Tackle on Harvey Elliot

rupertdabear

Well-Known Member
bit rough getting a red card but the lads on motd pointed out he was off the ground and in being so,out of control and endangering an opponent .there are worse tackles in practically every match. neither here nor there for the lad that got injured. he tried to get up on it too,prob out of shock and the players got him down pronto .shocking sight to see and hope he recovers well and able to play again.
i'm sure the leeds lad is not worrying about the red either. he will be in bits at the outcome as well .
sad all round
 

1BrianLaudrup

Well-Known Member
Two go in hard for a 50/50, ball in middle of both players and one comes out with a broken ankle. Red card?
This is exactly what happened to me 20 years ago, tib and fib broke clean through about halfway between knee and ankle. Total 50-50. Would never have blamed the other guy. He was horrified.

I don't think this one today lines up exactly with that scenario but I agree that just because somebody got injured doesn't mean it's automatically a red card or a terrible tackle.
 

Blaew

Well-Known Member
If two players go into a tackle and one breaks their ankle then only one of the players has went in with excessive force.

As for your second point, I understand that that's how you'd like to see football played but they aren't the rules of football anymore.
My centre half partner once 'broke' an opposition players ankle.

The boy went to take a shot on the edge of the box and my mate put in a normal run of the mill block tackle standing his ground. The boy kicked the ball but because the ball was effectively dead against my mate's planted foot, all the force he put into the shot stopped abruptly causing him to break his ankle.

In normal circumstances it's the most fair tackle you can possibly have on the pitch. Are you saying something like that should now be a red card?
 

MightyGersLand!

Well-Known Member
My centre half partner once 'broke' an opposition players ankle.

The boy went to take a shot on the edge of the box and my mate put in a normal run of the mill block tackle standing his ground. The boy kicked the ball but because the ball was effectively dead against my mate's planted foot, all the force he put into the shot stopped abruptly causing him to break his ankle.

In normal circumstances it's the most fair tackle you can possibly have on the pitch. Are you saying something like that should now be a red card?
I could fly into a 2 footed lunge into anyone in Rangers first team, and I'd bounce off and my leg would be in pieces.
The idea that should be a red card and 4 match ban to Alfredo sums up what Scottish football has been brainwashed into believing!
:shh:
 

Archibald Leitch

Well-Known Member
I've not seen it back but if you snap someone's leg in a tackle then it should be a red card.

I know it sounds strange but if its a clean break then it's much better than ligament damage when it comes to rehab.

If it's a clean break then I wouldn't be surprised to see the lad back playing in January/February.
Then maybe you need to see it back CL.
Wasn't even deserving of a yellow imo, it was just the way Elliot tumbled.
I seem to remember Larsson's leg snapped when there was no-one near him. This, I think, is similar, but happened just at the same time as an innocuous tackle.
 

TheMish

Well-Known Member
If you go into a tackle with enough force to break someones leg then IMO you're using excessive force.
That logic is so silly, can’t believe you keep typing that as though it’s a definitive closing statement.

I mean I sort of get it, it’s the Internet and pride can be a right sod at times and it’s easy to double down, but not many are reading your statement and sitting nodding away in agreement. It’s a statement removed from the realities and tangibles that come with actually playing a game of football
 

SecondBestIsNothing

Well-Known Member
If two players go into a tackle and one breaks their ankle then only one of the players has went in with excessive force.

As for your second point, I understand that that's how you'd like to see football played but they aren't the rules of football anymore.
Actually pulling out of a tackle is one of the most dangerous things you can do. Either leaves your foot dangling which means any force will bend it or you end up going in over the top of the ball.
 

Scaramanga

Well-Known Member
“Wasn’t his fault what so ever! Neither was it a red card just a freak accident but these things happen in football. I’ll be back stronger 100%. Thanks for all the support”

Elliot was just commented this on Instagram, wise words

Top lad. The boy himself doesn’t think it was a red or that the defending player was at fault, so that’s ends that debate.
 
Last edited:

dt17

A mate of mine.....
Top lad. The boy himself doesn’t think it was a red or that the defending player was involved, so that’s ends that debate.

I think it's just common sense from him. He'll have seen the replay back and realised that there was no malice or intent whatsoever.
 

Mickethius

Well-Known Member
Possibly my acl being snapped when playing amateur football and the guy got nothing makes me see these kind of challenges differently. :)
Bad for you and bad for Elliot but that wasn’t even a foul, until that tramp Klopp got involved, he showed no concern for the lad just wanted to harangue the ref to get the colour card he wanted, Elliot comes out today and exonerates Stuijk, Klopp ought to have the good grace to do the same, of course he won’t, he’s at the perfect club for victimhood.
 

