collapse collapse

Please donate to help keep this site going.

The Fanzine

Heroes & Villains Fanzine

Get your fix of all things Claret & Blue by subscribing to the online version!

* H&V Best Of

Recent Posts

Re: Villa debutants quiz by purpletrousers
[Today at 02:39:34 PM]


Re: Jack Grealish by paul_e
[Today at 02:38:08 PM]


Re: Kappa new Principal Partner by Brazilian Villain
[Today at 02:35:13 PM]


Re: Kappa new Principal Partner by cdbullyweefan
[Today at 02:31:43 PM]


Re: Jack Grealish by purpletrousers
[Today at 02:27:45 PM]


Re: Kappa new Principal Partner by paul_e
[Today at 02:27:38 PM]


Re: Jack Grealish by paul_e
[Today at 02:14:34 PM]


Re: Kappa new Principal Partner by Drummond
[Today at 02:10:50 PM]

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)  (Read 134186 times)

Offline Russ aka Big Nose

  • Member
  • Posts: 629
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1950 on: January 03, 2020, 09:03:02 PM »
The initial tackle was ok but as soon you scissor round with your trailing leg you risk pinning the players ankle under you and injuring them. Doesn't look as bad as studs into the shin but causes far more injuries. Look at the picture, if you tackle someone and end up in that position then you've got the technique all wrong, sadly the current guidelines for refs mean these tackles go unpunished.

Sorry, but this is wrong.

The Laws of the Game have been clear for some time (Law 12).

It is irrelevant whether you harm the opponent or not, it is about intent. It is also irrelevant if you "get the ball first". From the FA website, just the directly relevant bit cut and pasted below:

* Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
* Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
* Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

The tackle from Mee was both reckless and with excessive force. A key element being that they are not travelling in the same direction, i.e. in from the side. Hence the intended collision is evidently reckless as given the (excessive) force it will mean a problem for Wesley as it causes an unnatural flex of joints (hence more serious than a straight impact injury).

I can't remember when precisely the Law was changed but it was clearly and thoroughly briefed through all levels of the game - both adult and youth football (I still play and also coach). UTV

I said guidelines not laws, the current guidelines focus on contact from the leading leg (or going in 2 footed) but largely ignore the trailing leg, which is why you rarely see bookings for tackles like this.

Not looking to disagree for the sake of it, but this is not the case. The current 'explanations and guidance' for referees from the FA gives equal prominence to:

a) tackling with the foot lifted from the ground
b) tackling with two feet together
c) tackling by sliding
d) tackling which endangers the safety of an opponent

It was missed, which was my original point - 4 minutes for VAR to determine that Wesley's heal might have been offside for a cross that didn't lead to a goal, yet no interest at the time or since for serious foul play that endangered the safety of a player and caused serious injury.

The primary responsibility of the Ref and The FA is the safety of players.

Online paul_e

  • Member
  • Posts: 20524
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Back from the frozen North
  • GM : July, 2013
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1951 on: January 03, 2020, 10:49:16 PM »
The initial tackle was ok but as soon you scissor round with your trailing leg you risk pinning the players ankle under you and injuring them. Doesn't look as bad as studs into the shin but causes far more injuries. Look at the picture, if you tackle someone and end up in that position then you've got the technique all wrong, sadly the current guidelines for refs mean these tackles go unpunished.

Sorry, but this is wrong.

The Laws of the Game have been clear for some time (Law 12).

It is irrelevant whether you harm the opponent or not, it is about intent. It is also irrelevant if you "get the ball first". From the FA website, just the directly relevant bit cut and pasted below:

* Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
* Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
* Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

The tackle from Mee was both reckless and with excessive force. A key element being that they are not travelling in the same direction, i.e. in from the side. Hence the intended collision is evidently reckless as given the (excessive) force it will mean a problem for Wesley as it causes an unnatural flex of joints (hence more serious than a straight impact injury).

I can't remember when precisely the Law was changed but it was clearly and thoroughly briefed through all levels of the game - both adult and youth football (I still play and also coach). UTV

I said guidelines not laws, the current guidelines focus on contact from the leading leg (or going in 2 footed) but largely ignore the trailing leg, which is why you rarely see bookings for tackles like this.

Not looking to disagree for the sake of it, but this is not the case. The current 'explanations and guidance' for referees from the FA gives equal prominence to:

a) tackling with the foot lifted from the ground
b) tackling with two feet together
c) tackling by sliding
d) tackling which endangers the safety of an opponent

It was missed, which was my original point - 4 minutes for VAR to determine that Wesley's heal might have been offside for a cross that didn't lead to a goal, yet no interest at the time or since for serious foul play that endangered the safety of a player and caused serious injury.

The primary responsibility of the Ref and The FA is the safety of players.

Nor am I but there are many examples of tackles like this leading to injuries with no consequences for the tackler. It's pretty clear that for some reason this type of tackle isn't considered under point d.

