Match Thread Coventry City - Middlesbrough Match Thread - Saturday 3rd May (60 Viewers)

steve101

Well-Known Member
If there was a coordinated and collective blowing air, would it reach the pitch? Just thinking if a Boro player shoots and everyone blows, would it take the pace off?
 

Alkhen

Well-Known Member

Viktor17

Well-Known Member
Id expect Thomas, MVE and Lati to be ok

EMC - think its a pain thing, so if an injection can get him through and there is only really value in doing that if hes going to start - then so be it. Sounds like may need op perhaps in close season.
 

skyblue_55

Well-Known Member
EMC might have been missed & more than likely, is to continue on the treatment table for & beyond Saturdays game , but I can’t really remember a season , when we have so many options , on our left hand side ?
Paterson , whether starting or as a sub , knows where the net is & his experience in games like these is priceless.
Hadji , possibly his best position is the left , but certainly needs to do more than of late .
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
EMC might have been missed & more than likely, is to continue on the treatment table for & beyond Saturdays game , but I can’t really remember a season , when we have so many options , on our left hand side ?
Paterson , whether starting or as a sub , knows where the net is & his experience in games like these is priceless.
Hadji , possibly his best position is the left , but certainly needs to do more than of late .
I'd sooner see Wright up front in place of the ineffective Simms and EMC or Pato on the left.
But I doubt Frank will give Pato a start at this stage of the season.
 

ccfcricoh

Well-Known Member
i am by no means a physio or medical person, but at the JSB day last Wednesday, EMC could barely walk - i dont think we see him again on Saturday
 

skybluelee

Well-Known Member
Monday, so not totally up to date but post Luton:

Not
Not that you can tell from that website which is borderline undecipherable but I'm pretty sure those were Lampard's comments at the weekend rather than anything new?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Show me a law that mentions “intentional”

The law says “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. Which do you think applies here?

Here’s the exemplification:

  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
  • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
 

Johhny Blue

Well-Known Member
The law says “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. Which do you think applies here?

Here’s the exemplification:

You conveniently missed two very important parts. “Trips or attempts to trip” and “in the consideration of the referee”
It was a tough call to swallow and “in the consideration” of many referees it may have gone unpunished but by the literal letter of the law it was a correct decision.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
You conveniently missed two very important parts. “Trips or attempts to trip” and “in the consideration of the referee”
It was a tough call to swallow and “in the consideration” of many referees it may have gone unpunished but by the literal letter of the law it was a correct decision.

No you’re misreading the rule as a whole. Here it is in full;


“A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
  • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
  • a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
  • holds an opponent
  • impedes an opponent with contact
  • bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
  • throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object
See also offences in Law 3”

Any of those offences has to be carried out in a manner that is “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. If that wasn’t the case then simply “tackles or challenges” would be a foul. One player tripping over another isn’t in and of itself a foul without carelessness recklessness or excessive force from the opponent.
 

Johhny Blue

Well-Known Member
No you’re misreading the rule as a whole. Here it is in full;


“A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
  • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
  • a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
  • holds an opponent
  • impedes an opponent with contact
  • bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
  • throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object
See also offences in Law 3”

Any of those offences has to be carried out in a manner that is “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. If that wasn’t the case then simply “tackles or challenges” would be a foul. One player tripping over another isn’t in and of itself a foul without carelessness recklessness or excessive force from the opponent.
I’m not misreading anything. In the consideration of the referee it was careless and a trip.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
No you’re misreading the rule as a whole. Here it is in full;


“A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
  • Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
  • Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
  • Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences:
  • a handball offence (except for the goalkeeper within their penalty area)
  • holds an opponent
  • impedes an opponent with contact
  • bites or spits at someone on the team lists or a match official
  • throws an object at the ball, opponent or match official, or makes contact with the ball with a held object
See also offences in Law 3”

Any of those offences has to be carried out in a manner that is “careless, reckless, or using excessive force”. If that wasn’t the case then simply “tackles or challenges” would be a foul. One player tripping over another isn’t in and of itself a foul without carelessness recklessness or excessive force from the opponent.
You can definitely argue it's careless and he impedes an opponent with contact.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top