2019/20 Andre Gomes

[PhilEFC]

There is a varying degree of what constitutes a yellow card and what doesn't. Unless we have a sin bin scenario, lesser 'crimes' will receive the same punishment.

Was it okay for him to tackle like that? No, hence why Atkinson was reaching for the yellow, but the point is does the initial challenge warrant a sending off?

Like @JLW mentioned, if he wasn't injured then we wouldn't even be talking about it. We would praise Garth Barry for cynical professional fouls every game.

Did he ever attempt to win the ball when teams were breaking against us on the half-way line? Did he heck, and rightfully he would be booked nearly each game.

Don't get me wrong, Son's was pretty rash, but personally I still don't think it constituted a red card as it wasn't violent conduct and no studs were showing etc.

If it were the other way around, I seriously doubt people on here would be saying our player would be worthy of a ban and would be calling it an accident. Pot, kettle.

But the thing is he was injured and he did go in late with a cowards tackle and with his feet off the ground.

If he hadn’t caused Gomes to lose balance he wouldn’t have broke his ankle. Therefore he is responsible, so he should deal with the consequences and we should not have the press acting like he’s the victim.

 

[Lanolin]

I see it like this.

Did Sons tackle directly snapped Gomes ankle? No
Did he contribute to it? Yes
Did he mean it? No
Was the tackle he made on Gomes a yellow card tackle? Yes
Was it the unfortunate landing body position that caused the ankle to break? Yes
If Gomes never fell awkwardly would we be having this debate? No

I’m judging it by the tackle not the injury

And that’s fine. You can judge it that way, no problem. I’m not saying you’re wrong to think that way, just that you’re wrong to suggest there’s no other way of looking at it. The laws of the game can very easily be interpreted to say that son’s tackle was a red, that’s indisputable really, when you look at the amount of people here who are interpreting them that way.

 

[ToffeeTim]

There is a varying degree of what constitutes a yellow card and what doesn't. Unless we have a sin bin scenario, lesser 'crimes' will receive the same punishment.

Was it okay for him to tackle like that? No, hence why Atkinson was reaching for the yellow, but the point is does the initial challenge warrant a sending off?

Like @JLW mentioned, if he wasn't injured then we wouldn't even be talking about it. We would praise Garth Barry for cynical professional fouls every game.

Did he ever attempt to win the ball when teams were breaking against us on the half-way line? Did he heck, and rightfully he would be booked nearly each game.

Don't get me wrong, Son's was pretty rash, but personally I still don't think it constituted a red card as it wasn't violent conduct and no studs were showing etc.

If it were the other way around, I seriously doubt people on here would be saying our player would be worthy of a ban and would be calling it an accident. Pot, kettle.

Lunges which are aimed at the man and not the ball are very rare and need outlawed. Almost all cynical fouls are clips or pushes/pulls and the defender doesn't dive in.

As for no studs???? I'm afraid you've not looked properly at it. It's the textbook sole of the boot motion they always red card these days. See below.

 

[Tipp blue]

Sorry mate I disagree, if Gomes got up in no way was that red card

Rules of the game say it should be.

 

[PhilM]

The laws of football are subject to interpretation. You’re saying the laws aren’t purely down to consequence and claiming that is a ‘glaringly obvious flaw’, conveniently ignoring that at no point have I said or even suggested that’s the case. So it’s not a flaw at all really is it? Its just you constructing a straw man argument.

The law says you can be sent off for endangering an opponent. I’m saying that it’s hardly outlandish to say that a player ending up seriously injured as a direct result of your tackle means that you endangered them, and therefore a red card can easily be justified.

You’re welcome to disagree with my conclusion, but you’re not welcome to suggest that there’s a logical flaw to my argument because there isn’t. You can interpret the law differently but don’t try to put what you’re saying across as a fact, it isn’t.

We play Southampton next week. If Mina tugs on Ings shirt causing him to fall and accidentally break his ankle, does Mina deserve a red?

The consequence is the same. The offence, pulling on the shirt even though it’s not a direct causation, has promoted him to be seriously injured.

 

[d34noj]

There is a varying degree of what constitutes a yellow card and what doesn't. Unless we have a sin bin scenario, lesser 'crimes' will receive the same punishment.

Was it okay for him to tackle like that? No, hence why Atkinson was reaching for the yellow, but the point is does the initial challenge warrant a sending off?

