Today’s Football 2020/21 Season

[SunKing]

I've looked at it a number of times and genuinely I can't tell whether or not Soucek meant it because I can't read Soucek's mind.

I'm no fan of Mike Dean but the fall out from this sending off has been way OTT. He raised his arm and hit the Fulham player, I can see why he's given the red to be honest. The main irk should be with Mitorovic (I think it was who threw himself on the floor?). Why are the media going after the referee whose been put in a difficult position rather than the Fulham players for play acting? Same with Salah yesterday - it's like a players union, pundits lambast referees but never actually call out the player for outright cheating.

 

[JMT]

I've looked at it a number of times and genuinely I can't tell whether or not Soucek meant it because I can't read Soucek's mind.

It looks like one of them where he *could* have meant it but the way it's done is accidental or it could have been just an unlucky accident.

 

[TheBigIguana]

It looks like one of them where he *could* have meant it but the way it's done is accidental or it could have been just an unlucky accident.

My feeling is instead of trying to determine that you can just look at what happened, he elbowed him in the face, and send him off. And it isn't like he was challenging for the ball or something where you can mitigate it and say it is yellow. They're just standing there and he elbows him in the face.

 

[mahermi1]

Then honestly what is the point of having the laws anymore if we're not actually required to follow them in the name of some type of common sense? That's why I can't get behind the whole idea. You kind have to have rules or not. It isn't really fair to sometimes just say the rule doesn't apply here because he didn't mean it or whatever.

Your still not getting it are you, if it was intentional I would wholeheartedly agree with you but it was not, an accidental clash, should not be a sending off. Yes rules should apply, but there is such a thing as common sense and not just football, the whole world would be happier if it was applied more often.

 

[mahermi1]

My feeling is instead of trying to determine that you can just look at what happened, he elbowed him in the face, and send him off. And it isn't like he was challenging for the ball or something where you can mitigate it and say it is yellow. They're just standing there and he elbows him in the face.

He wasn't just standing there though was he, he was jockeying for position just like the defender, he didn't see the defender and raised his arm to try and speed up his movement and help his balance. Accidents do happen and most people seem to think that was an accident, you don't and want to punish him, try and use some common sense.

 

[Ring master]

 

[mahermi1]

I'm no fan of Mike Dean but the fall out from this sending off has been way OTT. He raised his arm and hit the Fulham player, I can see why he's given the red to be honest. The main irk should be with Mitorovic (I think it was who threw himself on the floor?). Why are the media going after the referee whose been put in a difficult position rather than the Fulham players for play acting? Same with Salah yesterday - it's like a players union, pundits lambast referees but never actually call out the player for outright cheating.

To be fair to Mitrovic, he was straight up and arguing Soucek's case, he tried to talk the ref out of sending him off.

 

[TheBigIguana]

He wasn't just standing there though was he, he was jockeying for position just like the defender, he didn't see the defender and raised his arm to try and speed up his movement and help his balance. Accidents do happen and most people seem to think that was an accident, you don't and want to punish him, try and use some common sense.

I'd reckon most red card tackles are accidents too.

 

[mahermi1]

I'd reckon most red card tackles are accidents too.

You think ? Or have you resorted to sarcasm and lost the debate ?

 

[TheBigIguana]

You think ? Or have you resorted to sarcasm and lost the debate ?

I'm really not sure what you mean. I'm honestly saying if "it was an accident" was an excuse you'd have about 5 red cards a season where guys lose their cool and do something on purpose. I mean the first red card in the Saints-United game was also an accident. The guy wasn't trying to go over the ball like that I don't think but it clearly didn't matter. But in this case it is fine because he didn't mean it and there seems to be a pretty strong support for that. I don't get it.

 

[mahermi1]

I'm really not sure what you mean. I'm honestly saying if "it was an accident" was an excuse you'd have about 5 red cards a season where guys lose their cool and do something on purpose. I mean the first red card in the Saints-United game was also an accident. The guy wasn't trying to go over the ball like that I don't think but it clearly didn't matter. But in this case it is fine because he didn't mean it and there seems to be a pretty strong support for that. I don't get it.

It's been rightly rescinded, fair enough. Or don't you agree with that either

 

[roydo]

I'm really not sure what you mean. I'm honestly saying if "it was an accident" was an excuse you'd have about 5 red cards a season where guys lose their cool and do something on purpose. I mean the first red card in the Saints-United game was also an accident. The guy wasn't trying to go over the ball like that I don't think but it clearly didn't matter. But in this case it is fine because he didn't mean it and there seems to be a pretty strong support for that. I don't get it.

Its quite simple.

The Fulham players head connected with the West Hams players elbow, which was raised in a normal movement.

The Southampton player was reckless in his attempt to win the ball.

Not sure why you are confused.

 

[TheBigIguana]

It's been rightly rescinded, fair enough. Or don't you agree with that either

I mean I really don't. I think it is a pretty inconsistent decision when you've got lots of other red cards given for less contact to the head than that. As I've said I think trying to adjudicate based on intent is a silly thing because very rarely is the player ever going to admit to meaning it so your often just guessing he didn't and if you take out the "it was an accident" you're left with a red card incident every day of the week.

It's just weird to me, non-violent stuff is given as a read because touching a players head/face is strictly illegal but then you've got actual violent conduct that is allowable because "I swear I didn't mean it!"

 

[TheBigIguana]

Its quite simple.

The Fulham players head connected with the West Hams players elbow, which was raised in a normal movement.

The Southampton player was reckless in his attempt to win the ball.

Not sure why you are confused.

Mitrovic is only two inches shorter than Soucek. His elbow is quite high up to hit him in the face. Are we sure it is really that normal?

I mean people are jockeying in the box all the time and the amount of times some gets caught that directly with an elbow is not that high.

And also the Mitrovic's head hit his elbow is some LOL framing of what happened.

 

[mahermi1]

I mean I really don't. I think it is a pretty inconsistent decision when you've got lots of other red cards given for less contact to the head than that. As I've said I think trying to adjudicate based on intent is a silly thing because very rarely is the player ever going to admit to meaning it so your often just guessing he didn't and if you take out the "it was an accident" you're left with a red card incident every day of the week.

It's just weird to me, non-violent stuff is given as a read because touching a players head/face is strictly illegal but then you've got actual violent conduct that is allowable because "I swear I didn't mean it!"

Jesus hope your never anywhere near a jury if I'm the accused pal, hang em high would be your motto, just joking there btw, can't go on with this any further, we are not going to agree on anything, so let's just leave it there eh.