Printable View
Met Rob in the airport at Leeds,hes suspended for a few games, sound lad, even after my mate hounded him to sign for Leeds,top lad i have to say . P.S Andy Keogh had a class game when he came on at Leeds, very decent preformance, Aidy White was solid enough to, But i was surprised at Keogh
just saw the tackle he was sent off for. I thought it might be a typical wingers studs up and fly in but to be fair it was a real strong side on tackle where he won the ball that did not deserve any card.
Totally agree with above comment. Football is turning into a non contact sport, where the tackle is being outlawed. Shameful decision by Ref.Quote:
Originally Posted by liamoo11
I love watching a proper tackle where one guy's foot steals the ball from his opponent's foot, ideally standing up.
A sliding tackle where the defenders "sweeps" the ball with the top of his foot is great to watch too.
A sliding tackle with studs up is the dangerous one.
There's always a grey area between a fair shoulder and a barge.
I haven't seen Brady's tackle, but I'm generally unsympathetic to "football's becoming a non-contact" sport claims because of who usually makes them. Duty of care is the key issue, but another is to restore the skill to tackling.
I have seen the tackle and ten years ago the tackle would have been allowed. At the very most he should have been penalised for an over robust tackle.
Philip Reid mentioned Brady in Saturday's Irish Times, saying that he could be a real possible bolter come next June for Trappatoni's squad, as there is a possibility he'll get game time with United in the new year.
Edit. here's the piece
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/...308524111.html
I'm not usually sympathetic to people who get sent off for heavy challenges but this does look a bit harsh. At the same time, I read in a couple of places that a red card's been coming for him. He's definitely a full-blooded tackler.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AX_8vjQvWqU
What the hell? That tackle was never a straight red card. It must have looked a lot worse from the angle the referee was looking at it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Hmm, I'll sit on the fence on that one.
He clearly won the ball but it was a lunge and those lunges can go wrong. His follow through came right through the guy. On this instance I'd have given a foul on the basis that he owes a duty of care which was not shown, but given a stern warning rather than a card. There are degrees of recklessnes and I think the fact that it was side-on and the ball was well ahead of the Southampton player made it less reckless than, say, the Hutton tackle.
I think referees are right to focus on overly aggressive tackles though. The art of actually tackling properly is going out of the game.
I think that's fair enough but in this instance I'd hate to see tackles like that stamped out (pardon the pun) - the ball was there to be played and Brady went in for it 100%. Took the man on the way through, so a foul but no way was it a sending off. The signal this sends out is 'don't tackle' when the message should be 'tackle properly'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Not a red card. The Southampton player's histrionics gets him sent off.
I think it was an almost fair lunge for the ball. The ball was there for a fraction of time in no man's land and Brady went for it.
No way were Brady's studs going to make contact with the other player. You might even make a case for the other player jumping in, in such a way to protect the ball that he put himself in danger. But I might be biased. This Brady lad looks good.
Did you see the ticker tape 'Reid sent off for Forest' :)
I agree - that's a very harsh sending off.
Should never have been sent off, he had every right to go for the ball, if anything the other
player should have been booked for obstruction, he makes no attempt to play the ball
and he clearly tries to obstruct Brady from getting to the ball.
The game has gone crazy to the extent to can't make a legitimate tackle.
It is ridiculous, Brady clearly goes to play the ball and it is equally clear that
the other guy doesn't attempt to play the ball and it is clear his
only intention was to body check Brady to obstruct him!!
Look where he puts his foot, no attempt to play the ball just to block Brady.
The Southampton player was fully entitled to shield the ball with his body. The issue is Brady's tackle and whether it was reckless and likely to cause injury. I think the fact he brought his second leg around to swipe the player from behind was probably enough to justify a red card. Hull haven't appealed, in any case.
He didn't swipe his leg. He comes straight through the tackle, one leg leading, the other leg coming behind it pretty much in parallel with the first. The nature of the challenge and the body position of the player he's tackling makes it look like a swiping motion, but there's definitely no intentional movement from Brady. It's a forceful if relatively fair attempt to play the ball imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I don't think he is entitled to shield the ball like that, I see that as obstruction, and look where he stamps his foot, heQuote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
could have broke Brady's leg. The rules are all wrong, you cannot tackle anymore you can pick up the ball and walk it
into the goal and it anyone tackles you they are sent off!!
How can it be dangerous when he plays the ball?
Also how is Brady's lunge any different to that of the other guy?
The only difference I can see is that Brady plays the ball and the other guy does not!!!
I don't think he brings his second leg round either, his second leg just happens to be connected to
the rest of his body and thus tends to follow it around automatically.
Makes no sense!!!
What? He went to shield the ball because normally Brady would attempt to go shoulder to shoulder. The tackle was completely unnecessary. Maybe he doesn't swing the leg around but the way he goes in he stills takes the defender's legs out from under him.
