Aleksandar Mitrović

[Deckard 13]

Fwiw all of the BBC Sport coverage on the matchday updates, the ex pros and that, absolutely agreed it was a poor decision.

 

I'm assuming that "all the TV commentators" thst think its a red are people like Savage, Wright and Keown.

[Dr Venkman]

hmm... i remember a certain Callum McManaman early in is career doing a horror-tackle on Massadio-Haidara & getting what again?  was Mitro's anything like that 'challenge'?

 

No, but it doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous.

 

I don't get why there's such an argument about it. Vast majority of pundits and NUFC fans can see why he gave a red. It's not like it's an outrageous decision.

 

I personally think it is a red. Can see why people think it's soft, but to hear people say "never a red" is ludicrous when basically 95% of all coverage of it has agreed that it was probably the right decision.

A... Do you think it would have been a red had Giroud done it ?

B....Do you think there was intent ?

a) some days yes, some days no. Don't think anyone can say either way for sure.

b) No, but it's already been established that they don't take that into account.

Have to say I think your wrong. Look at every tackle in isolation like that and you can buiold a case. Colback was fouled at shin height with no attempt at playing tha ball, foul, no booking, it's letter of the law some times, not at others (and today that was obvious) not helped by by a ref who gave 2 bookings because someone told him to.

The Colback tackle was shin height but not particularly dangerous (although probably should have been a yellow).

 

Mitrovic's was studs down the shin and onto the foot.

 

Look, all I'm saying is it's hardly the outrageous decision that some are making out. You put all 10 PL refs in a room to watch that challenge and I can almost guarantee you that at least 8 or 9 of them give reds. I'm backing this up based on Howard Webb and Graham Poll's comments after the game - both of which said it was a red card offence.

 

I COMPLETELY agree that there's issues with consistency, but as a stand alone incident it's so obvious why it was a red card.

 

Look, more made up statistics.

 

You thought it was a red, fine. Why are you making stuff up man?

[madras]

hmm... i remember a certain Callum McManaman early in is career doing a horror-tackle on Massadio-Haidara & getting what again?  was Mitro's anything like that 'challenge'?

 

No, but it doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous.

 

I don't get why there's such an argument about it. Vast majority of pundits and NUFC fans can see why he gave a red. It's not like it's an outrageous decision.

 

I personally think it is a red. Can see why people think it's soft, but to hear people say "never a red" is ludicrous when basically 95% of all coverage of it has agreed that it was probably the right decision.

A... Do you think it would have been a red had Giroud done it ?

B....Do you think there was intent ?

a) some days yes, some days no. Don't think anyone can say either way for sure.

b) No, but it's already been established that they don't take that into account.

Have to say I think your wrong. Look at every tackle in isolation like that and you can buiold a case. Colback was fouled at shin height with no attempt at playing tha ball, foul, no booking, it's letter of the law some times, not at others (and today that was obvious) not helped by by a ref who gave 2 bookings because someone told him to.

The Colback tackle was shin height but not particularly dangerous (although probably should have been a yellow).

 

Mitrovic's was studs down the shin and onto the foot.

 

Look, all I'm saying is it's hardly the outrageous decision that some are making out. You put all 10 PL refs in a room to watch that challenge and I can almost guarantee you that at least 8 or 9 of them give reds. I'm backing this up based on Howard Webb and Graham Poll's comments after the game - both of which said it was a red card offence.

 

I COMPLETELY agree that there's issues with consistency, but as a stand alone incident it's so obvious why it was a red card.

I'd bet if Webb and Poll saw Giroud do that they wouldn't say it was a red.

 

I'm not saying that as a big club bias thing, more that he wouldn't be a marked man.

[Figures 1-0 Football]

Would Howard Webb have sent Wayne Rooney off for that incident at Old Trafford?

Never. In. A. Million. Years.

[TRon]

I can see why some could think it's a red, tbh. But it shows a fundamental lack of recognition for what the player was trying to do IMO. He tried to bring the ball down and the Arsenal player nicked in there first, simple as that. Add a scream and a bit of writhing around and hey presto the referee is conned.