Mickethius

Well-Known Member
The fact the player injured was young? It does not matter a jot what age the player is.. It was scissor challenge from behind, (guy i have just commented on said it was one leg after other but not scissor, %^*& me), the boy had no chance and from what i am seeing it is clear as day that the contact is what breaks his leg.. If that is not excessive then what in the hell is? Leg fully amputated in challenge?
Elliot has himself today said it was not Stuijk’s fault, I reckon he would know, you are clearly wrong.
 

Mickethius

Well-Known Member
I defined it in that post mate.

If you go into a tackle with enough force to break someones leg then IMO you're using excessive force.
Absolute hogwash, we all love two players going full on to win the ball, slight mistiming and it results in a yellow card usually, this wasn’t even a foul, Klopp got the boy red carded by his use of Liverpool’s victim card.
 

Mickethius

Well-Known Member
Agreed there was no intent to hurt elliot Granted but the tackle is very poor. Why there is so many people saying it's not a red card is baffling to me watched it multiple times its a definite red
So was Liam Coopers tackle 5 minutes later a red? He went in in identical fashion but won the ball, no break, no card no foul?
 

dazzapat

Well-Known Member
As far as I'm concerned, and I don't want to see challenge again, any over physical challenge that leads to horrific injuries like this boy has just suffered should be red cards.
So, you’d have seen Broadfoot red carded for his challenge on Valencia of Man Utd back in 2010?
 

Maxi1872

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
So was Liam Coopers tackle 5 minutes later a red? He went in in identical fashion but won the ball, no break, no card no foul?
Never seen it and never watched the game only seen the tackle on elliot. Its a red card imo
 

Marlo Stanfield

Well-Known Member
People saying that’s not a red card. Are you stuck 30 years in the past? It’s a dividing slide from behind, Leeds player is airborne and yes his lead leg gets the ball but the trailing leg and the majority of his weight comes down on Elliott’s planted leg snapping his ankle. It’s a reckless tackle, it obviously meets the criteria of endangering an opponent as is displayed by the damage done. I don’t believe the tackle was malicious he’s not trying to hurt Elliott but it’s obviously dangerous and careless.
 
Last edited:

jdm1873

Well-Known Member
I don't think the tackle had intent. The tackle on Kent on Saturday was worse imo.

Hope the lad recovers quickly.
 

dt17

A mate of mine.....
People saying that’s not a red card. Are you stuck 30 years in the past? It’s a dividing slide from behind, Leeds player is airborne and yes his lead leg gets the ball but the trailing leg and the majority of his weight comes down on Elliott’s planted leg snapping his ankle. It’s a reckless tackle, it obviously meets the criteria of endangering an opponent as is displayed by the damage done. I don’t believe the tackle was malicious he’s not trying to hurt Elliott but it’s obviously dangerous and careless.

So dangerous the ref never even gave a foul at first.
 

SouthEast Jim

Well-Known Member
Sometimes bad accidents happen and that's what that was. It wasn't a mad lunge, it was a sliding tackle which had a horrendous outcome. There'll be a hundred worse tackles every weekend that don't result in a bad injury
 

Mickethius

Well-Known Member
People saying that’s not a red card. Are you stuck 30 years in the past? It’s a dividing slide from behind, Leeds player is airborne and yes his lead leg gets the ball but the trailing leg and the majority of his weight comes down on Elliott’s planted leg snapping his ankle. It’s a reckless tackle, it obviously meets the criteria of endangering an opponent as is displayed by the damage done. I don’t believe the tackle was malicious he’s not trying to hurt Elliott but it’s obviously dangerous and careless.
Snapping his ankle? Sure the medics said dislocation but don’t let the truth get in the way of your rant, even the lad himself has said it’s not a red card.
 

The_Hammer1990

Well-Known Member
Imo it was just one of those unfortunate outcomes. No intent or malice, the tackle wasn’t overly aggressive either.

Never a red card, ref collapsed due to the outcome of the tackle which isn’t right. Wouldn’t even say it was a yellow either tbh, but wouldn’t be against it being given.
 

John MacKenzie

Well-Known Member
Watched the tackle and replayed it frame by frame,was never a foul or a card of ant sort,once again a referee being influenced by others and the severity of the injury.
 

