"He got the ball"...

Two things I have learned when on the armchair (barstool) watching football. Ex-pros dislike referees and they think once contact is first made with the ball, all is well. The latter may be correct when dinasaurs ruled the earth, but is no longer the rule. Kompany's tackle yesterday was a case in point. It is a sending off offence for studs to show in a tackle AND to lunge in the air at the same time even if the ball is the first object of contact. Danny Mills the co-commentator on Setanta didn't seem to grasp this point and went on as nauseum about it, so much so that I had to turn over to ITV. Luckily Nanni or whatever his name is was not in the line of fire so he didn't get hurt or protest about it but if contact had been made, he would have been seriously injured. Three other Man U players thought it was a sending off offence (even though Mills said there was no protest from the Man U players). Fergie thought so as well but....

It was a pity of course and made the contest unequal (didn't ruin it) but I would have thought that a team on which multi millions was spent should be able to cope with one player down rather than caving in 3-0. They had a bit more fight in the second half at least and perhaps should have had a peno but then so should Man U.

By the letter of the law he had to go but in the real world it was a good old fashioned fair tackle. He clearly didn't go to do the player but the rules are the rules. Just because City have spent X amount doesn't mean they should not conceed goals as it could easily happen with 11 men on the pitch. You could say similar about Man U in the second half in that with the man advantage they should have scored more but they didn't. These things happen in football. Overall Man U won the game and deserved to win it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

It is a sending off offence for studs to show in a tackle AND to lunge in the air at the same time even if the ball is the first object of contact.

---

NOWHERE in the laws of the game does it mention studs, or being in the air.

The only thing that's outlawed are tackles that are reckless, dangerous or excessively forceful. I'd argue strongly that Kompany's tackle was none of these.

I'm not one of these "modern football is ****e" types, but there are so many myths perpetrated by the media about the laws of the game its unreal. The laws don't differentiate between tackling with one or two feet, they don't mention 'daylight' when it comes to offside etc etc

The lack of focus on the actual laws rather than what actually looks like a foul or offside is shocking.

I don't actually know what the referees are instructed to do, but in my opinion the key is "duty of care" to your opponent. You might have got the ball, but what if you were a fraction out (like a non-league player is likely to be - they play to the same rules)?

That's why Essien was (rightly) sent off last year despite winning the ball cleanly, and Jay Spearing this year and why Hutton should have been sent off this year (Shane Long). Flamini should have seen a red versus Spurs in Milan last year.

Dodge, isn't it the case that although the rules outlaw dangerous, reckless and excessively forceful tackles, the instructions given to refs is to interpret 2 footed tackles as such? As with all laws, there's also an accompanying "users' guidelines".

Personally, I think Kompany's tackle was 2 footed, but didn't show any great neglect of his duty of care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

NOWHERE in the laws of the game does it mention studs, or being in the air.

The only thing that's outlawed are tackles that are reckless, dangerous or excessively forceful. I'd argue strongly that Kompany's tackle was none of these.

I'm not one of these "modern football is ****e" types, but there are so many myths perpetrated by the media about the laws of the game its unreal. The laws don't differentiate between tackling with one or two feet, they don't mention 'daylight' when it comes to offside etc etc

---

Are the refs not told how to interpret the laws though? Two footed tackles have been dodgy ground for at least 10 years at this stage, probably longer.

But the point is that two footed challenges themselves aren't illegal, but the the vast majorityof two footed challenges are, because they're dangerous (if that makes sense).

In England they might be told to look out for them, as a possible indicator, but they're not completely outlawed.

None of which detracts from the fact that Kompany should be aware of how card happy some refs are. I can understand why the ref sent him off, but I think it was the wrong decision

Regardless of what the rules are or how they are interpreted, there is a skill in tackling that the studs up / two footed tackle doesn't exhibit. By all means let players go to ground but it should be to win the ball sideways / with the top of the foot in a sweeping movement. The likes of Alan Hansen will moan that it's making the game a game for namby pambies but I disagree. Seeing a really good tackle, preferably standing up, is something you don't see very often anymore. It's as pleasing on the eye as a good pass or shot.

Wanna tear your hair out?

Listen to Cas and Lawro on the Last Word now.

Growing up, I always thought the Stuart Pearce tackle was the pinnacle of world football. Simultaneously winning the ball, and crippling the man - Magic!

Giles used to talk about targeting the man but making sure yoiu got at least a small bit of the ball, just to make it look like you tried!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonnieShels

Wanna tear your hair out?

Listen to Cas and Lawro on the Last Word now.

---

I was listening!!

http://tirelessthoughts.files.wordpr.../bald_head.jpg

There was an interesting one in the Sunderland v Man City game in December where a City player stuck out a leg but missed both man and ball, but the Sunderland player had to leap over the leg, losing control of the ball in the process and going to ground. Ref gave a foul (rightly imo).

The commentator thought it was controversial because there was no contact but the co-commentator (Davie Provan?) said no, there doesn't need to be contact for it to be a foul. I was delighted to hear it said, but surprised at the same time.

Kompany's red at the weekend did remind me of the time Ronaldo was sent off for something similar a few years ago in the Manchester derby. Never made contact with the player, the ref sent him off for intent, and dangerous play. Ronaldo was a bit more blatant about it though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonnieShels

Wanna tear your hair out?

Listen to Cas and Lawro on the Last Word now.

---

Or any other time they're on. Comfortably the worst football punditry team around.

I download the (usually) excellent "The Game" podcast from the Times. If Cascirino is on, I just delete. Ruins the odd commute...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

NOWHERE in the laws of the game does it mention studs, or being in the air.

The only thing that's outlawed are tackles that are reckless, dangerous or excessively forceful. I'd argue strongly that Kompany's tackle was none of these.

I'm not one of these "modern football is ****e" types, but there are so many myths perpetrated by the media about the laws of the game its unreal. The laws don't differentiate between tackling with one or two feet, they don't mention 'daylight' when it comes to offside etc etc

---

Alan Hansen doing punditry for the Manchester City-Liverpool game in the Carling Cup; just informing viewers that the "letter of the law" prohibits two-footed tackles...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Alan Hansen doing punditry for the Manchester City-Liverpool game in the Carling Cup; just informing viewers that the "letter of the law" prohibits two-footed tackles...

---

The ********ology that was talked after that Johnson tackle was breathtaking.

How is the rule so difficult to understand for these plebs?

Lawrenson on co-commentary was his usual generic best. Saying a whole lot of nothing.

After the game though the discussion that Hansen, Shearer and Dixon had was so far beyond reasoned and informed that I wondered when my brain would call it quits.

Lawro and BBC commentator last night (Glen Johnson tackle) - "but he got the ball"! Only on the replay did they see why it was controversial.

Sorry Bonnie - was typing while your post went up. Agree entirely. Infuriating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Alan Hansen doing punditry for the Manchester City-Liverpool game in the Carling Cup; just informing viewers that the "letter of the law" prohibits two-footed tackles...

---

I couldn't have asked for greater validation that hansen disagreeing with me ;)

I wonder have TV bosses noticed how everyone who watches football on TV racves about Gary Neville's analysis. its because he's actually played the modern game and isn't harping back to his old glory days like the rest of the fools (Shearer is the antithesis to this argument but he's just a clown...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macy

Are the refs not told how to interpret the laws though? Two footed tackles have been dodgy ground for at least 10 years at this stage, probably longer.

---

The refs are told what offences go with cards, and they're told to apply them.

As for Johno last night, he won the ball. No foul, no free kick, no discussion required.