Punishments for players should be harsher when they inflict serious injury on an opponent

It’s a shocking tackle absolutely, it’s a fairly obvious goalkeeping manoeuvre though and throwing everything you can to keep the thing out the net.

If it was a Keane on Haaland type assault then yes it would be justified but this was an accident IMO. I don’t feel this is warranting of anything more than a retrospective ban in line with the current procedure. No matter how bad it looks and the damage it has caused.

For example, Jones tackle on that tim in the OF game was an even worse tackle that would have been a horror injury had the lads leg been planted. Again, i would be outraged if he was banned for X amount of time.

Pickford does come across a bit of a jack the lad wannabe type cnut, but I don’t think he’s seriously meant to injure VVD here.

So no, I don’t think he should be banned for however long VVD is out for. Which really isn’t that controversial in my opinion.
 
It’s a shocking tackle absolutely, it’s a fairly obvious goalkeeping manoeuvre though and throwing everything you can to keep the thing out the net.

If it was a Keane on Haaland type assault then yes it would be justified but this was an accident IMO. I don’t feel this is warranting of anything more than a retrospective ban in line with the current procedure. No matter how bad it looks and the damage it has caused.

For example, Jones tackle on that tim in the OF game was an even worse tackle that would have been a horror injury had the lads leg been planted. Again, i would be outraged if he was banned for X amount of time.

Pickford does come across a bit of a jack the lad wannabe type cnut, but I don’t think he’s seriously meant to injure VVD here.

So no, I don’t think he should be banned for however long VVD is out for. Which really isn’t that controversial in my opinion.

Absolutely this. It should have been a red card, standard ban served and no more. If it’s a lesser player at a smaller club this sort of hysteria never manifests.
 
Absolutely this. It should have been a red card, standard ban served and no more. If it’s a lesser player at a smaller club this sort of hysteria never manifests.
He could still have been given a red, despite the ball being out of play.
Where’s our English football correspondent when needed :))

In all seriousness Grigo’s point is where I’m confused, I thought because the phase of play the incident took place in was effectively ‘invalid’ he couldn’t have been red carded.

However, I imagine precedent for such a thing does exist. The attention this incident will get will most likely lead to new legislation (if there already isn’t) and rightfully so.

Even with an ‘intentional’ injury it all comes down to interpretation.
 
Where’s our English football correspondent when needed :))

In all seriousness Grigo’s point is where I’m confused, I thought because the phase of play the incident took place in was effectively ‘invalid’ he couldn’t have been red carded.

However, I imagine precedent for such a thing does exist. The attention this incident will get will most likely lead to new legislation (if there already isn’t) and rightfully so.

Even with an ‘intentional’ injury it all comes down to interpretation.

My understanding is that the ball was out of play, EB, so they can’t give a penalty, however a red card can be awarded any time the players are within the referees control, even after The final whistle.

No ?
 
My understanding is that the ball was out of play, EB, so they can’t give a penalty, however a red card can be awarded any time the players are within the referees control, even after The final whistle.

No ?
Possibly, players can get booked and sent off from corners without penalties (Zizkov against us) I think you are right mate.

Like I said, either way we will hearing about it from all angles for the next few weeks.
 
Possibly, players can get booked and sent off from corners without penalties (Zizkov against us) I think you are right mate.

Like I said, either way we will hearing about it from all angles for the next few weeks.

I must say, I thought it was absolutely reckless & I hope he is cited.

Total disregard for a fellow professional in my personal opinion.
 
Once again we are seeing current England internationals on the protected species list.

I am pretty sure the initial thinking that he couldn't be punished because of the offside was completely wrong - simply he couldn't win a penalty for it.

They are now coming out to say he won't receive retrospective punishment because the incident was seen at the time. How can you see that incident and not view it as a red card?? He has virtually jumped in and wrapped his legs round the opponent.
 
And Carragher who played as a centre half and whose responsibility it was to make tackles said that’s bollocks. Wouldn’t he know?

I’ve posted a photo at the point of contact and explained why what you’re saying just isn’t true. I can’t do any more than that. To call it an assault ascertain “he knew what he was doing” just doesn’t fly.
You're 100% right there. Nobody can argue with this point.
 
