• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

The Tackle on Suarez

Forums New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Spionkop69

Spionkop69

Get the cretins out!
Member
I've only really seen the post match reaction to tackle.

Has there been any reaction from people?

As Chris Coleman said, it was a cowards tackle; from behind, late, studs up and a stamp down to the back of players leg. Suarez was lucky that he was only clipped by it.

Actually I have seen one reaction to it, and that was from the Welsh Midget. He says it definitely wasn't a red and he can't see how people can say there was intent. What a cunt, but then we kind of knew that didn't we.
 
mark1975 said:
Some Geordie I know said he dived. lol.
Click to expand...

He wasn't hit that hard but there was contact, it was down the back of his legs and his ankle and frankly only an idiot would think that Collocini had anything else on his mind but to "do" Suarez.
 
If that tackle had been on me, and I'd seen the replay, then I'd be in the oppo dressing room after the game to "discuss" that tackle. Its was totally unacceptable.
 
I've only seen it from one angle and from that angle I couldn't really see the contact, but it was very late. He wasn't even travelling particularly fast either so it's not as if it would take him time to stop.
 
athensruairi said:
I've only seen it from one angle and from that angle I couldn't really see the contact, but it was very late. He wasn't even travelling particularly fast either so it's not as if it would take him time to stop.
Click to expand...

I don't see why attacking players shouldn't exaggerate contact though (obviously not to theatrical lengths), if they stay up then the ref thinks there's nothing doing.
 
What about the challenge for the penalty claim first half? I was down the other end of the ground so not the best view - penalty or not ?
 
Sunny said:
What about the challenge for the penalty claim first half? I was down the other end of the ground so not the best view - penalty or not ?
Click to expand...

It was one of them which you could argue - like Skrtel on Baines last week, but don't get given because even though there was contact the ball had already gone and wasn't under the attacking player's control.

I do think that kinda thing needs addressing in the rules though. Outside the box it would be called a late challenge and given, in the box people seem to accept that it isn't. Of course there's nothing in the rule book, it's just kinda accepted.
 
mark1975 said:
I don't see why attacking players shouldn't exaggerate contact though (obviously not to theatrical lengths), if they stay up then the ref thinks there's nothing doing.
Click to expand...

I'm not doubting the contact, just that from the angle I seen it I couldn't really tell. But he was very late.
 
LeTallecWiz said:
I asked that in the match thread and no one answered. It's a 50/50 ...
Click to expand...

Yeah, as Woland said, it was 50/50, I felt it would have been harsh if given. I thought the ref handled the game reasonably well yesterday, but it was a bit stop start and he kept picking up on minor challenges that were neither here nor there.
 
I seriously can't believe people are still debating this. I can see why Pardew was a bit pissed off at first. It didn't look like much from certain angles. But now that we've all seen the replay, it's a fucking no-brainer. People seriously need to cop on, and get off Suarez's case.
 
Sunny said:
What about the challenge for the penalty claim first half? I was down the other end of the ground so not the best view - penalty or not ?
Click to expand...

It was one of those that if it was given, you wouldn't debate it as there was clumsy contact on his heels that made him tumble. I personally think we were lucky to get away with that one.
 
I don't know what that wee bollocks Owen is talking about after seeing that.
 
A good thing seeing the replay from another angle was seeing the liner saying to the ref. RED RED RED.... They don't all hate him!
 
Woland said:
A good thing seeing the replay from another angle was seeing the liner saying to the ref. RED RED RED.... They don't all hate him!
Click to expand...

Thought it made a nice change for a liner to actually have a pair and give a decision other than an offside / throw / corner / goal kick. Too often they bottle things and leave it all to the ref even when they're better placed and act like sunday league club liners
 
From F365.

I'm starting to worry that Luis Suarez is to this column as the ravens are to the Tower of London. Please don't go back to Uruguay, Luis. Myself and the Yeomen have to put food on the table.
This week, though, he was on the receiving end of a couple of incidents, and was very much the innocent party in a couple of clashes with Fabricio Coloccini.
Coloccini was quite rightly dismissed for a lunge on Suarez in the second half of the game between Liverpool and Newcastle at Anfield on Sunday. A few have suggested that a lack of substantial contact is a fair reason for keeping the Argentine centre-half on the field, but I don't buy that at all.
I think if you are that late, with your studs raised and going in at force, you shouldn't escape censure just because you were BAD at trying to foul someone. It's like when people get a lesser sentence for attempted murder. Why should someone be lenient on you if you are not only prepared to be so brutal, but you can't even do it properly?
If Coloccini had broken Suarez's leg, then the opinion would be universal that he deserved a red card, so I fail to see why missing his target should mean that he only gets a yellow card. A tackle to has to have excessive force or brutality to earn a red card, and I certainly felt this one ticked that box.
Earlier in the game, Liverpool felt that they should have had a penalty for a foul involving them same two men, this time in the penalty area albeit with far less nastiness.
I have a lot of sympathy with the Reds on that one, but I also understand why the spot kick was not given. In real time I thought it looked like a good tackle, as my eyes were on the ball, and Coloccini very clearly played it.
Watching replays, however, I can see that his right leg - nowhere the ball and possibly even detached from his body - came through Suarez and brought him down. The replays show, to me, that it was a foul, and therefore should have been a pen.
Replays are a luxury, though, and on this occasion, from the angle he had and at the speed he would have seen it, I have no complaints with the referee not giving what he can't have been 100% sure about.
Click to expand...
 
Woland said:
A good thing seeing the replay from another angle was seeing the liner saying to the ref. RED RED RED.... They don't all hate him!
Click to expand...

It was funny seeing their player come over and try to defend Collocini with an "he went for the ball" gesture. Hmmmm'kay!
 
It was a terible tackle, and definitly orange. I guess I wouldn't care if he was only booked, as the clock was running out anyway.

For the penalty, it is crystal clear that he take the man, and is hit by ther ball. It is bullshit to say he took the ball. That is a clear penalty in my book (which I said about the Skrtle one as well).
 
DHSC said:
"Definitely orange"?
Click to expand...

Beyond yellow, but not nesserally red. Sometimes people are unlucky, sometimes they are nasty and sometimes just plain stupid... So same tackle can be up for interpretations. i don't think this tackle would been red after lets say 7 mins play.
 
DHSC said:
From F365.

I think if you are that late, with your studs raised and going in at force, you shouldn't escape censure just because you were BAD at trying to foul someone. It's like when people get a lesser sentence for attempted murder. Why should someone be lenient on you if you are not only prepared to be so brutal, but you can't even do it properly?
If Coloccini had broken Suarez's leg, then the opinion would be universal that he deserved a red card, so I fail to see why missing his target should mean that he only gets a yellow card. A tackle to has to have excessive force or brutality to earn a red card, and I certainly felt this one ticked that box.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
He didn't deserve any prize for missing his target.
 
Insignificance said:
Beyond yellow, but not nesserally red. Sometimes people are unlucky, sometimes they are nasty and sometimes just plain stupid... So same tackle can be up for interpretations. i don't think this tackle would been red after lets say 7 mins play.
Click to expand...

That's because refs are human and some of their decisions are affected by unrelated facts e.g. what minute it is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom