Joey47 Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Just now, Yorkie said: Yeah, even just two games would be somewhat more proportionate. Will be interesting to see how much we miss him. His quality is undeniable but it's only appeared in flashes since his wee man was born; there's a very clear 'before and after' in terms of his performances imo. I kinda think he's been asking for a red too in terms of some of how he's been going into challenges. As it happened last night's was pretty unlikely despite being the correct call. There could be benefits to this. He'll be very well rested and massively up for it come final day, like. Hopefully can finish the season in the way he started it. I feel the same, but also wondering if maybe it's partly due to me getting used to having Bruno's quality in our midfield. When he first came, every touch and through ball he made was pretty much mindblowing. Now I think I kind of take it for granted the things he's able to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bondedcrown Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 3 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: It's a terrible tackle and obviously dangerous. Why is he coming up so high? He's nowhere near the ball too. Not as bad as Fabinho's but pretty awful. Wasn't high! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 10 minutes ago, TRon said: It wasn't as it looked IMO, he just caught him late because he's not the quickest over a few yards. Used to see Cabaye make similar fouls for the same reason. It's not intentional, just when you are up against someone with pace it's easy to miss the tackle by a split second. Doesn't matter if it was intentional. It was a potential leg breaking tackle. And a terrible tackle. Cabaye regularly committed terrible tackles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 10 minutes ago, Bondedcrown said: Wasn't high! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Is that supposed to be proving that it's high? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) TBF it was a tackle that was worthy of 2 red cards, and we would be calling conspiracy if it was reversed and the tackle was on Bruno putting him out of action for a month. Let’s not be like all the rest that call out bad tackles on our players but turn a blind eye when it’s our players that do it. Edited February 1, 2023 by nufcnick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 It looks worse when it’s a snapshot of that exact moment, but so do most tackles. It was a split second and could have easily gone the other way if Bruno had his foot down a split second sooner, as the Southampton player would have been on top of Bruno’s foot/ankle. It’s just one of those things where two players go in for the same ball at such a pace. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Easy red, just hope the FA don't drop down a sudden extended ban for no reason. He's been lucky a few games escaping a yellow/red for stud down the ankles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) Haven't seen a single Newcastle fan try to say it wasn't a red card, all anyone's saying is that it 1, wasn't high and 2, wasn't malicious. Edited February 1, 2023 by Kid Icarus Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nufcnick Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 1 minute ago, OCK said: Easy red, just hope the FA don't drop down a sudden extended ban for no reason. He's been lucky a few games escaping a yellow/red for stud down the ankles. Not for that, they tend to look at the Gerard esk 2 footed jumping in tackles for an extra game ban Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The College Dropout Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 A tackle where studs ae higher than the boot and ankle is high. It's dangerous and an awful tackle precisely because it's high, studs up and late. Malicious intent? No. But reckless, impetuous and dangerous - yes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wandy Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Thought he was magnificent in the first 30 mins and he has definitely been more aggressive in recent games. Last night was a lesson to just reign that aggression in a tiny bit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 41 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: Liverpool will be right up for the game. If they find some form between now and then.. at worst they'll be 7 points behind with an opportunity to cut it to 4 points. If we end that 3 game run at least 7 points clear of them, I reckon we'll finish ahead of them. Massive 3 games to come. We'll need new heroes. Gordon! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Icarus Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 I wouldn't consider a tackle that's at ball height and not 'over the ball' - as the expression goes - as high, it's late and reckless agreed, but not high. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexf Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Christ I swear some people see a different game or haven't played themselves. He clearly turned his foot at ball height to try to block the ball and win possession. The lad turned his foot at the last second and got it Infront of the ball by being too fast for Bruno. Watch it at full speed and not super slomo and you will get a better understanding. It is clearly in no way a malicious tackle it's just a unfortunate mistime. 9/10 the player doesn't get his foot Infront at that angle and Bruno blocks the ball. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloGeordio Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said: I wouldn't consider a tackle that's at ball height and not 'over the ball' - as the expression goes - as high, it's late and reckless agreed, but not high. Yeah put the ball between foot and contact point. Is it over the ball or on it? On the ball. Clumsy/mistimed and not high. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bondedcrown Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 52 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: My ankles are only a couple of inches above my foot ! Describe what you mean by high? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 First sending off of his career? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colos Short and Curlies Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Bondedcrown said: My ankles are only a couple of inches above my foot ! Describe what you mean by high? salisu’s mortal kombat fatality attempt on Miggy (yes completely accidental but if intent isn’t a factor then that was high) Edited February 1, 2023 by Colos Short and Curlies Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 I thought he lost his head a bit second half. But weirdly, as awful as the slow mo's and the still images look. I didn't think he went in to do him, for all that it was a red. Just a fraction late and his studs are up. So once you make contact like that, it's usually going to be given. He should have been booked not long before. Seemed fuming for not getting what looked like a foul and then getting done for handball. Left one on Lavia (I think it was?) and then about a minute later, looked to put a naughty one on him from behind. I said his emotional nature would result in him getting a red or two for us over the years. Wasn't quite expecting it so soon! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stottie Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Bruno won't get to play against his mate Paqueta. It might have been interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 1 hour ago, Yorkie said: Yeah, even just two games would be somewhat more proportionate. Will be interesting to see how much we miss him. His quality is undeniable but it's only appeared in flashes since his wee man was born; there's a very clear 'before and after' in terms of his performances imo. I kinda think he's been asking for a red too in terms of some of how he's been going into challenges. As it happened last night's was pretty unlucky despite being the correct call. There could be benefits to this. He'll be very well rested and massively up for it come final day, like. Hopefully can finish the season in the way he started it. Apart from before the world cup I think it was. Where he did seem to drop off for a game or two. I am really not seeing this, despite plenty saying the same. He still is about the only player in the side that regularly attempts, never mind completes through balls. His defensive work is superb and is one of our only players who is competent at receiving the ball under pressure and not losing it. Whenever we have highlights of our games, he always seems to be involved in the build up, directly creating the chance or the shot itself. I think he is trying to force it a bit at times and does try his samba skills in some weird areas. But I think it is an absolute myth that he has been 'worse' since his kid was born. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 40 minutes ago, Wandy said: Thought he was magnificent in the first 30 mins and he has definitely been more aggressive in recent games. Last night was a lesson to just reign that aggression in a tiny bit. It was his best 45 mins for a long time I thought, he was absolutely imperious in the first half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanj Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 57 minutes ago, The College Dropout said: A tackle where studs ae higher than the boot and ankle is high. It's dangerous and an awful tackle precisely because it's high, studs up and late. Malicious intent? No. But reckless, impetuous and dangerous - yes. It’s not high bro. It’s not high at all. If you roll the ball with your studs you’re basically saying that’s high. The connection was at ankle. High is above the height of the ball. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Geese Posted February 1, 2023 Share Posted February 1, 2023 Any chance we appeal the Red Card ? Mistimed tackle, no malice ! 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