That's even more dumb.
by NDMike2001 (2019-01-03 18:31:43)

In reply to: Flopped? Seriously?  posted by tex29


I thought you were talking about Agueros flop before his goal. Lovrens tactical foul was a textbook yellow.

Sterling literally grabbed Robertson and took him down. Watch it again. Agree it's a foul. On Sterling.


Hilarious.
by tex29  (2019-01-03 18:35:42)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I’m not saying Lovren should have seen red. I’m saying his tackle was every bit as dangerous as Kompany’s. I thought both were yellow. But if Kompany’s could have been red, so could Lovren’s.

As for Sterling, you must be joking.

One or both of us is being a complete homer, because there’s just no way that’s not a foul.


Kompany's was def dangerous.
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-03 18:53:34)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And it meets the current definition of a red. I just dont agree with the rule where the contact was avoided. (Unlike Edersons foul which took out Mane. I have a beautiful screen shot, but I dont know how to post it.) And I definitely didnt want this game decided by a rule I dont like.

I dont know any rule that makes Lovrens foul a red. But hey, Liverpool were probably better with 10. He was one of Citys better players today.

Watch the Sterling play again. If you dont see what I see then we'll agree to disagree. I think it's rather obvious.


I’d say both challenges were reckless.
by tex29  (2019-01-03 19:03:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And both could have led to serious injuries. Kompany’s studs were a little higher, so maybe his was *slightly* more reckless? But it was the same exact thing. Either tackle could have ended someone’s season. The difference is Mo Salah is Mo Salah, and Aguero is Aguero. And anyone calling Aguero a flopper, in comparison to Mo Salah, should rethink things.

As for Sterling, I don’t have the clip handy. But I remember watching it from multiple angles. Robertson saw Sterling was loose, broke down like he was trying to keep Sterling from dribbling past him into the paint, then clotheslined Sterling as he tried to run past him to the ball. But my memory has failed me before.

In any event, I think it’s fair to say City were fortunate to come away with three. Just as Pool were fortunate to avoid City coming away with three at Anfield.


You really need to watch again.
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-03 20:01:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The things you are saying are absolutely silly.

Lovren's tackle was from behind with his foot on the ground. Not just parallel to the ground. On the ground. It was a textbook tactical yellow card. It was about as dangerous as any tackle. It's a contact sport after all. Kompany's foot was several inches off the ground and perpendicular to the ground...coming directly at the player. Studs to shin. Completely different tackles. Mo was fortunate to avoid worse contact.

On Sterling's play he was already past Robertson. He did not have the corner to turn on Robertson. So he cut the ball back. It got further away from him than he would have hoped. One could claim a stonewall by Robertson. I could at least buy that argument. Except stonewalls are usually fouls when the player is going towards the goal. In this case Sterling was going away from the goal trying to cut back.

But the clear sign of Sterling's dive are his feet. If Robertson's contact made him go down, then he would have fallen from the point of contact (i.e. his upper body would have moved in the direction that Robertson was blocking or grabbing as some might claim). But you'll see Sterling's legs actually kick out in the opposite direction from Robertson. This is what players do when they dive. They kick their feet back. Sterling kicked his feet back, took his arm to the back of Robertson's neck and they both went to ground. What made the play look worse for Robertson is that he actually seems to try and grab Sterling's waste to keep him up (or maybe himself). But again, Sterling's legs and now but are going away from Robertson. Obviously there is contact there. But if Robertson made Sterling go down like that, then the laws of physics don't apply to him. And maybe they don't. He is a freakish athlete.


A nit
by HTownND  (2019-01-03 23:31:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Rocksteady can weigh in because he knows the rules better than many.

But it doesn’t have to be studs up to be a straight red.

Lovrens tackle was bullshit, he didn’t come anywhere close to the ball.

I’ll grant that it was different than Kompany, who did have his studs up.

But Lovren doesn’t get a pass simply because his feet are planted. He clearly went in to take Aguero out with no attempt whatsoever to play the ball. I don’t think it was a red but I also think it was close and it’s not because his studs weren’t up. It was a really shitty and dangerous tackle with an intent to take him out of the play entirely. It was a dangerous two footed challenge (which again doesn’t require studs to be up). There are plenty of examples of a two footed challenge that don’t have studs up.


How do you link that picture and call it two footed?
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-03 23:48:39)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I never said it wasn't dangerous. Nor bullshit. I said it was textbook yellow.

My discussion of the studs is in reference to him calling it nearly identical tackles. They were entirely different. And the studs up being the clear and obvious distinction. The distinction in which I stated the rules tend to call that a red. But I nonetheless think was a yellow in this instance since Mo was quick enough to avoid the contact.


You misunderstood.
by tex29  (2019-01-03 23:54:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I never meant to suggest the tackles were identical in every respect. I acknowledged from the beginning that Kompany’s studs were up. What I’m saying is the tackles were exactly the same in terms of their recklessness and potential for injury—which means they each could have been given red cards. As HTown says, you don’t have to have studs up to get red carded for a dangerous challenge.

As for whether it was two footed, it wasn’t initially. But Lovren swept his other foot through at the end and absolutely wrecked Aguero.


On the last sentence
by HTownND  (2019-01-04 14:20:40)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Exactly.

That sweep through was the problem.

And to be clear, I wouldn’t have called it red, but I would not have been surprised if they had.


