Chris Morgan's assault on Iain Hume

[Syrette]

Midds makes a fair point like, it would be hard to prove he actually set out to do that, unless someone came forward as a witness to him actually saying he had set out to do it.

 

 

Alright Mick?

 

[Mick]

Alright Mick?

 

Yes, spot on. 

[Mowen]

Morgan used his elbows as leverage and caught the lad straight in the head. It was dangerous and I've got a sneaking suspicion Morgan knew what he was doing (no-one could ever prove he meant it like). It's very unfortunate for the lad and I hope he makes a full recovery but hauling Morgan over the coals won't achieve anything. Every single CH and CF will always raise their elbows when jumping for a ball. It's a natural thing to do and every now and again there's going to be a bit of damage done to some poor sod. It's not pleasant and I feel for the lad but it happens  - it's part and parcel of the game.

 

Calling for courts/police is just ridiculous.

 

Shearer could quite easily have suffered the same fate at the hands/elbows of that Grimsby centre half a few years back.

 

 

 

Shearer's an absolute legend but he left his elbow in there loads of times.

 

He took kickings from CH's but could look after himself and was a dirty bastard too. It's the moral outrage I'm more concerned with. How the severity of the injury alters people's perceptions of the incident. Oooooh he's fractured his skull.......burn the twat, throw the fucking key away, he should suffer the same fate, ban the cunt, fucking disgrace to the game...etc.

 

Absolutely insane.

If what Morgan did was with deliberate malicious intent, then i'd say a bit of outrage is warranted, really. Surely that's what they're investigating, isn't it - whether or not it was deliberate?

 

 

I'm not condoning all the moral outrage.

 

Tbh though Midds, i'm surprised you can't see how it's deliberate. It's quite obviously done with malicious intent to me.

 

Ok, so if it's that obvious then it'll be easy to prove it then.

 

Fire away.

 

You can't prove anything on a pitch. You can't prove that Shearer was trying to score when he whacked in that volley against Everton. I'm not calling for it to go to court or anything, but I've seen it enough times to know full well he threw that elbow on purpose, making him (imo) an utter c*nt.

[Guest Geordiesned]

Shearer's done worse than that tbf.

 

Seems harsh but it's part and parcel of the game. Morgan's a big rough b****** but if the ref gave a yellow then it should stay a yellow. IMO of course.

Shearer ever fractured anyone's skull? Very nearly causing their death? How the fuck is assaulting someone by brutally bashing in their skull "all part and parcel of the game"? What a ridiculous statement, and if you think that a yellow was reasonable punishment then I'd hate to see what a player has to do to get a red card.

 

First off, I never said yellow was a 'reasonable punishment'. The ref gave a yellow and I said it should stay a yellow.

 

Second off, can you prove he actually MEANT to fracture his skull?

 

Third off, Shearer kicked Neil Lennon full in the face. Should he have been banned from playing again and handed over to the courts?

 

You're over-reacting. It was a dangerous challenge which has unfortunately left the lad with a cracked skull. He was punished by the arbiter of the game and it should be put to bed. No reason whatsoever for bringing the police/courts into it. If that was the case you'd need a dozen bobbies on the sidelines at every game of Rugby up and down the country.

 

If it can't be proved he meant to fracture his skull he could still be charged with a 'Section 20 GBH' which is one charge below a 'Section 18 GBH With Intent To Cause Serious Harm'.

 

I don't think people are over reacting to this at all. Morgan clearly elbowed the player deliberatetly and to hide behind the fact that it was in a game of football is completely wrong. The lad suffered life threatening injuries but thankfully looks as though he'll make a recovery. What if he had died? Would that still be "part and parcel of the game"? Of course it wouldn't but because he's been lucky you think it's ok and everyone should move on? I couldn't disagree more.

[Guest Geordiesned]

Morgan used his elbows as leverage and caught the lad straight in the head. It was dangerous and I've got a sneaking suspicion Morgan knew what he was doing (no-one could ever prove he meant it like). It's very unfortunate for the lad and I hope he makes a full recovery but hauling Morgan over the coals won't achieve anything. Every single CH and CF will always raise their elbows when jumping for a ball. It's a natural thing to do and every now and again there's going to be a bit of damage done to some poor sod. It's not pleasant and I feel for the lad but it happens  - it's part and parcel of the game.

 

Calling for courts/police is just ridiculous.

 

Midds, Morgan didn't even jump so how the hell was he using his elbows as leverage? Plus, as I said in previous post, no proof is needed that Morgan intended to seriously injure the player. The fact that there is proof that he was responsible for causing the horrific injuries is enough for a charge of Section 20 GBH.

