Bristol City 1 - 2 Wolves: Verdict thread

[Deutsch Wolf]

That's just a terrible decision, it doesn't fit in any context. It's like saying we deserved a pen on Jota yesterday because Bournemouth also got one miles outside the box against us in 2015.

 

[Johnny75]

I know we were the other end of the pitch but when Danny went in for the challenge i thought fuck straight away, i knew he was gone. A few years ago i think it's a great challenge and applauded but the game has changed whether that's for the best or not that is a different argument but I can see why the ref has sent him off. I don't think Danny has gone to try and hurt him but he has gone with a lot of force which has resulted in Danny's studs landing on Magnusson's boots in the follow through.

What i will say though is Danny has given the ref a chance to send him off for going in with so much force for a meaningless tackle. Later in the game Coady had to make a challenge but instead of going to ground he stayed on his feet got his body behind the ball and put his side foot through it, that's what Danny should have been doing or just getting in the way of Magnusson's clearance. As it is i think that now means Bennett will be back in and he's been better imo, i thought Danny was poor before he got sent off.

The odd thing is it isn't safer for the game. Magnusson placed himself in danger by being late for the challenge. Coady going for a block tackle with his side foot exposes the inside of his knee (MCL) which is far more prone to injury than a kick on the shin or calf (bruising).

Batth doesn't put anybody in danger if Magnusson jumps out of the way of the ball, especially as Batth cannot stop his momentum once he has won the ball, which he did.

I can see currently why the ref gave it as he did and no sleight on him as I thought he had a good game. It is simply a lack of knowledge from the FA, PGMOL and the law makers in general. They all need to learn more about the human body and biomechanics but none of them really take an interest and so we are left being led up an alley by the ignorant.

 

[Kenny]

When are appeals looked at? It has to be resolved in time for our next game doesn't it?

The FA have been working today as they have given 3 game bans to a couple of players.

 

[b3h]

Was bound to happen, I had Danny first goal ! I'll make sure to bet on Brentford double chance next game

 

[MARKakaJIM]

The odd thing is it isn't safer for the game. Magnusson placed himself in danger by being late for the challenge. Coady going for a block tackle with his side foot exposes the inside of his knee (MCL) which is far more prone to injury than a kick on the shin or calf (bruising).

Batth doesn't put anybody in danger if Magnusson jumps out of the way of the ball, especially as Batth cannot stop his momentum once he has won the ball, which he did.

I can see currently why the ref gave it as he did and no sleight on him as I thought he had a good game. It is simply a lack of knowledge from the FA, PGMOL and the law makers in general. They all need to learn more about the human body and biomechanics but none of them really take an interest and so we are left being led up an alley by the ignorant.

Why would Magnussen jump out of the way?! He's effectively clearing a loose ball by the time it gets to him, the contact with the ball from Batth when he slides is meaningless. There was nothing positive to come out of Batth's challenge, best case scenario he'd have lost the ball a couple yards further up the pitch than if he'd just given it up but been on his arse and less capable to recover his position.

 

[Johnny75]

Why would Magnussen jump out of the way?! He's effectively clearing a loose ball by the time it gets to him, the contact with the ball from Batth when he slides is meaningless. There was nothing positive to come out of Batth's challenge, best case scenario he'd have lost the ball a couple yards further up the pitch than if he'd just given it up but been on his arse and less capable to recover his position.

As I have said, and you seem to have ignored, Magnusson put himself in harms way as Batth has won the ball and as Newton's law of momentum still applies on a football pitch he is hardly in a position to stop. It is Magnusson's decision that had placed him in danger.

At best it should be described as a footballing incident, at worst it's just a 50:50 and a free kick. However, the laws aren't that way unfortunately and until somebody gets some knowledge they won't change. Look at Batth's tackle and then compare that to the assault from Puncheon today. What was the result of the Puncheon challenge?

 

[The Bear]

Magnusson has every right to go for a 50/50 ball and not expect a hard tackle with studs on the top of his foot.

Yeah Batth won the ball but it was a stupid decision to go in like that. You catch the player and you're more likely than not to get at least a yellow.

 

[Wilf Wolf]

Batth didn't have to go into the tackle the way he did. If he'd brought his foot to the side of the ball he could have kept his studs down. That would have meant a slight delay as he would have needed to get closer before committing to the tackle. As soon as he went in with his studs up he was unable to stop and gave the ref a decision to make. Frankly there is no chance the decision will be overturned, the guidance to referees was changed specifically to stop this kind of tackle. Just a shame referees seem to ignore it when on Jota.

 

[slink]

The odd thing is it isn't safer for the game. Magnusson placed himself in danger by being late for the challenge. Coady going for a block tackle with his side foot exposes the inside of his knee (MCL) which is far more prone to injury than a kick on the shin or calf (bruising).

Batth doesn't put anybody in danger if Magnusson jumps out of the way of the ball, especially as Batth cannot stop his momentum once he has won the ball, which he did.

I can see currently why the ref gave it as he did and no sleight on him as I thought he had a good game. It is simply a lack of knowledge from the FA, PGMOL and the law makers in general. They all need to learn more about the human body and biomechanics but none of them really take an interest and so we are left being led up an alley by the ignorant.

Not sure how you can say Magnusson placed himself in danger, he's getting to the ball easily before Danny goes to ground. Now going to ground shouldn't be outlawed and i like a tackle but Danny definitely goes in stupidly imo, it wasn't dangerous but he gave the ref a chance to send him off by going to ground. Who goes in for tackle and thinks if i go with my side foot i expose the inside of my knee, you make the decision based on which is the best way to win the ball and not make a foul.

Magnusson is not going to jump out of the way of the ball, if he did everyone would have been thinking what the fuck is he doing? I agree Danny can't stop but again he shouldn't be going to ground in that area the way he did imo, red or not he gave the ref a decision to make.

Not sure how knowing about biomechanics would have helped anyone with the challenge. Batth goes to ground with a fair bit of force and his follow through means he ends up with his studs on Magnusson who is a little late because he stays on his feet. At the pace it was the ref has a split second to make his mind up and he's definitely seen the end of the follow through and how Magnusson has gone down which definitely didn't help. Some refs would have just given yellows but i can't complain with a red after seeing it numerous times.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Look at the distance FFS. Please, you can't tell me that Danny isn't entitled to go for that ball.

 

[slink]

He is entitled but he doesn't need to go to ground, that still shows he could have stayed on his feet quite easily. Stick by the fact i think he's stupid for not staying on his feet there.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Perceived stupidity isn't a red card offence as far as I know, if it were then Harlee Dean would be sent off after 0.01 seconds of every game.

 

[Wilf Wolf]

Look at the distance FFS. Please, you can't tell me that Danny isn't entitled to go for that ball.

The issue is he is that he is then committed and follows through with his studs up. The still makes it look fine but at real speed the Bristol player is a fraction later.

 

[slink]

Not sure where i said it was a red card offence but the follow through from his stupid challenge means he ends up with his studs on Magnusson's boot. Therefore i can see why the ref has seen that and sent him off.

 

[Jack Regan]

Looking at that pic the FA will say he's left the ground (he has) and say he's unnecessarily aggressive as a result. He's also not in control of the ball or himself hence why he ends up clattering the Bristol player.

 

[The Bear]

Put up a still at the moment of contact on Magnusson's foot and it looks very different.

I agree the ref could have given a yellow for some consistency, especially with the treatment Jota has gotten, but I still see why he gave a red.

 

[AndyWolves]

Please do, I'd love to see it. Right now I don't think it was a red

 

[The Bear]

It doesn't have to be two footed either to be a red. Just excessive force or reckless.

It's easy to see him jump in and nail Magnusson's foot afterwards to think excessive force was used.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

As I have said, and you seem to have ignored, Magnusson put himself in harms way as Batth has won the ball and as Newton's law of momentum still applies on a football pitch he is hardly in a position to stop. It is Magnusson's decision that had placed him in danger.

At best it should be described as a footballing incident, at worst it's just a 50:50 and a free kick. However, the laws aren't that way unfortunately and until somebody gets some knowledge they won't change. Look at Batth's tackle and then compare that to the assault from Puncheon today. What was the result of the Puncheon challenge?

So he's meant to let a loose ball run through now because someone else has made a reckless challenge? He's clearing a loose ball as Batth had long since lost control of it, not his fault he gets clattered by the follow through.

Some epic victim blaming there.

 

[AndyWolves]

So he's meant to let a loose ball run through now because someone else has made a reckless challenge? He's clearing a loose ball as Batth had long since lost control of it, not his fault he gets clattered by the follow through.

Some epic victim blaming there.

Same argument for Danny, he's not allowed to challenge because his opponent might get there late?

How is this different to when Baath got clattered in the air at our place? Baath was second to the ball and got clattered