Match Thread City v Doncaster Rovers Saturday 30 July 2022 @ 3.00pm

Both feet were on the floor initially but clearly raises his studs after he has kicked the ball and follows through to leave something on Paddy. I wouldn't go so far as to say he meant to injur him that badly but it was nasty and a red all day that could end Paddy's career.

 

I don’t know why anyone thinks this isn’t an out of control tackle endangering an opponent thus a sending off offence. How many times do people need to see it. Awful at the time,and still remains awful. The referee had an absolute shocker, lost control because of it and to add insult to injury blatantly ignored timewasting as an offence. So much for a crackdown!

 

I don't think he meant it to end like that but It's not justifiable to raise your studs on a follow through like that he knew what he was doing it was nasty. Paddy is seriously injured because of it. You do see tough tackles in every match but that was more than that.

 

You are still wrong no matter how many times you say it. If it wasn’t a dangerous tackle how did his leg break occur? I don’t give a shiny one about consensus on another forum.

 

So any tackle could potentially be dangerous. There have been loads of leg breaks that have been extremely unlucky.

Been on another forum. Literally no one thinks it's a red. I'd take a bunch of random neutrals view as a fairly good meter for whether you're letting club colours blind your judgement. A trailing leg following through well after the ball has been won does not constitute a red card. Having said all that I'll go back to my original position. A red wouldn't necessarily be a bad decision but then neither is a yellow. Like I say if that was the other way round the majority on hete would be saying 'good tackle / very unfortunate injury'.

 

Sounds like those around him need to grow up

 

He cant because he’s got himself down a rabbit hole staring a ferret in the face perhaps?

 

Dangerous play does not require intent, whether he meant to do it I doubt without hesitation , but that’s missing the point. It was unintentional dangerous play as the outcome proves without equivocation.

 

Interested to read the posts on that forum-got a link?

 

one of those where you go in to let him know and leave something on him. Over aggressive is a sending off. Tick. High tackle. Tick. Out of control. Tick. The intent might not to have hurt him badly but it has, and it was down to him. Bit like drunk or reckless driving

 

If it was reversed and it was a city challenge you'd be the first defending it. I admire your level of partisanship.

 

He's 33??. Hard paper round

 

I wouldn't have Donny top seven on that display, they were dire. We weren't much better unfortunately, the Osadebe injury seemed to throw us out of sync but in all honesty if we start.with that line up every week we won't reach the playoffs, never mind go up automatically. It's early in the season and will take a while for the team to gel but today showed we haven't replaced Vernam and there was a distinct lack of flair throughout.i can see us bringing in a replacement for Osadebe because we clearly lack a player who either beat a man.

 

How was that a controlled tackle, on the third picture you can clearly see his follow up leg is off the pitch the linesman stood 8 yards away and never flagged poor officiating.

 

No it was a sending off no matter who the player , no matter the team….So now what’s your next excuse?

Don’t patronise me either. Dangerous play is dangerous no matter one’s team.

 

People on other forums don't sit in the block right in front of where it happened take it from me he raised his studs as he followed through. It was nasty and a straight red if his foot was on the floor how has he connected with his leg and not his foot? If we had a player of ours who did that I'd be saying the same thing.

 

You know you are wrong about that. Most around me have regularly winced when a City player has gone in and often agreed it was a bad tackle.

 

Yes mate. Here we are...

https://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/please-settle-a-debate.1584980/

Select from:

A) Mackem have different rules.
B) Mackem don't understand football.
C) Sunderland have a long standing hatred of Bradford City as do referees.
D) They're all Donny fans in disguise.
E) Hmm maybe sometimes we have a habit of being a bit blinkered when it comes to decisions against City.

 

I've played footy when down to ten men or on the back foot. It's easier as less space and mentality you have it tight. Judge s defence on what they are like when they need to win or score

 

My experience is that every time a player breathes near a city player the whole block cries blue murder at the referee. I think most fans would concede that my scenario is more familiar.