11 Sep 2017 21:35:17
I brought up the matt Richie challange last and now in the West ham game Winston reed made exactly the same challange high boot kicked the huddesfeilfd player in the face not even a yellow card again were is the consistency from the refs. -- mane red 3 game ban-- Richie yellow no ban-- reed no card its a joke.

1.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 21:45:29
Yea! But it's still an offense.

2.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 21:59:24
I saw that too red. To be fair Reeds foot wasn't high but did he endanger the safety the other player? Absolutely! He kicked him in the face! The more you see these other collisions the more you think that if Mane's was red then we could end up with players being sent off in most games which would ruin the game. You can't referee a game by adhering absolutely to words written on paper there is so much more involved. You need to understand the game and the context of the challenge/ collision. For me, Mane's wasn't a red card. Nor was Ritchie's or Reed's tonight. Accidental collisions happen and should never result in ruining the spectacle for the millions that have paid good money to watch it.

{Ed025's Note - but you cant let it get like UFC either ings, mane,s was 100% a red card mate whether you want to believe it or not is up to you..

3.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 22:36:31
Actually it isn't an offense we can't defend. It is an offence as are most of your comments!

4.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 22:45:19
Ok so why not Ritchie or Reed tonight? Based on the Endangering safety rule both should go. Fact is lots of actions on a football pitch endanger the safety of other players. Sometimes they get injured, sometimes they don't but if players are scared to go for a 50/ 50 ball for fear of a red card the game will be a lot worse for it.

5.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 22:45:19
Ok so why not Ritchie or Reed tonight? Based on the Endangering safety rule both should go. Fact is lots of actions on a football pitch endanger the safety of other players. Sometimes they get injured, sometimes they don't but if players are scared to go for a 50/ 50 ball for fear of a red card the game will be a lot worse for it.

6.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 23:27:26
How was the tackle tonight different from the other 2,
In each instance the foot was raised "dangerously" high and at pace,
The only difference was the injury and and the stretcher etc

Either all red or all yellow, not 3 different decisions.

7.) 11 Sep 2017
11 Sep 2017 23:48:48
LFCDER
I agree with you that was my point they were all the same type of challange they should all receive the same punishment referies are making a mockery of the laws giving 3 different desisions 1 red 1 yellow and no card at all.

8.) 12 Sep 2017
12 Sep 2017 00:00:11
Yes inconsistency is annoying but at least one ref made the right decision, just it happened to be against us. Problem is until refs take a consistent approach players will continue doing silly things and potentially hurting other players because they think it's ok. Time to let it go though.

9.) 12 Sep 2017
12 Sep 2017 00:05:01
One is someone's studs digging into someone's skull that's the difference. The other is a high foot with the laces side catching someone

Both are fouls, 1 is a definite sending off, 1 is just a foul.
This is regarding Reid

I am not saying there are not inconsistencies from officials, just saying there are clear differences.

10.) 12 Sep 2017
12 Sep 2017 08:32:49
Westwood this football the players should be potentially hurting each other if they're not then we will get steam rolled every game. I want to see hard tackles and people not backing out of 50/ 50 balls. I want to see Mane running at pace and stretching every sinue to nick that ball ahead of a keeper also running at pace to stop him. On this occasion the ball was nicked by the keeper as it was travelling in his direction and both players have clashed into each other. If Mane gets there first then it's a red for the keeper but not for foul play for denying a clear goal scoring opportunity. I just can't see though how that's a red for Mane it's an accidental collision.

11.) 12 Sep 2017
12 Sep 2017 08:49:02
People seem to forget that Ederson actually won the ball with his head before Mane planted his studs in his face. This was not incidental contact. Ederson won the ball and caught Mane's boot in the face. Move on, people. It was a red card and case closed. Dragging other incidents into this, serves no purpose, IMO.

12.) 12 Sep 2017
12 Sep 2017 11:11:29
Ings I can understand the argument completely but the rules don't say anything about incidents being accidental or not. They talk about endangering other players which obviously happened. I mean just look at Edersons face! If you think the rules are wrong that's fair enough but the ref called it right in line with the law of the game. The ref for the Ritchie incident got it wrong. If Aguero had done that to Migs and didn't get sent off and we'v of then lost we'd all be furious.