[midds]

Morgan used his elbows as leverage and caught the lad straight in the head. It was dangerous and I've got a sneaking suspicion Morgan knew what he was doing (no-one could ever prove he meant it like). It's very unfortunate for the lad and I hope he makes a full recovery but hauling Morgan over the coals won't achieve anything. Every single CH and CF will always raise their elbows when jumping for a ball. It's a natural thing to do and every now and again there's going to be a bit of damage done to some poor sod. It's not pleasant and I feel for the lad but it happens  - it's part and parcel of the game.

 

Calling for courts/police is just ridiculous.

 

Midds, Morgan didn't even jump so how the hell was he using his elbows as leverage? Plus, as I said in previous post, no proof is needed that Morgan intended to seriously injure the player. The fact that there is proof that he was responsible for causing the horrific injuries is enough for a charge of Section 20 GBH.

 

Fair enough I stand corrected. I thought you needed to prove intent if you wanted to take it further. 

 

I do still think it was caused as part of the game though. It's different to say, Paul Davis breaking Glenn Cockerill's jaw years ago. That was a punch off the ball which the ref didn't see. He got done and rightly so. This was 2 players challenging for the dropping ball. Morgan's attempt to play the ball was dangerous and I do think he knew exactly what he was doing. The ref saw it and gave a yellow. Bad challenge which has caused an injury so serious it's caused outrage. I'm arguing that people are up i arms due to the severity of the injury rather than the nasty challenge it was.

 

Haven't explained that very well tbh. 

[Guest Geordiesned]

Morgan used his elbows as leverage and caught the lad straight in the head. It was dangerous and I've got a sneaking suspicion Morgan knew what he was doing (no-one could ever prove he meant it like). It's very unfortunate for the lad and I hope he makes a full recovery but hauling Morgan over the coals won't achieve anything. Every single CH and CF will always raise their elbows when jumping for a ball. It's a natural thing to do and every now and again there's going to be a bit of damage done to some poor sod. It's not pleasant and I feel for the lad but it happens  - it's part and parcel of the game.

 

Calling for courts/police is just ridiculous.

 

Midds, Morgan didn't even jump so how the hell was he using his elbows as leverage? Plus, as I said in previous post, no proof is needed that Morgan intended to seriously injure the player. The fact that there is proof that he was responsible for causing the horrific injuries is enough for a charge of Section 20 GBH.

 

Fair enough I stand corrected. I thought you needed to prove intent if you wanted to take it further. 

 

I do still think it was caused as part of the game though. It's different to say, Paul Davis breaking Glenn Cockerill's jaw years ago. That was a punch off the ball which the ref didn't see. He got done and rightly so. This was 2 players challenging for the dropping ball. Morgan's attempt to play the ball was dangerous and I do think he knew exactly what he was doing. The ref saw it and gave a yellow. Bad challenge which has caused an injury so serious it's caused outrage. I'm arguing that people are up i arms due to the severity of the injury rather than the nasty challenge it was.

 

Haven't explained that very well tbh. 

 

But surely that is fair enough? If you take an assault that takes place in the street and the offender is arrested and charged, the charge is always going to be in relation to the injuries caused. For instance, there have been a few cases where one punch has been thrown, the victim has fallen back hit his head on the kerb and subsequently died. The offender is then charged with either murder or manslaughter (similar to the S18/S20 instance manslaughter would be the more likely charge as it is highly unlikely that the offender set out to kill). If the victim had merely received bruising then Section 39 Common Assault would be the preferred charge.

 

So basically, it is the injuries sustained that are taken into consideration first and then the issue of intent.

 

When an incident occurs on the football field (or rugby field, hockey pitch, etc) the issue is generally one of if there was malice intended. It's accepted that injuries will occur in sport and that some of those injuries can occure when players collide or with football in particular one player is late into a challenge. I don't think it is acceptable though when a player deliberately tries to injure another player. In my opinion the contact Morgan made with the Hume was not part of the game and a deliberate attempt to injure him. Of course I don't think he set out to fracture his skull but I do think that in a moment of madness he tried to, in footballers speak "do him".

 

Players accept they may be injured when playing but surely must be protected as the man in the street is from someone deliberately trying to injure them.

 

The prosecution rests. 

[Guest optimistic nit]

if this gets to court and morgan loses it would be very bad for the game imo. it may have been nasty but it could open the door to loads more court cases. it should go to fifa/ the fa and if they think that, if you dont take into account the injuries the player suffered, he should be banned for the elbow for a certain number of games then fine, although iirc if a ref gives a yellow fifa/ the fa can't get involved and in that case nothing should be done.

[johnnypd]

there's a difference between physical confrontations which are a byproduct and part of the game and attacks which have nothing to do with it ie ferguson headbutting McStay a decade or so ago which resulted in a prison sentence. so someone using elbows to jump to for a header, or extending them to fight for space a la shearer, is different to someone clearly smashing an elbow with force into someone else's head for no reason other than to cause harm. not sure which category this incident falls into though as ive only seen it once a few days ago.