 

Said exactly this at the time. Fuck knows when leaping into the air followed by a tuck and roll with scream became acceptable for an elite athlete.

 

It became acceptable when reckless challenges ended with studs catching above the boot level from what I understand. If Mitro's studs had made no contact then the Arsenal player would have been booked for diving.

[Dr Venkman]

100% of the cats in my house don't think it was a red card.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I can see why some could think it's a red, tbh. But it shows a fundamental lack of recognition for what the player was trying to do IMO. He tried to bring the ball down and the Arsenal player nicked in there first, simple as that. Add a scream and a bit of writhing around and hey presto the referee is conned.

 

Said exactly this at the time. Fuck knows when leaping into the air followed by a tuck and roll with scream became acceptable for an elite athlete.

 

It became acceptable when reckless challenges ended with studs catching above the boot level from what I understand. If Mitro's studs had made no contact then the Arsenal player would have been booked for diving.

 

Sorry? I mean, why not just react to the challenge in a natural way? If you're tripped, fall over. If someone makes contact with your shin pad, it barely hurts at all.

 

And also, they should be pretending not to be hurt even when they are, like nearly every other sportsperson in the world.

[Mowen]

 

hmm... i remember a certain Callum McManaman early in is career doing a horror-tackle on Massadio-Haidara & getting what again?  was Mitro's anything like that 'challenge'?

 

Good fucking post.

 

No it isn't ffs

 

A clearly wrong decision has nothing to do with this. There would never be another red card again if the criteria was it being comparable to this challenge.

 

FWIW my view is similar to what someone posted earlier about it being an "orange" card. It's clearly at least a yellow and worse than almost all yellow card challenges you'd see. It's not like it's an incomprehensible decision like the Afelley or Noble red cards. Also, everyone who says he was trying to control the ball, even if the Arsenal player wasn't there that's a bloody weird way to try and control the ball.

[Figures 1-0 Football]

http://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/premier-league-newcastle-v-arsenal-29-08-15-12-45pm-bt-sport.28426/page-22

 

Very split decision by ARSENAL fans on whether it was a red card.

If Arsenal fans think it was harsh, it probably was harsh.

[Guest neesy111]

hmm... i remember a certain Callum McManaman early in is career doing a horror-tackle on Massadio-Haidara & getting what again?  was Mitro's anything like that 'challenge'?

 

No, but it doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous.

 

I don't get why there's such an argument about it. Vast majority of pundits and NUFC fans can see why he gave a red. It's not like it's an outrageous decision.

 

I personally think it is a red. Can see why people think it's soft, but to hear people say "never a red" is ludicrous when basically 95% of all coverage of it has agreed that it was probably the right decision.

A... Do you think it would have been a red had Giroud done it ?

B....Do you think there was intent ?

a) some days yes, some days no. Don't think anyone can say either way for sure.

b) No, but it's already been established that they don't take that into account.

Have to say I think your wrong. Look at every tackle in isolation like that and you can buiold a case. Colback was fouled at shin height with no attempt at playing tha ball, foul, no booking, it's letter of the law some times, not at others (and today that was obvious) not helped by by a ref who gave 2 bookings because someone told him to.

The Colback tackle was shin height but not particularly dangerous (although probably should have been a yellow).

 

Mitrovic's was studs down the shin and onto the foot.

 

Look, all I'm saying is it's hardly the outrageous decision that some are making out. You put all 10 PL refs in a room to watch that challenge and I can almost guarantee you that at least 8 or 9 of them give reds. I'm backing this up based on Howard Webb and Graham Poll's comments after the game - both of which said it was a red card offence.

 

I COMPLETELY agree that there's issues with consistency, but as a stand alone incident it's so obvious why it was a red card.

 

Look, more made up statistics.

 

You thought it was a red, fine. Why are you making stuff up man?

Ok, you clearly have an issue with my posts today so I will refrain from replying after this one, but I clearly said above why I think that most refs would give it based on the fact that one did give it, and two ex refs agreed with it. Hardly a "made up" stay as you are suggesting. If ex refs are agreeing with the decision is it soooo outlandish to suggest that the majority of refs would also agree?

