Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Peter H

André Gomes

Recommended Posts

Seemed to apoligse to the camera when he scored tonight in dedication to Gomes. A bit cheesy, and as angry as I am with what happened Son had absolutely no intention to endanger Gomes with that challenge. It was a professional foul that had a very unlikely and unlucky outcome. 

You could see how torn up the poor lad was, I feel for him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I saw he didn't celebrate his goals. Doesn't make up for what happened, but at least he has enough sense not to run around like a madman celebrating. 

Crazy thing about this is that Son will probably come away from this incident a more popular player. Strange world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bailey said:

Looking at the FA rules I guess it would be determined as one of a tackle / challenge / trip. Incidentally it mentions nothing about intending to win the ball. 

I would call it one of the above. 

I find all of this a bit sanctimonious. Gomes is easily the worst player on our team for making these challenges. Not trying to win the ball but to bring the player down. He has even been seen stamping on opponents out of revenge. 

So that’s alright then what Son did was perfectly acceptable, and Gomes has nothing to complain about 

 

25 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

And he got a three game for it. 

Which is right he should have, no complaints from me on that score. 
But so should have Son and that’s where my grievances lay he should have been facing the same ban, but instead he walks away free with people in some quarters even fighting his corner  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Palfy said:

So that’s alright then what Son did was perfectly acceptable, and Gomes has nothing to complain about 

 

Which is right he should have, no complaints from me on that score. 
But so should have Son and that’s where my grievances lay he should have been facing the same ban, but instead he walks away free with people in some quarters even fighting his corner  

 

That was my point, Palf. Gomes was punished, Son’s been hugged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Aidan said:

Seemed to apoligse to the camera when he scored tonight in dedication to Gomes. A bit cheesy, and as angry as I am with what happened Son had absolutely no intention to endanger Gomes with that challenge. It was a professional foul that had a very unlikely and unlucky outcome. 

You could see how torn up the poor lad was, I feel for him. 

Don't think Andre will have been watching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Palfy said:

So that’s alright then what Son did was perfectly acceptable, and Gomes has nothing to complain about 

 

Which is right he should have, no complaints from me on that score. 
But so should have Son and that’s where my grievances lay he should have been facing the same ban, but instead he walks away free with people in some quarters even fighting his corner  

 

I didn't say it was alright, it's a foul and he should be booked.

There is a difference between a trip and a ban and rightly so. Son attempted to trip Gomes and bring him down. Gomes deliberately stamped on a players for no reason at all when the player was on the ground. 

In first view I thought Son had gone to do him but his foot is on the ground and he has clearly just gone to bring him down whether it's revenge or to stop him getting away. If he had flown in shin height then I would agree with you but he hasn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Son should have had a yellow for ghost blatant dive that went to VAR so the Gomes incident should have meant he’d of walked either way. Now he’ll have no ban at all. Can we get Ali’s handball overturned? Oh no course not .. .. Crazy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bailey said:

I didn't say it was alright, it's a foul and he should be booked.

There is a difference between a trip and a ban and rightly so. Son attempted to trip Gomes and bring him down. Gomes deliberately stamped on a players for no reason at all when the player was on the ground. 

In first view I thought Son had gone to do him but his foot is on the ground and he has clearly just gone to bring him down whether it's revenge or to stop him getting away. If he had flown in shin height then I would agree with you but he hasn't. 

Son knew what he was doing. He wasn't playing the ball. He went to take him out. It's no longer a tactical foul when it's just a little bit past midfield with tons of players in front of them. It was malicious and reckless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Palfy said:

I think it’s called a tactical foul not a tactical tackle, and I agree you won’t stop them, but there should be an appropriate punishment to try and protect players, you get a yellow card for kicking the ball away. 

Yeah, tactical foul by making a tackle, I’m getting my words mixed up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bailey said:

I didn't say it was alright, it's a foul and he should be booked.

There is a difference between a trip and a ban and rightly so. Son attempted to trip Gomes and bring him down. Gomes deliberately stamped on a players for no reason at all when the player was on the ground. 

In first view I thought Son had gone to do him but his foot is on the ground and he has clearly just gone to bring him down whether it's revenge or to stop him getting away. If he had flown in shin height then I would agree with you but he hasn't. 

 

2 hours ago, Matt said:

Yeah, tactical foul by making a tackle, I’m getting my words mixed up. 

It’s a very contentious subject which we may never all agree on and is evident as we keep going round in circles. 
But for me a cynical foul should be a red card.

