> He aimed for the ball.

Refs are racist desu. Had it been a hard working white lad like good ol ' Arry Kane it do had been a slap on the wrist and 60 excuses by commentators.

>Dat guilty look up

he had his eyes 100% on the ball the entire time though

>>78170870
Are you fucking retardet? All the commentators were defending this dindu.

>de gay

File: Screenshot_20170910-125609.png (582KB, 1080x1920px) Image search: [Google]

582KB, 1080x1920px

>>78170910
>I dint see im

*Looks directly at him*

>implying intent matters

Why do people who love soccer never just read the fucking rules? It is super short, just read the fucking thing.

Objectively, OBJECTIVELY, soccer fans are the most retarded bunch, and I say that as a soccer fan.

>>78170852
The hui played dead. If he'd gone up like a real man it's be a TAA free kick peach goal.

Doesn't matter if he intended or not, you can't lift your foot that high,that alone should get him a yellow card, for murdering the hue he deserved a red as well.

He deserves to be banned for as long as the player he injured is out for

>>78170956
>emre can will steal it and then belt it 100mph 10 miles wide

>>78171011
So about half an hour then?

>>78171011
Shit lads, grandads escaped from the old folks home

>>78171011
t. ABL

>>78171030
Goalkeepers Union actually

>>78170999
Glad to see someone actually referencing the laws of the game in here instead of talking about race

>>78171047
>Victim Mentality Union actually

ftfy

>>78170852
mane endangered his opponent going for the ball the way he did and it's probably a rightful red, but why does everyone ignore the goalkeeper full-on bodying him, outside his area, with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?

>>78171097
lol I'm retarded

>>78171011

>lé gruff English "journo" voice

BACK WHEN I WAS AH PLAYAH

>>78171097
Because hes a goalie

they always can do whatever they want

>>78170852
did the keeper slip ?

>>78171097
>with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?
Why would you comment without watching the incident? The keeper got the ball.

>>78171097
>with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?
But the keeper was the one who got to the ball first.

>>78171070
>literally being this much of a dumb nigger
wow lads, look at this dumb cunt

>>78171072
It's a Football match with clear and defined rules, not a war, you pathetic moron

If that was the case Ederson should have charged with his foot forwards also so as not to be the "Victim"

>going for the ball is an excuse to commit attempted murder
Also intent is nowhere in Law 12. All you have to do is have acted recklessly and had no regard to your opponents safety with excessive force to be sent off.
Excessive force is defined as any force that would be in danger of injuring an opponent.

Your intent doesn't matter, If you acted carelessly and recklessly and with excessive force it's an auto sending off.

Based ederson won the game with this move, stopped a 95% chance on goal and got rid of liverplops best player

people implying this isnt a straight red card are baiting right?

>>78171128
>saying the N word

kill yourself, asshole

File: asd.jpg (81KB, 858x500px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 858x500px

>>78170929
He sees to be looking up

>>78172433
C'mon, now we know you're baiting.

>>78172433
You have to be 18 or above to post on this site.

>>78172407
Some commentators were actually trying to argue it's not a red.

>>78170929
>I didn't see im

Is exactly the point. He should have looked before planting his foot randomly.

Try giving the excuse that you were looking at a hot girl's ass and didn't see them while plowing through pedestrians at a zebra crossing.

"he had the eyes on the ball" is the most retarded lying trash I've heard from football fans/coaches/players in a while. If he didn't think the keeper was coming at him, which he knew because he clearly looked, then he would have no reason to jump that high to catch the ball.

>>78172462
Most pundits are Liverpool, no surprise they're biased to the point of idiocy.

>>78171097
>no attempt to play the ball
>he's the only one who plays the ball

>>78172478
He had to try. This is the EPL.

>>78170852
what he did was dumb, but you see in this replay he really only had eyes on the ball.

>>78172532
Mane would have played the ball if he had got to it first. Then it would have been Ederson headbutting the side of Mane's leg and people would have said, "Gosh, lucky they didn't collide. That could have been bad. Well, let's get back to playing 11v11."

>>78170852

The goalie deserved it. Fuck goalies and their entitlement, always rushing into situations like that with no regard themselves either. The striker needs to defend himself, otherwise the goalie is going to lay him out and there wouldn't even be any consequences.

>>78172602
1) even if he did get the ball high foot is dangerous play, yellow if he doesn't hit a player red if he does.
2) but he didn't. therefore you're retarded.

>>78172621
>let me defend myself by extending my leg towards your face

>>78171097
Actually it's a tactic for goalkeepers to draw fouls in 50/50s like this where the GK is the last line of defence. It's easier for them to get fouls given for them. If anything, going for the ball in this scenario is the worst thing to do. Ederson is a smart lad.

>>78172687
That's dumb. Things aren't less dangerous because something bad takes place. If I shoot up a crowd, I should be given the same amount of punishment regardless of how many people I hit.

>>78170952
>American
>footy fan

haha no. you don't know shit about football, jog on ya cunt

Cahill didn't intend to go studs up into that Burnley players shin but if you play recklessly you will get a red, intent doesn't even come into it.

>>78172788
>if I speed on a road I should be given the same amount of punshiment regardless of whether I kill someone or not

it's the laws of the game, period. You never played football if you think high foots are fine.

File: 21371117_1956909434520776_912445722027721282_n.jpg (84KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 960x540px

>he dindu nuffin
>almost murders the keeper

Ederson should get done for dangerous play as well. He was just as much the cause of the foot to the face as Mane.

>>78172801
But the outcome does seem to come into it. That's why people are judging it based on fact that Mane did make contact. If he had missed him just slightly they wouldn't have cared.

>>78172838
>it's the laws of the game
Is it the laws of the game or is it just the way referees feel at that moment in time? It just seems to be completely within the referee's discretion.

>if I speed on a road I should be given the same amount of punishment regardless of whether I kill someone or not
That's not quite the same. It's like I threw keys at your face. You'd be pissed regardless of whether or not I hit you. If Mane had missed only slightly, if Ederson had clattered him, no-one would have cared.

