Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Harvey Elliott

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    33,731

    Harvey Elliott

    For me this was another nail in the coffin for Football.

    Its a contact sport, but the powers that be are destroying one of the main factors of the game.

    It was a fair tackle on Harvey Elliott but Pascal Struijk was sent off, I'm sure if Elliott would not have been injured nothing would have been given.

    Minutes later another Leeds player tackled another Liverpool player in exactly the same manner and won the ball just like Struijk did, but nothing was done, its pathetic.

    Klopp is an adopted scouser and I would'nt be surprised if he made a crisis out of it as usual.

    Its disgraceful what Football is turning into.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    6,197
    alto --I couldn't agree more! It was an unfortunate incident and I hope that Harvey Elliott recovers and continues to make progress in the game. Struijk and Elliott were both challenging for the ball and the referee did not see anything wrong and allowed play to continue. It was only when the Liverpool physios went on to the pitch wihtou authority that he stopped play.
    Whether or not the 4th official (Andy Madley) became involved in the discussion is open to question, however, someone must have had the input for the ref to issue the red card. It looks to me as though it is a case of the extent of the injury being determined as to whether or not a tackle is fair ------you can't work that way, however, football at the top level is going further and further down that path. Very sad indeed!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    36,278
    Nothing wrong whatsoever with the er tackle,a case of the refs looking after the top 6 clubs again.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,665
    He shouldn't have been sent off but the criticism should be about the quality of refereeing.
    Refs should focus on what happened rather than the (in this case unfortunate) outcome.
    Last Monday we had a stonewall pen refused in the 93rd minute when the score was 0 - 0 and the pundits said they understood why the ref didn't give it "because it was so late in the game" - as if that's got anything to do with making the right decision.
    Folk complain about VAR but at least it gives bad refs more information/less to hide behind and as in the case of the Leeds Liverpool game, teams should be given say 3 chances to question the decision as they are in e.g. cricket. IMO

  5. #5
    I honestly thought Struijk had done a Verstappen and took Elliot out of the game.

    I could not understand why a yellow card was not issued, but to issue a retrospective red and send Struijk off was bonkers.

    Once again, the decision raises the question as to what is the point of VAR?

  6. #6
    But doesn’t this injury all of a sudden “prove” Klopp right in his criticism of late?? I didn’t see the game only highlights and I haven’t seen the tackle again. I didn’t think the tackle was that bad when I saw it, but wasn’t it from behind and wasn’t there a trailing leg? And can’t VAR have been the one who said it was a red card? And the ref always writes a report after every game... is that not open for everyone to read?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,998
    Quote Originally Posted by WillPark View Post
    But doesnít this injury all of a sudden ďproveĒ Klopp right in his criticism of late?? I didnít see the game only highlights and I havenít seen the tackle again. I didnít think the tackle was that bad when I saw it, but wasnít it from behind and wasnít there a trailing leg? And canít VAR have been the one who said it was a red card? And the ref always writes a report after every game... is that not open for everyone to read?
    Posted this before Will and itís only my opinion but I think Var is good for offsides only.

    And Iíd rather we kept all other decisions with the referee , however if they came out after a game and explained anything that could be shall we say controversial and how they saw it and why they gave it etc etc I think most fans would be happy.

    After all the refs get paid a very good salary nowadays and in truth every employee in every job would be answerable on matters that required looking at.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,607
    Injuries are part of the game.He will be back playing in no time.He wont lose any wages and Liverpool have a big squad so it wont affect them either.Get over it and on to the next game.Red card should never have been given.Pathetic.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by ClaretinBudapest View Post
    Injuries are part of the game.He will be back playing in no time.He wont lose any wages and Liverpool have a big squad so it wont affect them either.Get over it and on to the next game.Red card should never have been given.Pathetic.
    I found it bizarre to say the least CiB. I'm not at all fond of these retrospective decisions/punishments. Football is all about the "heat of the moment" and I feel we should let the referees interpret what they see (or miss) at the exact point of impact on man or ball.

    The match referee let play go on without a caution and although I thought that was a wrong decision (what's new?), the fourth official intervened and the player got sent off.

    I'm not at all sure I like where the beautiful game is going.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,630
    Quote Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier View Post

    I'm not at all sure I like where the beautiful game is going.
    What is not to like BT? It is being beautifully packaged on Sky as their political football, huge salaries and agents fees and all that in the name of equality. Just take a knee and enjoy.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •