Re: Football Chat : Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:16 pm  

Cibaman wrote:

I dont think any player tries to injure an opponent with their trailing leg. He seemed determined to win the ball rather than hurt the player.

Regardless of whether he meant it or not, it happened and he didn injure an opponent through his poor tackling technique.



When you allow your trailing leg to go through somebody like the above and create a 'scissor' effect, it becomes irrelevant that he won the ball. You simply cannot go into a tackle like this.

Re: Football Chat : Mon Oct 04, 2010 9:15 pm  

Fresh Prince of Chesh-air wrote:

1. If the Shawcross incident happened to a Chelsea player you would be crying into your cheerios. Don't give me all this Sh happens rubbish. That was a needless tackle if you ever saw one.

Ramsay was the player making the tackle. He just nipped in quicker than Shawcross, who was trying to clear the ball downfield from a crowded midfield area.

2. De Jong- as much as I think he is a dirty player, the tackle against Ben-A wasn't half as bad as the Shawcross one. It was just a solid challenge, he won the ball, and a free-kick wasn't even given.

If he'd cleared the ball into touch or played it towards a Citeh player he'd have won the ball. That didn't ****ing happen. He basically just managed to stop the ball where it was with his slight contact. It would have been an utterly useless tackle if he didn't also take out the player while doing it.

The fact that a free kick wasn't given is just a terrible reflection on a bad refereeing performance. This tackle is a perfect example of what FIFA have been driving out of the game for the last few years.

3.. Of course has got to do with the clubs involved. You have blinkers on!

I hate Arsenal because of their hypocrisy and the media bull5hit surrounding them.

I don't hate Citeh, I just dislike EE and his hypocritical bull5hit.

When watching a game live, every challenge on a Chelsea player is a bad one and every challenge by a Chelsea player a good one. If a Chelsea player committed a "de Jong" and got a red my first reaction would be that the ref was a bent **nt. But on the second replay it'd be "Well, maybe it wasn't quite a good challenge" and by the third or fourth replay I'd be accepting that he deserved the red and the ref got it right.

4. I don't see how you can defend somebody stamping on someone elses face, unless of course he was an Arsenal player....oh that's right!

Because of the speed and way the incident happened I don't believe that anyone can say that it was a deliberate stamp. I think Adebayor and Citeh should have defended themselves better and fought the charge.

Re: Football Chat : Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:07 pm  

Paddy Evra wrote:

:roll:

If you're old enough, you're good enough, as Mike Bassett used to say.

Re: Football Chat : Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:24 pm  

http://www.sportinglife.com/football/ne ... tlead.html

http://www.sportinglife.com/football/ne ... tlead.html

Re: Football Chat : Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:30 am  

ash4hullfc wrote:

Regardless of whether he meant it or not, it happened and he didn injure an opponent through his poor tackling technique.



When you allow your trailing leg to go through somebody like the above and create a 'scissor' effect, it becomes irrelevant that he won the ball. You simply cannot go into a tackle like this.

Why reference a picture that actually goes against what you are saying? De Jong tackled with his left leg. He followed through with his right leg but he pulled it into towards his body. He simply wasn’t performing the scissor that you stated. After the impact, his right leg became outstretched.

Maybe he should have unscrewed his right leg and folded it into his body.

Have you actually played football? I ask because you are coming across as someone who has never made a tackle or been tackled before. I have witnessed heavier challenges from bigger people than De Jong, but the tackled player get up and simply dust himself down. Sometimes a player is simply unlucky. That’s little consolation but we have all seen it happen before.

As for those who don’t think De Jong did any wrong – go on most football forums, read the press, listen to ex-players. You will only find the ‘shock jocks’, Newcastle supporters and United fans (Bitter? Yes) who claim De Jong’s tackle was nasty and made with intent to inflict serious injury.

Re: Football Chat : Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:19 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

Because of the speed and way the incident happened I don't believe that anyone can say that it was a deliberate stamp. I think Adebayor and Citeh should have defended themselves better and fought the charge.

My argument at the time was that the Adebayor "stamp" only looked bad when viewed in slow motion. I think the same applies to De Jong's tackle. Slow motion gives a very distorted view of the players intent. It makes every movement look deliberate.

If you look at the two controversial tackles over the weekend Henry's tackle when viewed in slow motion doesnt look that bad, De Jong's tackle looks horrible. View them at full speed and its reversed.

Re: Football Chat : Tue Oct 05, 2010 9:32 am  

Cibaman wrote:

My argument at the time was that the Adebayor "stamp" only looked bad when viewed in slow motion. I think the same applies to De Jong's tackle. Slow motion gives a very distorted view of the players intent. It makes every movement look deliberate.

If you look at the two controversial tackles over the weekend Henry's tackle when viewed in slow motion doesnt look that bad, De Jong's tackle looks horrible. View them at full speed and its reversed.

Indeed.

SKY will use the VT speed that makes the tackle look worse, especially when it is a City player. For some reason, when one of our players makes a tackle that injures a player, they show the tackle on loop. Not always the case with players from other teams.

I thought Adebayor’s intention was to stamp on Van Persie but not to stamp on his head. If you watch it full speed, you will see that there is no way that Adebayor could have possibly reacted so quickly to aim the stamp at the head. In slow motion though, it looked terrible. He was banned, and deservedly so. Adebayor only jumped to prevent himself getting a potentially serious injury from a reckless tackle by Van Persie.

Re: Football Chat : Tue Oct 05, 2010 11:39 am  

http://www.hotukdeals.com/freebies/free ... -be/771207

http://www.hotukdeals.com/freebies/free ... -be/771207

Re: Football Chat : Tue Oct 05, 2010 11:59 am  

Enfield Exile wrote:

As for those who don’t think De Jong did any wrong – go on most football forums, read the press, listen to ex-players. You will only find the ‘shock jocks’, Newcastle supporters and United fans (Bitter? Yes) who claim De Jong’s tackle was nasty and made with intent to inflict serious injury.

I assume you mean those who do think De Jong did wrong.

You missed out the Dutch national team coach from the list who think it was a nasty challenge. I guess he's probably a bitter United fan though?

I don't think De Jong meant to cause injury. I think he went in hard knowing he'd take out Ben Arfa as well as the ball and make him wonder for the rest of the match where the next hit was coming from. 5 years ago that would have been fine. But it isn't 2005 now. We've had years of FIFA directives that ball and all tackles were outlawed and players couldn't dive in to challenges like that.

And the two broken legs that De Jong has dished out this year is the exact reason why FIFA have clamped down.

Re: Football Chat : Tue Oct 05, 2010 12:11 pm  

next you will be telling us they should ban headers too stop concussion. Load of pants it is you step on the pitch knowin there is a chance of injury. De jong went in for a good hard challenge won the ball and took te man no intention it happens. Ben Arfas leg got stuck in a wrong position thats all. De jong didnt go in over the knee he kept feeton the ground and shouldnt get a ban for that. Your taking the art of a good hard tackle away by stopping them tackles IMO