 

Anyway, you've clearly got a problem with me having a different opinion to you, so I'll be sure to get confirmed Opta stats to back up my opinion next time...see if you approve more then

He's had an issue with mine as well.

[Kanji]

I couldn't give a single fuck what biased London media who never report it correctly about us or what some old shitbag refs tweet supporting their brother in arms. You're far fucking smarter than to sit and nod your head in approval about that. Have a thought for yourself man. Jesus Christ.

[Pata]

I couldn't give a single f*** what biased London media who never report it correctly about us or what some old shitbag refs tweet supporting their brother in arms. You're far f***ing smarter than to sit and nod your head in approval about that. Have a thought for yourself man. Jesus Christ.

 

[number9shirt]

We knew some refs would have seen his first couple of games & thought if he tries that with me he's off, Case in point.

[Figures 1-0 Football]

http://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/premier-league-newcastle-v-arsenal-29-08-15-12-45pm-bt-sport.28426/page-22

 

Very split decision by ARSENAL fans on whether it was a red card.

If Arsenal fans think it was harsh, it probably was harsh.

 

Harsh, possibly. Stupid rule, probably. Understandle why he gave it, absolutely.

 

As has been said on here it was one the softer side of red, but worse than your average yellow.

 

So far you've said you think there is no intent, it was possibly harsh, a soft red...

But it's definitely a red because we're all idiots and two ex-refs and ex-Arsenal players & Robbie Savage said it was.

[Dr Venkman]

hmm... i remember a certain Callum McManaman early in is career doing a horror-tackle on Massadio-Haidara & getting what again?  was Mitro's anything like that 'challenge'?

 

No, but it doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous.

 

I don't get why there's such an argument about it. Vast majority of pundits and NUFC fans can see why he gave a red. It's not like it's an outrageous decision.

 

I personally think it is a red. Can see why people think it's soft, but to hear people say "never a red" is ludicrous when basically 95% of all coverage of it has agreed that it was probably the right decision.

A... Do you think it would have been a red had Giroud done it ?

B....Do you think there was intent ?

a) some days yes, some days no. Don't think anyone can say either way for sure.

b) No, but it's already been established that they don't take that into account.

Have to say I think your wrong. Look at every tackle in isolation like that and you can buiold a case. Colback was fouled at shin height with no attempt at playing tha ball, foul, no booking, it's letter of the law some times, not at others (and today that was obvious) not helped by by a ref who gave 2 bookings because someone told him to.

The Colback tackle was shin height but not particularly dangerous (although probably should have been a yellow).

 

Mitrovic's was studs down the shin and onto the foot.

 

Look, all I'm saying is it's hardly the outrageous decision that some are making out. You put all 10 PL refs in a room to watch that challenge and I can almost guarantee you that at least 8 or 9 of them give reds. I'm backing this up based on Howard Webb and Graham Poll's comments after the game - both of which said it was a red card offence.

 

I COMPLETELY agree that there's issues with consistency, but as a stand alone incident it's so obvious why it was a red card.

 

Look, more made up statistics.

 

You thought it was a red, fine. Why are you making stuff up man?

Ok, you clearly have an issue with my posts today so I will refrain from replying after this one, but I clearly said above why I think that most refs would give it based on the fact that one did give it, and two ex refs agreed with it. Hardly a "made up" stay as you are suggesting. If ex refs are agreeing with the decision is it soooo outlandish to suggest that the majority of refs would also agree?

 

Anyway, you've clearly got a problem with me having a different opinion to you, so I'll be sure to get confirmed Opta stats to back up my opinion next time...see if you approve more then

 

Nah, sorry, I'm not being accused of having a problem with you having a different opinion, that's just bullshit. I've said all along it's the way you're constructing wafer thin arguments based on made up statistics to try and prove the way you saw it was correct.

 

 

[madras]

http://arsenal-mania.com/forum/threads/premier-league-newcastle-v-arsenal-29-08-15-12-45pm-bt-sport.28426/page-22

 

Very split decision by ARSENAL fans on whether it was a red card.