I think it’s being talked about because there has been no punishment for an outrageous lunge on a fellow pro, that will potentially mean he is missing almost a full season. Throw in the fact he is one of the top CB out there then it’s bad for the game. People want to see top players on the pitch.
I think a 5 game ban would be appropriate. Pickford is an enigma. He really hasn’t improved since coming through as a young keeper, he’s making mistakes and now he’s injured someone.
I don’t think it was intentional, I don’t think he’s that sort of guy. In the case of Keane v Haaland, Keane should have been banned for life. That was a premeditated attack - assault. It wasn’t anything to do with a hard tackle. He went in there to ruin someone’s career. Thugs like that have no place in the game. Now sometimes you’re unlucky and you have a career ending tackle or injury that’s accidental and not intended. I think the difference is intent.
 
2002 WC, first player to be sent off without being on the pitch in WC history. Even Claudio was a bit too old by 06 :)
Ach so it was. Mind playing tricks on me. Doesn’t seem that long ago.
I do remember his last game was in 2012 when he scored for Wembley in a FA Cup preliminary round. I had only just moved and we went to the local pub for lunch and the game was being shown there. Had it been 10-15 years earlier it would have been a most impressive line up.
 
It's ironic that its a goalkeeper who are uber protected got away with an assault that an outfield player would have been red carded for.
 
It’s been touted that if you injured a guy you should sit out for as long as it takes them to recover.

The trouble is the subjectivity of how bad the tackle is. I’ve seen players seriously injured in pretty innocuous tackles and I’ve seen tackles which are totally malicious.

It would also be open to abuse as another club could manipulate a situation to keep one of your players sidelined.
 
Getting banned for the same amount of time as someone's injury is nonsense and everyone knows it. Plus, how can you even judge based on intent - practically it doesn't work as it's purely subjective.

I think it was a horrendous tackle by the way, I'm not denying that fact but some of the shite that's getting spouted is getting beyond a joke.
We need to get “intent” into its correct context
A small numbers of tackles (assaults) are so obvious that there is no debate
The issue here is lack of control and reckless endangerment. Despairing lunges by players might be loved by fans, we all love our players to be wholehearted ,but they have to educated not to crash in unlessThey have a realistic chance of winning the ball fairly.Stiffer penalties must be brought in to educate players to not to go balls to the walls at any cost
 
And Carragher who played as a centre half and whose responsibility it was to make tackles said that’s bollocks. Wouldn’t he know?

I’ve posted a photo at the point of contact and explained why what you’re saying just isn’t true. I can’t do any more than that. To call it an assault ascertain “he knew what he was doing” just doesn’t fly.
Don’t have to prove intent ,malicious or otherwise it was reckless and has put the player out for 6 to 9 months
 
Don’t have to prove intent ,malicious or otherwise it was reckless and has put the player out for 6 to 9 months
You obviously don’t, but the poster in question clearly thinks it’s quantifiable and something that should be used to dole out a much more severe punishment. Before he went on to pick and choose which “pro” is credible whilst discrediting the one that don’t subscribe to his theory as an uncle tom. Load of bollocks.
 
Last edited:
If Pickford came out today and said I did exactly what i intended to do injure VVD then he would maybe have a point.

Pickford didn't go out to injure the player, was clumsy yes but no way intended to injure. Intent is really important here. Might be able to suggest some tackles were reckless, but impossible to prove intent was to seriously injure.

Football is a contact sport and accidental injuries are part of that. Even if you look at some of the really bad tackles, Simpson on Durrant the referee that day had a lot to answer for, the game was out of control he had allowed emotions to go unchecked. Never a black and white situation.
 
Getting banned for the same amount of time as someone's injury is nonsense and everyone knows it. Plus, how can you even judge based on intent - practically it doesn't work as it's purely subjective.

I think it was a horrendous tackle by the way, I'm not denying that fact but some of the shite that's getting spouted is getting beyond a joke.
That’s probably the whole answer.
The only person that knows intent is the perpetrator.
It’d be impossible to include a line like “could have” or “likely would have” as these can be argued away very easily.
 
Back
Top