Though I accept your arguments I think it would be simpler to agree to disagree, and offer our support and best wishes to Gomes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, MikeO said:

What's annoying is how Son's the one getting all the pity from the media. Was out in the car listening to the build up for their game tonight and all the talk was about how he was going to get over it, then they made a big deal about him being the one to lead the team out for the warm-up.

Couldn’t agree more with that, it’s been pretty annoying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

Apparently this would have been the third time he'd been sent off for a revenge tackle. And yet the cunt has managed to come out of this smelling of roses, hugged by Everton players and defended by Everton fans... Unbelievable.

Yep I really can’t get my head around this at any level

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It beggars belief. Let’s hope Gomes gets back to himself 100% but if he doesn’t nobody will say fuck all about that snide little prick ruining a persons career. Imagine that happening to salah or one of the media’s golden boys? U would not hear the end of it. Even tonight listening to talksport the debate was, is son world class? Wtf?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Yep I really can’t get my head around this at any level

Me neither. One can easily get a 10 match ban for saying the "N" word, but a violation that leads to a potentially career ending injury will be passed without any sanction? That's just ridiculous! Serving a three match ban is the least moral thing Son could do in this particular situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

Apparently this would have been the third time he'd been sent off for a revenge tackle. And yet the cunt has managed to come out of this smelling of roses, hugged by Everton players and defended by Everton fans... Unbelievable.

Professionals consoling professionals, friends comforting friends... how dare they! 
 

the media has completely skewed this to flame things. Even after the challenge the BBC feed was saying something along the lines of “Son is gonna get a lot of flack for this on social media” and, the defensive intent was apparently justified. But they have then completely negated any well meaning with going OTT in the defence, ignorance and bias.

Son went in to take him out. Clear. He hold his hands up when the whistle has gone. Clear. He makes no contact with the ankle that goes. Clear. He sees the injury... and then he reacts. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Of course I hope Gomes fully recovers, but I worry that if he somehow is "fit" enough to play in, say, May, then he might be selected for Portugal's Euro 2020 squad.  But maybe that selection must occur earlier, and he will not be considered?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Elston Gunnn said:

Of course I hope Gomes fully recovers, but I worry that if he somehow is "fit" enough to play in, say, May, then he might be selected for Portugal's Euro 2020 squad.  But maybe that selection must occur earlier, and he will not be considered?

If he’s selected it’ll be squad not starter. I’d see it as good preseason and nothing else

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

Apparently this would have been the third time he'd been sent off for a revenge tackle. And yet the cunt has managed to come out of this smelling of roses, hugged by Everton players and defended by Everton fans... Unbelievable.

I can’t comment mate I have agreed to disagree, but I sincerely agree with you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Matt said:

Professionals consoling professionals, friends comforting friends... how dare they! 
 

the media has completely skewed this to flame things. Even after the challenge the BBC feed was saying something along the lines of “Son is gonna get a lot of flack for this on social media” and, the defensive intent was apparently justified. But they have then completely negated any well meaning with going OTT in the defence, ignorance and bias.

Son went in to take him out. Clear. He hold his hands up when the whistle has gone. Clear. He makes no contact with the ankle that goes. Clear. He sees the injury... and then he reacts. 

 

Except that he did make contact with the ankle both with the tackling foot then again with the follow through with his other leg 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Sibdane said:

Son knew what he was doing. He wasn't playing the ball. He went to take him out. It's no longer a tactical foul when it's just a little bit past midfield with tons of players in front of them. It was malicious and reckless. 

I don't disagree with most of the first part. He was trying to bring him down but he wasn't trying to break his leg. The challenge itself wasn't that bad at all. Son's leg goes in front of Gomes' in order to trip him up. I don't know if you have watched it back but I would urge you to do so.

13 hours ago, Palfy said:

 

It’s a very contentious subject which we may never all agree on and is evident as we keep going round in circles. 
But for me a cynical foul should be a red card.

Though I accept your arguments I think it would be simpler to agree to disagree, and offer our support and best wishes to Gomes. 

Agree Palfy, even in respect of the cynical foul comment.

1 hour ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Except that he did make contact with the ankle both with the tackling foot then again with the follow through with his other leg 

However neither of those two impacts would cause the injury suffered. The follow through brushed his leg and the main tackling leg went in front of Gomes'. You see tackles like that in most games, whether mistimed or deliberate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think it could force us into the market in January- which was already looking busy for us. I just hope if they go in for someone, it’s not a short term idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Bailey said:

I don't disagree with most of the first part. He was trying to bring him down but he wasn't trying to break his leg. The challenge itself wasn't that bad at all. Son's leg goes in front of Gomes' in order to trip him up. I don't know if you have watched it back but I would urge you to do so.

