Eduardo

[NeilMcD]

id say you have a perfect grasp of reality alright - in your own little world..some of your statements are just plain ridiculous and borderline spa...

to say that steve bruce says its not a red card to prove your point is comical really...heres one for you - when was the last time you heard a manager admit after a game that his player deserved a red card???
well alex mcleish said "i don't think there was any intent or malice but it was a red card..taylor isnt a malicious type of player"
the whole thing here is that a player can be sent off for intent alone - but whether there was intent or not in this case is almost irrelevant in regard to the red card.. the tackle was wreckless,late and high with studs showing...
the only argument about intent coming into it will be when the FA decide the length of his ban - 3 games if judged no intent, maybe 4/5 if they think there was intent...
do us all a favour neil mcd and spend a long time reading about the rules of football again will you????

Just cause your name is Cartman on this do you really have to get your point across in the same way that the Cartoon Character you are named after does.

Also if you read my previous post I said that the quotes from Steve Bruce did not prove my point but they showed that even people who know about football and played the game at the highest level did not think it was a red card. In my view its not a a closed and **** case and I am of the opinion that it was a yellow card and not a red one.

I respect your opinion but I am not sure why you have to go to the levels of personal insult as its only a football forum after all. As Greenforever said, if Eduardo had not got injured nobody would even be talking about Taylors tackle.

[Morbo]

And my point is that all similar tackles should be punished equally. I mean if Eduardo jumped the tackle and wasnt hurt there would be no clamour for blood.

You can not take into account damage caused as the opposite is well no damage so it's ok?

No I'm not saying its ok if there was no damage done, it was still a red IMO whether or not he did damage, I just think that damage inflicted should be a factor in deciding the length of ban as it is not always obvious whether there was intent or not, granted this does introduce an element of luck for akward players who get lucky and don't cause a serious injury but I also think it would be a deterent to the type of player who deliberately tries to cause an injury but does a good job hiding his intent

[Greenforever]

No I'm not saying its ok if there was no damage done, it was still a red IMO whether or not he did damage, I just think that damage inflicted should be a factor in deciding the length of ban as it is not always obvious whether there was intent or not, granted this does introduce an element of luck for akward players who get lucky and don't cause a serious injury but I also think it would be a deterent to the type of player who deliberately tries to cause an injury but does a good job hiding his intent

you're contradiciting yourself, i doubt if Mr Taylor will feel any better or worse whatever the lenght of ban, I've yet to here one respected football person describe the tackle has malicious or with intent,

[Greenforever]

[FONT=Verdana]Having undergone surgery, Eduardo was transferred from Birmingham's Selly Oak Hospital to an unnamed London clinic on Sunday to begin his recovery process, but he was quick to underline that he bore no malice to Birmingham defender Martin Taylor, who was dismissed for the challenge that broke his leg. "As far as I remember Martin Taylor has still not been to see me but I was under sedation so who knows," he said. "If he does come, I will let him see me. I forgive him. I know it wasn't deliberate. These things happen." [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana]"Eduardo" [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]Quote taken from Uefa website - I think this should settle a few arguments[/FONT]

[Morbo]

Who is this Font Verdana chap and how exactly does his quotes settle a few arguments

you're contradiciting yourself, i doubt if Mr Taylor will feel any better or worse whatever the lenght of ban, I've yet to here one respected football person describe the tackle has malicious or with intent,

Where am I contradiciting myself there? Anyway I think this is one of those cases where only Taylor knows for sure if there was intent or not and no respected football person would describe a tackle as malicious unless they were sure it was

[cheifo]

Wenger made his comments after seeing one of his players with his foot hanging off.The people focusing on his remarks despite the retraction are too biased to see common sense.

[razor]

so build a bridge lads.

Is Cobh really that bad?

[Greenforever]

Who is this Font Verdana chap and how exactly does his quotes settle a few arguments


Where am I contradiciting myself there? Anyway I think this is one of those cases where only Taylor knows for sure if there was intent or not and no respected football person would describe a tackle as malicious unless they were sure it was

If you actually read the post you would see it's taken off the official UEFA website, and its Eduardo that said the words, so surely if he's willing to accept it was not malicious that should be good enough for us

[NeilMcD]

Surely the Font Verdana was a joke but maybe I am giving Morbo a bit too much credit.

[Greenforever]

Surely the Font Verdana was a joke but maybe I am giving Morbo a bit too much credit.

probably was, just a bad day at the office

[Trainee]

Eduardos surgeon expects him to be back playing in 12 months

[deecay]

So it's a bad tackle with no intent = a few games ban

therefore

Missing a sitter = 2 game ban

goalkeeper lets it through his legs = 3 match ban

think that makes a mockery of your coment

I dont think in any of those incidents some goofball centre half breaks someones leg,no intent maybe,but he should still be severely punished

[jmurphyc]

For me, the referees are too lenient in England. I'm not saying this to have a dig at referees, but it just seems as though they aren't instructed properly. Players can go out onto the pitch knowing that they can go in with a high tackle and get away with it. If the rules were different, then managers would ensure that their players don't go in with dangerous tackles.

Hunt got away with a poor tackle earlier in the season, as did Kuyt. I'm sure there are plenty of others. The fact that players dive so much doesn't help as referees will often side with the defensive player when unsure.

Referees need to be instructed to send off players when they go in high, whether the tackle injures the player or not shouldn't matter. In fact, I'd even go as far to say that even if the player who goes in doesn't even make contact, he should still be sent off. That would put an end to injuries like this, because at the moment tackles like Taylor's will result in anything from no red card and no ban to a 6 game ban.

[Roadend]

For me, the referees are too lenient in England.

Are you having a laugh? Have you only started watching football since Sky took over? Referees are more strict than ever. You only have to look at the amount of nothing frees in every game and yellow cards for nothing tackles. You cannot breath on a player these days only for a free to be given.

[Greenforever]

I dont think in any of those incidents some goofball centre half breaks someones leg,no intent maybe,but he should still be severely punished

accidents happen, so if a kid runs out in front of your car and you kill it, even though you didnt intend to you should be locked up?


no intent = no excess punishment

[jmurphyc]

Are you having a laugh? Have you only started watching football since Sky took over? Referees are more strict than ever. You only have to look at the amount of nothing frees in every game and yellow cards for nothing tackles. You cannot breath on a player these days only for a free to be given.

For some things they're strict. They have started giving yellows for shirt pulling and stuff like that but they still don't punish tackles like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLqF6y_j1zQ

that harshly enough. That Reading player could have been out for a long, long time. That should have been a red, as should Kuyt's against Everton which I couldn't find. There are tackles like this going unpunished all the time. If you haven't noticed this then you don't watch much football.

[ramsfan]

that was a horror, nearly caught him in the rollers it was so high

[bellavistaman]

what about the comments underneath saying that tackle was no way worse than taylors, are they mad, the intent in hunts tackle was unreal, was a disgraceful tackle.

[Roadend]

For some things they're strict. They have started giving yellows for shirt pulling and stuff like that but they still don't punish tackles like

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLqF6y_j1zQ

that harshly enough. That Reading player could have been out for a long, long time. That should have been a red, as should Kuyt's against Everton which I couldn't find. There are tackles like this going unpunished all the time. If you haven't noticed this then you don't watch much football.

So you say I don't watch football and yet aldo say Kuyt's non-challenge is a red. Good on you lad, any more pearls of wisdom?

[Macy]

In fairness I can fully understand Wengers anger, he has just lost a class player for the rest of the season(and who possibly will never be the same player again) and it wouldn't be the first time the opposition went out with the intention of kicking them off the pitch instead of playing

I must have imagined Wenger last week excusing one of his players going out to get an opposition player? Or is that okay because Gallas didn't cause serious injury even though he deliberately went for the player, but Taylor did cause injury with a clumsy challenge? Or is Wenger just a total hypocrite?