>>78172933
Yes, he dangerously led with his head to head the ball and managed to do so while going nowhere near mane except the nigger stuck out his studs and caught his face.

>being this much of a retarded scouser actually trying to pretend it's 'refball' because you didn't get away with murder again

>>78173003
Why is he putting his head in that position?

>>78172888
The guy was knocked out only. Not such a big deal. Stop being such a pussy.

>>78172933
>>96

>>78172888
still better than bravo

>>78173128
Probably to avoid getting decapitated by the impact of mane's foot?

>>78173128
Watch the clip.
He see's mane flying towards him and tries to evade but can't.
>Why was his head in that position
He's trying to head the ball away out of danger. It think he's entitled to expect not to get kicked in the head by an opponent.

>>78173180
And why does he need to avoid that? Did he fuck up so bad that his best option was less pain? Why did he put himself in such a dangerous position in the first place?

Are you trying to say it wasn't a 50/50? That's the only way they're not both responsible.

>>78173148
I give a fuck.

>>78173250
>why does he need to avoid that?
Because liverpool is a shit team that doesn't teach it's players the basics of sport.

>>78170852
This is why keepers need to stay in their fucking box and not fly around the pitch head first

>>78173250
>50/50
>Ederson won the ball
How was that a 50/50?
That's a 51/49 the the very least. He got nothing of the ball and all of Ederson's face.

>>78173280
His sacrifice killed the livershit title hope meme.

clear red card

>>78173289
One person always gets there first in a 50/50. You're twisting words.

If Ederson had slightly missed Mane's boot and went into his shin and been okay, there wouldn't have been a red card. Do any of you red card twats disagree?

>>78173369
Yeah, and the one that gets there first wins the prize of net getting sent off.
BUT HERP DERP WE MUST DIVE INTO 50/50 CHALLENGES BECAUSE MUH EPL PASSION AND FIRE

Protip: The best central midfielders and central defenders never dived into 50/50s because only retarded brainlets do that and get sent off because of it.

All you have to do to get the other player sent off is throw your fucking face into the path of a kick.

>>78172933
>Is it the laws of the game or is it just the way referees feel at that moment in time?
it's the laws of the game

>>78173474
>Yeah, and the one that gets there first wins the prize of net getting sent off.
That's your argument. That's fucking retarded. They are both equally put the other person in danger. You're stupid.

>>78173488
if you lower your head down to shin level and get kicked in the face, you're the one who is supposed to get a punishment for dangerous play, in this case the nigger threw a head high kick

>>78173530
Why are they so inconsistent then? They only seem to apply it when contact as made. Take something that's actually consistent: two footed tackles. Players get sent off regardless of whether contact is made. When it comes to high feet they don't have a clear-cut way of saying what is okay and what is not. And that's why I ask if it's in the laws of the game.

>>78173543
>equally put the other person in danger
cool story brah, ederson's head really put mane's foot in danger.

>being this much of a brainlet

Typical case of Liverpool claiming "We dindu nuffin". Pathetic club

>>78173565
Players do that all the time to get to the ball though. In this case Mane was already behind the entire opposition and still outside the box. it's not a situation where you can expect the goalkeeper to be and shove his face into the path of your foot.

>>78173624
>one person got hurt therefore that person was more put in danger than the other
If we meet at high noon and my bullet goes into you but not yours into me, do I thereby put you in more danger? You stupid.

>>78170952

It matters on the color of the card. I celebrate Hillsborough but that wasn't red.

>>78173666
you can't be this retarded, the only reason mane kicked that high was because he saw the goalkeeper coming and he saw that ederson would get to the ball first if he didn't do that shit.

>>78173669
high foot is dangerous play you dumb scouser, heading a ball at head level isn't.

>>78173741
He was going for the ball you retard. That's why he kicked that high and as I said before it happens a million times. Only reason it was a red is because Ederson went down like a sack of shit and english refs being amongst the worst on the planet.

File: battiston-schumacher-le-drame-de-seville-lors-de-la-demi-finale-france-rfa-le-8-juillet-1982--photo-archives-rl-.jpg (458KB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 1600x1067px

Anyone remember Toni Schumacher killing French NT?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UnMBH3EGWM

>>78173543
>They are both equally put the other person in danger.
Please tell me you don't actually believe this.

>>78173825
>He was going for the ball
completely irrelevant, read the rules of game.
also he missed it.

>>78173771
So if no-one is around him and he controls the ball he should be sent off.

>inb4 he knew Ederson was there
And so did Ederson know Mane was there. He endangered himself. It's a 50/50 which means no-one is more responsible for Ederson being endangered.

Consider a player trying to kick the ball with another player in between and the player in between getting hit in the face. Everyone would blame the kicker. Consider the kicker being closer to the ball and the other player 'putting his head in'. Everyone would call the second player brave ('blaming him'). IF IT'S A 50/50 THEY ARE EITHER BOTH TO BLAME OR NEITHER IS TO BLAME.

>dumb scouser
Not a scouser you dumb Hue monkey. Check your digits, faggot.

Is this the first time someones got a red without there being any intent?

last man reds i guess. and 2 footers but 2 footers are always reds

>>78173887
You have to apply the rules to the individual situations. If you want consistency then you have to card the players any time they put their foot up.

File: sfp.jpg-large.jpg (199KB, 1152x2048px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1152x2048px

Anyone who thinks it wasn't a red is a literal retard.

File: mane.png (378KB, 500x491px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 500x491px

How much do you need to be crouching down before it counts as your fault?

>>78173930
Id guess most reds are unintended

>>78173887
>read the rules of game
And they say 'dangerous' and 'reckless' which is vague. There has to be a consensus about what constitutes dangerous and reckless and is this case there is not. It's not like the case of two footed tackle where the player is sent off irrespective off hurting the other player. Here the standard is: Well, he knocked him out so it must be bad! If he missed by 2 inches and Ederson got a shin in the mouth it's only a yellow card because I don't feel so bad!

File: push-overs.jpg (182KB, 1108x760px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1108x760px

>>78173921
learn to read please:
>high foot is dangerous play you dumb scouser, heading a ball at head level isn't.

