A&H

Hard Tackles

The Referee Store
The players do not appeal for a foul either. I have blown for a foul for a tackle like that, although the player did not fly through the air as much and got wined at by both teams who thought it was a great tackle at Dog and Duck level. And in this weather we should all be concerned with small tackle!
 
JH said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1044116106674233344

The general consensus when Dier was cautioned for the tackle on Ramos was correct decision.
At the time I questioned whether it would be given in England... lo and behold.
This tackle is even more forceful for me, yet the English official doesn't bat an eyelid.

Thoughts? What would you do?
Click to expand...
The younger generation on here won't like it. I find these very difficult as i grew up in an era when leaving your mark was positively encouraged. Nonetheless, i'd probably caution for this
 
bucket.jpeg

Back in my day, revenge would have been served..... I did a similar tackle once, man, ball, the lot..... great feeling!!!
 
Big Cat said:
Absolute quality tackle but the recipient could have done some post-somersault damage :blackeye:
Click to expand...

I know H&S has taken over but that wouldn't of been even a yellow, especially early on in a game back in the day!
 
Last edited:
You would get destroyed if you give this at any level, the lower down the level the more you would get slated.

I think the ref has a slight look as if to say i know i probably should do something but its such a great tackle.

BUT

I would say its exactly the sort of tackle that IFAB and co dont way to see, if thats not excessive force i dont know what is.
 
No argument from the player, if that was me maybe a word to the defending player. IF he was to miss the ball that's gonna be quite the foul, but that's playing the IF game
 
No giving it. The tackle is as perfectly timed as it comes. If it was the trailing leg that cleaned red it would have been a different story. Contact is on the hip of blue which means red was still a some distance away when blue cleared the ball. Also the direction that red falls is a sign. It's very little in the direction of blue and almost completely in the direction that red was running. They were running in right angle to each other. This is an indication red tripped himself over blue and not blue tripping red. IMO red was the cause of his own predicament and the somersault was caused by his over committing to challenge for the ball despite not being able to get to the ball first.
 
one said:
No giving it. The tackle is as perfectly timed as it comes. If it was the trailing leg that cleaned red it would have been a different story. Contact is on the hip of blue which means red was still a some distance away when blue cleared the ball. Also the direction that red falls is a sign. It's very little in the direction of blue and almost completely in the direction that red was running. They were running in right angle to each other. This is an indication red tripped himself over blue and not blue tripping red. IMO red was the cause of his own predicament and the somersault was caused by his over committing to challenge for the ball despite not being able to get to the ball first.
Click to expand...

We are watching the same clip aren't we? The red player has tripped himself??? Really??

Whilst i agree he wins the ball and back in the day that is a good hard tackle. However, if a player comes in at that speed with that force then its a foul and a minimum or a caution. How can you say that is not a reckless challenge?

  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
 
This one's a foul and a caution. Remember the LOTG was changed precisely for this sort of tackle - and the defender knows exactly what he's doing. Not only has he ended up several yards past the player (usually a good indication that the force used was disproportionate), but he's clearly done it in such a manner that he'd clean up the attacker with his body. Completely unnecessary. Entertaining as a fan, of course, but unnecessary nonetheless.

As a fan it's the sort of tackle you love watching your defensive midfielder doing, and you'd call it a well-earned card.

As for comments about there being no appeal - players sometimes don't appeal for fouls and do appeal for nothing. You wait for the appeal and you're going to (rightly) be accuse of 'only giving it because they shouted for it'. Sometimes you need to make your decision quickly.

I'd expect any referee giving that foul to be blowing for it before that attacker has had the chance to appeal given how long it took for him to find his way upright!

If this doesn't fall under 'tackles an opponent...CRUEF' then I'm not sure what does.

one said:
No giving it. The tackle is as perfectly timed as it comes. If it was the trailing leg that cleaned red it would have been a different story. Contact is on the hip of blue which means red was still a some distance away when blue cleared the ball. Also the direction that red falls is a sign. It's very little in the direction of blue and almost completely in the direction that red was running. They were running in right angle to each other. This is an indication red tripped himself over blue and not blue tripping red. IMO red was the cause of his own predicament and the somersault was caused by his over committing to challenge for the ball despite not being able to get to the ball first.
Click to expand...
You should probably watch the tackle again.....This post honestly doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
This is the kind of tackle that we see from yesteryear from the likes of Norman Hunter, Billy Bremner and later Graeme Souness and Vinnie Jones and whenever we do we take a sharp intake of breath and say something like, how did they used to get away with tackles like that??
 
Cheshire Ref said:
However, if a player comes in at that speed with that force then its a foul and a minimum or a caution. How can you say that is not a reckless challenge?
Click to expand...
One of the points of my post was the speed and force of blue has no impact. red has not moved in the direction of which blue was going. The cause of how red ends up in the air is his own speed. Blue could have been 10 times slower but red would have still ended up the same because of his own speed.

Yes blue knew if goes for the tackle there will be a collision. So did red. Its clear to me that blue did not 'hit' red hers. It was red who collided with blue.

CapnBloodbeard said:
You should probably watch the tackle again
Click to expand...
I did a number of times before posting. In full speed and slow motion, freeze frame and so on. My post may make more sense of you watched it in the same way. :)
 
one said:
One of the points of my post was the speed and force of blue has no impact. red has not moved in the direction of which blue was going. The cause of how red ends up in the air is his own speed. Blue could have been 10 times slower but red would have still ended up the same because of his own speed.

Yes blue knew if goes for the tackle there will be a collision. So did red. Its clear to me that blue did not 'hit' red hers. It was red who collided with blue.


I did a number of times before posting. In full speed and slow motion, freeze frame and so on. My post may make more sense of you watched it in the same way. :)
Click to expand...

Your interpretation of this is absolutely bonkers!!

Red is running down the line, blue comes in and completely wipes him out but that is reds fault??
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
one said:
One of the points of my post was the speed and force of blue has no impact. red has not moved in the direction of which blue was going. The cause of how red ends up in the air is his own speed. Blue could have been 10 times slower but red would have still ended up the same because of his own speed.
Click to expand...

Don't be so ridiculous. So if the player came in at walking speed, the opponent would've still been turned upside down?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top