Massive, quick question. What punishment

[Lazie]

you think should be handed out to the player that broke Eduardo's foot?

Personally, I think the 3 game suspension for the straight red should be sufficient. I watched it over and over last evening between Skysports and FSW Report. I don't get the impression he wanted to harm the youth. Maybe he wanted Eduardo to know he was there, but breaking the foot seems accidential to me.

I say the 3 game suspension should be enough.

[Karl]

Frankly coming in with a foot or feet off the ground in those types tackles (*Eboue on Terry was one such)...is with the knowledge that there is probability of serious injury and a career ending injury(ies) is a possibility.

The player going in in such a manner knows what damage that can/could be cause.

Perhaps...I am going somewhat over the top...but if someone attempts to shoot another in the fleshy part of the body there is knowledge that missing what was aimed at could result in serious injury or a 'career ending' injury...(????)

Repeat - Players know what they are doing!

...however, based on what I have observed on how similar incidents have been treated - 3 - 6 games.

I am sure the player who caused the injury had instant remorse! ...some murderers, I am sure go through that same stage of emotion!

Personal opinion - The punishment should be such that a clear message is sent to have players consciously not make such tackles!

Hefty Fine!
6 months ban!
Civil suit!

Maybe the message would then reach all players that such tackles are a "No!-No!!!"

*Eboue on his return for the CAF tournament again made a horrible 'foot high - studs showing tackle' on another player. Cannot remember who it was...but he got his just straight red!

..and just to remind - He broke Terry's leg (...or was it Terry's foot?)

[Mosiah]

There would be few players left in the CPPL!

I agree with you Karl, to an extent. A strong message should be sent even though I don't believe he wanted to do such damage. But we need to discourage such tackles in every league, all over the world. A 3 match suspension is not sending a strong enuff message. People get that all the time. Not sure if 6 months is too long. How about 1 month? 2?

And, just as important, players that attempt such tackles and miss or don't do as much damage should also be given that 1 or 2 month suspension!!! We must not wait for another ghastly injury before we punish!!!

[Mexxx]

I agree with ex ref Winter's view

TIME TO TACKLE THE TACKLES 26-2-08
Jeff Winter



“He is not that sort of player” Big Eck stated after his player Martin Taylor had possibly finished the career of Eduardo.

I would not argue with that statement but he is a member of the growing band of footballers who in recent months have forgotten how to tackle.

The growing number of studs-showing two footed lunges has grown to epidemic proportions.

What happened at St. Andrew’s has been coming for weeks now. It is more by luck than good management that until now we have escaped the sight that we saw on Saturday, with a player's leg distorted when the simple equation of studs and bone did not meet on favourable terms.

As players and physios looked away in horror, let’s hope that the one good thing that will come out of this is that players will have a long hard look at themselves and stop what has become the new cancer in the game.

Arsene Wenger angrily stated that Taylor should never be allowed to play football again. This is a statement he later retracted but that fate may well become true for Eduardo.

Enough is enough and the PFA must act to inform its members that these tackles are not permissible.

The FA should take responsibility and start handing out serious punishments and looking at videos each week and handing out retrospective punishments. It is a time for action, not talk.

Talking of thugs and bad tackles, it was another accident waiting to happen wasn’t it? Aliadiere sent off for violent conduct, yer joking aren’t yer?

Yes he raised his hands but so did Mascerano and he should have gone also.

It will be interesting to see if the authorities charge the Liverpool player. Don’t hold your breath!!

It was another example of the Boro having a new Premier League referee who does not appear on his games so far to be up to the task.

But Aliadiere will serve a three match ban for a bit of petulance exactly the same as Taylor for his career threatening challenge.

It does not take me to tell you that there is something wrong.

Keep up to date with all my columns on www.jeffwinter.co.uk

[Mexxx]

James Lofton also has this to say

James Lawton: Reckless tackles leave ugly stain that apologists can no longer wipe away

function displayImage(sPicURL) { window.open("popup.jsp?"+sPicURL, "", "resizable=1,HEIGHT=200,WIDTH=200"); }Related Articles

• <LI class=bullet>Da Silva refuses to blame Taylor for broken leg
• Arsenal set end of year target for Eduardo

Tuesday, February 26, 2008




Eduardo da Silva once had exquisitely skilful and very quick feet. It is a statement of fact made no less forlorn by yesterday's optimistic news that we may be able to say that again in roughly nine months' time.

