Two Footed Tackles

[Ian Royal]

number of feet is irrelevent.

dangerous tackle = big ban

You can go in with 6 feet for all I care as long as you're going in safe and in control.
Gunnars tackle looked appauling, and you can't argue he shouldn't have done it. an inch higher, or later and its stretcher time. But he doesn't deserve harsh penalties until he hurts someone. Up 'til that point it is enough to punish and discourage the potential injury.

You'll see plenty of more dangerous 1 footed tackles every weekend. iirc most of the leg breakers I've seen have all been one footed. What does that tell you.

[readingbedding]

Maybe not, but are they right?

Well, commonsense says no. But I've got this niggling thought at the back of my head that says it's not quite as clear cut as it seems.

Two feet directly aimed at the ball/players legs = not right

Two feet off the ground aimed directly at the ball/players legs = 10 match ban

How about two feet aimed directly at the balls?

Red Card.

[Sharpy]

i think people need to man the fcuk up....its a contact sport...deal with it!

[Tredder]

i think people need to man the fcuk up....its a contact sport...deal with it!

Quote that next time someone lunges at you from height and distance with 'i'm gonna break you' on their studs.

[Sharpy]

blatent tackles with intent ie keane on haarland (sp?) ages ago and others are sick yes...but when they are going for the ball whats the problem? footballs going soft...bunch of pansies!

[Hahnemann's Hairdresser]

Right, if two footed tackles are to be expected is Richard Carpenter off the hook now then?

[dariusz]

blatent tackles with intent ie keane on haarland (sp?) ages ago and others are sick yes...but when they are going for the ball whats the problem? footballs going soft...bunch of pansies!

Thats alrite then be as late and uncoordinated as you like! Everybody says they were going for the ball but its what they actually get that matters!

Slide tackle all u like but don't jump in 2 footed as its dangerous and its not even a natural way of tackling.

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

What's Kits had to say bout two footed tackles?

Didn't he rightly go mad at Gulitt for him saying Kitson was trying to hurt Evra?

Where's the line? I guess that's a real problem for refs.

And as Coppell said, are we going to end up where the tackler is putting himself at risk by doing weak one footed tackles? Where he could easily break his leg.

[readingbedding]

I did an interview a couple of weeks back saying that the two-footed jump tackle is the one we want to eliminate. Just because there's not always a consequence doesn't mean you shouldn't get rid of it. You shouldn't judge on whether you get injured. The technique is unsafe, it's wrong.

Ironically, I believe the referees had some kind of written guidance to alert them to this, but the managers didn't get it. The communications could be better, if they get an internal alert, so should we.

I've been told by another manager this morning, who had a player sent off in his game, I won't mention his name. He said he spoke to that referee, and they'd had a thing through saying to watch for these challenges, they must be punished.

Would it have made a difference? No. He won one challenge, then the ball breaks a distance and the intuitive response was to stretch and win the ball. He did win the ball, he didn't get the player. A month ago he would have got away with it, definitely. Now people are more sensititive, and he got done for it.

Now the challenge is there, can they be consistent?

[Royal Rother]

Officials also visit every club during pre season to go over these things so managers and players are well aware of the consequences before they commit a foul like this.

But that didn't happen in this case.

[Stranded]

Officials also visit every club during pre season to go over these things so managers and players are well aware of the consequences before they commit a foul like this.

But that didn't happen in this case.

Depends on who you listen to, Mark Hughes, and another manager who I forget, said this week that the clampdown was brought to their attention preseason during one of those visits and he communicated that to his squad.

It's possible that the message may not have got to all but I'd like to think that was an exception rather than the rule.

[Royal Rother]

Hahnemann commented on TalkSport yesterday that he / we didn't have a problem with the treatment given to the 2 footed tackle per se, but that such initiatives should be communicated to the clubs as well, and that in this case it hadn't been.

Just echoing what Coppell said which you would expect of course. (Maybe they just told Wally and he considered it too namby-pamby to pass on...)

[cmonurz]

blatent tackles with intent ie keane on haarland (sp?) ages ago and others are sick yes...but when they are going for the ball whats the problem? footballs going soft...bunch of pansies!

Two-footed challenge, late, over the ball, complete accident but snaps your leg in two and you never play football again. Pansy.

Two-footed challenges are dangerous and are rightly punished by a straight red.

As said on this thread, it just needs to be applied consistently. How Kuyt and Hunt avoided red cards I don't know.

[Sharpy]

if a tackle is attempted and contact is made with the ball and miss a player whats wrong with it? the intent is there to win the ball, you cant say "it could break his leg", the fact is it didnt!!

however i agree when it is wreckless, high and nowhere near the ball it should be a long ban...

[cmonurz]

So it's ok to tackle recklessly as long as you are lucky enough to get the ball? The margins between a successful tackle and a leg-breaking one are so small - think how quick Ronaldo is with his feet, the ball can be there and gone in a split second.

Straight red every time, ball or not.