>>78173936
You can't lift your foot during a tackle, moron.

>>78174032
>high foot is dangerous play
Except in the cases where it isn't. Thanks for clearing that up!

File: z6vJF9v.jpg (438KB, 900x1200px)

438KB, 900x1200px

>>78173966
Literal refs know more than spee desu

If someone were to fly in like this >>78172442 at someones knee, there would be no arguments at all that it was a red. It was reckless and not controlled. Because he hit him in the head for some reason retards are defending him.

>>78174032
See >>78173974

Ederson has both knees bent, leaning over with his head down. He's way under head height.

>>78174046
It's not a tackle you fucking idiot.

>>78172407
yes

>>78174076
>a player who was running had his knees slightly bent

how the fuck do you run you fat imbecile

>>78174083
A ball dispute, wathever. You can lift your foot to reach the ball as long as you isn't in a ball dispute.

>>78174076
Mane's leg is at the height of his own face and he's jumping 2ft off the ground, he fucked up and liverpool shat the bed just admit it

>>78174056
/thread

well as far as the discussion goes, but continue to shitpost

>>78174056

>trusting referees when they don't even card players for diving

This is worse than nani's red card so yeah it's defiantly a red card

File: 1452993944573.png (133KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 306x306px

>>78170999
>you can't lift your foot that high
Yes, I agree. give yellow cards for every Bicycle kick and high volley attempt

You dumb fucking coffee nigger...

>>78173966
This shit was brought in for the purpose of getting rid of tackles where the commentator reasoned about it being acceptable by saying, "Well, he got the ball." Doesn't apply.

>a tackle or challenge
>challenge
Is this supposed to be clear? What does this mean? /sp/ just told me to read the rules and it would be all clear.

>>78174228
If they boot a defender or keeper in the face instead of getting the ball then yes

>>78174228
>muslims in charge of understanding Football

He is your (you) Ahmed.

Are niggers never not violent? Christ, go back to AIDsfrica already you low iq subhumans.

>>78174290
>Here

>>78174272
it wasn't a challenge then? liverpool fandom is a mental illness

>>78174056
literally says yellow card for dangerous play when the rules state it's a yellow for reckless play and red card for dangerous play

>>78174216
Not every contact is a red card you shitter.

>england is more physical
lel

Turns out that the britbongs are the biggest queers in football.

>>78174334
And what's that? A shoulder barge?

>liverpool fandom
There you go again.

>>78174274
So the only thing a keeper or a defender has to do is to jump into the attacking player and the attacking player get a card? Fuck off.
>>78174290
Come to Sweden and we'll see who people think is a muslim of the two of us fucking favela monkey

>the monkey sticking up for his chimp brother

>>78174542
>So the only thing a keeper or a defender has to do is to jump into the attacking player and the attacking player get a card?
If the defender of keeper get the ball, and the attacker kicks them in the face, yes. Obviously.

>this fucking thread

If it wasn't a red the ref wouldn't have shown a red card.

Eat shit fucking lazy scouse scum.

>>78174542
If it's the other way round and Ederson bumps his shoulder into Mane's head and knocks him, no-one gives a fuck. In fact, no-one would have given a fuck in the card was yellow. It's just they think Scousers are butthurt at the decision because they lost and want to tell them to shut up.

>>78170852
That's unfortunate but he was looking at the ball the entire time

>>78174684
>no one gives a fuck
It would be red card if mane won the ball because he was the last man and it was preventing a goalscoring opportunity.

Stop lying, shitter scousecunt.

File: Capturar.png (579KB, 645x434px) Image search: [Google]

579KB, 645x434px

He didn't even look where he it him. He already knew, he looked straight to the ref.

>>78174783
Understandable with english refs. They are fucking awful and Moss didn't disappoint in the tradition of retarded decision making.

I was happy to see Clattenshit fuck of to Saudi Arabia or whatever shithole he went to. That alone improved the quality of the CL.

>>78174776
If Ederson gets the ball then gets the player you fucking stupid cunt.

Nigga didn't even complain lmao.

Fucking disgusting sliperpoo fans make me sick just take the fucking L already.

Why wasn't Neuer sent off here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14WDjvsxCQk

Listen to the music, he's evil!

>>78174305
what the fuck do you know about football, cletus? go back to fucking your fat sister

>>78174851
>If Ederson gets the ball
So? If he wasn't kicked in the face it wouldn't be red card?
Is that your stupid assessment of the situation?

Yeah if Abdul didn't fuck your mum, she wouldn't have given you herpes either.

>>78174960
absolutely fucking based vuvuzela

it would be a red card even if mane's foot missed ederson and everyone was ok, right?

>>78174992
So Ederson knocks Mane out with his shoulder and it's not a red card? Nice consistency.

Liverpool is shot and filled with literal dindu fans

>>78175078
Yes it would and everyone here would be arguing for it to be given if it wasn't. It's not like if there was 5cm's distance between Mane's foot and the onrushing monkey's foot, which is too little to be controllable, they would shrug their shoulders and forget about it.

>>78172687
>>78172933
That's a red even if it doesn't hit. The rule says "hit or attempt to hit"

>>78173488 this ->>>78173565, if you lowered your head in that case....you get the yellow for being a moron

say ederson stayed on is goal line and mane did what he did, would that be ok?

or, since ederson did come out, and mane was already running at full tilt, what else should mane have done to try to control the ball and score?

>>78175110
>It's not a red card?
If he wont he ball why would it be a red card?
It's an aerial challenge for the ball

And nobody has ever died from a fucking shoulder to the face.
Your fucking false equivalence bullshit is literal kindergarten tier bullshit dumb scouse cunt.

>>78175175
>That's a red even if it doesn't hit.
In practice, right? If Mane is only
just slightly wide the referee gives a red card for sure, right?

>>78173930
The rule talks about putting a player's integrity in danger. It doesn't even require intent, it can be by negligence too.

>>78173974
Any foot above hip level already counts as "too high"

>>78174960
That's right, stay in your AIDs infested, 3rd world, 60 average iq shithole you violent, rape prone, backward savage nigger. Stay in hell.

>>78175174
did you mean "onrushing monkey's face"?

i've seen collisions like this before where the a player has a dangerous leg out but pulls it back just in time.
i think zlatan did it last year and was called for a foul or something, right?

>>78170873

idk, I'd prob make that face too if I accidentally hurt someone let alone kicked them in the face.

making that family guy shin sound like oooooh is it bad?

>>78175217
Are you kidding me? The force is the pretty much the same. A player can easily get knocked out by a shoulder like that. Watch more football/sport.

>>78175271
>Any foot above hip level already counts as "too high"

No wonder we're seeing so many red cards.

>>78174960
It's funny because he is also fat

>>78175282
Exactly, Ederson is a monkey. Scousers are subhuman, all right. But, m8, Hues are subscouser.

File: Screenshot_20170910-125609.png (186KB, 381x505px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 381x505px

>>78172442
>Le really fast Nig kicking at really high speed

>>78175350
i'm not talking about the monkey part, i'll leave that alone. i'm saying you meant to say face, not foot.

>scousers are SO entitled that they believe that Ederson should just stay in his box and let Mane equalise

Baffling

File: zizu.jpg (109KB, 1968x1314px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 1968x1314px

is this legal?

>>78175391
No, the foot of Ederson. Ederson is a monkey, like all Brazil scum.

>>78175434
RED CARD THIS MAN

FUCKING DISGRACE BAN HIM FOR LIFE

>>78175350
fat scouse cunt
pathetic dindu apologist

>>78175328
It's funny because Mexico is more obese then America.

>>78171070
You are right, but still a nigger

>>78175425
Goalies should be banned from leaving their boxes desu like in hockey

>>78175434
Red card. Red him, lad. Fucking red him.

>>78175110
>So Ederson knocks Mane out with his shoulder and it's not a red card? Nice consistency
That's a yellow. Same for elbow unless it is deliberate, in which case it is a red

>>78175234
Yes. Red even if he misses. If he pulls his leg at the last second, might get a yellow but he left his leg extended at that crazy height.

>>78174905
Ref didn't see him. Just because you win the ball, it doesn't excuse you from using excessive force or dangerous play

>>78175434
>no keeper heading the ball

yes

>>78175434
Clearly a high foot.

That's a red in my book.

>>78175485
>says Scousers are subhuman
>haha u patetic scooser u are a dindu pologist

>>78173152
Yeah remember when you last beat him in the WC?

>>78175517
ok so how close to another player can you do this?

>>78175531
has a red ever been called for that move in the middle of the field with no one around?

anyone have that webm of zlatan doing the same thing last season but pulling his leg back just in time?

File: highfoot.jpg (95KB, 960x626px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 960x626px

>>78175605
No, but have something similar. This is not a red card either.

>>78175516
>Ref didn't see him.
GKs get away with that shit all the time, Neuer is just an example.

>That's a yellow
Why? The player would be knocked out either way. Unbelievable.

>Same for elbow unless it is deliberate
And Mane wasn't deliberate so no red card.

>Yes. Red even if he misses. If he pulls his leg at the last second, might get a yellow.
Zlatan did that for a disallowed goal and didn't get a yellow. If Mane didn't make contact, no-one would have cared.

>>78170852
that's a red for the goalkeeper desu

>>78175653
Another Man Utd thing is Shaw's leg break. Not a case of a high leg but similar because it wasn't considered dangerous. This is important because lots of these dummies think just because Ederson got knocked out like the Hue pussy he is it should be considered dangerous, although in lots of other like situations where no-one is hurt, people don't care. In fact, even if people are hurt, people don't get sent off.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VILxhD1L4O8
This challenge endanger Torres. Why wasn't Gimenez sent off?

>>78175653
>>78151202

>>78175779
>If Mane didn't make contact no-one would have cared

If the bullet didn't hit JFK he'd still be alive today.

>>78175836
Because it was a normal ball dispute, only reason why Torres passed out it's because he hit the head into the ground, filthy dumb scourse.

>>78175434
If someone's head is literally under ur boot, then No. White ppl understand this, Scousers aren't White

>>78175836
Because he didn't kick him in the head

American here. Why are goalies allowed to just charge right at you, slam into you, then you get carded?
What's wrong with a little contact, you faggot pussies?

>>78175839
Did you watch that game? Netherlands were setting out to murder Spain. Mane was just trying to control the ball.

>>78175863
It doesn't make sense to punish someone just for the misfortune of being slightly 5cm to the wrong side. That's why people think it's stupid when a player trying to perform a bicycle kick is yellow-carded just because some mong tries to stick his head in.

>>78175883
>normal ball dispute
Technical language from the Hue. Where's that in the rulebook?

>because he hit the head into the ground
His head hit the ground because he was knocked out and couldn't put his hangs out.

>>78175178
>or, since ederson did come out, and mane was already running at full tilt, what else should mane have done to try to control the ball and score?

can someone answer this for me?
liverpool already down 1-0 at that point. they need to tie the game, here is a golden chance, if he can nick the ball around the keeper he's through on goal and the game is 1-1. tie game away vs city. or he can pull out of the challenge and liverpool can lose 2-0 at least.

>>78175996
He still endangered him. It was a 50/50 and his head went into Torres' head. If two people go up to head the ball and their heads collide I guess the rule should be the one who isn't rolling around on the floor gets sent off. Hmm. Interdasting. I guess this 'filthy dumb scourse' is learning.

>>78176036
i did watch it. de jong wasn't sent off. same danger, only difference is xabi wasn't as injured as ederson.

>>78176036
Yeah you punish someone for reckless, carless conduct that's endangers another opponent. There's no risk to injury from missing someone by 5cm. You're a professional footballer and you can't realize that jumping head height without looking at what's in front of you on the pitch is dangerous?

>>78176049
>say ederson stayed on is goal line and mane did what he did, would that be ok?

Yes

or, since ederson did come out, and mane was already running at full tilt, what else should mane have done to try to control the ball and score?

