| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... 22:08 - Jan 26 with 2147 views | monytowbray |
How was the challenge a red? To me it looked like momentum going forward to win the ball in a good position and he turned to hold up.
How am I looking at this wrong as I’m clearly in the minority and missing something. |  |
| |  |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:34 - Jan 26 with 583 views | BlueBadger |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:19 - Jan 26 by Garv |
Give over. He's saying what everyone else is. |
Blimey. What's still impressing you about the man who got use relegated without a fight and is doing his level best to keep us in the third division, all whilst playing terrible, teriible football? |  |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:34 - Jan 26 with 580 views | m14_blue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:16 - Jan 26 by Marshalls_Mullet |
Good old slow motion. |
Not so much the slow motion, more an angle where you could actually see how high up Wright’s leg he planted his studs. |  | | |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:38 - Jan 26 with 570 views | StokieBlue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:27 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
Nah. I’m not disagreeing with how it looked or that the ref was likely to send him off. But the replay where you can see him looking at the ball the whole time is pretty clear that he wasn’t actually trying to challenge the opponent so much as get his foot over the ball to control it.
Watch it again if you can. |
I've seen it and it's been posted again in this thread.
It's an incredibly poor challenge in the end, I really can't see what you are looking at. If anything it looks worse looking at it again.
As discussed, intent isn't relevant.
SB [Post edited 26 Jan 2021 23:44]
|  | | |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:40 - Jan 26 with 564 views | Hullblue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:30 - Jan 26 by Rozz |
I was convinced it was a foul on Jackson initially, but as other have said there can be absolutely no arguments with the other angles of this. Badly misjudged and very high on the shin. Not up for debate, and talk of having it overturned are frankly laughable.
|
Bluee, Crazee and Kayden Jackson’s mum could be the appeals panel and they still wouldn’t overturn that red card. Terrible tackle. |  |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:46 - Jan 26 with 544 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:29 - Jan 26 by jayessess |
I don't think anyone is saying Jackson was trying to break his leg, but... that's not what the rule demands for a red card. |
True. But I’m disputing he was making an actual challenge on the Sunderland player until the very last second when the Sunderland player came in from the side.
Reminds me of the tackle a few years ago where a Prem player tried to play a sidefoot pass and the opposition player nicked it away at the very last second. Cut to a slow motion replay of the “passer” going studs up over the top of the ball.
But clearly that wasn’t what happened and he basically get sent off for trying a sidefoot pass. Here we had Jackson getting sent off for trying to control the ball. |  |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:52 - Jan 26 with 528 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:38 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
I've seen it and it's been posted again in this thread.
It's an incredibly poor challenge in the end, I really can't see what you are looking at. If anything it looks worse looking at it again.
As discussed, intent isn't relevant.
SB [Post edited 26 Jan 2021 23:44]
|
Fair enough.
I’m used to rugby VAR that doesn’t just address intent but also mitigating factors. By your literal interpretation of the freeze frame, you could score a volley but if you hit a defender in the follow through the goal should be disallowed and you should be sent off. Because you’re not allowed to kick opponents right? | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:53 - Jan 26 with 521 views | textbackup |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:52 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
Fair enough.
I’m used to rugby VAR that doesn’t just address intent but also mitigating factors. By your literal interpretation of the freeze frame, you could score a volley but if you hit a defender in the follow through the goal should be disallowed and you should be sent off. Because you’re not allowed to kick opponents right? |
if that tackle is against us, and the man doesn't see red, there is uproar that we never get big decisions |  |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:56 - Jan 26 with 512 views | StokieBlue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:52 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
Fair enough.
I’m used to rugby VAR that doesn’t just address intent but also mitigating factors. By your literal interpretation of the freeze frame, you could score a volley but if you hit a defender in the follow through the goal should be disallowed and you should be sent off. Because you’re not allowed to kick opponents right? |
I'm really not sure what you point is. That's not what I've said at all and I've not even mentioned freeze frames.
You're inventing ways to interpret football matches to suit your view. It's a clear red, virtually everyone thinks so, not really sure what more I can say.
SB | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:57 - Jan 26 with 508 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:53 - Jan 26 by textbackup |
if that tackle is against us, and the man doesn't see red, there is uproar that we never get big decisions |
Well, I was more upset by Winchester’s challenge. Two-footed, in the air and it was ONLY because he knew what he was doing that he pulled out while not pulling out.
Jackson didn’t even know he was making a potential foul challenge until he found himself in that position. | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:00 - Jan 26 with 501 views | mattyhollandsirish |
Someone's on the wind up and a lot of people fell for it. | | | |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:09 - Jan 26 with 479 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:56 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
I'm really not sure what you point is. That's not what I've said at all and I've not even mentioned freeze frames.
