That was Harsh that red card, where is his leg supposed to go.....no doubting it looked bad, but hardly intentional

 

Edited April 24, 20215 yr by Ballack & Blu

That might have looked like a harsh red but intentional or not, that could have caused serious injury to Chilwell. Plus the follow through didn't look completely natural. I believe that's what the ref took into consideration.

2 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

Can we stick Tammy on now?

Yes we can!

I think harsh red and I don’t like going a man up. Gives me the heebee jeebees 

Don't understand those who say not a red. He hit his studs high up chillwells leg. Accidental or otherwise, it is dangerous foul play - and hence a red card is fully justified.

Tammy brought on to defend corners then

Some lad called Tammy coming on, hope he is decent. 

Even with var the refs get it wrong so there just all sh*t 

1 minute ago, sonic90 said:

Just looking at the way his body moves it does look cheeky, after clearing the ball you don't usually stamp down with so much force

Bodyweight and momentum.

1 minute ago, CFCCAN said:

Maybe an accidental follow through but dangerous play IMO and could have caused a serious injury. 

All he is doing is booting the ball away and the momentum between the two players has caused a collision. There is an element of danger in every tackle or collision. I would be pissed if that was against us.

Just now, Girish said:

That might have looked like a harsh red but intentional or not, that could have caused serious injury to Chilwell. Plus the follow through didn't look completely natural. I believe that's what the ref took into consideration.

On the contrary, I thought it looked completely natural. Ridiculous decision in my opinion. 

Tammy on!! Come on Tammy, show us what you can do!

We better not concede now. Will be even more annoying. 

Timogol off and Tamexcistent on. 

Nice to see Tammy back 

3 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

So we now have to saw off players arms and ban them from kicking the ball?

In the 1970 Cup Final it would have been a noted as a tap on the calf 

Ziyech is looking pretty good isn’t he?

2 minutes ago, nonotnowjim said:

Don't understand those who say not a red. He hit his studs high up chillwells leg. Accidental or otherwise, it is dangerous foul play - and hence a red card is fully justified.

It’s simple, he was kicking the ball. It’s a pretty integral part of the game. 

5 minutes ago, Munkworth said:

I have one in the freezer but I’m full of katsu...

Yeah you are but I need a nemesis to stay semi relevant and you started slowing down on the insults so I had to threaten to replace you and on the same day I count no less than 3 little digs....

Obviously you need me too, that's all I need to know. 

Just now, CFCCAN said:

In the 1970 Cup Final it would have been a noted as a tap on the calf 

I don’t think it would have been noted at all. 

Great, we let them push us back.

Players are responsible for their follow through. Mount has been booked for it before.

Just now, coco said:

Players are responsible for their follow through. Mount has been booked for it before.

Don’t say follow through, it’s reminding me of Mike Wozniak on Taskmaster Thursday night!

If they lose, Moyes is going to be stark raving mad after this game and throwing a few haggis around. 

1 minute ago, nonotnowjim said:

Don't understand those who say not a red. He hit his studs high up chillwells leg. Accidental or otherwise, it is dangerous foul play - and hence a red card is fully justified.

What is he supposed to do, not clear the ball? It was an unavoidable collision. Seeing it in full speed shows how ridiculous that decision is. Just because he made contact with Chilwell with his studs, it shouldn't mean it's a red card. It's like people don't understand natural body movements.