Mane fucked up, both players are entitled to go for the ball but getting your leg up to face height whilst running full pelt is a gamble which didnt pay off

would you guys rather watch a sport where:
1. players pull out of a bunch of challenges they would normally make for fear of it being dangerous
2. players continuing making the same challenges but getting sent off for them
3. players continuing making the same challenges like this and at most yellow cards unless the ref thinks its intentional or something.

People always talk about intent while discussing reds which is the most retarded thing ever. Intent is impossible to prove and irrelevant to the punishment. If bad intentions do become obvious that should mean an additional penalty on top of the mandated red or yellow.

If you make or even almost make dangerous contact then its a red or yellow based on how dangerous it was/could have been. In any 50/50 your first concern should be the safety of your follow professional and not getting the ball.

In this case wold Mane have lead with his head with the same confidence he did with his foot? Probably not, because he values his safety. He lead with his foot because he didn't care about the GKs safety. This can be seen through his actions on the field not by trying to guess his intent.

>>78171097
If Mane got to the ball and the keeper followed into him the keeper gets a red. Or not because the rules are dumb and people get away with dodgy shit all the time. It's a deserved red maybe but then so much other stuff is.

You may as well ban overhead kicks for dangerous play. Elbows while trying to head the ball should be a red. Anyone trying to control the ball like Mane which they do a lot in the centre of the field, red.

>>78176256
>1. players pull out of a bunch of challenges they would normally make for fear of it being dangerous
Because that ensures players are actually trying to play football, not "getting stuck in"

>>78173974
I you slide for the ball, when it's on the floor, with both feet off the ground it's a red card. Why should this be any different.

>>78176256
go back to watching niggercollision, lardass

>>78176186
You seem to think risk means the bad thing actually occurring. Like if I shoot an arrow at you the risk doesn't exist unless I actually hit. Pretty retarded.

>You're a professional footballer and you can't realize that jumping head height without looking at what's in front of you on the pitch is dangerous?
And that's not what i'm saying. I'm saying when there is a 50/50 and are both trying their best to go for a ball. As is the case with Mane/Ederson.

>>78176178
And he should have been because he was being a reckless cunt.

>>78176258
>In this case wold Mane have lead with his head with the same confidence he did with his foot? Probably not, because he values his safety.
Good luck trying to control the ball with your head on a pass like that.

>>78176341
this desu, in both situations the player isn't in control

>>78176341
Because that's actually something that has been cleared up.

>>78176408
Neither is Ederson.

never trust an Hue

>>78176144
Last time i checked ur head is an unextendable part of ur body, unlike ur leg which you have a concsious choice to raise.

Basic Biology m8

>all of the nigger apologists ITTY

You are the reason niggers walk around and do whatever the fuck they feel like without consequences.

>>78176665
so as long as you try to play a ball with your head and you lose a 50/50 you're good?

>>78176665
So players can't not challenge for the ball in the air? I don't understand.

>>78176399
My point was players almost never go in for 50/50s with the head with the same speed and commitment they do when leading with the foot or elbow. Shows that you're able to discern dangerous play when it's dangerous to you.

>>78170852
No one is debating whether he went for the ball or not it's obvious he was, it is whether he should have been sent off or not, and yes he should. Coming up to him at that speed with your studs showing, not looking where you're going is so fucking stupid. Typical nogs.

>>78176639
oh here he is, everyone! the funny, outgoing brit making extreme quality posts for the community! isn't he something else?! I have a feeling that a Brit would unironically make a site like this and I feel like it would be genuine, hidden under a layer of over the top "I'm British so you can't use what I say against me cause us British chaps are never truly serious or are we? Cheerio!"-attitude.

can someone edit Liu Kangs screaming dropkick sound from Mortal Kombat 3 into this webm? i need it for reasons.

>>78176433
>Neither is Ederson
Mane didn't get fucked up and Ederson got the ball.
Stop talking shit.

>>78177063
It was stupid of Ederson to go for the ball too and put himself in danger. Ederson should have been sent off for reckless play towards himself.

>>78177134
>Mane didn't get fucked up and Ederson got the ball.
Again you find it hard to separate potentiality from actuality. Danger implies potential of harm so what you said is irrelevant.

>>78170852
Ederson will become a mediocre goalkeeper and lose his bravery in one on ones from this crash
screencap this post

>>78177025
Yeah they just jump into the other player and possibly elbow them, and it's never a red. I've seen it time and time again people going flying in, clearly out of control, and they get a yellow because the other player might not be badly injured.

At that point you're just giving reds because the other player is injured which isn't in the rules. Like I said, do a bicycle kick and no one gets kicked, do you still book for it? It's dangerous play you can't tell if someone is behind you, but we both know play would just go on. So are you then booking him only because he caught Ederson? If it's dangerous play you can give cards without any collision actually happening, but they very rarely do.

I'm not saying it wasn't a red but that referees are so inconsistent with how they apply them it's ridiculous.

>>78177168
If we followed the rules and Edersen caught Mane instead of the other way around, just running into him while Mane is in the air, he should get a red. Everyone knows though this simply wouldn't happen and everyone would throw a fit.

>>78177101
Says the dickhead who keeps calling me Scouse and using that against me.

>>78177168
IT'S one thing to willingly put yourself in danger and another to recklessly endanger another person

What this thread show us is that >>96 weren't enough.

>>78177343
>If we followed the rules and Edersen caught Mane instead of the other way around, just running into him while Mane is in the air, he should get a red. Everyone knows though this simply wouldn't happen and everyone would throw a fit.
Exactly. Same if Mane didn't touch him. These Hues and these Aussie faggots don't even understand this argument though and have yet to address it.

>>78177415
He should have been sent off for recklessly endangering Mane then. The guy is an asshole, Mane could have seriously hurt. I'm glad he got knocked out. Only thing that would have perfectly satisfactory is if Mane get knocked out too. I'm sure after they were both then being stretchered off the referee would have given a red card to each off them.

>>78177343
>At that point you're just giving reds because the other player is injured which isn't in the rules.
It's not in the rules but I don't see what's wrong with that. A player getting a head injury from another player's foot when not crouching is definitive proof of dangerous play.

>Like I said, do a bicycle kick and no one gets kicked, do you still book for it?
Bicycle kicks by their nature aren't half has fast and can almost never have the studs up.

>So are you then booking him only because he caught Ederson?
No but that's the most definitive proof of dangerous play. Without contact it's hard to establish how dangerous a play was.

>I'm not saying it wasn't a red but that referees are so inconsistent with how they apply them it's ridiculous.
A ref's job is to interpret the rules vis-a-vis what's happening on the field. It's going to be inconsistent by its very nature. VRA won't solve this either, might even make it worse.

>>78177951
>when not crouching
Well he certainly wasn't jumping.

>Bicycle kicks by their nature aren't half has fast and can almost never have the studs up.
I imagine actually getting kicked by any part of the shoe could cause a fair amount of damage. Studs or not shouldn't really matter in this case, they'd both be kicks to the head.

>Without contact it's hard to establish how dangerous a play was.
Fuck off no it's not.

>interpret the rules
They have fairly clear guidelines. Maybe these need to be made even clearer if Moss thinks it's a red and Clattenburg doesn't.

Also someone else did it today in the Swansea game and got a yellow. Red for the contact not the nature of the challenge apparently.

>>78173856
probably the single worst refereeing decision ive ever seen

apart from Gascoigne not getting sent off in the 1991 FA cup final!

fucking ref.....he robbed us....that red's why we let 5 in..........

>>78176907
As long as ur not about to kick someone in the head then yeah, if this was leg to leg neither player would have been sent off

>the victimship of the traveling scouse

ees a good guy la, dindu nuffin la, why was the keeper outside his box la, he should have let mane score la

>>78176868
If a ball is as head height, another player shouldn't be going to control the ball with his studs showing in the first place, it's a head to head challenge

>>78178237
You know for a fact if Mane and Ederson collided Mane would still get a yellow. Not some sort of Liverpool bias but if anyone collides with a keeper the keeper almost always have the ref on their side.

>>78178142
>Well he certainly wasn't jumping.
His head was about 6 feet off the ground at least.

>Studs or not shouldn't really matter in this case, they'd both be kicks to the head.
I disagree. Studs up towards another players head is way more dangerous in most situations.

>Fuck off no it's not.
Of course it is. It's a case of could this move have injured another player v/s this move did injure another player. Whether you like it or not the latter is a much easier decision.

>Maybe these need to be made even clearer if Moss thinks it's a red and Clattenburg doesn't.
That's the point, guidelines are just that a way to help guide the refs towards a uniform application of the rules. But it ultimately depends in their interpretation of the play on the field. There is always going to be room for multiple interpretations. The NFL with much clearer rules, much more regimented play and video referrals that go into minutes still has cases where multiple interpretations of stuff like pass interference are possible. Happens very commonly. Expecting better consistency in a fluid game like soccer without any assistance is retarded.

>>78171011
>fake being injured by Messi
>out for the rest of the season

heh, nothing personnel, concha

if mane pulled out of that challenge like theo walcott we'd all be calling him a pussy and after liverpool lost 2 or 3-0 we'd all be piling on.

>>78179531
>Studs up towards another players head is way more dangerous in most situations.
And I've seen players knocked out from simple collisions. Studs or no studs a high kick like a bicycle kick is dangerous.

>Of course it is.
It's not. If someone goes flying in like Mane you know that's dangerous. Someone accidentally throws an elbow dangerous. You don't need someone to get hit to know this.

>Expecting better consistency in a fluid game like soccer without any assistance is retarded.
It's not the referees even have to go and explain their decisions in reports after the game. They simply need to be told whether that was a right decision or not. Instead the FA absolutely babies them and they make shit decisions week after week. I can't remember the last weekend of PL football where there was no outrageous referee decision that fucked the game.

I'm guessing you didn't see the one in the Swansea game by the way you didn't reply. I don't blame you because it was bound to be boring as shit but go find a highlight of it if you can. It's almost exactly what Mane did and he gets a yellow. So one of these referees is wrong and I'd put money on neither of them being told whether they made the wrong decision or not.

>>78175506
Goalies aren't banned from leaving their box in hockey. They can't go past the halfway line, and in American leagues they can't go into the corners.

>>78177343
>>78177951
>>78178142
>>78179531
>>78180078
autism

>>78173682

This is objectively wrong, you dimwit

>>78179332
That's the way it should be desu

>>78180735
No thanks. I don't really want a game where the keeper plays for a foul on every single corner.

>>78170852

ARE YOU FUCKING SORRY?!?!

>>78180078
>And I've seen players knocked out from simple collisions. Studs or no studs a high kick like a bicycle kick is dangerous.
Bad things can happen no matter how careful you are. The point of cards is to disincentivize dangerous play. Whether that danger comes from callousness or cuntery is irrelevant.

> You don't need someone to get hit to know this.
You don't but if someone does get hit it makes it much easier to determine it. I'm not saying that getting hit is the only way to determine foul play but it makes it much easier.

>Instead the FA absolutely babies them and they make shit decisions week after week.
It's probably because of how much controversy each questionable decision attracts from players and fans that the FA need to protect them.

And you're right I didn't see the Swansea collision I'll see if I can find it. But it doesn't change my point about interpretation always being prone to inconsistency.

>>78180622
>any civil discussion with points being addressed is autism

This is why Brazil couldn't make the step up from developing country to a developed one despite having all the ingredients to do so.

>>78180971
>FA need to protect them
If I fuck up at work I'd probably get in trouble for it. Referees have to fuck up unbelievably hard for anything to happen and that's why they get so much stick, because they're awful.

It doesn't have to be inconsistant though. It's just Moss is a fat cunt who likes to make the game about himself.

>b-but he was going for the ball, it wasnt intentional , that aint a red

by that fucktarded logic 90% of red carded tackless shouldnt have been red since players were trying to win the ball and just mistimed it

>>78173930
Nani against Madrid

>>78181363
No ones saying it should be a red because it wasn't intentional, or if they are they're wrong. People are saying that it'd usually be a yellow. Someone did it again today only difference is they didn't catch the other person and got a yellow.