You're inventing ways to interpret football matches to suit your view. It's a clear red, virtually everyone thinks so, not really sure what more I can say.
SB |
I don’t understand your unequivocal view either.
My volley example was just to show that you make a mockery of a sport with a literal interpretation of the rules but only at certain times if the volley example can be ignored. In Jackson’s case I think the fact that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle but control the ball is a rather big mitigating factor. | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:18 - Jan 26 with 459 views | StokieBlue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:09 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
I don’t understand your unequivocal view either.
My volley example was just to show that you make a mockery of a sport with a literal interpretation of the rules but only at certain times if the volley example can be ignored. In Jackson’s case I think the fact that he wasn’t trying to make a tackle but control the ball is a rather big mitigating factor. |
I never said anything like what you are presenting though. I've not mentioned slow motions or freeze frames.
It's all irrelevant, it was a clear red regardless of what he was trying to do. The rules simply don't allow for the interpretation you are trying to implement.
SB [Post edited 26 Jan 2021 23:21]
| | | |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:25 - Jan 26 with 437 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:18 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
I never said anything like what you are presenting though. I've not mentioned slow motions or freeze frames.
It's all irrelevant, it was a clear red regardless of what he was trying to do. The rules simply don't allow for the interpretation you are trying to implement.
SB [Post edited 26 Jan 2021 23:21]
|
I know you haven’t said it. I said it to try and question a too literal interpretation of the rules.
I’ll defend Jackson against you and Lambert though. Clearly accidental and an attempt to control the ball that turned into a challenge.
Free the Jackson One! | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:33 - Jan 26 with 417 views | StokieBlue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:25 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
I know you haven’t said it. I said it to try and question a too literal interpretation of the rules.
I’ll defend Jackson against you and Lambert though. Clearly accidental and an attempt to control the ball that turned into a challenge.
Free the Jackson One! |
Why would you need to defend him against me?
I've not said he's done anything on purpose, intent is irrelevant though and what actually happened was a red card offence. I said that on the second post of this thread and that's pretty much it. In fact many have posted a much harsher interpretation of the incident than me.
Nice to be lumped in with Lambert though, very kind of you, even though I never said anything like what Lambert said.
SB | | | |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:40 - Jan 26 with 406 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:33 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
Why would you need to defend him against me?
I've not said he's done anything on purpose, intent is irrelevant though and what actually happened was a red card offence. I said that on the second post of this thread and that's pretty much it. In fact many have posted a much harsher interpretation of the incident than me.
Nice to be lumped in with Lambert though, very kind of you, even though I never said anything like what Lambert said.
SB |
So we actually agree. As I also said I understood why it was given as a red card at the time.
Glad that’s all sorted. | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:42 - Jan 26 with 400 views | textbackup |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:57 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
Well, I was more upset by Winchester’s challenge. Two-footed, in the air and it was ONLY because he knew what he was doing that he pulled out while not pulling out.
Jackson didn’t even know he was making a potential foul challenge until he found himself in that position. |
absolute rubbish. even he has said it was a poor tackle. | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:43 - Jan 26 with 395 views | StokieBlue |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:40 - Jan 26 by Darth_Koont |
So we actually agree. As I also said I understood why it was given as a red card at the time.
Glad that’s all sorted. |
You're acting weird.
I've not changed my stance since my first post in this thread.
Have a lovely evening.
SB | | | |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:50 - Jan 26 with 384 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:42 - Jan 26 by textbackup |
absolute rubbish. even he has said it was a poor tackle. |
Where he caught the Sunderland player high up with his studs was a poor tackle, I agree.
I don’t believe there was that intent though. And yes, I know intent itself doesn’t matter but this all feels remarkably literal for someone who was trying to get his foot over the ball to control it not make a challenge.
Football rules and their literal interpretations are generally sh!t though so I should have known before I got involved here. | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:54 - Jan 26 with 380 views | Darth_Koont |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 23:43 - Jan 26 by StokieBlue |
You're acting weird.
I've not changed my stance since my first post in this thread.
Have a lovely evening.
SB |
No, I just don’t agree with what I consider to be a too narrow interpretation.
Sweet dreams. | |
| |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 00:04 - Jan 27 with 357 views | acj |
| Not controversial, genuine question RE Jackson red card... on 22:10 - Jan 26 by itfcjoe |
Whatever he tried to do, he ended up planting his boot in the middle of his leg - it's a definite red
Even though I thought it would be our FK in real time |
I was half-watching on my phone while teaching an English class, so I kinda caught the tackle out of the corner of my eye and thought it was our free kick. Moments later I saw the ref flashing a red and thought to myself 'get in', only to then see Jackson walking off down the tunnel. Absolute shocker of a tackle having watched it back though! |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