[Tsunami]

For me there's no argument here. Morgan sees his man, plants his foot and swings his elbow, he then pleads innocence to the ref. There was intent, no attempt to play the ball and was a cowards attack.

 

He should get in real trouble for what he did.

[Optimistic Nut]

 

 

Third off, Shearer kicked Neil Lennon full in the face. Should he have been banned from playing again and handed over to the courts?

 

 

No, because it was obvious he had his studs caught in the grass.

 

Really can't believe there's people who actually still do think that.

[Neil]

So basically the conclusion of all this is that I can be a lawyer with A level law. Lovely jubbly.

[Cronky]

It's difficult, because it's very easy to make a deliberate swing of the elbow look accidental. I reckon that in 80% of cases where a player is caught by an elbow, there's some kind of intent involved. Even if a player isn't going out with the aim of hurting an opponent, it's often an intimidatory tactic which now seems pretty endemic in the professional game.

 

 

[Cajun]

I don't see any reason why he was swinging his elbow as he wasn't jumping for the ball.

 

 

[Mowen]

It's difficult, because it's very easy to make a deliberate swing of the elbow look accidental. I reckon that in 80% of cases where a player is caught by an elbow, there's some kind of intent involved. Even if a player isn't going out with the aim of hurting an opponent, it's often an intimidatory tactic which now seems pretty endemic in the professional game.

 

And he couldn't even do that.

[Dave]

On Look North now. Jesus, it's a terrible scar he's got.

[Mr. Snrub]

Seen Hume's interview on SSN, what a terrible injury.  Scar was horrible.

 

Morgan probably sat watching it laughing the sinister cunt.

[Wullie]

Just seen it. Dear me.

[Robster]

How is Ian Hulme. Is he likely to play again ?

[Guest Chubby Jason]

Proper legendary 'ard man that Morgan. Proper player, just what football is all about if ya ask me fella.

[Guest Heneage]

Just seen that scar, christ almighty feel sorry for the bloke, always been a fan of Hume from his days at Tranmere.

[Guest timmy boy]

Scar looked horrific.

 

I can't see how he is going to be able to play again having to head the ball so often. If Cech has to wear that head thing still and his head doesn't come into contact with the ball as much as Hume's would. Surely it would cause serious damage in the long term.

[Guest Chubby Jason]

That scar is crazy, looked like he got hit with an iron pipe or something, dreadful act by this Morgan fella.

That should be a case for the police, authorities or something, if you do this to a guy as a regular joe you get a prison sentence for christ sake

Yeah but he attacked him on a football pitch, so it's alright.

[Mr. Snrub]

Morgan escapes further FA action

 

The FA has confirmed that no further action will be taken against Sheffield United's Chris Morgan for his challenge on Barnsley striker Iain Hume.

 

Hume, 25, suffered a fractured skull in the incident and although he left hospital last week, he was readmitted on Tuesday as a precaution.

"Iain began feeling unwell at home and we hope it's a case of better safe than sorry," a Tykes spokesman said.

 

Morgan, 31, was booked but the FA said it cannot upgrade yellow cards to red.

 

An FA spokesman said: "When judging whether to take disciplinary action in this case, The FA has had to consider the challenge itself and not the outcome of it.

 

"The FA has been given express direction from Fifa that we cannot upgrade yellow cards to red.

 

"On this basis, we can only bring additional charges in the most exceptional cases and only if it can be proved beyond doubt that the actions of a player were a deliberate attempt to injure an opponent.

 

"Having reviewed all available evidence in this case, including submissions made by Barnsley, there is no basis on which an additional charge could be brought."

 

Joke.

[Guest Chubby Jason]

Morgan escapes further FA action

 

The FA has confirmed that no further action will be taken against Sheffield United's Chris Morgan for his challenge on Barnsley striker Iain Hume.

 

Hume, 25, suffered a fractured skull in the incident and although he left hospital last week, he was readmitted on Tuesday as a precaution.

"Iain began feeling unwell at home and we hope it's a case of better safe than sorry," a Tykes spokesman said.

 

Morgan, 31, was booked but the FA said it cannot upgrade yellow cards to red.

 

An FA spokesman said: "When judging whether to take disciplinary action in this case, The FA has had to consider the challenge itself and not the outcome of it.

 

"The FA has been given express direction from Fifa that we cannot upgrade yellow cards to red.

 

"On this basis, we can only bring additional charges in the most exceptional cases and only if it can be proved beyond doubt that the actions of a player were a deliberate attempt to injure an opponent.

 

"Having reviewed all available evidence in this case, including submissions made by Barnsley, there is no basis on which an additional charge could be brought."

 

Joke.

Utterly vile, just despicable on the part of the FA. What he had died, which he very well could have done, what would they have done then? Fuck all probably, it's things like this that will stop people following football in the long run.