Football / Soccer / Calcio / Futebol / Fußball

Dont like that red at all, just trying to shield the ball

Wait people think this is a fair card??? nah this is a shocking one

Most people here showing they have never stepped foot on a pitch.

Dude is stepping to block the ball and the Copenhagen guy just sticks his foot in. Very unfortunate but if you get stepped on trying to play the ball it does happen.

When Cisse got his leg broken it was sad but it wasn’t a red card.

VAR is not doing its job properly.

Kinda ridiculous that. Looks red, but not intentional. Yellow would be deserving. Idk, that’s unfortunate.

Never a red. Yellow at most. He's shielding the ball and doesn't look like he knows he's going to make contact, especially in that spot on the lad's ankle, even more so in the heat of the moment full speed.

Are some peoples bones made out of cardboard in this thread? Might sprain your ankle if you are unlucky but no one is breaking their shin or ankle from that.

I’m clearly becoming more and more out of touch because that’s never a red, but I’m seeing a pretty even split of opinions. Just wow. Shielding the ball. What’s next, players slides you while you’re running normally and if you step on him then it’s a red.

This has to be one of the most benign maneuvers I’ve ever seen given a red.

I’m not loving this. Seems like there’s been 4 or 5 reds this year because of where players are ending up with no intention to rather than because of the actual tackle.

Thats not a red. Unfortunate play as hes just trying to shield

I feel like the meaning of a "red card" is just completely different now than it was before. Intent doesn't matter at all anymore, instead if the tackle looks bad and might have caused an injury, it's a red.

It just overlooks the fact that this is a contact sport. There's no way to play it that completely removes the risk of injury.

Weekly reminder that Rashford looks like Alistair Overeem when he is off roids.

Yellow at the most.

Leg breaker.. straight to jail

What I don't understand is, how come they can go back after the play (that went to Hojlund's shot) continued here, when they couldn't for the VAR fiasco from Diaz's (not-)goal?

This was a red. The law is pretty clear on endangering another player. Intent, shielding the ball, whatever other crock pot conspiracy theory is meaningless.

Personally I think red is a bit harsh here, yellow for sure, but that rashford is in possession and doesn't appear to see the other player I think saves him. Honestly though I could see it teetering red. Really unfortunate accident though, hence why I think rashford shouldn't have been given red.

I dislike ManU but i absolutely despise red card decisions like these.

Everyone and their mother knows this was utterly unintentional.

Is this really what a red card should be about? Technicalities?

For me it should be the exact opposite: A red is when people deliberatly try to injure, or provoke injuries.

None of that happened here.

And this is comming from a guy liking Kopenhagen, Liverpool and City.

I dont know man, do we give red cards for unfortunate clashes now. It was not a tackle, not reckless not out of control.

Seems ridiculous to be a red card.

Is everyone posting here like ten years old or just happen to have short memories?

The suggestion that this is somehow a new approach by refs is way off the mark. As a refresher, here's Ronaldinho's red card in the Quarter Final of the 2002 World Cup against England (which was less dangerous than Rashford's tackle here- Ronaldinho scrapes the shin of his opponent whereas Rashford could easily have broken his opponent's leg) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GckBqFP120s

​

By the way, I think Rashford is one of the true good guys in the game. Feel genuinely sad that he's going to now have a torrent of abuse from knuckle draggers who have the mental maturity of a five year old on a sugar rush.

I don't really understand how he gets a red card for defending the ball when somebody else dives in for a tackle

anyone that says that isnt a red (regardless of intent) is genuinely insane

Will his suspension carry over into the Europa League?

Not malicious, not deliberate. He's eyes fixated on the ball (where feet will be). Slow mo making it look worse.

Orange for me.

His out of form rn . He hasn't done anything in this season

What's the actual rule here? No mal intent = no red? Or any studs above the ankle = red?

Unintentional but dangerous and looks painful. Red card all day these days.

I don’t understand how there is an argument against this red card

I think the current application of rules is very fucked up in that they judge a player by the outcome, not their intent, nor even a "reasonably foreseeable consequence" of their action.

Havertz was a red card all day long for me, it's an incredibly dangerous, out of control tackle, off the ground, plenty of force, that's going to break someone's leg but he gets lucky and doesn't make much contact, so they give a yellow, even though it's blatantly dangerous. Rashford tries to shield the ball and a leg appears under him and it's a red. It's not some outrageously dangerous action, if he doesn't make contact, and it's not even a foul, whereas the Havertz one should be a red regardless of contact, IMO.

We now punish dangerous tackles and unfortunate accidents identically. It was a red card in 2023, but it shouldn't be, IMO.

Disclaimer: I don't have a hard on for punishing Havertz in particular, it was just the most recent "dangerous tackle" let off that stuck in my head

This is one of those where I don't think there's any intention on Rashford's part, but it is a red. If he doesn't put his foot out so far then the contact is nowhere near as severe.

Oh hell nah. That's even worse in slow motion.

This sub makes me go insane sometimes.

It seems you have to break a bone for it to be a red card, and even then I’m sure half the sub would argue it’s not because it was an accident.

At most this is a yellow

The officials are desperate for Copenhagen to win this match

Is that really a red?

Elbow to the ear and step on the ankle not a red? What the fuck are you smoking?

That’s a harsh red

This basically happened to Marcelo. Completely innocent move but with horrible results. It's a red.

As a Liverpool fan who is loving the outcome of this game, this should defo not be a red

Tbh it's a clear red to me. I get it's not intentional and he's trying to shield the ball but he absolutely does not need to over-extend his leg to that extent, it's very reckless and could easily have broken the other guy's leg. You need to have better spatial awareness and control your leg extension.

It was totally possible to shield the ball without putting his studs on the other guy's ankle.

Ten hag is going to blame so many things in the presser

🤌🤌🤌

10hag bringing best out of Trashford

It’s a red card offence by the rules, but there is literally nothing he could’ve done differently, just extremely unfortunate outcome. It’s not even a dangerous play, it’s him planting his foot down as he is shielding the ball, the play itself is made 100 times a game.

I see so many people here say intent doesn’t matter, and maybe it doesn’t, but shouldn’t it?

I really don't understand the controversy in this. Yes it unfortunate and accidental, but why is that a factor? If he seriously injured the player as he could easily have done there would be no furor about this. It reminds me of Jones vs Spurs - unfortunate for the player but the correct call.

Just when we were having a good match ...

Fuck VAR

Fucking rubbish decision he’s not even looking at the player

By what fucking rule is that a red?