Because Hull are not appealing, does not mean they think it was straight red card offense. Once a ref decides it was a straight red card, then that becomes the truth by default.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I actually think, if anything, that makes it a fairer attempt. From looking at it the ball is there to be played but the angle of the Southampton player means, to play it, a tackler would have to come 'round the corner', at an angle. Brady could've went straight through the guy, but instead, he tries to play the ball first by swinging his right leg round to play it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
It doesn't quite come off for him - it's a foul for me - but it's still a tough challenge, in the spirit of the game. Zero malice in it. Over-exuberant maybe, full-blooded sure, but definitely not a red. I think he's very unlucky.
Again pretty ridiculous, Brady goes to play the ball, which is the fundamental right of a football player, it is the other player who goes to 'play Brady'Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
ie body check him or obstruct him with his body, that is illegal in football (unless you are playing gridiron football where tackling off the ball is allowed).
How can a tackle be completely unnecessary???? He got the ball, that is a necessary part of the game!!!
Red cards are turned over a few times a year, aren't they? Hull not appealing means that while they thought it was harsh, they reckon the 3-game ban would likely be upheld or extended as the rules are commonly interpreted.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I think he was unlucky, sure, but I think he was reckless too. Youthful exuberance I think people call it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SwanVsDalton
No, not body check, getting to the ball first and putting his body in the way. It happens dozens of times in every game. It's Brady's job to either get to the ball or win it cleanly.Quote:
Originally Posted by tricky_colour
Just watch the Southampton player, he makes no attempt to move to the ball just to block Brady with a body check, that is illegal.
If it is a 50/50 ball you can use a shoulder charge to hold your ground as you go the ball but can't just body check a player off the
ball like that.
Can't believe he got sent off, the game has gone mad!!
Also if Hull appeal they risk the ban being lengthened.
I simply do not understand how playing the ball can get you sent off, whilst not playing the ball and barging into another
player trying to play the ball gets not sanction!! Lets face it if the other player had tried to play the ball as he should have, then
there would have been no incident as such. The game has gone mad.
He does not get to the ball first, in fact he never touches it!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Total miscarriage of justice!!!
It doesn't matter that he didn't touch the ball. He was between Brady and the ball and Brady went through him. You can debate whether it was a red card but there's no way you could possibly argue it wasn't a foul.
The only reason 'Brady went through him' was because he recklessly threw himself into the path of BradyQuote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
id Brady had not gone down to avoid avoid him there coudl have been a potentially fatal clash of heads.
He even stick his arm across Robbies chest.
So you've now upgraded it from a body check to attempted murder? I can't wait to find out what happens next.
To quote a reliable source "The FA's appeals policy is generally seen as quite restrictive and only a small percentage of red cards are ever overturned"Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I don't know why Hull decided not to appeal. I would refer you to the reliable source quoted above, as a probable incentive for a club to decide not to appeal.Quote:
Hull not appealing means that while they thought it was harsh, they reckon the 3-game ban would likely be upheld or extended as the rules are commonly interpreted.
The burden of proof is on the player to prove the ref wrong. And I refer you to the reliable source quoted above to reflect just how difficult a task that is.
I shouldn't have said overturned actually - they'd probably have been better arguing that no more than a game was sufficient. The system is strict but if they had a decent shout, they could have gone for it.
Jeez, that's nothing.
Anyone see the Spearing straight red for Liverpool at Fulham? Won the ball cleanly, no doubt, but again a reckless lunge. If he didn't win the ball it was a leg breaker. And this time his opponent was much closer and in front of him.
Some will think the game has gone mad but I'd have played football for a few years longer if some fecker hadn't felt it was OK to lunge feet first at speed.
3 words: Duty of care.
Funny enough Stutts was watching the game and after I saw the tackle I immediately thought of this discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
For me this is a perfect example of what you're referring to - the ball was there to be played and he played it, but in terms of technique and nastiness it was diabolical.
Why he felt the need to go off this feet and two footed when a perfectly ordinary slide tackle would've sufficed is beyond me.
This possibly goes back to you initial point - this kid is supposed to be a Premier League standard midfielder but that was a horrendously executed tackle. Maybe there's some coaching points being skipped here.
Exactly, like how to tackle. And the commentators shamefully passed over addressing the issue at hand. They let all the kids out there learning the game wondering why, if he won the ball, was it even a foul. No mention of Edoardo or others who have been out out for a year by genuine but reckless lunge.
Yeah it was definitely worse than Brady's. He got the ball and then his studs flew right and took Dembele out of it. If Dembele had been a second earlier and nipped the ball away his ankle would likely be in 100 pieces by now.
I would have sent the Southampton guy off.
I hate seeing red cards for challenges like this. An almost identical tackle ruled me out of the Kennedy Cup final as a kid.
Still feel bitter about it to this day.
I don't agree with giving red cards for perfectly good tackles. Haven't seen the Liverpool one but Brady's sending off was a joke.
Had just turned on the game at Craven Cottage when the Spearing tackle happened.
The straight red was merited. Terrible lunge.
I've missed the last two pages. Did we agree that he'll probably get a call up in the new year, but is unlikely to get into the squad for the Championships?
Should there be a training camp for potential additions, Brady is very likely to be included. Brady's club form aside, Noel King frequently informs Trapattoni of players who are worth monitoring.