Yes, soccer is a dangerous sport.
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-04 00:08:18)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Lovren's was a proper challenge that missed the ball. He's looking at the ball. He's alongside Aguero. He lunges towards the ball with one foot, studs pointing directly to the ground. He misses. Catches Aguero. Yes violently. Thus a yellow card.



Kompany lunges directly towards Salah. Studs up. Both are violent actions. One is proper form. The other is not.

By the book, Lovren's tackle is a fair one if he wins the ball. It's not even a foul. He misses, he gets yellow. By the same book Kompany earns red because it was never a proper tackle...whether he won the ball or not. That's where I disagree with the rule. I think it's a yellow if the contact is avoided.


Lovren didn’t go for the ball. He didn’t get anywhere close
by tex29  (2019-01-04 00:16:22)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

to the ball. The rules don’t allow you to wipe out someone’s legs with a challenge that late. You said yourself it was a “tactical foul.” In other words, you admitted he had no intention of getting the ball—he intended to foul to stop Aguero’s run. People commit “tactical fouls” all the time. But they are usually holds, pushes, less dangerous trips, etc.

You now act as if Lovren was unfortunate to just barely mistime an otherwise proper challenge. Horseshit. He intended to wipe out Aguero, and that’s exactly what he did. It was a reckless challenge with great potential for injury, regardless of whether his studs were up.


Why is it so difficult to comprehend?
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-04 07:54:33)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

It's all captured right there in the picture. Yes it's tactical insofar as the point is to stop the counter. If you foul, so be it. Take the card and go on. A pull back is a completely different tactical foul not involving a tackle at all.

And now you are calling it "late." You do not seem to understand the rules. That is obviously not a late challenge. There is no argument for that at all. None. Zip. Zero.

This is a tackle. It's proper form. He didnt win the ball. Foul. Card. End of story.

Clearly we dont agree. You think that proper tackles that are dangerous should be red. I think that improper tackles that are dangerous should be red.


I fear you are the one struggling with comprehension.
by tex29  (2019-01-04 08:09:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I never said it should be red. Not once. I said it *could* have been red—just like Kompany’s *could* have been red. I thought *both* tackles were properly yellow.

And you miss the whole point of my argument. The problem with Lovren’s tackle wasn’t his pre-contact form; it was that he slid through someone’s legs with absolutely no intention of getting the ball. It’s one thing to have a potentially dangerous tackle where the intent is to get the ball. It’s a whole different kind of tackle—regardless of the technique used to execute it—when the target is the player rather than the ball.

If you can’t see that—and judging from this conversation, you can’t—then there is nothing left to say. You can have the last word, because we fundamentally have a different view of the rules.


The problem is that you changed the argument.
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-04 09:01:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And never acknowledged mine. I acknowledged that you believe that the inherently dangerous tackle makes it red (or possibly red) just like Kompany's. You said Kompany's studs may have been a little higher. Then you also called it late. Then you said he never intended to go for the ball.

1. It's not a late challenge. That's indisputable.
2. His studs are not up. At all.
3. There's a picture of him looking directly at the ball while lunging directly at it. Not sure how you can claim he's not going for it.
4. Sliding through legs. There's nothing in the rules against it. Proper tackles go through the legs all the time and never get called. Hell, James Milner completely upended Neymar in the Champions league this year. I think he may have done the same to Sterling a year or so ago. Proper challenge, through the legs. No foul was even called. However, if you miss the ball, you are going to see yellow.
5. That leaves intent. You believe that he has intent to be going for Aguero and take out his legs. I believe that the intent is obvious. He's making a tactical foul going for the ball.

Where we disagree is with Kompany. You are trying to draw a connection between a discretionary/judgment call above with his definitive situation. Kompany's tackle was improper by the book. There's no judgment call to make there regarding intent or anything. It doesn't matter if he's going for the ball or not. He's studs up to the leg. That's a red card by the book. And it's my OPINION that there should be some discretion where the contact was avoided and a red could spoil a wonderful match. That's an unwritten rule, and one that I believe was probably the underlying reason why red wasn't given.


Lovren's was not a two footed challenge. *
by NDBass  (2019-01-03 23:40:30)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Ok. We will probably have to agree to disagree.
by tex29  (2019-01-03 22:41:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

With the Aguero tackle, Lovren gets nowhere near the ball and slides into Aguero’s knees, making knee to knee contact. If that’s not dangerous, I don’t know what is. That’s a recipe for blowing out someone’s knee.

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/sergio-aguero-of-manchester-city-and-dejan-lovren-of-liverpool-during-picture-id1076913718

You may be correct that tackles that poor are fairly common. But so are tackles like Kompany’s. Kompany’s studs are up, so you are probably correct that he is more likely to see red. I still think they are both reckless with potential to injure. The difference is that Aguero got up and said, “WTF?” While Salah acted like Kompany impaled him with a pineapple tree.

As for Sterling, this is a penalty all day. Robertson clearly sticks out his arms and wraps him up to prevent him from going back to the ball in a dangerous position. I linked the clip. Maybe an impartial observer can shed some light on it. But I think it’s a pretty clear foul on Robertson.


That's a great clip of Sterling
by NDMike2001  (2019-01-03 23:36:08)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I explained what I saw. Do you honestly think that Robertson took him down? And if so, please explain how his Sterling's legs go out in the opposite direction of his fall, and how Robertson suddenly falls.

As for Lovren, that's a nice picture of a proper tackle. He missed the ball and saw yellow.



I suppose Kompany should be happy that Salah "dove". Otherwise he'd be missing at his next match like Van Dijk for the same tackle in Champions League.