Like @JLW mentioned, if he wasn't injured then we wouldn't even be talking about it. We would praise Garth Barry for cynical professional fouls every game.

Did he ever attempt to win the ball when teams were breaking against us on the half-way line? Did he heck, and rightfully he would be booked nearly each game.

Don't get me wrong, Son's was pretty rash, but personally I still don't think it constituted a red card as it wasn't violent conduct and no studs were showing etc.

If it were the other way around, I seriously doubt people on here would be saying our player would be worthy of a ban and would be calling it an accident. Pot, kettle.

Not a red card you say? Studs up, from behind, on top of his ankle - throwing him off balance, in retaliation.

Easiest red I've seen all season.

 

[blulouie]

An “innocuous challenge” is a common phrase in sports journalism mate.

In fact, a quick google search brings up several articles using that phrase to describe this very incident.

“The South Korean was left distraught and has been offered counselling after the seemingly innocuous challenge.....”

So you just keep siding with the media narrative wether its right or wrong.

Whats next.

"Spurs robbed of 3 points by a wrongful sending off"
No doubt you'll be backing that too.

 

[BernieH]

We play Southampton next week. If Mina tugs on Ings shirt causing him to fall and accidentally break his ankle, does Mina deserve a red?

The consequence is the same. The offence, pulling on the shirt even though it’s not a direct causation, has promoted him to be seriously injured.

If he's ran after him like a madman to do it then yes, its not rocket science.

 

[PhilM]

If he's ran after him like a madman to do it then yes, its not rocket science.

That’s not the point because the crux of the debate has been based on the consequence of someone being injured being the prerequisite for a ban.

@ToffeeTim I have looked at it, but rather than a sample shot (close in) I’ve rewatched the tackle in full and at the correct speed.

 

[TheBigIguana]

We play Southampton next week. If Mina tugs on Ings shirt causing him to fall and accidentally break his ankle, does Mina deserve a red?

The consequence is the same. The offence, pulling on the shirt even though it’s not a direct causation, has promoted him to be seriously injured.

If you knock someone off balance with a deliberate foul and they break a leg yes that should be punished with a red card

 

[ToffeeTim]

That’s not the point because the crux of the debate has been based on the consequence of someone being injured being the prerequisite for a ban.

@ToffeeTim I have looked at it, but rather than a sample shot (close in) I’ve rewatched the tackle in full and at the correct speed.

Mate I've watched it tonnes of times. I've shown the clip showing the blatant studs up nature of the challenge. I cant present it any clearer. That also looks like a spurs fan account? Come on... They've chatted some ginormous crap today.

You're entitled to your own view but I'm pretty clear in my own mind.

 

[Deleted member 38674]

So you just keep siding with the media narrative wether its right or wrong.

Whats next.

"Spurs robbed of 3 points by a wrongful sending off"
No doubt you'll be backing that too.

I’m not siding with any media narrative. I was pulled up on my use of the word “innocuous challenge” which is why I quoted that particular piece of text - I didn’t say I agreed with it.

I was explaining that it’s a fairly common phrase within Football, particularly in Sports journalism. No more, no less.

 

[JLW]

And that’s fine. You can judge it that way, no problem. I’m not saying you’re wrong to think that way, just that you’re wrong to suggest there’s no other way of looking at it. The laws of the game can very easily be interpreted to say that son’s tackle was a red, that’s indisputable really, when you look at the amount of people here who are interpreting them that way.

Mate If one of our players done that tackle to Son or in the derby with the same outcome to an opposing player I’m pretty sure many many more would be saying the tackle weren’t that bad it was the way he fell!!

 

[Deleted member 38674]

If he's ran after him like a madman to do it then yes, its not rocket science.

Fair enough. Love that consistency.

God forbid the two are chasing a bouncing ball, if Ings falls under a shove and seriously hurts himself, Yerry’s getting an early bath.

I don’t agree, but if you feel that’s how it should be then fair play, I respect that commitment to the cause.

 

[Undisputed_blue]

Frankly, I'm sick of FA's decisions going against Everton. An Everton would have been given a several games ban had it been the other way round. One rule for one and another rule for Everton. VARS a joke and the FA a joke.

I think the first step is create a thread where we can record all the corrupt decisions made by the FA and their Officials so that we can never forget their illogical decisions.