Guest Heneage Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 It's typical, pick the easy target, which in this case is Joey Barton. Because Henry is still new to this league his terrible nigh dangerous tackles will be ignored, or just put down as 'unfortunate but something we don't want the game to lose'. Essien however a bit like Fabregas is one of the media's babes, almost like he's too good to be dirty. I've said already yes Barton's punch was idiotic, and he deserves a 3 game ban, but compare that with a double footed lunge/tackle which can potentially end a players career for 6 months plus, I'd say the latter is far worse. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 01:04, Nixon said: It's typical, pick the easy target, which in this case is Joey Barton. Because Henry is still new to this league his terrible nigh dangerous tackles will be ignored, or just put down as 'unfortunate but something we don't want the game to lose'. Essien however a bit like Fabregas is one of the media's babes, almost like he's too good to be dirty. I've said already yes Barton's punch was idiotic, and he deserves a 3 game ban, but compare that with a double footed lunge/tackle which can potentially end a players career for 6 months plus, I'd say the latter is far worse. take the B&W glasses off man, one was a tackle so they can always claim he was going for the ball, one was a punch off the ball, which one will make the headlines ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 01:06, madras said: Quote It's typical, pick the easy target, which in this case is Joey Barton. Because Henry is still new to this league his terrible nigh dangerous tackles will be ignored, or just put down as 'unfortunate but something we don't want the game to lose'. Essien however a bit like Fabregas is one of the media's babes, almost like he's too good to be dirty. I've said already yes Barton's punch was idiotic, and he deserves a 3 game ban, but compare that with a double footed lunge/tackle which can potentially end a players career for 6 months plus, I'd say the latter is far worse. take the B&W glasses off man, one was a tackle so they can always claim he was going for the ball, one was a punch off the ball, which one will make the headlines ? But that's exactly my point, that's what's wrong with the media, they deem a punch to the ribs worse than a potential leg break, they've got no sense of perspective. We all know double footed tackles are instant red cards, they aren't allowed yet players still do them. It was the same with De Jong it was all about 'was it foul' not about the young player who's just lost nearly a year of his career because of some retard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 01:14, Nixon said: Quote Quote It's typical, pick the easy target, which in this case is Joey Barton. Because Henry is still new to this league his terrible nigh dangerous tackles will be ignored, or just put down as 'unfortunate but something we don't want the game to lose'. Essien however a bit like Fabregas is one of the media's babes, almost like he's too good to be dirty. I've said already yes Barton's punch was idiotic, and he deserves a 3 game ban, but compare that with a double footed lunge/tackle which can potentially end a players career for 6 months plus, I'd say the latter is far worse. take the B&W glasses off man, one was a tackle so they can always claim he was going for the ball, one was a punch off the ball, which one will make the headlines ? But that's exactly my point, that's what's wrong with the media, they deem a punch to the ribs worse than a potential leg break, they've got no sense of perspective. We all know double footed tackles are instant red cards, they aren't allowed yet players still do them. It was the same with De Jong it was all about 'was it foul' not about the young player who's just lost nearly a year of his career because of some retard. a leg break from a tackle is part of the game (personally i think it was deliberate...maybe not to break his leg but to hurt him and scare him early) a punch isn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 Double footed tackles aren't part of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 01:24, Nixon said: Double footed tackles aren't part of the game. but they are. as seen by some, an attempt at going for the ball (if you get my drift). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 A double footed leg breaking challenge is not part of the game, it's just disguised as so. however we seen with the alonso fiasco that if barton even discuised his 'assaults' behind "part of the game" he still gets absolutely crusified by every man and his dog. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughesy Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 01:24, Nixon said: Double footed tackles aren't part of the game. This exactly. People can't just pass off dangerous and reckless tackles as part of the game. It really annoys me when you get fans and pros banging on about how it's a man's game and it should be physical. Yes, it should be physical, but putting in leg breaking tackles isn't tough or manly. It's cowardly and the referees should do something about. Show a few more red cards and it will stop soon enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 There is very little difference between a dangerous two-footed tackle and a punch in the chest IMO. Both are acts of violent conduct, designed to hurt someone and driven by frustration. If anything, the tackle is worse, as it has the potential to much more seriously injure the victim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Zaius Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 10:59, Ian W said: There is very little difference between a dangerous two-footed tackle and a punch in the chest IMO. Both are acts of violent conduct, designed to hurt someone and driven by frustration. If anything, the tackle is worse, as it has the potential to much more seriously injure the victim. Nope. One is violent conduct, one is serious foul play isnt it? One can break a players leg effectively ending a career, another is a punch to the chest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 11:09, Doctor Zaius said: Quote There is very little difference between a dangerous two-footed tackle and a punch in the chest IMO. Both are acts of violent conduct, designed to hurt someone and driven by frustration. If anything, the tackle is worse, as it has the potential to much more seriously injure the victim. Nope. One is violent conduct, one is serious foul play isnt it? One can break a players leg effectively ending a career, another is a punch to the chest. I didn't really mean whether they were technically both "violent conduct" under the laws, I meant that they were both acts of violence and any distinction between them is morally dubious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 Its this "off the ball incident" that makes the difference.. and that a punch is not a tackle its a violent act that is not within the context of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 11:15, Skirge said: Its this "off the ball incident" that makes the difference.. and that a punch is not a tackle its a violent act that is not within the context of the game. I don't think that means much in reality. What's the difference between a player who loses his temper or gets frustrated and flies into a dangerous tackle, and one who gives someone a dig in the ribs? I know I would rather have Barton punch me fairly lightly in the chest than Nigel de Jong shatter my leg in two places, for example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 11:34, Ian W said: Quote Its this "off the ball incident" that makes the difference.. and that a punch is not a tackle its a violent act that is not within the context of the game. I don't think that means much in reality. What's the difference between a player who loses his temper or gets frustrated and flies into a dangerous tackle, and one who gives someone a dig in the ribs? I know I would rather have Barton punch me fairly lightly in the chest than Nigel de Jong shatter my leg in two places, for example. Indeed but its all about intention and proving it, you fly into a tackle with the intention to hurt someone its very hard to prove that was the case. You punch someone then your intention is only to hurt, you can say you went for the ball. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEA Mag Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 volenti non fit injuria All sportsmen, especially for contact sports going into games voluntarily consenting to risk in injuries, so tackles, no matter how cynical will always not be viewed in the same light as punching / slapping /spitting at somebody straight out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 13:30, SEA Mag said: volenti non fit injuria All sportsmen, especially for contact sports going into games voluntarily consenting to risk in injuries, so tackles, no matter how cynical will always not be viewed in the same light as punching / slapping /spitting at somebody straight out. Yes, players expect injuries when they go on the pitch, but they also expect the game to be played relatively fairly and without deliberate attempts to injure. If I was a builder and I pushed my mate of a roof, I couldn't just say "aye well he knew the risks of being a builder". It would be attempted murder. Slightly extreme example, but you see what I'm saying! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEA Mag Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 On 12/11/2010 at 14:19, Ian W said: Quote volenti non fit injuria All sportsmen, especially for contact sports going into games voluntarily consenting to risk in injuries, so tackles, no matter how cynical will always not be viewed in the same light as punching / slapping /spitting at somebody straight out. Yes, players expect injuries when they go on the pitch, but they also expect the game to be played relatively fairly and without deliberate attempts to injure. If I was a builder and I pushed my mate of a roof, I couldn't just say "aye well he knew the risks of being a builder". It would be attempted murder. Slightly extreme example, but you see what I'm saying! I do understand, I'm not condoning De Jong-like tackles btw. I hate it as much as you do that HBA is lost to a senseless 2 footed lunge and the culprit gets away scot-free while Barton gets a 3 match suspension for ribbing the Blackburn twat. Just that it's the letter of the law. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 Is "violent conduct" not a matter of opinion though? I don't know the letter of the law, but is it impossible for anything to be violent if it uses the feet and resembles a tackle? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEA Mag Posted November 12, 2010 Share Posted November 12, 2010 It obviously is, but it is very much a grey area, as we can see in the case of HBA, where the referee actually sees the foul but deems it not a foul. However, if a referee sees a player punch another player, he would have no choice but to send him off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now