Are Leicester going to do an Albion and feck up playing against a lower placed team with 10 men. Really hope not
Yes. Yes they are because we want a Leicester win. Our luck is rubbing off on them.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] Premier League 30/4 - 3/5/21
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
Yes. Yes they are because we want a Leicester win. Our luck is rubbing off on them.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 17,355
Are Leicester going to do an Albion and feck up playing against a lower placed team with 10 men. Really hope not
Personally I hope they do. Leicester are fast becoming my most detested team, Vardy is a snidey little cheat and Vestergaard’s sending off was farcical.
Ps - and despite my location,I am not a SaintsFan.
Come on. Leicester.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
Are Leicester going to do an Albion and feck up playing against a lower placed team with 10 men. Really hope not
FFS, looks like that is EXACTLY what is happening.
TFFT
And **** off stains.
And **** off stains.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
Yeah but your wife is a Saints fan, so you are clearly biased
Oh and take that 1-1
Can’t stand Ward-Prowse. Horrible little man.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
I’m not so sure you can blame the sending off on Vardy
The tackle was plainly dangerous. Should have been red on those grounds (and would have then been a three game, rather than one game, ban). They got off lightly.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 17,355
Yeah but your wife is a Saints fan, so you are clearly biased
Oh and take that 1-1
My wife is a Saints fan, but I have never liked Saints. It goes back to the 60s. I hated Terry Paine - thought he was the dirtiest player ever...... almost.
But it’s mostly about disliking Leicester, their cheating snidey ways and the commentators love for them. Tonight after the sending off they actually said something like “Leicester will be able to pick holes in thes 10 man Southampton team’s defence. Well they didn’t.
We never catch the teams above us even when they don’t win, the amount of times I have looked at the table with enthusiasm about how many places we can climb and we never ever do.
For the rest of this season I am only interested in those below us. If we overtake someone else it’s a total bonus.
For the rest of this season I am only interested in those below us. If we overtake someone else it’s a total bonus.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 17,355
Jamie Redknapp and Darren Bent were both clearly of the view that Vardy made the most of it -,he put his foot where Vestergaard was going.
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Oh dear and although I disagree with the sending off I think it’s interpretation of the incident rather than Vardy (who I have no like for)...
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,877
Struggling to see how that is a sending off let alone a foul. Maybe others have seen a different angle.
If a player manages to get the ball with force and studs up I can understand if there is a leg behind. But not in this instance.
If there was a fear of connecting with the player accidently like that after playing the ball, you'd never make a tackle. Hope that is overturned.
If a player manages to get the ball with force and studs up I can understand if there is a leg behind. But not in this instance.
If there was a fear of connecting with the player accidently like that after playing the ball, you'd never make a tackle. Hope that is overturned.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,877
The "last man" rule hasn't existed for years unless they have reintroduced it. It annoys me when they mention it on the radio,
Denying a goal scoring opportunity yes, "last man" no.
Then they are morons.
Vardy runs completely normally, to the ball. Vestegaard comes in, off the ground, gets a toe to the ball, then plants his full weight on the side of Vardy’s ankle. It’s pretty much the definition of a dangerous tackle, and it’s pure chance that there was no serious injury.
The concept of a player being absolved of any responsibility for the opponent’s safety, so long as they ‘get the ball’, belongs with dinosaurs like Souness. The pundits last night have embarrassed themselves there.
The officials have also got it wrong, by saying the dismissal is for ‘denying the opportunity’. That plays into the hands of the ‘got the ball’ crowd, and opens up an argument. Lucky for the player though, who avoids the correct 3 match ban.
This. Spot on.
Coldeanseagull
Opinionated
I also agree
Agreed.
The laws of the game say a direct free kick is awarded if:
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
If an offence involves contact, it is penalised by a direct free kick.
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
charges
jumps at
kicks or attempts to kick
pushes
strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
tackles or challenges
trips or attempts to trip
jumps at
kicks or attempts to kick
pushes
strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
tackles or challenges
trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact, it is penalised by a direct free kick.
Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
holds an opponent
impedes an opponent with contact
bites or spits at someone
throws an object at the ball, an opponent or a match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object
holds an opponent
impedes an opponent with contact
bites or spits at someone
throws an object at the ball, an opponent or a match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object
And indirect free kick is award for playing in a dangerous manner with a dangeous manner defined:
Playing in a dangerous manner
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that it is not dangerous to an opponent.
Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.
A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that it is not dangerous to an opponent.
The common underlying theme here is player safety. How much due concern and attention are you giving your opponent when making a challenge. 'Well, he has to follow through, it's the only way he can get the ball' then he shouldn't be challenging for the ball. If the only way you can get that ball is through a challenge that will result in your studs going into your opponents leg, then you shouldn't make the challenge. No one says 'of course he kicked the goalkeepers hands, how else could he win the ball?! We understand that there are situations where a player in possession is protecting the ball and making a good challenge impossible. Yes, "football is a contact sport!" but it isn't a combat sport. The aim is not to assualt your opponent and beat them into submission or knock them out.