"He won the ball"

[Mellotron]

This is STILL getting trotted out time and again in discussions about possible red cards.

Please understand that in terms of whether an offence is a red card or not, the phrase "he won the ball" means SHIT ALL.

Anyone found using it in defence of a tackle should be given an immediate 1 year ban from NSC.

Rant over.

 

[JJB]

The game is for poofs now. Whenever a proper challenge comes in a card is produced, joke.

 

[seagullmouse]

Agree with OP. The rules are the rules, ridiculous to blame the ref for implementing the rules.

The players know the rules, and if they don't they can learn them when they are sitting in the stands banned.

 

[Commander]

You could smash someone round the head with a clawhammer but 'win the ball'. Doesn't mean it's not a foul.

 

[Mellotron]

The game is for poofs now. Whenever a proper challenge comes in a card is produced, joke.

While that may be, rules is rules and it just gets annoying how many people pontificate about controversial situations without understanding the first thing about what the laws of the game are.

 

[Del Boy]

The game is for poofs now. Whenever a proper challenge comes in a card is produced, joke.

Agree with this. EPL has become an inconsistent joke.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

The game is for poofs now. Whenever a proper challenge comes in a card is produced, joke.

Quick, someone inform the Police about this blatant homophobia!

 

[Everest]

But he won the ball

Quick, someone inform the Police about this blatant homophobia!

Never mind that, just Jamie him.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

agreed, basically defenders are going to learn how to tackle within the current rules, if they can't learn this then they're going to be punished, quite simple

whether or not they, or pundits/managers THINK that the tackle was 'fair' is irrelevent

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Worst rant of the year.

 

[Mellotron]

Worst rant of the year.

Admittedly, it was far too sensible, I didn't lose my rag at any point, or suggest Poyet should be sacked.

 

[turienzo's lovechild]

the current crop of pundits seem to have SO little knowledge of the current rules it's ridiculous

whether or not it would've been a fair tackle in "their day" is irrelevent

 

[Tom Bombadil]

But sometimes its relevent
If you tackle someone from behind it is irrelevant. If you tackle some one running towards you then it is relevant. if you launch yourself into the air irrelevant, slide studs down along the ground, relevant.

 

[Mellotron]

But sometimes its relevent
If you tackle someone from behind it is irrelevant. If you tackle some one running towards you then it is relevant. if you launch yourself into the air irrelevant, slide studs down along the ground, relevant.

My point is, "he won the ball" DOESN'T override other reasons that a tackle IS an offence (either reckless, from behind, studs up, lunging, out of control, etc etc).

 

[sten_super]

But sometimes its relevent
If you tackle someone from behind it is irrelevant. If you tackle some one running towards you then it is relevant. if you launch yourself into the air irrelevant, slide studs down along the ground, relevant.

The OP talks about it in the context of red card decisions - when it's not relevant (unless you are talking about adjudicating a foul when it's 'denying a clear goalscoring opportunity' I suppose).

Even talking more generally about fouls, I'd argue that it's more than that - it's not about simply winning the ball, but getting the ball before the man.

 

[mikeyjh]

the current crop of pundits seem to have SO little knowledge of the current rules it's ridiculous

whether or not it would've been a fair tackle in "their day" is irrelevent

Drives me nuts - 'There was contact' supporting a penalty is a personal favourite.....

 

[CHAPPERS]

The Kompany challenge at the weekend is a perfect example of this. He went in two footed, off the ground and was lucky not to have hurt Nani seriously. Que the usual idiot pundits banging on about how he's won the ball and then the tossers on Radio 5 hoping that last night's game wasn't ruined because of a bad decision by a referee, hinting that the red card for the Kompany offence was incorrect.

Fair enough rant.

 

[GingerBeerMan]

So if you go in two footed like Kompany did on Sunday, and win 100% of the ball and don't touch the player, why is that a red card?

Winning the ball does matter if you don't touch the player. IMO a two-footed high challenge which is timed perfectly and wins the ball while touching none of the player is fine, it's when it goes wrong that its a red card.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

The Kompany challenge at the weekend is a perfect example of this. He went in two footed, off the ground and was lucky not to have hurt Nani seriously. Que the usual idiot pundits banging on about how he's won the ball and then the tossers on Radio 5 hoping that last night's game wasn't ruined because of a bad decision by a referee, hinting that the red card for the Kompany offence was incorrect.

Fair enough rant.

Admitedly first view it looked ok to me, but the live camera shot was qute a way away, but slo-mo showed it to be worse. I too thought that if Nani hadn't been so quick to jump out the way, it could have been quite nasty. As I've just on another thread, it was worse than the Milijas one for Sunderland a couple of weeks ago, and that wasn't rescinded, but it wasn't as bad as Lampards last week which got a yellow. No consistency.

 

[CHAPPERS]

So if you go in two footed like Kompany did on Sunday, and win 100% of the ball and don't touch the player, why is that a red card?

Winning the ball does matter if you don't touch the player. IMO a two-footed high challenge which is timed perfectly and wins the ball while touching none of the player is fine, it's when it goes wrong that its a red card.

The Kompany challenge was extremely dangerous.