Quote:
Originally Posted by andy_m
The laws of the game - dangerous play is when somebody has to get out of the way to avoid being hurt, ie. when somebody avoids a bad tackle. If contact is made then it's no longer dangerous play but it's one of six fouls where contact (in this instance, a kick) is made or attempted which must result in a direct free kick. It's then for the referee to decide if the player was careless, no card, reckless, yellow card, used excessive force, red card. My personal opinion is that Nani's eyes were on the ball, not the player and that he was at worst reckless, but no more.
|
You clearly know your laws andy_m, and I am grateful for the enlightening me. I, maybe wrong, but I guess it's all down to interpretation.
Having played at a very minor level (like many others on here would have/currently do) I know it is possible to keep your on the ball and also know when someone is running towards/getting close to you (team-mates shout, fans shout, you can hear the player running and you also see them out of the "corner of your eye" - especially if they are running at you.) As such, I do not believe he
only had his eyes on the ball and I believe that he tried to gain a deliberate advantage, possibly by using excessive force. (Thanks again for info)
The ref had plenty of time to come to a decision on all of the laws you have kindly posted, and by all accounts consulted with his assistant too. He clearly felt Nani had a strong case to answer. As I stated earlier, I believe there was no effort made by Nani to avoid the collision.
If the ref had given a straight red, and not consulted with his assistant I would find the decision a little more baffling.
It would be nice if the ref was allowed to explain his decision though, for all involved.