Agree Palfy, even in respect of the cynical foul comment.

However neither of those two impacts would cause the injury suffered. The follow through brushed his leg and the main tackling leg went in front of Gomes'. You see tackles like that in most games, whether mistimed or deliberate.

This is the entire point for me, whichever we you try and paint this his tackle , and those impacts, are the  direct cause of Gomes injury. If he doesn’t deliberately set out to do Gomes ( and I’m very clear in this , Son’s intent was most definitely not to just trip Gomes ) then this injury doesn’t happen 

If he made the same tackle with the same consequences on Mo Salah or Kevin de Bruyne do you honestly think he would get away with it ?

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Son's tackle led to a devastating injury to Gomes. A lot of reaction in the hour after the incident came from the gut on both sides of the situation. We are rightly going to support and take the corner of our own. Once things calmed down it sucks that Son has coming out smelling of roses and getting  uber sympathy from the media. This will impact our reaction to TH for quite a time to come.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aidan said:

From now on in is a professional foul a red card just incase someone breaks a leg? 

I would call what Son did unprofessional not professional and for that he most definitely should have been shown a red card, he has a history of this type of incident, and calling it or him professional is to legitimise and absorb him of the reason or blame for Gomes injury. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Palfy said:

I would call what Son did unprofessional not professional and for that he most definitely should have been shown a red card, he has a history of this type of incident, and calling it or him professional is to legitimise and absorb him of the reason or blame for Gomes injury. 

You're being pedantic - Tactical, professional, whatever you want to call it. I agree he should have been shown a red card as it would not be appropriate for him to remain on the field with the extent of the injury and how it could be perceived by others on the field.

Is it his fault that Gomes got injured? Yes. Did Son intend to cause such injury? No. Will those types of tackles still happen every single week? Absolutely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Aidan said:

You're being pedantic - Tactical, professional, whatever you want to call it. I agree he should have been shown a red card as it would not be appropriate for him to remain on the field with the extent of the injury and how it could be perceived by others on the field.

Is it his fault that Gomes got injured? Yes. Did Son intend to cause such injury? No. Will those types of tackles still happen every single week? Absolutely. 

Have you not just answered your own first question, which is a yes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/11/2019 at 22:04, Aidan said:

Seemed to apoligse to the camera when he scored tonight in dedication to Gomes. A bit cheesy, and as angry as I am with what happened Son had absolutely no intention to endanger Gomes with that challenge. It was a professional foul that had a very unlikely and unlucky outcome. 

You could see how torn up the poor lad was, I feel for him. 

Poor lad he was playing and scoring a few days later, unlucky Gomes won’t be for months because of that poor lad.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

Except that he did make contact with the ankle both with the tackling foot then again with the follow through with his other leg 

Not in the replay I saw but I don’t want to look at it again so I can’t argue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bailey said:

Except that he did make contact with the ankle both with the tackling foot then again with the follow through with his other leg 

Feck sake. Copied the quote from in your one from @duncanmckenzieismagic 

Any how just rewatched it. Son's foot is in front of Gomes' initially, with Son's heel roughly hitting the right hand side and toes end on Gomes' boot. 

Gomes' next stride then rides on Son's trailing leg, it's this that knocks Gomes off balance. As he slipped off he falls at an angle which makes his foot get caught in turf. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Palfy said:

Poor lad he was playing and scoring a few days later, unlucky Gomes won’t be for months because of that poor lad.  

Obviously gomes came off worse, but sons reaction was almost identical to Rondons - he was gutted like any of us would be after an accident

Serious tribal mentality for blues at the moment, and I understand why. But like I said before I firmly believe if Gomes was the perpetrator we would be defending him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Matt said:

Not in the replay I saw but I don’t want to look at it again so I can’t argue. 

look at it from that angle, he’s already hit him with his tackling foot and you can see his trailing leg about to follow through while Gomes foot is already at an odd angle 

To me a professional foul is taking one for the team with a deliberate trip or pull of the shirt to stop the opposition from breaking away and IMO that was not what Son was thinking , it was a revenge tackle pure and simple 

It’s not like he hasn’t got form for it either so forgive me for not falling for the love in for him, the decision is a disgrace and the club are far too soft just rolling over and accepting it

If Peter Reid was still playing for us he would snap Son in half in the return fixture which is a lot closer to what he actually deserves rather than all this pathetic molly coddling

Not only has Son got away with one he is being made out to be the victim, it’s as equally infuriating as it is pathetic and unjust 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Aidan said:

Obviously gomes came off worse, but sons reaction was almost identical to Rondons - he was gutted like any of us would be after an accident

Serious tribal mentality for blues at the moment, and I understand why. But like I said before I firmly believe if Gomes was the perpetrator we would be defending him. 