>>78181293
>If I fuck up at work I'd probably get in trouble for it
Your work isn't being scrutinized by millions live and after the fact. If it was, your employers would probably have to be more protective of their asset.

>It doesn't have to be inconsistant though.
It kind of does when you consider the speed the game is being played at and decisions are taken on the interpretation of rules on the fly. And the rules aren't as watertight as you're making them out to be.

>It's just Moss is a fat cunt who likes to make the game about himself.
I agree to this in general. I can excuse any error by a ref because of the mitigating circumstances I mentioned above. What I can't excuse is when a glorified bureaucrat tries to act like he's a star just because he shares the screen and field with them.

>>78181698
They don't need to be that protective. They're grown adults if they make a wrong decision they should know that they have. The fact that they know they're not going to get punished in any way for being consistently awful just allows them to continue being awful.

There were 8 minutes of stoppage after he red carded Mane. There are at least 3 other officials they can talk to about the challenge and what their thoughts are, each knowing the rules themselves. They don't have to be made in a split second he has the chance to go speak to any of them. But instead he took it on himself to decide it's definitely a red. I honestly think if Ederson had got up straight away Mane would've got a yellow.

Honestly he's shit in every game he's in. I usually just sit there waiting for him to make some awful decision that wrecks the game.

>>78181073
kys obesecunt

> 300+ discussion on /sp/

Ref should have better thought about his decision ...
Would be interesting to see what VAR would have done..

File: 1490637116453.jpg (136KB, 356x378px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 356x378px

I don't understand the argument against this as a red. How does 'intent' even factor into dangerous play?

>He was just doing jumping flying kicks, he didn't mean to hit anybody.
>He was just randomly throwing his elbows around, he didn't mean to hit anybody!
>He was just going in studs up and two footed as a lark, m8! he didn't even know he'd break his legs

Not to mention he was late as well, because Ederson got to the ball first.
Studs up + late + high boot = red any fucking day of the week. Intent doesn't factor into the decision.

>English football
>starts with a hoof

Shocking.

>>78182820
It has to be a red card. Think about it. If an outfield player can do that, the goalkeeper can do it, then the league will not have any strikers with heads or knees or torsos.

>>78175434
What a GOD!

>tfw you had the chance to see him live..


...aahhh...better than sex desu

>>78183131
But EPL is more about entertainment than football. Would pay 5€ extra to watch players literally knocking themselves out as long as they play the ball. Injured/dead players should be excluded from subs etc.
Commercial Football needs to get more violent for the US market.
Ppv death matches etc.

>>78182952
The argument isn't about intent at all, it's that most referees give a yellow for it. Someone else did it today and got a yellow. If this is a red so was the one today. All I want is some consistency.

>>78172433
Go back to plebbit you stupid nigger

>>78177168
>It was stupid of Ederson to go for the ball too and put himself in danger. Ederson should have been sent off for reckless play towards himself.
These are the people we discuss sports with every day on espee

>>78179332
If Mane plays the ball with his head, the keeper gets there much earlier. So Mane would just be late to the challenge. That's a card any time

>>78180841
KEK

>>78176258
>Intent is impossible to prove and irrelevant to the punishment
This isn't true, and you'd know it if you've ever played the game. If I don't play the ball and hit the defender instead, there is a clear intent to hurt the player. If you are playing a ball you have no cchance of winning, and deliberately leave your leg extended towards the player, not only are you being reckless you also did it in purpose (like Mane).

>>78176804
It's just a fucking sport, you demented fat piece of shit.

>>78189422
t.nigger

>>78189533
t. nobody gives a shit

>>78170852
I watched the video. He dindu nuffin

>>78170852
>I did not knew that in a divide ball when I and the keeper are running full speed to catch it, that if a raised my foot to head level I would have a high chance of knocking the fuck outta him.
You are judging this as if the nigga had the reasoning capacity of an infant.
I knew the dangerous plays and when not to go full berserk into a play because the danger of badly injuring the rival was high since I was 11 aprox.

>>78170952
do yanks still take penalties from beyond the actual penalty spot now and you think you can come in here and start talking about "soccer ball" like that? fuck off back to baseball pussyole

File: Slips the cup away.png (250KB, 583x366px) Image search: [Google]

250KB, 583x366px

>He aimed for the ball

File: klopplel.jpg (103KB, 850x512px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 850x512px

he dindu nuffink la 'ee aimed for the ball la

>>78179332
The gk only get refs protection inside the box. Did you start to follow this game yesterday?

>niggers

why wasn't this a red?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14WDjvsxCQk

>>78170852
what happened after this? because he clearly kicked the goalie in the face on purpose.

american btw so im an expert

>>78172788
No? If you hit one person and don't kill them, it's attempted murder, GBH and ABH. If you hit 10 people and kill 7, it's a terrorist attack, 7 counts of murder and attempted murder and so on. You're a fucking retard.

Law 12 says intent is not fucking relevant and Mane was doing a dangerous play. I have come to the conclusion you're just shitposting.

>>78174056
And the rules state that you could book people for diving. Yet Newcastle players fell over in the box, no penalty given, therefore the AUTOMATIC response should be a yellow card for diving. Refs ignoring the rules =! the rules. The rules state it's a red card and the ref got it right.

>>78174776
Last man is not part of the rules any more. It's all about goalscoring opportunity.

Goalies are the QBs of euroball. Fuck em

>>78175779
Except everyone who wasn't a fucking retard called the Shaw leg break tackle a clear red and a penalty. Idiot

>nazi scum posting this when neuer literally knee'd someone in the fucking jew at the world cup, INSIDE THE BOX
>nazi scum posting this when battiston literally got fractured vertibrae and missing teeth at the world cup in 82
>not a single yellow, in either case

Why does this faggot GK get to lower his head to get out of a scoring opportunity? Clearly misstimed his run, noticed he was too late to kick it away so he resorted to being a faggot and lowered his head when he had no business doing so. Reminds me of that pathetic MU defender heading the ball at foot height, would Giroud get a red for kicking his head?

