Wanyama's red card

This is where I think you can point out a major flaw in the rule. Clearly Vic's tackle on Sunday wasn't dangerous, he was going for the ball and won it and got none of the man, yet the referee sends him off purely because it could have been dangerous.

So what's the difference between that and say for example an overhead kick? If someone slightly misjudges one of those then an opposing player could be left with a faceful of studs or a serious head injury. It's clearly a 'dangerous' technique but if it goes wrong then all that's ever given is a foul for a high boot. So why is a 2 footed challenge so different if they're both, in theory, dangerous?

Ridiculous that people get sent off purely for going in 2 footed if they execute the tackle well.

 

Only reason why he gave bocanegra a red card was to make stats look better.. neither of the red cards was proper sending offs. 3 red and one yellow in one game ?

 

Would it have been a straight red card if a hun did it? I don't think so.

 

This is a genuine question because I cannot remember it exactly. But was Wanyama's challenge any worse then McElbows challenge which effectively ended Kayal's season?

 

The problem is referees are clamping down big time on that sort of challenge wether the ball is won or not, all they seem to see is two feet off the ground, it needs one referee to have the balls to say no.

 

It was a red, 2 footed is always a red in my book. The thing that gets me is that whittaker goes over the ball and stamps on Wanyamas shin and nothing is done?

 

* sake, he went in two footed. His studs were clearly showing, unless he had his legs tucked up under his knees.

It was stupid, reckless and naive. Hope he learns from it.

 

I think the reaction from the players/club tells you all you need to know. There is minimal protest from the players and the club aren't appealling it either, but are appealling Cha's.

The ref could of gave a yellow, but... he's justified for giving the red.

 

They weren't though. His feet were on the floor, his studs weren't up.

 

One of the reasons you get a straight red regardless if you won the ball or not is to discourage players from ever making that challenge.

What if wanyama got away with that challenge and next week some youth player or even another professional has in the back of their mind that wanyamas challenge was ok and goes through some lad and snaps his leg in 2.

the margin for error is very little in that kind of challenge and can have horrible outcomes as we have seen in the past.

 

The rule is if you go in 2 footed it's a red however wanyama's wasn't a lunge he never left the ground and he took the ball without touching whittaker surely the referee should be given some grounds to make the judgement himself as to wether it is a good challeneg which Wanyama's was and not just have to decide that if its 2 footed its a red without even thinking.

 

The same could be said of any kind of tackle. If Wanyama had only lead with one foot in that challenge, the result would have been exactly the same except there wouldn't have been a foul. If someone makes a hard, but fair challenge, it's not even a foul, yet we have seen even challenges on the floor, studs not showing can lead to horrible injuries (e.g. Aaron Ramsey). It should be about whether the tackle was dangerous and whether or not the player was in control. In Wanyama's case the tackle was not dangerous and he was very much in control.

 

Cha's was never a sending off (although he was exposed and shouldn't have started but that's a separate issue) but don't think we can have any argument over Victor's. It was wreckless and there was no way back in the game for us after that. I was up the back of the top tier and it looked like a sending off from there and the highlights confirmed it for me. What I would say is that Whittaker's tackle wasn't much better and was also dangerous, he was lucky to get away with his challenge.

 

we can debate this to the end of the season and still not come to agreement but the fact is if it was a the other way about and the hun player did not get sent off we would be shouting all sorts.

 

100% spot on.

 

No, we wouldn't. As it was a perfectly good tackle.

 

Sorry mate

 

It for me was an excellent challenge, full contact with the ball, no contact with the player, if a rangers player did that to a Celtic player, yeh you would get mad wanting him to get sent off but once you calm down and look at it again, how can a player get sent off without actually touching the opposing player?

All of this intent and dangerous play is highly subjective and refs take the easy way out.