Harvey Elliot

Norman_Conquest said:
I was going to post this earlier.

The idea of being sent off if you hurt someone is ridiculous. When I ran a Sunday morning team, I had an 18 year-old playing for me who was brilliant. A good friend and ex-work colleague of mine was playing for the opposition and tackled this kid. Both players got the ball, but the opposition player was of stronger physique due to being older than him. My player went down and we all knew he was badly injured. The lad had dislocated his knee in the tackle and ended up being taken to hospital.

There was nothing wrong with the tackle, both players got the ball, one was stronger than the other.
Click to expand...
That happened to me when I was 17, both in at the same time, I came off worse, cracked bone, no foul involved.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
So a clash of heads and one player comes off worse and has to be stitched up, the other gets a red?
Click to expand...

I'm aware it's a minefield, especially when it's a 50/50.

If that had been a player's boot then they'd have been sent off, even though in both situations it was a body part being used to challenge for the ball.
It's rare someone is deliberately kicking someone in the head.

It never sat right with me that Aden Flint knocked Bamford unconscious and was able to play on.

Or that Gary Cahill could end Ryan Mason's career and stay on the pitch and even go on to score in the same match.
 
But I also don't like the idea of a player being banned for multiple matches because of an accident, I wouldn't be against suspensionless red cards if the referee believed the incident in question to be completely accidental and not due to wilful recklessness.
 
TeaCider said:
I'm aware it's a minefield, especially when it's a 50/50.

If that had been a player's boot then they'd have been sent off, even though in both situations it was a body part being used to challenge for the ball.
It's rare someone is deliberately kicking someone in the head.

It never sat right with me that Aden Flint knocked Bamford unconscious and was able to play on.

Or that Gary Cahill could end Ryan Mason's career and stay on the pitch and even go on to score in the same match.
Click to expand...
So how long do you wait for a referee to make a decision?

Does he wait until there's numerous replays and maybe a physio report of the injury coming in, we've seen a Boro player run off with a broken leg, walk off with ligament damage, both resulting in long lay offs from fairly innocuous challenges?

Should the opposition player have received the red card?

We've seen opposition players stretchered off at Boro without a foul being given, should the player making the tackle be given a red immediately?
 
As above, think this falls under serious foul play (definition below):

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

In short, it's difficult to separate the act (the tackle which endangers the safety of an opponent) from the outcome (Elliot's ankle being displaced which has clearly endangered his safety).

Note, there's absolutely nothing on intent in the definition, therefore an accident is equally as punishable as an intentional foul.

I do wonder if the ref has second thoughts initially about whether the tackle endangered his safety but clearly picks up the outcome (from Elliot's obvious serious injury) and therefore shows the red?
 
changingman said:
As above, think this falls under serious foul play (definition below):

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

In short, it's difficult to separate the act (the tackle which endangers the safety of an opponent) from the outcome (Elliot's ankle being displaced which has clearly endangered his safety).

Note, there's absolutely nothing on intent in the definition, therefore an accident is equally as punishable as an intentional foul.

I do wonder if the ref has second thoughts initially about whether the tackle endangered his safety but clearly picks up the outcome (from Elliot's obvious serious injury) and therefore shows the red?
Click to expand...
The outcome, without a doubt.
 
In one game my studs caught in the mud as I as going for the ball and I came in at a strange angle as I was being tackled which resulted in me being caught in the had with the defenders knee and me being knocked out for several minutes and I had to spend a couple of days in hospital with serious concussion. Are you suggesting that the defender should have been sent off because I was badly injured?
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
So how long do you wait for a referee to make a decision?

Does he wait until there's numerous replays and maybe a physio report of the injury coming in, we've seen a Boro player run off with a broken leg, walk off with ligament damage, both resulting in long lay offs from fairly innocuous challenges?

Should the opposition player have received the red card?

We've seen opposition players stretchered off at Boro without a foul being given, should the player making the tackle be given a red immediately?
Click to expand...

That's the question, isn't it?

I do appreciate your point.

But it seems daft to have untold numbers of players sent off because they could have seriously injured another player but allow players that did seriously injure another player to get away it.

In the case of Boro players, if they've caused a player to get stretchered off because of their tackle then I would say they should be sent off, yes.
 
Brian Marwood said:
In one game my studs caught in the mud as I as going for the ball and I came in at a strange angle as I was being tackled which resulted in me being caught in the had with the defenders knee and me being knocked out for several minutes and I had to spend a couple of days in hospital with serious concussion. Are you suggesting that the defender should have been sent off because I was badly injured?
Click to expand...
Under the current laws of the game, yes probably.
 
TeaCider said:
That's the question, isn't it?

I do appreciate your point.

But it seems daft to have untold numbers of players sent off because they could have seriously injured another player but allow players that did seriously injure another player to get away it.

In the case of Boro players, if they've caused a player to get stretchered off because of their tackle then I would say they should be sent off, yes.
Click to expand...
Another problem is you don't know what injury the player was carrying into the game.

The Elliott injury was obvious, but you can't always see the injury, and with so much cheating going on, how do you know the injury is genuine?

Could we see managers sacrificing players to get other players sent off, with so many subs available it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

For me the tackle has to be punished, not the outcome. You're basing the rules on luck only, that can't be right
 
The rule is there to protect players. Stujk ended up landing his full weight on the back of Elliots leg in an attempt to win the ball.

Strip it down. If you jump on the back of someone's leg, are you endangering that players safety? The answer is yes. It's a red card under the laws of the game whether he ended up dislocating his ankle or not.
 
On Monday, Elliott replied to an Instagram post to say that the 22-year-old centre-back had nothing to apologise for.

He wrote: "Wasn't his fault whatsoever! Neither was it a red card, just a freak accident, but these things happen in football. I'll be back stronger 100%. Thanks for all the support."

What a mature and sportsman like response from a teenager, a credit to the game.

And to think NW would be dining out on it for a long, long time, and getting the fans wound up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top