*Official* English Football Season 2009-2010

[duffer]

The reckless driving analogy is very apt for this imo. How have people tried to counter reckless driving in society? By policing it a lot better. Where I am we have patrols almost every time I take the car out and hardly a few days goes by without me running into a booze bus somewhere along the line. Guess what, the road tolls are now a lot lower these days than they were even a decade ago.

Football officials don't police dangerous and reckless tackling well enough imo, and I see it every week when we play. Shawcross had a horrific lunge in the first half which went unpunished, if he had been shown a yellow card then the second challenge wouldn't have happened and if they properly cracked down on this type of bs consistently then being booked might actually seem like a deterrant to these neanderthals.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Arsenal fans going nuts about the Shawcross tackle should check out a replay of Van Persie's "tackle" when Adebayor kicked him in the face. About ten times worse than what Shawcross served up.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Going by that, though, Brumby... where do you draw the line? That was a fairly average challenge for me compared to even 90% of tackles, but it resulted in a pretty horrific injury. If every lesser challenge/injury is given a red or yellow, then we'll end up with every game stopped before half time, or no challenges at all. They'd end up letting the ball drop and bounce and kind of just looking at the other player with a wary face. I mean, if the ball moved slightly slower, it would have been Ramsey making the "potential legbreaker". With both players going in at speed, it was nothing bar unfortunate.

It's a contact sport. If a footballer in the PL, or La Liga, or even a five-a-side club at the back of a pub doesn't know and accept that you can potentially be injured in a 50/50 challenge, then they should switch to playing chess.

I think with Shawcross the tackle looks far worse close up; initially there didn't seem to be too much in it (&, in his defence, his studs weren't up), but when one sees the closer camera it really doesn't look very flash. The players who were closest to it were immediately insensed and with good cause too, IMHO.

No-one wants to see tackles removed from the game, but I'd have no problems with such reckless lunges being eradicated. As social and Burgey alluded to the rugby codes are starting to get their houses in order, thanks at least partly to video citing and bans, so it's time for the round ball game to follow suit.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Arsenal fans going nuts about the Shawcross tackle should check out a replay of Van Persie's "tackle" when Adebayor kicked him in the face. About ten times worse than what Shawcross served up.

What's sauce for the goose and all that. Must admit I don't recall the tackle, but if it was poor it should've been punished.

Oh, and the man who broke Diaby's leg? Dan Smith. Coinicidence? Pah.

 

[Uppercut]

No argument at all. However, if a player swings to put the laces through a ball he doesn't have control of (and Shawcross patently didn't) he is, almost by definition, playing with a recklessness that borders on the wanton.

Did Shawcross mean to break Ramsey's leg? No. Was it the kind of tackle that shouldn't be condoned in football and is worthy of punishment? Yes, IMHO. The intent is almost irrelevant. I'd liken it to driving home pissed; if you get behind the wheel seven sheets to the wind and make it to your house safely you're still a criminal just one who's got away with it. However, if you have an accident and hurt someone you'd be more likely to have to deal with the consequences in a court of law. The fact that you didn't intend to hurt someone doesn't change the inescapable fact you were indulging in behaviour that could quite well end up injuring a third party.

Look at the tackle though- what should Shawcross have done? It's a 50-50 and he tries to play the ball. Should he have pulled out? It's dangerous, obviously, but that's because football's dangerous. Occasionally you will try to play the ball and injure someone. But if Denilson had been in that situation, pulled out and let the other player have the ball, and Stoke had scored a winner, would you not be livid?

I mean, he's trying to kick the ball. There isn't really a safe way to go into a challenge like that, and pulling out brings just as much criticism. What does he do that you wouldn't want an Arsenal player to do?

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Oh, and the man who broke Diaby's leg? Dan Smith. Coinicidence? Pah.

He wishes.

 

[duffer]

It was a bad tackle and he should've been suspended for it. Not sure the relevance to the Shawcross discussion though.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

YouTube - Adebayor Stamp on Robin Van Persie

Two feet, studs out.

Still makes the hair stand up on the back of the neck

 

[Uppercut]

Would your tune be the same if it was Rooney instead of Ramsey and your team lost out on the EPL title as a result? I doubt it. The only way you can't have any hypocrisy if you would defend Shawcross (for example) in a similar tackle against one of your players, more so if he is a key player. I know you will say otherwise, and defend him, but I think you and Uppercut are full of ****.

You're just wrong. I'd be pissed off if Rooney got injured but I wouldn't blame it on Shawcross for a tackle like that. And given how he plays the game, I don't think Rooney would blame it on Shawcross either tbh.

 

[sledger]

Arguably the force used was on the excessive side, could have won the ball without trying to boot it half way to Hong Kong.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

It was a bad tackle and he should've been suspended for it. Not sure the relevance to the Shawcross discussion though.

It doesnt have a lot of relevance but some of the at-the-time over the top crap was getting on my nerves to read. Always happens to us blah blah. It only happens to your players because they're generally faster with their feet than the rest of the competition, so horrible tackles generally get a piece of the ball elsewhere and not halfway up a shin.

 

[Uppercut]

Arguably the force used was on the excessive side, could have won the ball without trying to boot it half way to Hong Kong.

He's running pretty damn fast though. The first thing that struck me about the incident was how quickly it happened. It's not really reasonable to expect him to think "****, need to play this ball more softly than usual" in a situation like that.

