A&H

Tottenham - Brentford

Tealeaf

Lighting the darkest hour
Staff member
Red card late in the second half for an awful challenge. The visible wounding to Hojberg was appalling.

Didn’t quite see what if anything other wise set off his red mist and wanting to take on everyone, despite the perpetrator being off.

Good to hear some positive punditry for a change when Brentford’s equaliser was ruled out. Instead of bemoaning the use of lines, and forensic analysis Andy Hinchcliffe agreed with the decision having seen it from the angle behind the goal where it was clear Toney was offside.
 
The Referee Store
That really was a shocking challenge, I was on a Zoom call that ended around that time so only saw the aftermath. Not sure there was anything that set him off though other than looking down and seeing the gash on his leg, that would probably annoy even the most mild mannered player.
 
I wondered if something had been said to him, especially as he wanted to go back and seemed set to fight despite being substituted for treatment.
 
I don't think it's possible to claim the culprit had any malicious intent. Difficult one to spot in real-time, not surprised MD missed it
Obviously SFP nevertheless
 
I wondered if something had been said to him, especially as he wanted to go back and seemed set to fight despite being substituted for treatment.
Think he wanted to play on

Absolute shocker of a tackle.. Not intentional by any means but that's unfortunate.
Beggars belief some of the things I have read online defending the player saying not a red card 😬
 
Think he wanted to play on

Absolute shocker of a tackle.. Not intentional by any means but that's unfortunate.
Beggars belief some of the things I have read online defending the player saying not a red card 😬

This is another one of those myths of soccer that a red card can only be done for a deliberate intent to injure. We all know that's not true in the least. There is nothing in Law 12 saying a send-off for SFP has to be deemed as an intentional/deliberate act. The two paragraphs for Serious Foul Play in Law 12 never once says the tackle or challenge must be with the intent to injure. All it says is (and I'm paraphrasing a little bit) that tackles and challenges done with excessive force or brutality endangering the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as SFP.

It's apparent that intent can be one part of the "excessive force" consideration, but a tackle can be SFP and be 100% without intent to injure. But we all know that here. It's the uninformed in the public who don't understand.
 
Think he wanted to play on

Absolute shocker of a tackle.. Not intentional by any means but that's unfortunate.
Beggars belief some of the things I have read online defending the player saying not a red card 😬
Yep straight red looking at the highlights, I'm not sure how anyone can judge whether he meant it or not, only the player himself knows for certain but the pictures do look bad.

I did not see the game so what was Mike Dean's original decision? Seeing as it's yet another incident a referee is being sent to the monitor, did Mike Dean had a good view of the incident in real time and should he of got the decision right straight away without the monitor, I'm guessing by Big Cats post perhaps not.
 
Yep straight red looking at the highlights, I'm not sure how anyone can judge whether he meant it or not, only the player himself knows for certain but the pictures do look bad.

I did not see the game so what was Mike Dean's original decision? Seeing as it's yet another incident a referee is being sent to the monitor, did Mike Dean had a good view of the incident in real time and should he of got the decision right straight away without the monitor, I'm guessing by Big Cats post perhaps not.
Nothing given at the time, played on. Bit disappointed with Mike Dean looking back, he was completely stationary in the centre circle in that phase of play. You could see a mile off that a challenge was about to happen yet he stood completely still, despite the fact he was directly behind the spurs player
 
Red card late in the second half for an awful challenge. The visible wounding to Hojberg was appalling.

Didn’t quite see what if anything other wise set off his red mist and wanting to take on everyone, despite the perpetrator being off.

Good to hear some positive punditry for a change when Brentford’s equaliser was ruled out. Instead of bemoaning the use of lines, and forensic analysis Andy Hinchcliffe agreed with the decision having seen it from the angle behind the goal where it was clear Toney was offside.
I write without seeing it - but how can you judge offside from an angle behind the goal?
 
I write without seeing it - but how can you judge offside from an angle behind the goal?
They used the angle from behind the goal to confirm the position of the defender’s foot.
 
I write without seeing it - but how can you judge offside from an angle behind the goal?
As ASM said above it showed the position of the foot. To visualise the l is the defender and the j the attacker. The curve of the j extends beyond the bottom of the l

lj
 
Back
Top