If Arsenal fans think it was harsh, it probably was harsh.

 

Harsh, possibly. Stupid rule, probably. Understandle why he gave it, absolutely.

 

As has been said on here it was one the softer side of red, but worse than your average yellow.

Even Arsenal fans are saying it's harsh and the rule is pretty clear, compounded by the ref not applying the rule equally (and the sending off seemed to affect them more than us)

 

Again, if Giroud had comitted that foul do you think he'd have been red'ed ?

[Kanji]

 

I couldn't give a single f*** what biased London media who never report it correctly about us or what some old shitbag refs tweet supporting their brother in arms. You're far f***ing smarter than to sit and nod your head in approval about that. Have a thought for yourself man. Jesus Christ.

 

Who's that aimed at?

 

If me, I have plenty of thoughts for myself thank you very much. A lot of them revolve around my family, music, guitars... sometimes I even think about politics and what to have for tea tonight, but most of the time I just blindly copy the thoughts of bald referees from yesteryear in the hope of gaining some notoriety on a bipolar NUFC forum.

 

Not aimed at you mate. I think you're a sound man and a really good poster. Just don't agree with you what so ever on this topic.

[Hanshithispantz]

hmm... i remember a certain Callum McManaman early in is career doing a horror-tackle on Massadio-Haidara & getting what again?  was Mitro's anything like that 'challenge'?

 

No, but it doesn't mean it wasn't dangerous.

 

I don't get why there's such an argument about it. Vast majority of pundits and NUFC fans can see why he gave a red. It's not like it's an outrageous decision.

 

I personally think it is a red. Can see why people think it's soft, but to hear people say "never a red" is ludicrous when basically 95% of all coverage of it has agreed that it was probably the right decision.

A... Do you think it would have been a red had Giroud done it ?

B....Do you think there was intent ?

b) No, but it's already been established that they don't take that into account.

Yes they do ffs

 

The fucking Referees Association said it was the correct decision because it was malicious intent, it's in the name man.

[B-more Mag]

100% of the cats in my house don't think it was a red card.

You may be onto something here. Do they have their badges?

[Hanshithispantz]

 

There's a load of neutrals talking about the challenge, I'd hazard a guess and say there isn't 95% of them claiming it was a red.

[Deuce]

He barely made contact with his shin, come away man.

If Coquelin had stood up and walked off (which he easily could have, as evidenced when he ran back on the pitch seconds later) - it would have been a yellow, at most.

The reaction bought the red card without a shadow of a doubt.

Barely made contact, you need your eyes checking.

 

You need your eyes checking mate. It's just not a Red Card. Costa/Rooney do that - they ain't getting sent off.

Yeah f***ing right, studs up on ankle is a red card.

 

I'll remember your username and remember never to take anything you say seriously.

 

 

:lol:

[Figures 1-0 Football]

Slow motion always seems worse. In real time you can see that it's just a misjudged 50-50 but slow motion makes it look so much worse. It's why I hate when people use slow motion replays to justify these kind of things, it always looks intentional in slow mo.

 

^ That comment hit the nail on the head with this challenge.

It was nowt more than a mistimed 50/50 with no intent.

To be fair, with Coquelin jumping through the air throughout the 90 minutes, he was never going to be at risk of serious injury.

[mrmojorisin75]

If McLaren has said they'll appeal I'm pretty pleased with that tbh, whether they get it overturned or not it'll show the lad they're rightly behind him.

 

Hopefully they're allowed to point to Sissoko's challenge before it and ask why that's not an automatic red and then numerous other challenges throughout the game and if nothing else make a point to them about consistency.

 

Awful, awful decision and it's heartening to see so many on here can see it as such

[Disco]

Annoying thing was it was barely a tackle, it was lax initial control followed by trying to control after the ball had been nicked away hence why his foot came down the way it did. He might as well of tried to take the blokes leg off for the severity of the offence. Either way he's a marked man for the rest of his PL career which after barely 200mins is pathetic.

[Figures 1-0 Football]

Can't wait for him to turn up to his next game with a bouquet of flowers for the referee and a chocolate for all of the opposition players to show what a nice guy he is.