W78

Well-Known Member
Doesn't surprise me. I'm surprised Leeds appealed, there'd have been a media stushie if it'd been overturned.
Elliot himself has been on social media to say that (1) the Leeds player didn’t need to apologise as it was a freak accident; and (2) it was wrong for the ban to be upheld. I think that if the guy who is lying in hospital with his leg broken and his career in jeopardy doesn’t think it was a red card or a bad tackle some of the posters on here need to have a rethink.

I also think it speaks volumes for Elliot that he’s willing to so publicly stand up for the Leeds player when he could have easily sat in silence focusing on his own issues without any criticism. He deserves to make a full recovery and get his career back on track as soon as possible.
 

Peedzy

Well-Known Member
Elliot himself has been on social media to say that (1) the Leeds player didn’t need to apologise as it was a freak accident; and (2) it was wrong for the ban to be upheld. I think that if the guy who is lying in hospital with his leg broken and his career in jeopardy doesn’t think it was a red card or a bad tackle some of the posters on here need to have a rethink.

I also think it speaks volumes for Elliot that he’s willing to so publicly stand up for the Leeds player when he could have easily sat in silence focusing on his own issues without any criticism. He deserves to make a full recovery and get his career back on track as soon as possible.
A passionate response, and not one I'm unsympathetic to.

I'm glad Elliot bears no malice, I don't believe there was any malicious attempt by the Leeds player.

In my era, there would've been a 'play on' by the ref, However, times have changed. I understand why a red was given. The media are all over it, especially because the recipient was from a 'bigger' club.

Elliot is a credit to the profession, I hope he makes a full recovery.

Am I surprised it was a Red? - No

Am I surprised it was appealed - Yes.

Am I surprised the appeal was rejected - No.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W78

dt17

A mate of mine.....
A passionate response, and not one I'm unsympathetic to.

I'm glad Elliot bears no malice, I don't believe there was any malicious attempt by the Leeds player.

In my era, there would've been a 'play on' by the ref, However, times have changed. I understand why a red was given. The media are all over it, especially because the recipient was from a 'bigger' club.

Elliot is a credit to the profession, I hope he makes a full recovery.

Am I surprised it was a Red? - No

Am I surprised it was appealed - Yes.

Am I surprised the appeal was rejected - No.

So should any tackle resulting in a bad injury be a red card nowadays?

That's what happened in this case. The ref didn't even think it was a foul until he seen the way Elliott's leg had twisted.
 

Peedzy

Well-Known Member
So should any tackle resulting in a bad injury be a red card nowadays?

That's what happened in this case. The ref didn't even think it was a foul until he seen the way Elliott's leg had twisted.
No, definitely not.

Personally I thought it was yellow at most,

I do understand why a lot of tackles are now given as red now though. Deemed as reckless, out of control, or endangering the safety of others.

The 'shock factor' of the players and coaching staff swayed the refs decision and I fully understand why the decision and subsequent appeal decision unfolded in this instance. I'm not saying I
agree with it, but I'm not surprised in the least.
 

Coda

Well-Known Member
People saying that’s not a red card. Are you stuck 30 years in the past? It’s a dividing slide from behind, Leeds player is airborne and yes his lead leg gets the ball but the trailing leg and the majority of his weight comes down on Elliott’s planted leg snapping his ankle. It’s a reckless tackle, it obviously meets the criteria of endangering an opponent as is displayed by the damage done. I don’t believe the tackle was malicious he’s not trying to hurt Elliott but it’s obviously dangerous and careless.

Elliot himself didn’t think it was a red, he stuck 30 years in the past too?
 

W78

Well-Known Member
A passionate response, and not one I'm unsympathetic to.

I'm glad Elliot bears no malice, I don't believe there was any malicious attempt by the Leeds player.

In my era, there would've been a 'play on' by the ref, However, times have changed. I understand why a red was given. The media are all over it, especially because the recipient was from a 'bigger' club.

Elliot is a credit to the profession, I hope he makes a full recovery.

Am I surprised it was a Red? - No

Am I surprised it was appealed - Yes.

Am I surprised the appeal was rejected - No.
I agree with you but my issue is with punishment of any player based on an injury and media perception. The ref initially didn’t think it was a bad tackle and if Elliot’s leg hadn’t got caught and he played on then VAR isn’t getting involved to say it’s a red card.

We punish tackles that potentially endanger an opponent, irrespective of whether a player is injured. That’s the correct approach as it is the tackle you are trying to get out of the game because someone could get seriously hurt. But the other side of that is that you shouldn’t punish tackles that are not in that category just because a player gets injured.

IMO this is a world away from the tackles on Aaron Ramsey or Eduardo that resulted in similar injuries. This was, as Elliot said, a freak accident. Those were tackles always likely to cause serious injury.
 
Top