Match Threads Spurs vs Brentford - Match Thread - EFL Cup Semifinal

[littlemandefoe]

View attachment 80126

thats class from Pierre. x

 

['O Zio]

I think he was trying to put one foot forward and then knock it behind that leg to get away, he stumbled and lost control and his leg planted into Hojbjerg's shin.

Yeah I've seen others say the same thing but I just don't see that from watching the replays. If anything, to me it looks like he's trying to do something like plant his foot the other side of the ball to "get his body in the way" and shield the ball or something. But equally likely for me is that it was just a tired lunge and he wasn't thinking properly.

He clearly loses control of whatever he's trying to do so in no way do I think he meant it like it turned out but this Rinaldo Chop thing seems like a massive stretch based on what I've seen anyway

 

[mr ashley]

Yeah I've seen others say the same thing but I just don't see that from watching the replays. If anything, to me it looks like he's trying to do something like plant his foot the other side of the ball to "get his body in the way" and shield the ball or something. But equally likely for me is that it was just a tired lunge and he wasn't thinking properly.

He clearly loses control of whatever he's trying to do so in no way do I think he meant it like it turned out but this Rinaldo Chop thing seems like a massive stretch based on what I've seen anyway

You just need to watch it again.
He chops the ball with his left foot (he’s left footed). His right foot slips and catches Hojbjerg badly, but clearly accidental.
Josh DaSilva is a really skilful player who has the ability to do this (the prematch analysis of Brentford highlighted him as their key player doing exactly these types of skills to beat players before crossing/shooting).

 

[Barmby Army]

Seems pretty clear to me that he slipped in the middle of a chop.

Out of interest I asked my mate who is a qualified high-level referee what the correct interpretation of the rules is if we accept that it was an accident (ie. not just that there was no intent to injure, which is irrelevant, but that there was no intent to tackle him at all) and he said that while it's a weird scenario that the rules don't really cater for, it would probably still fall under the category of 'endagering a player's safety', therefore still a red card.

I asked for clarification that this was the case even if the tackle itself wasn't intended let alone the impact, but I think he was starting to lose interest as he said "manslaughter is a crime" and then didn't respond to any of my subsequent messages.

 

[Yid-ol]

Seems pretty clear to me that he slipped in the middle of a chop.

Out of interest I asked my mate who is a qualified high-level referee what the correct interpretation of the rules is if we accept that it was an accident (ie. not just that there was no intent to injure, which is irrelevant, but that there was no intent to tackle him at all) and he said that while it's a weird scenario that the rules don't really cater for, it would probably still fall under the category of 'endagering a player's safety', therefore still a red card.

I asked for clarification that this was the case even if the tackle itself wasn't intended let alone the impact, but I think he was starting to lose interest as he said "manslaughter is a crime" and then didn't respond to any of my subsequent messages.

He lost control of his actions and put another player in danger, we all know it's not what he meant to do, but will always be a red.

If a player goes in with both feet off the floor (not 2 footed tackle though) he isn't in control of that tackle anymore and always gets looked at for a yellow or red if he goes through the player.

 

[DogsOfWar]

Oh dear! You are joking of course? Comparing a Champions League Final to a League Cup takes some brainwashing! Let’s face it we won a couple of matches against second tier sides. We just sneaked past Brentford who were unlucky. Mind you we did at least have 50% of the ball so a big change.

Winning a LC final is nothing. We have won it several times and has never even registered as meaningful. It certainly won’t if we win it again. Sure beating one of the Manchester clubs again would be nice but the LC is worthless and always has been.

I would have agreed 10-20 years ago but certainly not now.
The competition was de-valued (as was the FA and Europa cups) when the likes of Utd, Chelsea, and Arsenal were guaranteed a top 4 finish every year and a chance of winning the title/CL.
Since City, Liverpool, and us created a top six and the big clubs were no longer guaranteed a place in the big two competitions the focus on these competitions has changed dramatically.
One look at the winners over the last 7 or 8 years for both domestic cup competitions shows how the focus on winning this has changed with complete dominance from teams from the top six (apart from us).
Even the Europa has seen two English winners from the top six in this time frame.

