Match Thread: Lincoln City v Cambridge United | Page 20 | Vital Football

Match Thread: Lincoln City v Cambridge United

Working on the assumption, the red card was for serious foul play- the laws are as follows- it doesn't consider what protection the player has (shin pads etc) but just whether the tackle was a lunge, from any angle, which endangers the safety.

The ref has used his opinion to determine the lunge was unsafe.

We can agree or disagree all day long but I don't see this being overturned

1540120688273.png
 
I said this throughout the World Cup, with the farce that is VAR. WE CANNOT MAKE DECISIONS BY USE OF PHOTO STILLS AND ULTRA SLO-MO. Football is played in real time. Decisions have to be made in real time. Photos and slo-mos can change everything They can make anything look bad. Watch the tackle in real time and in no way is Chapman going to injure the opponent. It was powder puff. STOP LOOKING AT STILLS AND SLO-MO. Please. It is not a true representation of what happened.
 
StrangelyBrown said:
Working on the assumption, the red card was for serious foul play- the laws are as follows- it doesn't consider what protection the player has (shin pads etc) but just whether the tackle was a lunge, from any angle, which endangers the safety.

The ref has used his opinion to determine the lunge was unsafe.

We can agree or disagree all day long but I don't see this being overturned

View attachment 29605
Click to expand...
But what is a lunge. I don't class what Ellis did as a lunge (to move forward suddenly and with force especially in order to attack someone). I would say it was a controlled and expected tackle within reasonable parameters of the sport which he mistimed.
 
hulloutpost said:
But what is a lunge. I don't class what Ellis did as a lunge (to move forward suddenly and with force especially in order to attack someone). I would say it was a controlled and expected tackle within reasonable parameters of the sport which he mistimed.
Click to expand...

Bang on.
 
hulloutpost said:
But what is a lunge. I don't class what Ellis did as a lunge (to move forward suddenly and with force especially in order to attack someone). I would say it was a controlled and expected tackle within reasonable parameters of the sport which he mistimed.
Click to expand...
Same here, I'm not sure which part of the laws quoted he has gotten so badly on the wrong side of. You could deem any tackle has the possibility to cause harm to the other player if it is even slightly mis-timed.
 
the ball was on the ground. but chapman's left leg was never at ground level. and ended up swinging [late] over the ball and straight onto the guy's shin. that's what happened whichever speed you play it at. and the ref had a good view. the photo taken from the other side shows the assistant's view, so he can't add anything mitigating chapman.

chapman may have gone in intending to do a block tackle, but it didn't end up as anywhere near a block tackle. foot should be on the ground, and behind the ball. not anywhere near the opponents leg. plus he was leaning back, rather than having his weight over the ball. which you need for a block tackle.

he's a good player. and 17. will iron out these technicalities. and will also learn when not to tackle.
 
StrangelyBrown said:
Watching EFL highlights and Chapman's tackle (and the position of the ref in relation to the tackle), going to have to change my view.

That's a red card all day long- Ellis foot is almost knee high and is going to be considered reckless. Red card and 3 match ban.

That their No6 wasn't too badly hurt isn't going to matter- high tackle, almost knee high.

Didn't think it was at the ground today- but seeing it now. Got to be red.
Click to expand...
I agree very hard to overtun it on viewing it again later.Strange though the manager and player will support our appeal!
 
Redimps1 said:
I agree very hard to overtun it on viewing it again later.Strange though the manager and player will support our appeal!
Click to expand...
very strange that the same player face down on the turf after the tackle is supporting the appeal. maybe if he hadn't rolled around, banging his fist on the ground, and clutching his shin in feigned agony, but actually got up and supported chapman's cause at the time, and before the red card was out - there might have been no sending off.
 
One other thing from yesterday that's had me scratching my head since, 1 shot on target? Their keeper made 3 saves from watching the YouTube highlights, very strange.
 
Joe Dunne says it was not a red card, and he was standing less than ten yards away with a perfect view. The player so heinously offended - Gary Deegan - also says it was not a red card. He had a very good view of it, I would say.
 
Scotimp said:
Joe Dunne says it was not a red card, and he was standing less than ten yards away with a perfect view. The player so heinously offended - Gary Deegan - also says it was not a red card. He had a very good view of it, I would say.
Click to expand...

Although looking at the photo from TV I'd say other than the players the ref had the best uninterrupted view. The linesman and their manager were both on the blindside. Still don't think it was a red though.
 
nlondonimp said:
the ball was on the ground. but chapman's left leg was never at ground level. and ended up swinging [late] over the ball and straight onto the guy's shin. that's what happened whichever speed you play it at. and the ref had a good view. the photo taken from the other side shows the assistant's view, so he can't add anything mitigating chapman.

chapman may have gone in intending to do a block tackle, but it didn't end up as anywhere near a block tackle. foot should be on the ground, and behind the ball. not anywhere near the opponents leg. plus he was leaning back, rather than having his weight over the ball. which you need for a block tackle.

he's a good player. and 17. will iron out these technicalities. and will also learn when not to tackle.
Click to expand...
BIt of a bizarre paragraph, bar the final bit which I agree with.

If you go into a block tackle and the ball is nicked away, you still follow through. Your foot won't stop if there's nothing there (a ball) to stop it!
 
Scotimp said:
Joe Dunne says it was not a red card, and he was standing less than ten yards away with a perfect view. The player so heinously offended - Gary Deegan - also says it was not a red card. He had a very good view of it, I would say.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t there, so judging from the replays alone, our players didn’t seem to kick up much of a fuss which I thought odd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.