-- Anonymous, August 22, 2000

Answers

Now I have no time nor love for Patrick Vierra, but having just seen the incidents at Highbury last night, it has to be said that Graham Poll has completely lost the plot.

PV clearly got both feet on the ball, and if he was so badly OTT how come he was the one who ended up with stud marks right down his right thigh.

I said it at the time the FA launched these new 'laws' - it is fair enough to protect the referee's from the abuse of the players, but who is going to protect the fans from the abuse of the referee in this way.

GP is a complete tosser and I am quite litteraly frightened of the consequences to the game because of the actions of people like him and his equally stupid defender-in-chief Phillip Don.

The FA hove now come out and have confirmed that they will be banning Vierra for five games, but they have not given any indictation as to what they plan to do about the worst protagonist last night, that being Poll.

All this, and we have got him to look forward to at SJP on Septemebr the 9th when we play Chewsea.

-- Anonymous, August 22, 2000

I've seen Poll have some great games, but last night wasn't one of them. With all the red around, you'd think it was Poll Pot in charge.

The problem started when he sent off that nice lad McAllister - not been sent off for 10 years apparently, but he's a thug. It was a clumsy tackle - nowt else. Certainly not mallicious nor dangerous. But having sent GM off, he had little choice but to send off Vierra.

In the heat of the moment, PV's reputation went before him and what initally looked rash challenge (following a pretty good impression of Roy Keane running around like a madman), Poll's mind was made up.

Quite why he sent of Hamann is a bit difficult to understand - except it was Didi Hamann, and he was the one who had challenged Vierra. But really, I've had more aggro getting onto the bliddy train to Old Trafford on Sunday than those two dished oot.

IMHO the real culprits are the FA. Poll made some mistakes - maily due to trying to follow the FA's directives - and should be chastised. But to let Vierra's card stand is a travesty of justice. Did they explain why?

-- Anonymous, August 22, 2000

Got to admit that I thought none of the sendings off were warranted. I didn't even think that PV deserved to get sent off vs. the Mackems. Then again I am not of the opinion that booting Niall Quinn in the face should be a bookable offence.

Why do some guys just never get the benefit of the doubt and others (Roy Keane for example) get away with far too much?

-- Anonymous, August 22, 2000

Both the tackle from Vieira and the one from Mcallister were two footed tackles. Are you seriously suggesting that a player who lunges at another player with both feet off the ground does not deserve to get sent off. I know of many a player who has never recovered from a two footed challenge which broke their leg or did irreparable damage to their knee who may just disagree with you.

Vieira simply lost his rag, in both games and went looking for the player he had felt had done him some percieved wrong and went for him. So Roy keane is a thug but Vieira isn't. The truth is that they both lost their heads and went for a fellow professional trying to cause them harm. Don't give me he won the ball neither because if Hammann hadn't jumped over the tackle he wouldn't have been anywhere near the ball he would have hit the back of Didi's legs. The real injustice is that Vieira should have had a straight red card for that challenge alone as Mcallister did

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

Don't know which tackle you were watching Bake butseeing it all on slow motion on TV afterwards you could see two things, which admittedly the referee probably wouldn't have had time to see.

A) Viera started off with two feet but at the time he made contact with the ball he had tucked his left leg under his right leg.

B) Unlike Viera the only thing on Hamann's mind was the player. You could easily see that as soon as Viera launched himself Hamann had his eye on Viera and actually raked his stud's down Viera's leg.

Viera was making a comitted tackle which may have looked reckless but was executed well without injury to the other player. Hamann was thinking about something else entirely, so he's either and uncomitted wimp or a malicious german tosser!

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

I actually sympathise with Poll. None of his decisions was an outright mistake, ie mistaking a dive for a trip, or thinking someone hand balled etc. They were all a strict intepretation of the rules. As you say Bake, the refs have been specifically told to outlaw the two footed tackle so what real choice did he have. The problem seems to be that we, as supporters, have our own set of rules as to what's legitimate or not, the refs have their rulebook and directives, and the tow don't always seem to match up. I have little sympathy for Viera, most refs would have little choice. Macallister and HAmann perhaps deserved the benefit of the doubt. But none of the decisions were outrageous. None of them even came near to Shearer's sending off last season.

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

De Builder, he hardly tucked one leg under the other - although I have to admit not poring over the replay endlessly. Both feet might not have met the ball, but surely he shouldn't have dived in anyway. As a spectator the diving tackle is something I don't want to see disappera from the game, but it's fairly obvious that the powers that be are trying to outlaw it.

Perhaps I should look at the incident again though before I dig a hole for myself ;-) Any clips on the web?

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

Not that I know of Windy but if you do get to see one, take a look at that German and see what his intentions were.

I can see why he was sent off because in the couple of seconds Poll had to see the incident it looked pretty bad but then again he was only a couple of yards away from the incident.

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

DB

I have watched the tackle several times (which is more than the ref can at the time) and He left the ground with two feet diving at another player. That is as you rightly say a reckless challenge which has the potential to break legs. There is no need to leave the ground when trying to make a tackle when the ball is on the ground. Hammann made contact with Vieiras calf because he was jumping out of the way of a potentially career threatening tackle.

As for outlawing the two footed diving tackle, the sooner the better as far as I am concerned. There is no need for it and two many players are seriously injured by it.

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

Bake,

So Hamann wasn't going into the tackle looking at Viera's legs and then jumping up and coming down on the oncoming Viera's legs! Blatantly obvious.

At the end of the day is Hamann was going into the tackle going for the ball he wouldn't have come close to Viera until both touched the ball, at which point Viera was on the ground cleanly moving the ball.

It wasn't a tackle from behind, which I agree should be outlawed and Viera didn't go over the top either. Agreed he started off two footed but it wasn't your typical two footed lunge where the player is just jumping into the area where the ball is. Viera pulled off a highly skilful tackle and if Hamann is not prepared to stick his foot in the right area he shouldn't be taking on the likes of Viera.

Tackling has become as much an art as chipping the keeper from 20 yards and excellent examples of both are few and far between.....unfortunately.

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

ITK, I've just re-read your original posting, was it a Freudian slip on your behalf, or was it deliberate? The reason I ask is that when clicking on the thread title, the picture slowly opens and it looks as though Poll is, well...to$$ing!

:-7

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

My thoughts exactly when I opened the thread!

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

I'm a bit late for this debate, but having seen the video three times I think you could make an argument either way.
The tackle WAS two-footed AND off the ground AND slightly from the back. However, he played the ball very cleanly, with one foot, and did not even touch Hamman until the ball had been played away and Viera's momentum carried him into Hamman. In this instance I don't personally believe it was a dangerous tackle, but accept that it could have been if Viera's timing had not been as good as it was.
Frankly, I don't know what the law on such tackles is these days. In my playing days this particular tackle wouldn't have even warranted a free-kick, but nowadays ANY tackle that brings the man with the ball down is classed as a foul, even if the ball is won first and cleanly.
A worrying aspect for me is the use of the word "intent" in evaluating such a tackle - this is extremely subjective and IMO unhelpful.
In my personal view - accepting that my understanding of the law today may be out-of-date - Viera's tackle wasn't even a foul. If he had contacted Hamman prior to playing the ball away then it would have been a foul, and would have warranted either a yellow or even a red card depending on the contact.

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000

Steph/Bud.

No....just a very lucky side effect of the system!

I really think he is a total tosser metaphoric rather than self abuse sort of way.

-- Anonymous, August 23, 2000