>>78170910
if you've ever played a sport, you know he saw the keeper.
there's no way he didn't.

>>78200079
Yes and being the last man preventing a striker through on goal is preventing a goalscoring opportunity. If anything the last man rule is expanded not reduced.

>>78170852
shouldve been banned for the season, what the fuck

>>78170852
what a fucking idiot, should've competed in the air via head, was saying or weeks who needs Coutinho when you have Mane but thought he was a more clever player than that

not a red

>>78173974
sorry, flying karate kicks aren't allowed in the beautiful game you disgusting scouser mong

>>78170852
deserves a 10 match ban. fucking hack of a manager in klopp probably told his players to harm everyone as much as possible.

>>78200185
No, they didn't. Look at this thread: http://www.redcafe.net/threads/uefa-name-hector-moreno-man-of-the-match.409548/
A lot of the Man Utd fans are quite magnanimous. They can separate the horrific outcome from the type of tackle which was made. It's only a bitch like you that can't separate Ederson being knocked out from the numerous other similar instances where no-one cared.

>>78200488
>>96

Fucking scousers coming out in force to defend this. Do any of you sad, sorry lot know anything about football?

>There was no intent

What in the fuck ever made you think that mattered? Do you retards know literally anything?

You are never by any means allowed to endanger another player, be it intentional or not. Under the current rules, Mane would've been sent off even if his foot hadn't made contact (although the full extent of this rule is often not enforced)

t. actually played football at a competitive level for years while you were at home creating depressions in the couch


96 get

>>78200227
>tfw no one bites on your bait
git gud nigger

>>78171097
>ignore the goalkeeper full-on bodying him
If a goalie touches a player in the box if said player touched the ball first (never mind it being completely outside of the goal with no chances to make anything out of it, beside a pen that is) it's always a penalty.
Referees know it's unfair, so they keep the blind eye on goalies bodying players in cases such as this.

>>78174056
>Mark Inconsistenttenburg

The thing is that it's not defined. You can say dangerous and reckless because and sure, i'll give you that, but is it dangerous and reckless in a discernible way that we can then extend to other, what we will call, like situations? The answer is no and therefore it's not a rule that you can enforce with any sense. That is why there is a disagreement.

File: 1432596449342.jpg (5KB, 158x152px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 158x152px

>>78171097
>but why does everyone ignore the goalkeeper full-on bodying him, outside his area, with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?

are you thick in the head? both players had attempted to play the ball. the gk was the one who won the contest so it's mane at fault for not winning the ball when going in with a retarded foot first challenge like that. if mane won the ball and kicked it but the gk body slammed him then the gk most likely would have got the red for missing the ball as he would be considered last defender (or player) and it would be looked at as obstruction.

>>78200599
It's irony then.

>>78200597
Yes you stupid mong, It's at the referee's discretion.

>>78200597
>a boot to the face
>cannot be defined as categorically dangerous

kill yourself my main man, kys

>>78200620
You are completely missed the point, like many other people. It's not the boot to the face, it's the foot up in an attempt to control the ball when there is someone else around that you could collide with. You guys seem insouciant when it comes to the causes but appalled when it comes to the effects. You can't just take issue with something because it goes wrong and shrug your shoulders. Not only are you doing this but it seems you are REVELLING in your own whimsical conclusion.

>>78200615
>stupid mong
Redundant much?

>referee's discretion
If it's wholly at his discretion then then the laws change from one game to the next and you cannot 1. Blame Mane 2. Punish Mane. You don't just get to say something is the rule because you feel like it on that day.

>>78200597
>but is it dangerous and reckless in a discernible way that we can then extend to other, what we will call, like situations?
Yes

so much refball its a fucking joke. Funny how only shitcunt Manurefag Neville stuck to his guns. Not Carra though the turncoat cunt he even said he was "persuaded". Sky bent as fuck

>LFCTREBLE

>>78174960
South Africa bringing the heat

this thread cements the fact liverpool fans are the most cancerous fans in the top 5 leagues and they're actively killing the bpl. if mane had pulled out a gun and shot the goal keeper they'd still say "oh why is he in the way of the bullet".

genocide them all.

>>78200712
There are smart mongs that are high functioning and potato retards you stupid mong.

>>78170852
>>78170929
>>78172442
>>78172888
>>78173974
>>78174783
THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE THE KEEPER USING THE SAME COLOUR AS THE GRASS.
WHO THE FUCK THOUGH IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO CAMOUFLAGE THE KEEPER?

>>78201436
colour blind niggers shouldn't be allowed to play football.

>>78175588

yes, Spain ended up winning that WC.
How many WC do you have again my brown amigo?

>>78200070
Terrorist attack isn't just hurting or killing a lot of people.

It is just using violence in order to promote a political goal. Even if you kill no one.

This isn't "law" or anything like that.

Player 1 is going to kick the ball from a high position to keep pressure on the goal.

Goalie feels he needs his head going to the ball, where the other guy is targeting, goalie gets there first, but his head is now in the balls position , therefore the kick hit him instead.

>>78200518
Running at high speeds towards a common target is dangerous in itself, therefore the sport has a rule against playing the sport if that is the case.

File: 441F682900000578-4870608-The_Newcastle_midfielder_was_travelling_at_speed_as_he_raised_hi-a-1_1505067512970.jpg (48KB, 632x356px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 632x356px

lmao scouse fuming this doesn't get red carded

>>78200712
Are you retarded? I'm gonna put this n greentext so you cant miss it
>it doesn't matter even if he was just trying to control the ball. It's a red card
You cannot fly through the air at head height, doing a flying kick, with your kicking leg outstretched and studs up, with your other leg in no way touching the ground or in a position to slow/control your movement, at an opponent. You cannot flying kick your opponent anywhere, let alone in the head. It would be dangerous play and a red cars if it was at knee height or head height or chest height. The fact it was at head height, and you're still complaining, shows up Scousers for what they are. Accidentally retarded or purposely idiotic

File: era.jpg (51KB, 627x352px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 627x352px

you now remember the homosexual nazi killing a fat zebra
ERA