 22, 2012 by Toonpack

[Happy Face 29]

Put a poll up to see who thinks it was a red and yellow admin.

 

Have your poll starting abilities been revoked? Fill ya boots man. Admins aren't running round after you like your mam.

 

On the challenge, all these arguments against a red carry no weight. Tiotes line of sight, his level of aggression and intent (otherwise known as the look on his face), they're irrelevant even if the referee could be checking them at the same time as checking if it was the side of the foot or the studs that make contact.

 

Tiote was late, his studs were showing and he made contact well above the ankle.

 

A yellow might have been a better decision, especially considering previous decisions in the game, there would have been little controversy about a failure to send him off if he was booked instead, but if any of our players were a victim of that challe.he every one of us would undoubtedly scream for a red. No doubt.

 

On wether it makes him a liability we're better off without, I can't agree. Keane and Viera were mentioned, Ince had dreadful discipline too. These are players that win the mental battle for you by having the bite they do and letting the opposition know who is in charge. I said in this thread 5 minutes before he went that I was happy enough with Tiote going in strong and would hate to lose it from our armoury.

[PaddockLad 14621]

I'd say almost snapping someones leg is pretty far in the excessive force zone.

 

When Perch fairly won the ball in the second half he was using excessive force too mind....the only difference is he got the ball i.e. it was timed perfectly. Perhaps it could have been deemed "reckless" as Tiote went straight into the challenge on Fletcher without pausing for thought if you like. Its still only a yellow. You could say the whole thing was careless and reckless, it still doesnt add up to a red. I think looking at the guidelines its a yellow.

[McFaul 35]

We're you 8 pints stone cold sober again ???

What is this thick cunt on about now? We're? What? Make sense Albert son.

[McFaul 35]

When Perch fairly won the ball in the second half he was using excessive force too mind....the only difference is he got the ball i.e. it was timed perfectly. Perhaps it could have been deemed "reckless" as Tiote went straight into the challenge on Fletcher without pausing for thought if you like. Its still only a yellow. You could say the whole thing was careless and reckless, it still doesnt add up to a red. I think looking at the guidelines its a yellow.

I think more people think it was a red than a yellow. It was excessive, an assault on his shin. How many broken legs do you see? Too many and without any doubt it was a potential leg breaker. Thank God Fletcher's studs didn't stick in the turf, and fair play to Pards for admitting the obvious, he realised he would've looked a mug if he said any other.

[Toonpack 6871]

What is this thick cunt on about now? We're? What? Make sense Albert son.

 

Corrected, maybe you'll understand it now.

[wolfy 12]

I think more people think it was a red than a yellow. It was excessive, an assault on his shin. How many broken legs do you see? Too many and without any doubt it was a potential leg breaker. Thank God Fletcher's studs didn't stick in the turf, and fair play to Pards for admitting the obvious, he realised he would've looked a mug if he said any other.

Most tackles are potential leg breakers if mistimed and hard enough.

 

The game of football has gone soft. It's turning into a right fannies game.

[Toonpack 6871]

I think more people think it was a red than a yellow. It was excessive, an assault on his shin. How many broken legs do you see? Too many and without any doubt it was a potential leg breaker. Thank God Fletcher's studs didn't stick in the turf, and fair play to Pards for admitting the obvious, he realised he would've looked a mug if he said any other.

 

How could the leg/foot he was swinging through the air, kicking the ball with, "stick in the turf"

Edited October 22, 2012 by Toonpack

[PaddockLad 14621]

I think more people think it was a red than a yellow. It was excessive, an assault on his shin. How many broken legs do you see? Too many and without any doubt it was a potential leg breaker. Thank God Fletcher's studs didn't stick in the turf, and fair play to Pards for admitting the obvious, he realised he would've looked a mug if he said any other.

 

The thing is some of us older ones were brought up to think that the likes of that was merely mis-timed, I'm definetly one of them. The studs up off the ground thing make it reckless in the guidelines, not excessive. As I said, Perch certainly used excessive force in winning the ball cleanly, if he'd missed timed that it was amabulance job. So it would appear that if you win the ball cleanly but completley total the player in the process thats ok, even though the force used in that area of the pitch were excessive in Perch's case. Guidelines are fucked up iyam.

[McFaul 35]

Corrected, maybe you'll understand it now.

Sit in the corner mate ffs.

[McFaul 35]

The thing is some of us older ones were brought up to think that the likes of that was merely mis-timed, I'm definetly one of them. The studs up off the ground thing make it reckless in the guidelines, not excessive. As I said, Perch certainly used excessive force in winning the ball cleanly, if he'd missed timed that it was amabulance job. So it would appear that if you win the ball cleanly but completley total the player in the process thats ok, even though the force used in that area of the pitch were excessive in Perch's case. Guidelines are fucked up iyam.

In 1985 he might not have even have had a yellow card, we're in 2012 now, and it's becoming less and less a combative physical sport. You know yourself 9 out of 10 referee would've given a red card for that. Whatever Lee Ryder says it is, a red card or a yellow card, the opposite of what he says will be true.

Edited October 22, 2012 by McFaul