Ban Mcmanaman until next season pls

Yeah I think the difference between this and a tough tackle is that the defender is in full control of the situation i.e. isn't just throwing himself at the other guy.

Been funny reading and listening to some of the comments coming from the jawdee nation.

Banned for season

Same doesn't apply when Cabaye & Tiote do it.

sportsczy wrote:With modern medical care, Haidara should make a full recovery unless he's forced to have microfracture surgery... all depends if the cartilage is still enough. With microfracture, his career is all but over.

You are only talking about the physical recovery, but you fail to acknowledge the mental recovery from such an injury. Not to mention what sitting out for 6 months can do to a players state of mind.

NiallQuinnsdiscoPants wrote:Been funny reading and listening to some of the comments coming from the jawdee nation.

Banned for season

Same doesn't apply when Cabaye & Tiote do it.

Aye Cabaye and Tiote have broken players legs with studs up tackles above the knee with no aspirations but to take the player out in which time they do i fully agree with them getting lengthy bans.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:

Art Morte wrote:Look, it's a bad challenge, but calling for McManaman to be banned for the rest of the season or something ridiculous like that isn't very clever, imo. It's a red card tackle, but this won't be last time we see something like this. Sometimes people make mistakes. It was McManaman's first ever Premier League start and he was probably too pumped up about it and tried too hard to win the ball back. It's a very unfortunate situation, but I'd give him a 3-game ban and move on.

Aye that will stop thugs going studs up above the knee won't it.....

Also he has previous for things like this he injured someone in the reserve league in a similar fashion.

I don't give a shit if its his 1st start or 1,000th start its assault and stopped someones career before it even begun.

Also with attitude like this is the reason it won't be the last time we see things like this..... people like this need to be made example of and kick disgusting challenges like this out of the game.

So yeah lets ban someone for 3 games for basically taken someone out of football for a year that seems fair

The Franchise wrote:Nah, thats not right. You cant sort of let him slide based on "we seen this before" and "it was his first game and he was pumped"..that doesnt slide with me on something of this magnitide.

I understand he may of been pumped, but this is something else. Its displays a level of either stupidity of malice which is unacceptable. You hope its stupidity but who knows.

I find it amazing, when it comes to diving people are all for giving out lengthy bans to stop it, but this, excuses come out...im sorry, you tell me which is worse? A dive or this?

This is not a "red card tackle"..this is beyond that.

You cant tell me it makes sense to you that this tackle and Koscielny pen give away on Dzeko warrant the same punishment.

We have to accept that football is a sport where grown men run at each other at full speed and use their legs to win the ball back. You cannot eradicate bad injuries from a sport like that. Sometimes a player gets his tackle all wrong and injuries like this occur, but this issue can only be helped so much. Banning McManaman for a dozen matches won't stop it.

But it will probably stop McManaman from doing it again. As you said, in a sport where grown men are hurling themselves at one another at full speed, one less idiot or overhyped up player is a victory albeit a small one for the safety of the players in the sport.

Banning him for a dozen matches will not stop it, but it will make others think before they go in for such a tackle. I see what both parties are trying to say, but I feel that a three game ban would encourage this type of behavior. We can not simply down play such tackles and chalk it up to this being a sport where grown men run at each other, that is simply not good enough.

ranDOM 10 wrote:

sportsczy wrote:With modern medical care, Haidara should make a full recovery unless he's forced to have microfracture surgery... all depends if the cartilage is still enough. With microfracture, his career is all but over.

You are only talking about the physical recovery, but you fail to acknowledge the mental recovery from such an injury. Not to mention what sitting out for 6 months can do to a players state of mind.

I'm saying that, if it's microfracture surgery, there is no full physical recovery. At least with the the other types, he has a very good chance to get it all back.

I mean Ben Arfa took a monstrous (and similarly bad) tackle for De Jong and it took him 2 years to really recover. That's usually what it takes. You take about a year to get physically 100% and then another year to believe that you're 100%.

Very tough road regardless. Thank god i'm not in that position. I'd get my boyz to take a baseball to his knee so that he can suffer like he made me suffer.

I acknowledged that you had the physical part of the injury down, sportsczy. But I appreciate you explaining it further seeing as I do not have much knowledge with such injuries.