Certainly, there is no reassurance in the clamour that says however long he is out of the game it will not be because of the malicious nature of Birmingham City's Martin Taylor.


OK, let's agree Taylor is not a footballing psychopath and that his reaction of horror at the consequences of his tackle on Eduardo was entirely genuine. But then let's agree on something else. It was the kind of X-rated tackle which has become commonplace in the Premier League.

Taylor's foot was in the air, his studs were showing, and, given the hair-trigger dexterity of Eduardo on the ball, the chances of injury ran very high. Some have praised the referee for reaching so promptly for a red card but if you are a traffic cop and someone comes steaming through a red light you don't wait to see how much mayhem has been caused. The truth is, Eduardo's sickening fate was the big accident waiting to happen. Now that it has, maybe, just maybe, a growing problem will be addressed.

The trouble is not, as so many within the game say, that football is a contact sport that would be hopelessly diminished if defenders were not allowed to tackle with some force. Good defence is as much an art as good attack; for confirmation you only have to look at Paolo Maldini or, for that matter, Rio Ferdinand and Gaël Clichy on one of their better days. What has to be attacked, with new legislation, is the trend which Arsène Wenger legitimately criticised while, by his own commendable admission, going completely over the top in his assertion that Taylor should be banned for life.

What should be wiped away is the belief that teams of inferior resources, and thus inferior skills, are somehow justified in reducing the odds against them by blurring the line between honest, and vigorous, defence and tackling that has no place in the game. We are not talking about the old devilry of over-the-top tackling that became a dark cult in the Sixties and Seventies. It was also a deadly skill in possession of some of the most talented players who declared that if they ran the risk of dying by the sword while in full view of unknowing officials they might as well wield one in their own defence.

No, the kind of tackle that Taylor inflicted on Eduardo would have been scoffed at in the old days. It carried the inherent subtlety of a cudgel. However, nowadays whenever one of those crude assaults occurs there is an instant chorus from the broadcasting booth and analysis couches that what we have seen is no more than an excess of zeal and shortage of timing.

Wenger's contention, and it is one that has been loudly voiced this season by the only manager in England who can compete at his level of football skill, Sir Alex Ferguson, is that teams struggling for survival in the top flight too often attempt to kick and intimidate their way out of trouble. This is especially so when they are faced by teams who have got to the top essentially by playing football. It was a matter, for example, of much civic pride in Bolton that the blood of the old Gunners ran cold whenever they entered the Reebok Stadium. It was there, incidentally, that Ferguson was most outraged this season when his team surrendered three points in a storm of ferocious and, some would insist, outrageous tackling by Bolton.

We all know about Ferguson's occasional objectivity bypass – as we do Wenger's – but anyone in Bolton that day had to understand his rage to some serious degree. However, Bolton's new manager, Gary Megson, declared, " I asked them to be aggressive, yes, but I think we only had one bad tackle [fortunately, no one had their ankle broken in two places]. We have to compete and I'm not going to criticise them for competing. There would be a lot more complaints from myself if we did not compete. I know we have a squad to get us out of trouble." Naturally, this barrage of euphemism was warmly saluted in the Match of the Day studio.

Birmingham's manager, Alex McLeish, also stressed his pleasure at the competitive levels achieved by his struggling team against Arsenal. Here, of course, we have the greatest of all the euphemisms. If you don't have a Fabregas or a Hleb or an Eduardo, or a Ronaldo or a Rooney, to be competitive is all. But at what cost to the quality of the game and the safety of those stars who are supposed to represent the finest development of football in these days of super fitness?

If Eduardo does beat the odds and makes a perfect recovery, how confident will he be in his sleight of foot, and lightning speed the first time a big, heedless but famously unmalicious defender comes thundering into the tackle? And if he ducks the challenge, that is such a central part of his play can he really be said to have recovered? Hardly.

