This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

I think that you are both right. by NDMike2001

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.