Mido's Red Card

[Kyras]

Was it or was it not?

Having just watched it on MOTD, I thought it should have only been a yellow for a high foot, he had his eye on the ball, so regardless of whether contact was made, surely it's just a yellow.

It seems that if a stretcher is being called for now, the refs are too quick to pull out a red.

The high feet rule is there to protect players, and it is to book players who raise their feet to high.

Mido's 6'3" ish and Clichy is at least a full 6" smaller, it happens.

 

[bomberH]

I don't think it was. It wasn't intentional and he was looking at the ball the whole time.

If it had been a 50-50 directly running on to eachother, then yes. But they were both facing the same way, Mido was nearer to the ball and just lifted his foot up to control it. Just so happens the other twat stuck his head in there.

Massively harsh. Like getting genital warts after your first fuck.

 

[chrissivad]

It was harsh, but under the law of the game its a red.

Sending-Off Offences
A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red
card if he commits any of the following seven offences:
1. is guilty of serious foul play
2. is guilty of violent conduct
3. spits at an opponent or any other person
4. denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity
by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a
goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
5. denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving
towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick
or a penalty kick
6. uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
7. receives a second caution in the same match

Decision 4
A tackle, which endangers the safety of an opponent, must be sanctioned
as serious foul play.

So it was harsh, but the ref did what it says in the book.

What i dont get though is these over head kicks in the are with a defender going for the ball.

This must also come under the same section? High foot as well looking to get the ball.

 

[dontcallme]

While there is no doubt in my mind Mido had his eyes fully on the ball and meant no harm for me it is a sending off. Players will always challenge for these high balls whether you see them or not.

A ball that high should be played with either your head or chest, studs that high is just plain dangerous.

 

[SpurSince57]

I think you could tell from the reaction of the Arsenal players that they realised it was an accident, and I don't recall hearing Wenger sounding off about it, either. Mido was clearly pointing out that he just didn't see Clichy.

By the strict letter of the law it is a red, but as Chris says, does that mean all overhead kicks in the penalty area should be classed as dangerous play too? Hansen and Shearer also talked about this on MOTD.

 

[chinaman]

Referees these days don't exercise common sense. They'd rather hide behind the wording of the law.

When I was young, I could raise ny leg high to kick when it was no danger to anyone, and that was when no one was within legitimate playing distance; and I had already raised my foot high to kick, and some idiot who was not within playing distance dived in lowering his head and got kicked, he would get the foul call for dangerous play, that is endangering himself for diving in.

In my young days, a lot of the shielding of the ball that we see these days where players block off opponents for as far as twenty metres until it goes into touch would have been called for obstructions.

 

[PT]

If the Arsenal player wants to go around heading football boots, what's to be expected?

 

[KentuckyYid]

I don't think it was a straight red either.

It was more about giving Ar5ena1 a chance of getting something from the game...

 

[chinaman]

In fact as I've said some days ago, we're responsible for causing the Arse's major loss of form. They still haven't recovered from the 5-1 rout.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

It was harsh, but under the law of the game its a red.

So it was harsh, but the ref did what it says in the book.

What i dont get though is these over head kicks in the are with a defender going for the ball.

This must also come under the same section? High foot as well looking to get the ball.

But if that is the case, just employ one really dumb, short, really ugly tough bastard, stick him in defence and, when the balls floated in, just get him to stick his face in the way wherever it goes - even if it's bobbling along the floor - stick your face in the way and, anyone who kicks it, will be risking your clock and should be booked :up:

Yeah, he might get a few kicks in the noggin, but it'd be worth it :lol:

Mido didn't put his foot in a place where it would risk another players health - if anything, Clichy should have been booked for being stupid enough for sticking his face where it was :shrug:

50-50, stop the game to treat the player, but not a booking or anything...

 

[chrissivad]

But if that is the case, just employ one really dumb, short, really ugly tough bastard, stick him in defence and, when the balls floated in, just get him to stick his face in the way wherever it goes - even if it's bobbling along the floor - stick your face in the way and, anyone who kicks it, will be risking your clock and should be booked :up:

It would almost work, but you will be blown up (not litraly!) for dangerous play if you go for a header so low (dont know how low is low though)

 

[Flatters]

It was similar to the sending off against Chelsea in that there was clearly no intent. Obviously the sending off against Arsenal was much more dangerous (I don't think the sending off against Chelsea was dangerous at all). He probably deserved to get sent off this time, but it's very harsh on him as he didn't mean it at all.

Even so, he kicked an Arsenal player in the face. I loved Mido before, but I love him even more now. :-D

 

[Rocksuperstar]

It would almost work, but you will be blown up (not litraly!) for dangerous play if you go for a header so low (dont know how low is low though)

Well if i was Boro, or anyone else in that position, i'd submit a nice fat report to the FA, with full Brass Eye breakdowns of the whole thing, requesting their official word on where the line is that defines a high foot compared to stooping dangerously low :up:

It'd be like an argument i used to like to start with my mate about whether a piece of wood i found in the forest was a stick or a branch :lol:

I contested that all branches become sticks when they fall off the tree, he argues it depends on width on the scale of kindling/twig/stick/branch/log/limb :lol: excellent times were had over gallons of beer and confused onlookers...

 

[Legend10]

looked like a good challenge to me!

 

[hughy]

Should have done it to Eboue.

 

[Marty]

It was a very high foot in this case, but no more than a yellow as Mido had no idea where the opponent was.

Still, it was more of a red than Koumas' sending off for Wigan today...

Edit: Having seen the replay of the Koumas incident I retract that statement. It was a bit worse than it looked at first, but still not a red for me.

 

[don1]

Should have done it to Eboue.

:rofl::clap:

 

[nightgoat]

If it was Eboue going in like that Arsenal would have got a free kick...

 

[Michey]

If it was Eboue going in like that Arsenal would have got a free kick...

something like that

 

[Barmy_in_Palmy]

Massively harsh. Like getting genital warts after your first fuck.

Dude, how many times do I have to say I'm sorry? :shrug: