| Jackson's Red Card ... 12:36 - Feb 2 with 4142 views | El_Fenix |
Having watched replays in slow-motion several times, having read Lambert's harsh condemnation and Jackson's abject apology, and having noted the consensus of opinion on this board, I remain puzzled. Why did Kayden Jackson receive a red (or even a yellow ...) card for his role in the collision that occurred? What have I missed about the situation?
I saw Jackson gain possession of the ball and begin to accelerate down the field. The pitch was wet; and because Jackson is fast and his path was curving, he was experiencing a destabilizing centrifugal force. As the tackle came in from the side, Jackson was balanced on one leg that was not firmly planted, was looking ahead and was trying to control the ball. The impact of the tackle caused him to lose his balance and his legs became tangled with those of the tackler. In my opinion, the hazard to players' safety was caused by the tackler who could have received a yellow card for dangerous play. However, the tackler was also playing at high speed, going for the ball, and not displaying malicious intent. As anyone who has played football knows, football is played at high speed and in real time, not in slow motion by people sitting on their sofas!
I think that the referee panicked. I have some sympathy for him, because a no-call would have caused a huge upset. But what did Jackson do wrong? |  |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |  |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:46 - Feb 2 with 1101 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:36 - Feb 2 by TractorWood |
The referee panicking.
The waffle about centrifugal force. He was just high and late into a challenge.
It's a red card. |
He was not high and late going into a challenge. He was the player in possession, it was his opponent who made the challenge.
Centrifugal force is not 'waffle'. It is a well-known physical effect, associated with radial acceleration - and Kayden Jackson can accelerate faster than most football players ... | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:48 - Feb 2 with 1091 views | leitrimblue |
Think it was firm but fare |  | | |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:49 - Feb 2 with 1092 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:46 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
He was not high and late going into a challenge. He was the player in possession, it was his opponent who made the challenge.
Centrifugal force is not 'waffle'. It is a well-known physical effect, associated with radial acceleration - and Kayden Jackson can accelerate faster than most football players ... |
He was the last player to touch the ball, it's something of a stretch to say he was in possession. That he had to stretch to try to retain possession of the ball suggests it wasn't in his control. It was that motion that led to the challenge, which was quite correctly deemed to be reckless. |  |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:49 - Feb 2 with 1091 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:30 - Feb 2 by Paramedic |
I understand what you are saying. Unfortunately the referee sees it in a different light he doesn’t have VAR or a chance to watch it over. His decision is final. No point worrying about it now it’s gone. And I actually don’t think his dismissal had any impact on the outcome of the game. We would have lost with 11 anyway I believe. |
Thank you for the good advice. And I agree that we would have lost anyway. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:52 - Feb 2 with 1082 views | Darth_Koont |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:05 - Feb 2 by BrianTablet |
I'm one of those. Still can't see it as a certain red as some do.
It's like a defender preparing to kick the ball away and has it nicked off him by a striker, then his follow through catches the striker. His foot may well be in a dangerous place, but it's hardly his fault. |
Exactly. I made the same point at the time that it wasn’t even a challenge as Jackson had his foot raised to get it over the ball and under control. The player coming in from the side made it a challenge.
I can see why the red was given under a strict interpretation of the rules but then there’s a massive inconsistency every game in how that literal interpretation of contact is applied. I mean, of course, you can’t kick players in the head but if the defender ducks into a player’s attempted volley is that going to be a red card too? |  |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:55 - Feb 2 with 1072 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:49 - Feb 2 by Herbivore |
He was the last player to touch the ball, it's something of a stretch to say he was in possession. That he had to stretch to try to retain possession of the ball suggests it wasn't in his control. It was that motion that led to the challenge, which was quite correctly deemed to be reckless. |
The motion led to the challenge? No, the tackler made the challenge! Jackson's right foot was between the ball and the tackler, which is exactly where it needed to be during the process of controlling the ball. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:09 - Feb 2 with 1052 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:55 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
The motion led to the challenge? No, the tackler made the challenge! Jackson's right foot was between the ball and the tackler, which is exactly where it needed to be during the process of controlling the ball. |
That's your interpretation of it. | |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:10 - Feb 2 with 1050 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:52 - Feb 2 by Darth_Koont |
Exactly. I made the same point at the time that it wasn’t even a challenge as Jackson had his foot raised to get it over the ball and under control. The player coming in from the side made it a challenge.
I can see why the red was given under a strict interpretation of the rules but then there’s a massive inconsistency every game in how that literal interpretation of contact is applied. I mean, of course, you can’t kick players in the head but if the defender ducks into a player’s attempted volley is that going to be a red card too? |
It's as clear a red card as you'll see to be fair. He's carelessly gone over the ball and ran his studs down the guy's shin. It's not malicious, but it's a clear red card. Lambert's description of it and throwing him under the bus was ridiculous though. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:17 - Feb 2 with 1041 views | GeoffSentence |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:26 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
Jackson was in free fall due to the impact of the opponent's challenge. He had no ability to react and control the location his limbs were during the split-second of his free fall. |
That sounds very much like a description of 'out of control'
Red card. |  |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:21 - Feb 2 with 1031 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:10 - Feb 2 by Herbivore |
It's as clear a red card as you'll see to be fair. He's carelessly gone over the ball and ran his studs down the guy's shin. It's not malicious, but it's a clear red card. Lambert's description of it and throwing him under the bus was ridiculous though. |
It was primarily Lambert's description and attitude that triggered my quest to defend the actions of a player who was an unfortunate victim of circumstances. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:25 - Feb 2 with 1026 views | Ewan_Oozami |
Have watched it a few times:
1. Jackson was not in possession of the ball
2. Jackson knew the defender was there, he actually looks at him
3. When Jackson tries to protect the ball, he has his back to the defender
4. Jackson is stretching to get the ball so he couldn't really control where he would land his foot
Definite red card - personally that wasn't a challenge I'd have gone in for like that, I'd have tried to toe the ball away from the defender, I might well have got the foul, and probably a bruised ankle and the defender may well have seen red for the force of the challenge... |  |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:26 - Feb 2 with 1022 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:17 - Feb 2 by GeoffSentence |
That sounds very much like a description of 'out of control'
Red card. |
When the loss of control is caused by the impact of the person making the challenge, it is not the responsibility of the person who is being tackled. It's unfair to blame the victim! | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:26 - Feb 2 with 1023 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:21 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
It was primarily Lambert's description and attitude that triggered my quest to defend the actions of a player who was an unfortunate victim of circumstances. |
I agree that Lambert's reaction was ridiculous, I don't agree that he was simply an innocent victim of circumstance. The truth is somewhere in the middle, in that I don't think he intended to hurt or even make contact with the player, but the way he went about trying to secure the ball was careless and, indeed, reckless. He can have no complaints about the red, but he can legitimately complain that his boss is a prize jeb-end. | |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:27 - Feb 2 with 1017 views | longtimefan |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:10 - Feb 2 by Herbivore |
It's as clear a red card as you'll see to be fair. He's carelessly gone over the ball and ran his studs down the guy's shin. It's not malicious, but it's a clear red card. Lambert's description of it and throwing him under the bus was ridiculous though. |
Indeed. As a former referee, if I’d not produced a red card for that challenge, and had then seen the replay, I’d be gutted. |  | | |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:31 - Feb 2 with 1014 views | Garv |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:43 - Feb 2 by Radlett_blue |
There was equally a furore over Nsiala's red card against Wednesday a couple of years ago. Toto won the loose ball, but his follow through crashed into the Wednesday players & I guess the referee deemed it "reckless", endangering an opponent" or "excessive force". The laws are different these days & players should avoid reckless lunges as you're taking a big chance (and could break someone's leg, as Luke Hyam did). |
I remember.
'crashed into the Wednesday player' is colossally over the top though. I'm not sure he even touched him. It was Forestieri after all. |  |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:33 - Feb 2 with 1008 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:31 - Feb 2 by Garv |
I remember.
'crashed into the Wednesday player' is colossally over the top though. I'm not sure he even touched him. It was Forestieri after all. |
Yeah, that was a red card that genuinely was a joke. Very little wrong with Toto's challenge. | |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:36 - Feb 2 with 1005 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:27 - Feb 2 by longtimefan |
Indeed. As a former referee, if I’d not produced a red card for that challenge, and had then seen the replay, I’d be gutted. |
Why would you be gutted? Which part(s) of my assessment are wrong? (I'm genuinely interested ...) | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:10 - Feb 2 with 982 views | Darth_Koont |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:10 - Feb 2 by Herbivore |
It's as clear a red card as you'll see to be fair. He's carelessly gone over the ball and ran his studs down the guy's shin. It's not malicious, but it's a clear red card. Lambert's description of it and throwing him under the bus was ridiculous though. |
Going over the ball implies a challenge. But he was “over the ball” to try and trap it. Then the opposition player gets his leg in the way of his boot from the side.
As I said, I can understand the sending off but then you could arguably see a sending off every game or two if you take intention out of it. Any contact with a player could be interpreted in the most literal terms. | |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:11 - Feb 2 with 981 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 14:36 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
Why would you be gutted? Which part(s) of my assessment are wrong? (I'm genuinely interested ...) |
I saw Jackson gain possession of the ball - False - a Sunderland player kicked the ball against Jackson and the ball rebounded forward
He begin to accelerate down the field. True - but he was chasing after the ball that he didn't have control of
The pitch was wet - True
and because Jackson is fast - True
and his path was curving, True
he was experiencing a destabilizing centrifugal force. False - Jackson deliberately turns his back to the defender
As the tackle came in from the side, False, because Jackson turned, the tackle was from behind
Jackson was balanced on one leg that was not firmly planted, False, Jackson has planted his left foot
was looking ahead - False, he was looking down at the ball
and was trying to control the ball. - partially true, Jackson's foot was still well above the ground
The impact of the tackle caused him to lose his balance and his legs became tangled with those of the tackler. - this was after Jackson's foot had made contact with the defender
In my opinion, the hazard to players' safety was caused by the tackler who could have received a yellow card for dangerous play. - He could have done, had Jackson got his foot on the ground by the time the defender arrived
However, the tackler was also playing at high speed, going for the ball, and not displaying malicious intent. True
As anyone who has played football knows, football is played at high speed and in real time, not in slow motion by people sitting on their sofas! True, but the ref could see that the defender had got the ball before Jackson, in fact Jackson's foot hit the leg above the shinpad, | |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:28 - Feb 2 with 962 views | El_Fenix |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:11 - Feb 2 by Ewan_Oozami |
I saw Jackson gain possession of the ball - False - a Sunderland player kicked the ball against Jackson and the ball rebounded forward
He begin to accelerate down the field. True - but he was chasing after the ball that he didn't have control of
The pitch was wet - True
and because Jackson is fast - True
and his path was curving, True
he was experiencing a destabilizing centrifugal force. False - Jackson deliberately turns his back to the defender
As the tackle came in from the side, False, because Jackson turned, the tackle was from behind
Jackson was balanced on one leg that was not firmly planted, False, Jackson has planted his left foot
was looking ahead - False, he was looking down at the ball
and was trying to control the ball. - partially true, Jackson's foot was still well above the ground
The impact of the tackle caused him to lose his balance and his legs became tangled with those of the tackler. - this was after Jackson's foot had made contact with the defender
In my opinion, the hazard to players' safety was caused by the tackler who could have received a yellow card for dangerous play. - He could have done, had Jackson got his foot on the ground by the time the defender arrived
However, the tackler was also playing at high speed, going for the ball, and not displaying malicious intent. True
As anyone who has played football knows, football is played at high speed and in real time, not in slow motion by people sitting on their sofas! True, but the ref could see that the defender had got the ball before Jackson, in fact Jackson's foot hit the leg above the shinpad, |
There are genuine disparities regarding what each of us saw and how we interpreted it. It's not worth further dissection in this forum. I will agree to disagree. | |
| ITFC shall rise like a phoenix from the ashes of its long decline! |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:44 - Feb 2 with 947 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:10 - Feb 2 by Darth_Koont |
Going over the ball implies a challenge. But he was “over the ball” to try and trap it. Then the opposition player gets his leg in the way of his boot from the side.
As I said, I can understand the sending off but then you could arguably see a sending off every game or two if you take intention out of it. Any contact with a player could be interpreted in the most literal terms. |
Every game where a player plants his studs into an opponent's shin you do usually see a red card. | |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:46 - Feb 2 with 947 views | lowhouseblue |
on first viewing i thought the foul was against jackson. on the replay from the other angle it was clearly dangerous by jackson. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:55 - Feb 2 with 935 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:06 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
Jackson was in possession of the ball! He did not go into a tackle or make a challenge; he was tackled by an opponent, whose presence he may not have been fully aware of prior to the collision. |
This is the crux of it.
If, as you suggest, Jackson was in control of the ball then the challenge from the defender is a foul through the back of Jackson and that was how I saw it from the initial camera angle in normal time.
When you see it back again, you see that Jackson has overrun the ball and sees the defender coming in. He tries to spin to shield the ball from the defender but, because he is not actually in control of the football, the effect is that he goes over the top of the ball and straight at the defender who is challenging the loose ball. Then when you see it from the referee's angle too you see how bad a challenge it was.
It was the combination of no longer being in possession of the ball and going over the top of the ball and down the defender's leg that made it a red. If he had been in control of the ball, the defender would have gone through Jackson before reaching the ball and would have presumably received at least a yellow card for a challenge from behind. |  |
| |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:56 - Feb 2 with 935 views | andytown |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 13:17 - Feb 2 by El_Fenix |
No comparison at all. Judge was in possession of the ball and Hyam made an ugly tackle, seemingly with deliberate intent. |
From memory Hyam didn’t get a red for the Judge leg break challenge? As I remember he got a red much later in the game after 2 yellows. I’m not even sure he got booked for the original one on Judge. Not 100% sure on that though. | | | |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 16:02 - Feb 2 with 931 views | Herbivore |
| Jackson's Red Card ... on 15:56 - Feb 2 by andytown |
From memory Hyam didn’t get a red for the Judge leg break challenge? As I remember he got a red much later in the game after 2 yellows. I’m not even sure he got booked for the original one on Judge. Not 100% sure on that though. |
He got booked, but only once the ref saw that Judge was hurt and the Brentford players made a massive fuss. It really wasn't an especially bad challenge, just unlucky with the way Judge's leg was planted and the way the the challenge impacted. It was a full blooded challenge but not that out of the ordinary. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
