2019/20 Andre Gomes

[Goat]

So there's a picture of son looking angry and 30 seconds later the guy who made him angry is on the ground with his foot 90 degrees from where it should be after being tackled by a guy who was sent off earlier in the season for a reaction to someone else who made him angry ... we'll that's it I'm convinced open top bus parade for Son for being such a nice bloke.

See theres your problem, what has anything that has gone before got to do with it?

People are so consumed with rage and the desire to blame somebody.

It was a freak injury, caused by him stumbling after a slight nudge in the back.

An independent panel deemed it not a red card offence, im not saying they are all-powerful, but 50% of biased Everton fans consider it not a red card offence and im almost certain most neutrals would consider it not a red card offence also.

Anyway, ive made my point, repeatedly, im just a little peeved at the ongoing "ITS A CONSPIRACEE" im reading on an hourly basis.

 

[SantaClausisanEvertonian]

Former ref, Dermot Gallagher stated that any other official, having seen the injury, would have responded in the same way as Atkinson in giving the red card.


[/QUOTE]

Just a quick point; when was Dermot Gallagher anything marginally above being a God awful referee?
The fact that his opinion is as stated above proves absolutely nothing if my memory of Gallagher serves me well.

 

[Deleted member 38674]

Well if that's the case when does a ref give a red card for any tackle? There's never any way of knowing the intent of a player, you don't believe that son went out to intentionally hurt Gomes, so is that you saying that a red should only be given if it's the refs belief that there was intent to hurt. I'm genuinely struggling to see your argument.

No, my argument is that A red card should be given in this scenario if a ref deems a tackle to be reckless and endangering the safety of the player.

I don’t believe Son’s tackle fits that criteria. Irrespective of it’s consequences. There are plenty of harmless, soft tackles that cause leg breaks and plenty of reckless, wild, dangerous tackles that cause no injury at all.

In my view, it’s less about intent and more about control. Son had no intent, in my opinion, but he might be guilty of losing control. That’s why a yellow was the right decision for me.

 

[Goat]

Seen every angle many many times , what it doesnt take into account is Son ran 30 yards tried a nibble at Iwobi then as the opportunity arose for a flailing Gomes arm 2 mins earlier presented itself , Son with studs up tackled from behind ( outlawed years ago) was seeking retribution.
He didnt snap Gomes' ankle but he definately caused it.
If you disagree thats your opinion , FA/ Prem rules state opposite to your opinion.

Ps very very similar tackle by Xhaka was appealed and not rescinded.Red card.

But then again they aint Everton.

Xhakas red card wasnt appealed.

 

[Toffee in Jandals]

Instead of the poxy little git attempting to create more attention and sympathy for himself with all this over-the-top apologizing tonight, why on earth couldn't he have just scored, not celebrated, and run back to the halfway line ready for kick-off.

Honestly, it sadly reflects society that the media and public at large seem to be more concerned about the well-being and mental health of the perpetrator rather than the victim.

 

[blulouie]

Plenty of people apologise without admitting guilt. You can be sorry that something occurred without acknowledging full responsibility for it.

Plenty think Aurier should have been punished. Plenty believe it was a freak accident and nobody was to blame. Game of opinions, isn’t it.

I give up fella
Theres no helping you.

Ignore button is getting very itchy.

 

[TheBigIguana]

There’s no way of knowing if it was intentional or not. At best it was clumsy, at worst it was a cynical foul designed to halt an attack, the kind you see almost every game in the middle of the park.

I don’t believe that Son went out to intentionally hurt Gomes, if you do that’s fine. I just don’t think that’s what happened.

Hard to say it was stopping an attack when there wasn't one on. I believe he went to foul him and "leave a mark" so to speak.

 

[maccavennie]

Seen every angle many many times , what it doesnt take into account is Son ran 30 yards tried a nibble at Iwobi then as the opportunity arose for a flailing Gomes arm 2 mins earlier presented itself , Son with studs up tackled from behind ( outlawed years ago) was seeking retribution.
He didnt snap Gomes' ankle but he definately caused it.
If you disagree thats your opinion , FA/ Prem rules state opposite to your opinion.

Ps very very similar tackle by Xhaka was appealed and not rescinded.Red card.

But then again they aint Everton.

Yep, Xhakas tackle was exactly the same apart from the player was fortunate that his ankle didn't end up backwards. Wenger chatted crap about it being harsh but understood why it was given, appealed it l, appeal denied.

Its a red card tackle, I don't understand how anyone can say it isn't.

 

[blulouie]

Xhakas red card wasnt appealed.

Sure i read it was.
Even so very similar , I was surprised Spurs appealed it .

 

[Deleted member 38674]

Just a quick point; when was Dermot Gallagher anything marginally above being a God awful referee?

Who’s a good referee mate? Name me some good ones. They’ve all made bad decisions at times.