Art Morte wrote:

We have to accept that football is a sport where grown men run at each other at full speed and use their legs to win the ball back. You cannot eradicate bad injuries from a sport like that. Sometimes a player gets his tackle all wrong and injuries like this occur, but this issue can only be helped so much. Banning McManaman for a dozen matches won't stop it.

no, *bleep* that, that's like saying banning drunk driving won't help because there will always be people who drive drunk

what they should do is ban this twat for as long as possible to make an example out of him... then maybe the next aspiring whatshisname will think twice before flying into a dangerous tackle

fact is that as things stand the punishment for this kind of tackles is pretty much nonexistent, the player sits out two weeks and is back up and running, while the victim of his dangerous recklessness and/or malice is out for months at least

for comparison from hockey, when raffi torres gave marian hossa a concussion which left him 7 months out, he was suspended for 25 games... do you think torres is going to do the same thing again?

The Nature Boy wrote:But it will probably stop McManaman from doing it again. As you said, in a sport where grown men are hurling themselves at one another at full speed, one less idiot or overhyped up player is a victory albeit a small one for the safety of the players in the sport.

ranDOM 10 wrote:Banning him for a dozen matches will not stop it, but it will make others think before they go in for such a tackle. I see what both parties are trying to say, but I feel that a three game ban would encourage this type of behavior. We can not simply down play such tackles and chalk it up to this being a sport where grown men run at each other, that is simply not good enough.

I think the damning reaction from the fans, the press and most importantly from your fellow footballers has a much bigger effect on McManaman's and on other potentially-reckless players' future tackles than a lengthy ban would have.

This tackle shouldn't be looked at anything like acceptable, but neither it should be looked at like it happened in tennis.

My bottom line is that bad tackles and bad injuries are a necessary evil in a sport like football and it's a wrong approach to the issue to think "how massively long a ban we need to give for this tackle to stop it from happening ever again?". Because it simply can't be totally eradicated unless you ban every player for eternity.

che wrote:

Art Morte wrote:

We have to accept that football is a sport where grown men run at each other at full speed and use their legs to win the ball back. You cannot eradicate bad injuries from a sport like that. Sometimes a player gets his tackle all wrong and injuries like this occur, but this issue can only be helped so much. Banning McManaman for a dozen matches won't stop it.

no, *bleep* that, that's like saying banning drunk driving won't help because there will always be people who drive drunk

what they should do is ban this twat for as long as possible to make an example out of him... then maybe the next aspiring whatshisname will think twice before flying into a dangerous tackle

fact is that as things stand the punishment for this kind of tackles is pretty much nonexistent, the player sits out two weeks and is back up and running, while the victim of his dangerous recklessness and/or malice is out for months at least

for comparison from hockey, when raffi torres gave marian hossa a concussion which left him 7 months out, he was suspended for 25 games... do you think torres is going to do the same thing again?

If you go down that road where you hand out insanely long bans for tackles like this one, you are going to take a major step towards getting rid of tackling and challenging for the ball altogether.

No player can make 100% of his tackles to be perfectly clean, it's just a statistical truth that once in a while there will be a bad tackle and occasionally the absolutely horrible one.

Nobody thinks it can be eradicated.

But with a significant punishment, can we stop this from happening more often?

We have the power to ban this kid for a while for potentially ruining another kids playing career and set a clear, bold example that this is NOT acceptable...why wouldn't we take advantage of that?

These tackles...they are worse than any diving, any cheating IMO. So it should be treated as such.

EDIT:

If you go down that road where you hand out insanely long bans for tackles like this one, you are going to take a major step towards getting rid of tackling and challenging for the ball altogether.

Difference between a tackle and what happened here. Large and massive one.

Art Morte wrote:

If you go down that road where you hand out insanely long bans for tackles like this one, you are going to take a major step towards getting rid of tackling and challenging for the ball altogether.

you can't be serious

this has absolutely nothing to do with "tackling" or challenging for the ball... this is an unfortunate collision while challenging for the ball for which noone can really be blamed:


see the difference?

This isn't challenging or tackling this is assault.

Tackling means understanding the need for your eye to be on the ball at all times and not acting recklessly..... none of which happened.

Tackling involves looking to win the ball and not the man.... again didn't happen.

The different between challenges and tackling and this is drastically different.

This is a tackle....



What the shithead in question did has no place in society much less football.

I think the fa are too strict with most strong tackles result in fouls but this isnt acceptable tbh. It should be punished about 10x as harshly as what most of the tackles they deem "dangerous" are, it was as some say a "shithouse tackle" lol

Art Morte wrote:

che wrote:

Art Morte wrote:

We have to accept that football is a sport where grown men run at each other at full speed and use their legs to win the ball back. You cannot eradicate bad injuries from a sport like that. Sometimes a player gets his tackle all wrong and injuries like this occur, but this issue can only be helped so much. Banning McManaman for a dozen matches won't stop it.

no, *bleep* that, that's like saying banning drunk driving won't help because there will always be people who drive drunk

what they should do is ban this twat for as long as possible to make an example out of him... then maybe the next aspiring whatshisname will think twice before flying into a dangerous tackle

fact is that as things stand the punishment for this kind of tackles is pretty much nonexistent, the player sits out two weeks and is back up and running, while the victim of his dangerous recklessness and/or malice is out for months at least

for comparison from hockey, when raffi torres gave marian hossa a concussion which left him 7 months out, he was suspended for 25 games... do you think torres is going to do the same thing again?

If you go down that road where you hand out insanely long bans for tackles like this one, you are going to take a major step towards getting rid of tackling and challenging for the ball altogether.

No player can make 100% of his tackles to be perfectly clean, it's just a statistical truth that once in a while there will be a bad tackle and occasionally the absolutely horrible one.

Come on now, your taking a giant leap there.

There is 100% clean tackle and there is fouls, there are tackles which are part man, part ball and there are things like this is which is a different thing all together.

If someone tries to get the ball and mistimes it, I understand...he gets his red, but I wont condemn they guy.

But look how much force he is going in with, look how high it is...its either stupid or evil, whichever one it is, is crazy and cant be let go.

As I said, you think this deserves the same punishment as a normal red card?

I am all for it being a mans game, with contact, with tackling..heck, I am even one for intimidation within the rules...but im sorry, this is a completely different thing here.

I understand peoples concern that handing out a huge ban for incidents like this one might lead to ruining the contact part of football but I don't think it will.


Because that is not a tackle, that's just an aggrevated attack that took place in a game of football. The reff should always be able to see the difference between a mistimed tackle and this. And if he can't, a panel of judges can after the game.

Can't be bothered to quote you lot, but my point about 100% clean tackling being impossible is that you simply cannot avoid disasters. I don't believe that McManaman is a malicious player who goes out there trying to injury his opponents (unless he comes out and says that). Stupid, yeah, probably, to go into that challenge like that and in my opinion he deserves a 3 to 5 games ban.

But these things simply happen and you don't need deliberately malicious players for that. Someone can go into a tackle with the best of intentions, changes his position a little without anticipating its consequences while being in motion and suddenly he has gone through the tackle with studs up and in the air.

We cannot know if a player is being malicious unless it's bloody obvious and this, to me, isn't. Therefore I don't think the punishment should be the result of thinking "We need to punish him as if we know he deliberately wanted to injure the opposition player".

Its a horrible tackle but sometimes you just get carried away in 50-50s, You cant say what he intended. A normal ban would suffice.

50/50

Im quite sure nishank and arts opinion would be quite different if this happened to Suarez

Terrible tackle.....hope the lad is gonna be ok. It pisses me off because Haidara is still a kid, this thing could affect his career. I hope he comes back stronger

Art Morte wrote:

But these things simply happen and you don't need deliberately malicious players for that. Someone can go into a tackle with the best of intentions, changes his position a little without anticipating its consequences while being in motion and suddenly he has gone through the tackle with studs up and in the air.

maybe we should implement measures that stop players from doing potentially harmful actions without anticipating their consequences then?

che wrote:

Art Morte wrote:

But these things simply happen and you don't need deliberately malicious players for that. Someone can go into a tackle with the best of intentions, changes his position a little without anticipating its consequences while being in motion and suddenly he has gone through the tackle with studs up and in the air.

maybe we should implement measures that stop players from doing potentially harmful actions without anticipating their consequences then?

Yeah, a red card and a 3-game ban.

Hand out massive bans and, like I said, it's a step towards reducing tackling altogether. I don't support that.

But yeah yeah yeah, we've got different views on this and I've said my piece, over and out of this thread.

A kid has been banned 6 months in france for a similar tackle and resulting injury this month... has happened before in ligue 1 with very lengthy bans. Hasn't affected the tackling or physicality one bit. What it has done is that the thug players are gone and there were a lot of them in Ligue 1. Even Barton has completely stopped his antics right away because he took a 5 game ban in his first game at OM lol.

Your premise is not true morte.

FA HAS DECIDED TO IMPOSE NO BAN!

They said that they cannot ban an act that wasn't called a foul. What a bunch of hypocrites. It is creating furor in France. It is a complete shock here. What are they thinking?