He just does more or less what I would have done, and what I think the majority of footballers would have done. That's why I'm defending him.

 

[duffer]

It doesnt have a lot of relevance but some of the at-the-time over the top crap was getting on my nerves to read. Always happens to us blah blah. It only happens to your players because they're generally faster with their feet than the rest of the competition, so horrible tackles generally get a piece of the ball elsewhere and not halfway up a shin.

There's truth to it, but my main argument it that it isn't being policed well enough (not just the leg breakers but also a lot of the other very late tackles we get game in game out, which are let go).

Think you are discounting the mentality of the opposition teams who play us there as well.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Look at the tackle though- what should Shawcross have done? It's a 50-50 and he tries to play the ball. Should he have pulled out? It's dangerous, obviously, but that's because football's dangerous. Occasionally you will try to play the ball and injure someone. But if Denilson had been in that situation, pulled out and let the other player have the ball, and Stoke had scored a winner, would you not be livid?

I mean, he's trying to kick the ball. There isn't really a safe way to go into a challenge like that, and pulling out brings just as much criticism. What does he do that you wouldn't want an Arsenal player to do?

It's not trying to play the ball that I object to, it's how he went about it. It was just a big agricultural scythe at the ball. If he'd had slid in he'd possibly have been more likely to wear one himself, but he's also less likely to hurt the tacklee. Unless he goes in high with studs raised.

I've no doubt that Shawcross acted "instinctively" and, until such tackles are met with more punitive measures more regularly, a centre-half's instinct will remain to put the laces through it or take the man and the ball or however you want to put it.

 

[Loony BoB]

With that in mind, would you say that any tackle done at speed should be carded? As you said, it wasn't studs up, so there's nothing in it but speed. Since you can't completely control yourself at speed (using that driving at speed analogy others are using), surely that means that once you are running towards a player you should not tackle them? I can't imagine there are many tackles done when running towards a player that can't be potential leg breakers. In addition to that, 50/50 challenges (because technically what Shawcross did was challenge for a ball, not tackle) should be cards for both players that are running towards the ball and go for it within fractions of a second (if any) at all?

I know it's a nasty thing to have potential legbreakers out there but at the same time I'm at a loss as to how someone can decide what is a "potential leg breaker" and what is not. I was actually just watching a couple of youtube videos - one of "best tackles ever" and one of Rosicky doing a bunch of sliding tackles calling him the sliding tackle specialist. And fair play to the lad, a lot of them were efficiently done - but there were tackles that he slid in on - and won, no less - but still were potential leg breakers. To anyone who says "But he won the ball" - check out the video of Possebon getting his leg smashed into. Pogatetz does win the ball - but it bounces off Possebon's leg. Fractions of a second later, the studs up challenge slams into Possebon's leg and bang, red card. So that means winning the ball means nothing in 50/50 challenges when you're both racing towards the ball - you can still **** it up and get sent off. With that in mind, potential leg breakers are everywhere. I'm not condoning any tackles, I'm just saying that it's nigh on impossible to figure out what makes a "potential legbreaker" worth discipline when they happen about twenty times a game.

EDIT: Haha, this was in response to Brumby's post #9943 - guess we're all posting quickly today!

 

[duffer]

It's not trying to play the ball that I object to, it's how he went about it. It was just a big agricultural scythe at the ball. If he'd had slid in he'd possibly have been more likely to wear one himself, but he's also less likely to hurt the tacklee. Unless he goes in high with studs raised.

I've no doubt that Shawcross acted "instinctively" and, until such tackles are met with more punitive measures more regularly, a centre-half's instinct will remain to put the laces through it or take the man and the ball or however you want to put it.

Yep.

In other news:

Adebayor challenges Wenger to Live Debate

Sort of like me challenging Floyd Mayweahter to 12 rounds.

 

[BoyBrumby]

YouTube - Adebayor Stamp on Robin Van Persie

Two feet, studs out.

Still makes the hair stand up on the back of the neck

Fair call, tbh. Straight reds for both. IMHO.

 

[PhoenixFire]

With Van Persie's actually looking like he meant to cause some sort of injury, as opposed to Shawcross's.

 

[Uppercut]

It's not trying to play the ball that I object to, it's how he went about it. It was just a big agricultural scythe at the ball. If he'd had slid in he'd possibly have been more likely to wear one himself, but he's also less likely to hurt the tacklee. Unless he goes in high with studs raised.

I've no doubt that Shawcross acted "instinctively" and, until such tackles are met with more punitive measures more regularly, a centre-half's instinct will remain to put the laces through it or take the man and the ball or however you want to put it.

Personally, I don't want it any other way. Football is dangerous, all sports are dangerous, people get hurt occasionally. I like physical football. It's more fun to watch and more fun to play.

Bowling a bouncer is dangerous too, and until such bowling is met with more punitive measures more regularly, a fast bowler's instinct will remain to aim for the batsman's head or get 'im meloned or however you want to put it.

Look, if you prefer football to be played the Spanish way that's entirely up to you, just like some would prefer cricket to be played the gentleman's way. But there's not really a moral high ground for you to sit upon unless you're equally condemning of Jimmy Anderson knocking out two of Daniel Flynn's teeth.

 

[sledger]

Don't think anyone is actually defending Van Persie here tbh