Offline john e

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15268
  • GM : 24.01.21
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1952 on: January 03, 2020, 10:52:30 PM »
is he still here, as in England or has he gone somewhere else to rehabilitate
i keep reading things about Belgium and Brazil

i haven't got a problem if that's what they think best at the moment, just wondering

Offline Newby

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7092
  • Location: Down south now. Born in Aston.
  • GM : 01.12.2020
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1953 on: January 03, 2020, 10:59:25 PM »
The honesty of a good player doing a good job.  That is what Sean Dyche said about the tackle.  I wonder if he would have said this if things were the other way around?  It was a very robust tackle and in my view, having played centre half at a really decent standard, he took the opportunity and 'did him'.  That is the only 'good job' about it. 

Offline dalians umbrella

  • Member
  • Posts: 184
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1954 on: January 03, 2020, 11:15:40 PM »
is he still here, as in England or has he gone somewhere else to rehabilitate
i keep reading things about Belgium and Brazil

i haven't got a problem if that's what they think best at the moment, just wondering

He will need surgery first.

Offline Mister E

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11668
  • Location: Mostly the Republic of Yorkshire (N)
  • GM : 10.02.2021
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1955 on: January 04, 2020, 08:14:32 AM »
The honesty of a good player doing a good job.  That is what Sean Dyche said about the tackle.  I wonder if he would have said this if things were the other way around?  It was a very robust tackle and in my view, having played centre half at a really decent standard, he took the opportunity and 'did him'.  That is the only 'good job' about it. 
The tackle was not mentioned on MoTD either, and yet the lively debate on - for example - the Grauniad's comments pages would suggest fans of varying clubs have a strong opinion about this. Liverpool fans (c.f. Gomez) particularly have a view on this, but several others are vocal about Mee's 'form' on tackles like this.
For the sake of the viewer, tackles like this - where a player sustains a serious injury - should be debated on national TV platforms, 'cos I am (for one) confused about the rules. Yes, I've read them and applied them as a junior ref; but their application is not consistent and should be held up for debate.

Offline Mister E

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 11668
  • Location: Mostly the Republic of Yorkshire (N)
  • GM : 10.02.2021
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1956 on: January 04, 2020, 08:23:04 AM »
On a broader point arising from this and the use of VAR, where is the accountability for referees coming from?! The ref and footballing authorities seem batshit-scared of calling out poor refereeing decisions and inconsistencies that leave us fans scratching our heads.

Online andyh

  • Member
  • Posts: 11055
  • Location: Solihull
  • GM : May, 2012
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1957 on: January 04, 2020, 09:12:41 AM »
The thing is this.
Had not VAR not been a complete bag of shite the Wesley and Heaton would not be out with these long term injuries.
Has the first goal stood, like it should have done, the complexion of the match from thereonin should have been completely different to how it turned out.
We may have lost 10-1, we may have drawn 7-7, but Wesley would not have been in that position at that time to be scythed down like he was.

We say fuck VAR, but VAR has fucked us, good and proper.

Offline john e

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 15268
  • GM : 24.01.21
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1958 on: January 04, 2020, 09:19:50 AM »
The thing is this.
Had not VAR not been a complete bag of shite the Wesley and Heaton would not be out with these long term injuries.
Has the first goal stood, like it should have done, the complexion of the match from thereonin should have been completely different to how it turned out.
We may have lost 10-1, we may have drawn 7-7, but Wesley would not have been in that position at that time to be scythed down like he was.

We say fuck VAR, but VAR has fucked us, good and proper.

ha ha
and if my auntie had balls .......

Online SoccerHQ

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 36587
  • Location: Down, down, deeper and Down.
  • GM : 15.06.2020
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1959 on: January 04, 2020, 02:36:06 PM »
is he still here, as in England or has he gone somewhere else to rehabilitate
i keep reading things about Belgium and Brazil

i haven't got a problem if that's what they think best at the moment, just wondering

There was interview with him in 442 magazine recently, he won their inspiration of the year award given his background. Was pictured in the Hyatt so guess that's where he's been living so far.

Offline pauliewalnuts

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 59955
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1960 on: January 04, 2020, 06:29:04 PM »
is he still here, as in England or has he gone somewhere else to rehabilitate
i keep reading things about Belgium and Brazil

i haven't got a problem if that's what they think best at the moment, just wondering

There was interview with him in 442 magazine recently, he won their inspiration of the year award given his background. Was pictured in the Hyatt so guess that's where he's been living so far.

He lives at the Mailbox, I believe (stuff seen on instagram)

Offline AsTallAsLions

  • Member
  • Posts: 7691
  • Location: Everywhere
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1961 on: March 09, 2020, 12:42:43 PM »
Video just popped up on his Instagram of him doing bike work at Bodymoor. Assume it's just the start of a long period of rehab but he's back at base anyway and is mobile.

Online SoccerHQ

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 36587
  • Location: Down, down, deeper and Down.
  • GM : 15.06.2020
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1962 on: March 09, 2020, 12:44:26 PM »
October return, same for Heaton.

Offline AsTallAsLions

  • Member
  • Posts: 7691
  • Location: Everywhere
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1963 on: March 09, 2020, 12:55:32 PM »
October return, same for Heaton.

Aye, just reporting what I'm seeing, he's back doing light cardio.

Offline eamonn

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19698
  • Location: Highgate
  • GM : 26.07.2020
Re: Wesley Moraes - signed (confirmed)
« Reply #1964 on: March 09, 2020, 02:06:06 PM »
Definitely October?