The only reason I mentioned Gallagher was because, as a professional ref, he referenced the emotion of the game (the seriousness of the injury) as a factor in Atkinsons decision, rather than the tackle itself which most would agree was fairly tame.

 

[Tipp blue]

Because an impartial panel of independent regulatory officials who are trained in the rules of the game deemed after reviewing multiple angles of footage, the same footage that we have seen, that Son did not endanger the safety of Gomes with that tackle.

This overruled the earlier decision by Matchday official, Martin Atkinson, to award a red card to Son on the basis of endangering the safety of Gomes.

Former ref, Dermot Gallagher stated that any other official, having seen the injury, would have responded in the same way as Atkinson in giving the red card.

However, in the cold light of day, once the emotion and tempers of the game had died down, most fans recognised that the tackle wasn’t actually a “career ender” or a “leg-breaker”. It wasn’t dangerous in and of itself.

It was a fairly common, innocuous challenge that resulted in horrendous and unfortunate consequences for Gomes.

You disagree with that and that’s fine.

No tackle is a leg breaker until someone's leg is broken, pretty much every time you see this type of injury, it's never intended and is almost always because the foot is planted and the studs catch and the leg can't move away from the impact so bends and snaps, so using your argument there is always a reason not to punish the tackler, sure if he didn't fall that way or if his foot was half an inch off the ground... it's just an unlucky freak accident...

 

[Goat]

Yep, Xhakas tackle was exactly the same apart from the player was fortunate that his ankle didn't end up backwards. Wenger chatted crap about it being harsh but understood why it was given, appealed it l, appeal denied.

Its a red card tackle, I don't understand how anyone can say it isn't.

Arsenal do not intend to appeal Granit Xhaka’s red card and will reluctantly accept the likely four match ban for his dismissal in the 2-1 defeat to Burnley.

Xhaka received the second red of his Arsenal career – and his ninth in the past three seasons – in the 65th minute of Sunday’s match for a two-footed tackle on Burnley midfielder Steven Defour.

Referee Jon Moss consulted with his assistant before showing Xhaka a straight red, and Standard Sport understands that Arsenal believe input of a second official in the decision to give the midfielder his marching orders only makes an appeal more unlikely to succeed.

Arsene Wenger offered no defence for Xhaka in the aftermath of the Burnley loss, though he did avoid directly saying he was disappointed with the player when asked by Standard Sport.




They didnt appeal.

 

[maccavennie]

See theres your problem, what has anything that has gone before got to do with it?

People are so consumed with rage and the desire to blame somebody.

It was a freak injury, caused by him stumbling after a slight nudge in the back.

An independent panel deemed it not a red card offence, im not saying they are all-powerful, but 50% of biased Everton fans consider it not a red card offence and im almost certain most neutrals would consider it not a red card offence also.

Anyway, ive made my point, repeatedly, im just a little peeved at the ongoing "ITS A CONSPIRACEE" im reading on an hourly basis.

Come on MG, your a top poster (I mean that genuinely) and I know you've got your opinion on the matter and have stuck by it but it wasn't a slight nudge in the back.

Also, conspiracy wise (I don't think there is one) but I think it's alright to say a) the FA is a joke for rescinding it b) Spurs are cheeky beauts for even appealing it c) Everton are a soft touch for not saying anything about it.

That's not me coming up with any kind of conspiracy, that's me as a football supporter seeing it how it is.

But it definitely wasn't just a slight nudge in the back. Slight nudges don't make ankles look north whilst the toes point to the south

 

[blulouie]

Arsenal do not intend to appeal Granit Xhaka’s red card and will reluctantly accept the likely four match ban for his dismissal in the 2-1 defeat to Burnley.

Xhaka received the second red of his Arsenal career – and his ninth in the past three seasons – in the 65th minute of Sunday’s match for a two-footed tackle on Burnley midfielder Steven Defour.

Referee Jon Moss consulted with his assistant before showing Xhaka a straight red, and Standard Sport understands that Arsenal believe input of a second official in the decision to give the midfielder his marching orders only makes an appeal more unlikely to succeed.

Arsene Wenger offered no defence for Xhaka in the aftermath of the Burnley loss, though he did avoid directly saying he was disappointed with the player when asked by Standard Sport.




They didnt appeal.

Why didnt they appeal ?

Maybe Wenger saw everthing in that tackle that we saw in Son's tackle.

As it stands both were Red Cards.

 

[artetas_biggest_fan]

Sure i read it was.
Even so very similar , I was surprised Spurs appealed it .

I was surprised Spurs appealed it as it could look in bad taste (a player being out for 6 months minimum, so just take the 3 match ban rather than appeal it). On the other hand, having that on your CV (red card offence having broke an opponents leg) is damaging to a players reputation, and if most think it was a yellow then there’s justification to appeal.

It’s a tricky one either way.