Harvey Elliott's promising start just got railroaded.
by NDBass (2021-09-12 12:49:27)
Edited on 2021-09-12 12:50:15
Post Reply Return to Clark's Pitch

Looks like a nasty break. Hopefully just bone damage. I thought it was a foul, but don't care to see a replay to determine if it was missed.

EDIT: Apparently it was a bad foul as a red card has been issued.

ankle dislocation *
by wcnitz  (2021-09-12 14:55:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Not sure if that's better or not.
by NDBass  (2021-09-12 15:27:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I guess it depends on the extent of the ligament damage. Saw on Twitter that some kid was at the hospital with a broken arm he suffered in a game and they brought Elliott in next to him. He gave the kid his jersey and shoes. Not a bad way to deal with just having broken your arm.
Seemed like the red was for the result, not the foul *
by spade  (2021-09-12 13:06:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Nope, should have been a red no matter what
by wcnitz  (2021-09-12 14:54:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

That's a two footed scissor tackle, a leg/ankle breaker. They let that go in the PL with a yellow sometimes, but by the book it's absolutely a sending off.
I think that you are both right.
by NDMike2001  (2021-09-13 09:10:54)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Struijk initially won the ball and you can see Pawson tracking the ball as the game went on for a couple seconds. With the directives to let the game flow it's almost a no harm no foul rule.

In this instance it was the follow-through with that second leg that made it a text book dangerous play...the resulting injury the very reason why such a tackle is dangerous. But I am guessing that they would have played on had it not been for the injury. Of course I may be jaded. Pickford got away with a jumping scissor kick into VVD (without winning the ball). And because VVD got up and even tried to play for a few minutes, VAR determined it was not dangerous.

I don't think VVD tried to play after the injury.
by NDBass  (2021-09-13 14:28:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I see the sub is listed at the 11th minute, but I don't know if that was just when the sub was finally ready. Video I can find stops at 6:46 while there was still VAR shenanigans on going, but I don't recall him trying to play. It's possible, though.

That being said, VAR only reviewed whether or not he was offside. Once they determined he was, they dropped everything. Michael Oliver has since said he should've given a red card for dangerous play regardless of the offside decision.
I may be confusing the two injuries.
by NDMike2001  (2021-09-13 17:45:56)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Perhaps I'm remembering the fact that Thiago played and then being surprised that he had a significant injury.

I know that VVD definitely got up and walked off on his own because I recall people (not here) making a big deal about how tough he was to walk on a torn acl (which isn't a big deal).

As for the VAR I don't think the issue was that it was not reviewed for dangerous play. I don't recall that VAR necessarily announces its intent to review a matter. My issue is that it was 100% reviewed by VAR. Because it was offsides the clear and obvious foul (in the box) was made irrelevant. However, a human reviewed that play and somehow didn't come to the conclusion that he did a dangerous play.

The problem was the interpretation of the rule.
by NDBass  (2021-09-13 19:22:17)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Even if the VAR official thought it was a dangerous play, he didn't think he could recommend that as a foul/penalty because of the offside. It defies logic, but that is (maybe was now) the state of officiating in the Premier League. What's hilarious is that MLS VAR is drastically worse.

And yes, VVD walked off. I knew that didn't matter as I did that myself after tearing my ACL. I wasn't able to walk off after I fully ruptured it the first time, but there was a bit more trauma that time.

Thiago did continue to play after Richarlison acted as usual.
Yep
by wcnitz  (2021-09-13 10:53:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The nature of the tackle should always be what's considered. Not the result. Too many people write these tackles off as 'well he won the ball' or 'he got more ball than player' or 'he didn't intend for it to be dangerous.' Doesn't matter one bit.