Wenger admitted he was wrong to say Taylor's action warranted a life ban. However, he would have been right, utterly, if he had said a three-match automatic suspension was completely inadequate. In this case, and in all others that but for good luck might bring the same horrendous consequences, the punishment should be at least doubled.

A score of witnesses have sworn Taylor doesn't have a bad bone in his body but unfortunately, because of a crude and illegal tackle, his victim now has several. It is a cruel reality that football cannot afford to ignore. Not if it cares a penny for an image that will always be best protected by its most gifted players.

[Mosiah]

So, Mexxx, what kind of punishment do you think is appropriate?

[Mexxx]

9 EPL games or 2 months, whichever comes last

to be implemented now until the new EPL season starts.
Once the EPL season begins the supension/expulsion is dependent on the severity of the players injury and the length of time it takes the player to recover.
The ban will be given out by an adverse suspension board comprised of 7 people taken from 2 coaches (one from the top three and lower three team standings, which rotates from month to month), 2 senior referees, 2 FA, 1 doctor.

So for example in the 2008/09 season, adverse reckless tackle is reviewed and punishment given out to the letter of the law.
9 games or 2 months whichever comes last
then the committee makes the final decision whether to use the injured players recovery time as the full length of the ban for the perpetrator.

[Mosiah]

Fair enough for me!

[Brush]

I think the offending player history on the field should be taken into consideration. Taylor for example, have played over 250 top flight games as a defender and has beed shown the red card once before and six yellow cards. Now a defender with so many games under his belt with just six yellow cards suggest to me a player that keeps it clean when he is on the field. The tackle on Eduardo was indeed horrific(I cringe everytime I see it) but his history on the field suggest that he is not a dirty or reckles player. The three match suspension for the straight red is sufficient IMO. The fact that Eduardo may be out for at least nine months or worst case scenario, will not play again, should not be factored into how much time Taylor is kept off the field.

Just my 2cents.

[Mosiah]

That makes sense. He still deserves a lengthy punishment, but perhaps not as lengthy as someone who is clearly a cane-cutter.

[Jawge]

He will never be the same. Juninho
was damaged in Spain and was never the same (that creative inspiring player).
If you watched today's players most of them aren't footballers by 70s standard. This is why it's easy for players that rely heavily on technique (Zidane, Robinho comes to mind) can dominate (if the refs don't allow the robots to destroy them) in today's game.

Fifa should clean up the sport, so that it could be marketed properly and have people really enjoying the game. Same way the NBA did with Jordon and turned it into a mega billion machine.

[myYout]

Horrendous challenge bordering on criminal, him lucky if him escape wid tree game suspensian. Hi ah apologize, dat nuh mek it, heat a game nuh suppose to mek yuh challenge like dat now.

[TheDread]

Repeat - Players know what they are doing!

...however, based on what I have observed on how similar incidents have been treated - 3 - 6 games.

I am sure the player who caused the injury had instant remorse! ...some murders, I am sure go through that same stage of emotion!

Personal opinion - The punishment should be such that a clear message is sent to have players consciously not make such tackles!

Hefty Fine!
6 months ban!
Civil suit!

Maybe the message would then reach all players that such tackles are a "No!-No!!!"

6 month ban...hell no, mek da bwoy dey tek one year off with no pay and those types of plays will be greatly reduced.

[TheDread]

I think the offending player history on the field should be taken into consideration. Taylor for example, have played over 250 top flight games as a defender and has beed shown the red card once before and six yellow cards. Now a defender with so many games under his belt with just six yellow cards suggest to me a player that keeps it clean when he is on the field. The tackle on Eduardo was indeed horrific(I cringe everytime I see it) but his history on the field suggest that he is not a dirty or reckles player. The three match suspension for the straight red is sufficient IMO. The fact that Eduardo may be out for at least nine months or worst case scenario, will not play again, should not be factored into how much time Taylor is kept off the field.

Just my 2cents.

Brush, I can't really agree with that. "But, your honor him never shoot anyone before. Him did box up one bwoy, and get a few mis-demeanors for smoking ganja, but him is a good man. Yes, him did point the gun and pull the trigger, but that's not his nature..just check out his previous record, him don't deserve no jail time, just gi him probation."

[Assasin]

wha you say?

Leggo Kern.