The value of these competitions to the clubs has changed now but the entitled fans are just a bit slow in catching up with this as they still think they should be playing in the CL/winning the title because they did it in the past.

 

[degoose]

Seems pretty clear to me that he slipped in the middle of a chop.

Out of interest I asked my mate who is a qualified high-level referee what the correct interpretation of the rules is if we accept that it was an accident (ie. not just that there was no intent to injure, which is irrelevant, but that there was no intent to tackle him at all) and he said that while it's a weird scenario that the rules don't really cater for, it would probably still fall under the category of 'endagering a player's safety', therefore still a red card.

I asked for clarification that this was the case even if the tackle itself wasn't intended let alone the impact, but I think he was starting to lose interest as he said "manslaughter is a crime" and then didn't respond to any of my subsequent messages.

I would say that even though it wasn't intentional, well i don't think it was he endangered the other player as he was out of control. It was a bit like Doherty getting that yellow. He missed the player completely but because he was out of control he could have endangered another player or i guess it was intent.

It's all a load of bollocks to me though. Most of the rules chop and change as refs feel fit to do and whatever fits the current trend and changes of regulations. At one point they use to book players for diving, now even if a player goes down to get a penalty and it is reviewed and deemed not a penalty, they still don't get booked for simulating.

 

[OnTheUp]

It has been a long time since 61, maybe reinvest your time in another team or try to enjoy the one that we have now? Just saying..

Think we still had polio in 61, so it wasn't that great.

But hey, otherwise , enjoy your hate that we achieved a final..

Spurs supporter?????

Clearly not a Spurs fan, more likely an Arsenal fan with too much time on his hands.

 

[Shadydan]

Or just a troll that should be ignored...

 

[Shadydan]

Seems pretty clear to me that he slipped in the middle of a chop.

Out of interest I asked my mate who is a qualified high-level referee what the correct interpretation of the rules is if we accept that it was an accident (ie. not just that there was no intent to injure, which is irrelevant, but that there was no intent to tackle him at all) and he said that while it's a weird scenario that the rules don't really cater for, it would probably still fall under the category of 'endagering a player's safety', therefore still a red card.

I asked for clarification that this was the case even if the tackle itself wasn't intended let alone the impact, but I think he was starting to lose interest as he said "manslaughter is a crime" and then didn't respond to any of my subsequent messages.

That's always gonna be a red card, it's one of those unwritten rules in football that if you hurt a player like that even if its not intentional you should be sent off, for example Son against Gomes where he obbiulsy didn't mean it but was always gonna be sent off.

It's the correct decision for me, it would be totally unjust if a player stays on the pitch whilst the other player may have had their career ruined plus for the player's own safety because other players might want to seek retribution for their team mate.

 

[wiggo24]

The pass-map from tonight indicates much more of a 4-3-3 with Sissoko and Ndombele more advanced. Not that obvious on pitch but maybe there's been a slight change of system to get Ndombele on the ball a bit deeper, as he was tonight?

Would be a welcome change if this shape persists imo. Here's hoping it's not just because of the opposition.

Confirmation from the man himself that it was a deliberate tactical change.

 

[mr ashley]

Seems pretty clear to me that he slipped in the middle of a chop.

Out of interest I asked my mate who is a qualified high-level referee what the correct interpretation of the rules is if we accept that it was an accident (ie. not just that there was no intent to injure, which is irrelevant, but that there was no intent to tackle him at all) and he said that while it's a weird scenario that the rules don't really cater for, it would probably still fall under the category of 'endagering a player's safety', therefore still a red card.

I asked for clarification that this was the case even if the tackle itself wasn't intended let alone the impact, but I think he was starting to lose interest as he said "manslaughter is a crime" and then didn't respond to any of my subsequent messages.

I think there was a similar red card for Nani in the MLS this season. Got a red whilst trying to regain control of the ball and caught the defender.

Looking back on things, maybe that was the reason why Son got a red v Everton last season too (although overturned thankfully).

quite a rare one for referees to deal with

 

[Barmby Army]

He lost control of his actions and put another player in danger, we all know it's not what he meant to do, but will always be a red.

If a player goes in with both feet off the floor (not 2 footed tackle though) he isn't in control of that tackle anymore and always gets looked at for a yellow or red if he goes through the player.

I understand what you're saying, but I think there's an interesting discussion to be had when it comes to this sort of issue. We were all (rightly IMO) very quick to say Son shouldn't have been sent off for his tackle on Gomes, because he couldn't have anticipated that his action would have the impact it did. Isn't that exponentially more the case with this one, in that Dasilva didn't even intend the action, let alone the impact?

I'm not saying I'm necessarily right - I can completely see why Dasilva was sent off, it looked awful and could have broken Hojbjerg's leg - but football is a sport where pretty much every action can potentially be dangerous, Sending people off for something that is outside of their control like Dasilva's slip, or something they couldn't reasonably anticipate - I'm thinking specifically of one the other day when Craig Dawson kicked a Southampton player (Che Adams I think?) full in the face when he was attempting to shoot) - is a dangerous route to go down.

There wasn't much clamour for Dawson to get sent off in that incident, and again IMO it's probably 'worse' than the Dasilva incident because he did at least intent the action, even if he didn't intend to kick the player. If we accept that Dasilva slipped and therefore didn't intend his leg to stretch out like that at all, let alone hit Hojbjerg, I think sending him off for it is quite dodgy ground.

 

[ardiles&villa]

Pierre the Viking...what a geeza

 

[rez9000]

I understand what you're saying, but I think there's an interesting discussion to be had when it comes to this sort of issue. We were all (rightly IMO) very quick to say Son shouldn't have been sent off for his tackle on Gomes, because he couldn't have anticipated that his action would have the impact it did. Isn't that exponentially more the case with this one, in that Dasilva didn't even intend the action, let alone the impact?

I'm not saying I'm necessarily right - I can completely see why Dasilva was sent off, it looked awful and could have broken Hojbjerg's leg - but football is a sport where pretty much every action can potentially be dangerous, Sending people off for something that is outside of their control like Dasilva's slip, or something they couldn't reasonably anticipate - I'm thinking specifically of one the other day when Craig Dawson kicked a Southampton player (Che Adams I think?) full in the face when he was attempting to shoot) - is a dangerous route to go down.

There wasn't much clamour for Dawson to get sent off in that incident, and again IMO it's probably 'worse' than the Dasilva incident because he did at least intent the action, even if he didn't intend to kick the player. If we accept that Dasilva slipped and therefore didn't intend his leg to stretch out like that at all, let alone hit Hojbjerg, I think sending him off for it is quite dodgy ground.

Perhaps, although (if I remember correctly) Son's attempted tackle on Gomes wasn't what caused his injury. It may have led to Gomes' injury, but it was as a consequence of it rather than a direct causative. I stress, I may be misremembering, but I thought that Gomes' injury was something to do with his studs sticking in the ground. So, I'm not sure there's a direct correlation there. Bear in mind also that Son had his red card rescinded for the Gomes' incident.

Re the Dawson kick, I can see the argument being that attempting to strike the ball in the box and in the manner that Dawson did - the boot wasn't high, there was nothing intrinsically unusual about the manner he attempted to hit the ball - isn't an unusual action, whereas (in the Hojbjerg situation) moving at pace toward an opponent with your studs up may be considered to have been. That's not necessarily my argument, but I can see it being the case.

Again, relying on conjecture, I would imagine the thinking is that Dasilva didn't need to 'do the skill' in that scenario and so, intended or otherwise, it was his choice that led to injury to another player.

It's a knotty question, for sure, but I can understand how the rules could be interpreted in each scenario and lead to different outcomes.

 

[Wils]

Oh dear! You are joking of course? Comparing a Champions League Final to a League Cup takes some brainwashing! Let’s face it we won a couple of matches against second tier sides. We just sneaked past Brentford who were unlucky. Mind you we did at least have 50% of the ball so a big change.

Winning a LC final is nothing. We have won it several times and has never even registered as meaningful. It certainly won’t if we win it again. Sure beating one of the Manchester clubs again would be nice but the LC is worthless and always has been.

To me a trophy is a trophy and hopefully winning this will instill the winning mentality that has been lacking over the years

 

[peispurs]

Rico Henry is a good player

There are some definite gems in this Brentford team, and it will be great seeing them in PL next year.