colinmk Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 haven't watched the game (don't plan to either), am entirely sober (just in from work) and will fast forward to the incident............. at full speed and the origainal angle it looks like a red card due to the jump and the height. now for the other angles and slow mo's.... no it's not. he goes for the ball with his right foot, his left being the other side of the man (ie tiotes side), his right foot makes only contact with the ball, not even a booking. get the appeal in. Completely agree, I thought it was a red at first too but on closer inspection not a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It looks much worse on first glance than it actually is so I can kind of understand Marriner's initial decision. He's off the ground and he's travelling at some speed but it's not a red. Tiote won the ball, he was on the ground when the ball was won, he didn't make any contact with the player (who went over the ball, got up uninjured and then rolled around on the ground when he realised a foul had been given) and he went in one footed. If John Terry had put it in Sky would be wanking over it for decades to come. At the end of the day if that challenge is a red and De Jong's "reducer" on Ben Arfa isn't worth a blow of the whistle then something is seriously wrong with this game. That said I don't expect the decision to be overturned so we best get used to not having Tiote for the next three games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It looks much worse on first glance than it actually is so I can kind of understand Marriner's initial decision. He's off the ground and he's travelling at some speed but it's not a red. Tiote won the ball, he was on the ground when the ball was won, he didn't make any contact with the player (who went over the ball, got up uninjured and then rolled around on the ground when he realised a foul had been given) and he went in one footed. If John Terry had put it in Sky would be wanking over it for decades to come. At the end of the day if that challenge is a red and De Jong's "reducer" on Ben Arfa isn't worth a blow of the whistle then something is seriously wrong with this game. That said I don't expect the decision to be overturned so we best get used to not having Tiote for the next three games. no blame to marriner as it first sight it's a definite red. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderson Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm glad that this is the http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_430/1250899684xvSA69.jpg poll. I shudder to think what it would be like should it of been unofficial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spider Jerusalem Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Haven't seen the incident. May be a leg-breaker, may be a fair challenge. All I know is it will end up in a three match ban either way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 From where I saw it he clearly got the ball and it wasnt even a yellow fwiw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 From where I saw it he clearly got the ball and it wasnt even a yellow fwiw. Don't start it all off again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 How can you intend to hurt a player by lunging for the ball and the player contesting the tackle is running next to you? I've seen this mentioned a few times. I'm completely baffled how anyone can say they're running next to each other or in the same direction. They come together at almost 90 degrees. No they don't In the last 5 metes they are virtually side by side. Tiote gets to the ball and is in the process of hooking the ball back with his heel as the Stevenage falls over the back of his legs. Watch it again then. Because Tiote runs AT him, they're never side by side. They'd only be side by side if Tiote was running from behind or in front - he comes from the other side of the pitch. NO. http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/3002/tiote.jpg Not side by side have some have said, but he does NOT run or lunge at the player. But as I mentioned earlier, it doesn't really matter if he was lunging at the player or not. I don't think anyone so far has argued that Tiote went in to smash the lad or anything. However, what he did do was lunge recklessly into a 50/50 situation. Reckless = red. It isn't 50-50 though. Why did Tiote make a tackle at all then, if there was little or no chance of the other player beating him to the ball? How stupid is that? If he'd have just ran for the ball and not lunged at the ball,it would have been 50-50 for him getting there first,but the lunge,at the ball and not the player which I think is crucial here,gets him there before the Stevenage player.Hence the lunge gives him a better chance of making the ball first. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 From where I saw it he clearly got the ball and it wasnt even a yellow fwiw. Don't start it all off again Haven't read the other 11 pages but it really didn't and I was with an "impartial". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stottie Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I doubt it will be rescinded, though it should be. He got the ball well before the other player arrived. Its just another step in the crappy middle-classification of the game that sees rules and interpretations made by people who've never kicked a football in their life, let alone attempted a tackle on a surface that is soft enough to allow sliding tackles. The classic Beardo goal against Brighton would probably be a sending off now. [rules according to Delia Smith]Foot off the ground, studs showing, ....