You really need to watch again.
by NDMike2001 (2019-01-03 20:01:50)

In reply to: I’d say both challenges were reckless.  posted by tex29

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.