Kenny Dalglish Won't Be Delivering the Module: English Premiership 2011-12

Of course it bloody matters that he won the ball. That is the aim of a good tackle.

not in terms of endangering another player it doesn't.

won the ball's got nothing to do with the dangerousness of the tackle, it's true, and there probably is still an unsafe level of aggression tolerated in the EPL on the grounds of "he took the ball"

whether you win the ball or not is irrelevant. we've done this before. it's kind of amazing that commentators and players are so ignorant about it. like i think most of them have an instinctive feeling for what is fair and what is not, but when you ask them to explain it, they prove that they know literally nothing about the rules of the game they've based their career on.

lol xxp

who was it who pointed this out as a pundit last year? sounness or someone? i wanted to give him an obe.

sounness? oh the ironing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygVgxYa3mlo&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLF5F486C9743BE63D

winning the ball is not "irrelevant" when you execute a clean tackle and catch someone with your trailing leg. That's impossible to legislate for. You may as well outlaw all sliding tackles.

http://indobux.biz/gifs/Rodwell.gif

i would take his obe off him for that tackle tbf.

xxp, what is a "clean tackle"?

also that animated gif is absolutely a foul, sorry.

Souness definitely had the ball in his

yeah souness touched the ball immediately after breaking that guys leg, so fair play

Watched that 30 times, still no red tbh. Also Suarez is a diving cunt more every time I see it.

You may as well outlaw all sliding tackles.

Indeed. Might happen one day.

lol at the commentator thinking that was just a booking. he nearly amputated the guy.

a player isn't responsible for his own trailing leg when he leaves the ground in a tackle?

also that animated gif is absolutely a foul, sorry.

― caek, Tuesday, 4 October 2011 16:01 (1 minute ago) Bookmark

I don't think this is disputed? It's whether or not it's a straight red

that tackle is pretty much the perfect example of why whether you touch the ball before/after/not at all doesn't matter.

The leg that gets the ball is nowhere near Suarez. That is the point. "Oh, but he could injured him" No, because he timed it correctly.

Suarez's "dive" mitigated by the fact that the gif is in slow motion, surely?

probably not a red, looks like he was trying to stop the slide. doesn't seem malicious/violent, and suarez made a meal of it. absolutely no problem with it being a yellow though.

I thank god for qualification week so we can debate this tbh

probably not a red, looks like he was trying to stop the slide. doesn't seem malicious/violent, and suarez made a meal of it. absolutely no problem with it being a yellow though.

― caek, Tuesday, 4 October 2011 16:04 (35 seconds ago) Bookmark

otm

a player isn't responsible for his own trailing leg when he leaves the ground in a tackle?

Uhhhhhhh, what are you supposed to do with your trailing leg? Kinda hard to control is it not?

as long as we all agree that it doesn't matter whether/when he touched the ball or not, i think reasonable people can argue about whether that's a foul/yellow/red.

it's rare to get a red if you touch the ball because reds are usually given for violent conduct, and it's difficult to be sufficiently violent while also touching the ball. it's perfectly possible though. and whether you touch it doesn't matter.

where was the ref in relation to that tackle? can imagine it looking appalling from the right angle.

what's bemusing is that the FA (or UEFA or FIFA) don't appear to issue more clear cut public statements on how the laws are to be interpreted in these situations, instead of watching while pundits wank on and on about it

haven't seen a single premiership game this season btw. loving it.

how's the reffing been?

what are you supposed to do with your trailing leg?

Same thing you do with your leading leg, elbow, head, your arse. Take reasonable care that it doesn't connect with an opponent in a manner likely to cause injury.

xp

fucking terrible as per

pretty sure it was lee dixon who demonstrated he knew the rules last season. it was beautiful. i gave him an obe.

dope xp. makes for great telly. and by great i mean sub-comment-is-free.

read that as "i gave him an oboe"

reffing's been strict and good re tackles, pretty poor for wolves

not because of the strictness re: tackles

It's always Lee Dixon. 100% of incisive analysis over the past half-decade has been him.

keown and dixon are rte level pundits

Still don't see anything wrong with the rodwell tackle. Same kind of incidental contact that happens when a player wins a header and in doing so his chest connects with the back of an opponent afterwards. Oh but the player has left the ground to head the ball so should be sent off.

i will say time and again that it's stupid blaming referees for things they see once, at full speed, rather than from 30 slow mo angles. but what continues to grate is shocking inconsistency in the application of the laws, in giving cards out, and this monolithic refusal to apologise or explain in any circumstances ever, and little seeming effort to impose tighter standards from above.

consequences of going chest to chest with an opposition player vs sliding in with yr leg extended

seriously

that tackle seems far more likely to cause injury. would be a weird in air collision chest/back collision that ends up with a player breaking a bone.

xxp

What happens if Suarez reacts quicker and goes into the challenge at the same time as Rodwell?

_exactly_ the same time?

then it's whose name comes first in the alphabet

the pundits who were saying he got the ball first? were they also saying it wasn't a foul, or it wasn't a red?

Wasn't a foul, wasn't a red.