[/rules according to Delia Smith]. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm impressed that so many blind people are posting on the forum, to be honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It looks much worse on first glance than it actually is so I can kind of understand Marriner's initial decision. He's off the ground and he's travelling at some speed but it's not a red. Tiote won the ball, he was on the ground when the ball was won, he didn't make any contact with the player (who went over the ball, got up uninjured and then rolled around on the ground when he realised a foul had been given) and he went in one footed. If John Terry had put it in Sky would be wanking over it for decades to come. At the end of the day if that challenge is a red and De Jong's "reducer" on Ben Arfa isn't worth a blow of the whistle then something is seriously wrong with this game. That said I don't expect the decision to be overturned so we best get used to not having Tiote for the next three games. Regardless of the outcome of this appeal, there IS something seriously wrong with the game. I would have thought that the conclusion is obvious after all the manoeuverings from Blatter & Co esp re using technology....... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sicko2ndbest Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm impressed that so many blind people are posting on the forum, to be honest. In what sense? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 There is an angle which shows Tiote is nowhere near the man (especially when you consider the real time speed). However as the FA/ FIFA want to stop players leaving the ground then there is no chance of winning. I would add that De Jongs challenge was in a different league; his was intended to take the player and the scissor action was disgraceful. I have seen comments saying one was as bad as the other; no they weren't, Tiote took his frustration out on the ball, De Jong was clattering our flair player early on and went way overboard with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm impressed that so many blind people are posting on the forum, to be honest. In what sense? There's absolutely no chance it's getting overturned. I can see why people think it SHOULDN'T be a red card, but for anyone to expect the FA to rescind that with the rules the way they are is madness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guinness_fiend Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 From whatever angle people have viewed it at and notwithstanding the fact that he clearly won the ball, Tiote (a) lunged at the ball and left the ground; and (b) went studs first. A brilliant tackle as far as we're concerned, but a dangerous one from the FA's point of view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sicko2ndbest Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I'm impressed that so many blind people are posting on the forum, to be honest. In what sense? There's absolutely no chance it's getting overturned. I can see why people think it SHOULDN'T be a red card, but for anyone to expect the FA to rescind that with the rules the way they are is madness. My views are clear to see in the depths of this thread Having slept on it i am still of the opinion that it was in noway reckless and Jonnys stills back up the fact that in no sense did he direct his challenge towards the opponent I think the point about it being a great challenge in the eyes of football fans but not the FA is a valid one. They ae trying to erradicate players leaving the floor so i guess the appeal will fall on deaf ears Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I knew it was a good tackle when it was live man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SuperShola! Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I was sat in the Newcastle end and I saw him get the ball. Mind, it looked very dangerous, but he still got the ball. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I was sat in the Newcastle end and I saw him get the ball. Mind, it looked very dangerous, but he still got the ball. It just looked 'bad' because of the lunge. But the lunge wasn't in the tackle if you get me. It was to get to the ball first, by which time he was on the ground and the tackle was made with the calf of his right leg. So all this studs showing bollocks is nonsense. While we're on it. How are you supposed to make a tackle without your studs showing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Wasn't helped by the Stevenage cunt rolling around in feigned agony after barely, if at all, being touched. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuv Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Wasn't helped by the Stevenage c*** rolling around in feigned agony after barely, if at all, being touched. He sat up after the tackle perfectly fine. Then started to roll around a few seconds after. The c*** Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Wasn't helped by the Stevenage c*** rolling around in feigned agony after barely, if at all, being touched. disco, disco, disco, you ought to hang your head in shame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Wasn't helped by the Stevenage c*** rolling around in feigned agony after barely, if at all, being touched. disco, disco, disco, you ought to hang your head in shame. takes one to know one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Wasn't helped by the Stevenage c*** rolling around in feigned agony after barely, if at all, being touched. disco, disco, disco, you ought to hang your head in shame. takes one to know one. wasn't me throwing myself about like tom daley. 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