Identical in that they were completely different like. Rondon broke McCarthy's leg having a shot and kicking the back of James' leg as he blocked it, and Son has deliberately gone after Gomes.

Rondon, quite rightly, got sympathy from everyone because that really was an accident. A freak one at that. This was not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

look at it from that angle, he’s already hit him with his tackling foot and you can see his trailing leg about to follow through while Gomes foot is already at an odd angle 

That's a still from a poor angle. Gomes steps on Son's leg which makes him off balance, he then awkwardly plants his foot after stepping off Son's leg as he's unbalanced. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, pete0 said:

That's a still from a poor angle. Gomes steps on Son's leg which makes him off balance, he then awkwardly plants his foot after stepping off Son's leg as he's unbalanced. 

He doesn’t , Son’s tackling foot goes over the top of Gomes’ foot and traps his ankle , then his trailing leg wipes him out

A7F1CAF8-354C-4638-8CCF-CEB17EA949BC.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Romey 1878 said:

Identical in that they were completely different like. Rondon broke McCarthy's leg having a shot and kicking the back of James' leg as he blocked it, and Son has deliberately gone after Gomes.

Rondon, quite rightly, got sympathy from everyone because that really was an accident. A freak one at that. This was not.

It's a poor, nasty challenge and one that Gomes will have made several times in his career without the intent to seriously injure someone. 

No, the challenge was not an accident, the outcome of it was. Son was reckless, but not malicious. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Aidan said:

It's a poor, nasty challenge and one that Gomes will have made several times in his career without the intent to seriously injure someone. 

No, the challenge was not an accident, the outcome of it was. Son was reckless, but not malicious. 

There are countless punch-ups outside pubs/clubs all over the country every Friday/Saturday night, probably all with pretty much the same intent. In a tiny minority of these someone is seriously hurt or killed; when that happens the offender is punished with GBH or manslaughter and will be shipped off to prison. Just saying that if an incident outside a pub is judged on outcome rather than intent why shouldn't the same apply on a sports-field?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, duncanmckenzieismagic said:

He doesn’t , Son’s tackling foot goes over the top of Gomes’ foot and traps his ankle , then his trailing leg wipes him out

A7F1CAF8-354C-4638-8CCF-CEB17EA949BC.jpeg

Again that's just a picture. 

His foot doesn’t get trapped by the trailing leg, he steps on Son's leg and then when he plants his foot it gets stuck in the turf and pops under his weight. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Aidan said:

It's a poor, nasty challenge and one that Gomes will have made several times in his career without the intent to seriously injure someone. 

No, the challenge was not an accident, the outcome of it was. Son was reckless, but not malicious. 

Reckless warrants a red 🤷🏻‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Route cause and analysis being used in football for a tackle. The start of the end of football.

If we’re going this way then your all saying it’s Gomes fault surely? Isn’t hat he point of ROUTE CAUSE? 

Gomes elbows Son in the face, which starts a chain of events that ends in a devastating injury. 

I fear for football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, pete0 said:

Again that's just a picture. 

His foot doesn’t get trapped by the trailing leg, he steps on Son's leg and then when he plants his foot it gets stuck in the turf and pops under his weight. 

So if somebody had photographic evidence of you murdering someone, you would build your defence in court around “it’s just a picture” ? 🥴

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Aidan said:

It's a poor, nasty challenge and one that Gomes will have made several times in his career without the intent to seriously injure someone. 

No, the challenge was not an accident, the outcome of it was. Son was reckless, but not malicious. 

He was malicious though. Obviously not wanting to break Gomes’ leg but he’s not going to win the ball, he’s wanting to go in on him and leave a mark. That’s malicious as far as I’m concerned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MikeO said:

There are countless punch-ups outside pubs/clubs all over the country every Friday/Saturday night, probably all with pretty much the same intent. In a tiny minority of these someone is seriously hurt or killed; when that happens the offender is punished with GBH or manslaughter and will be shipped off to prison. Just saying that if an incident outside a pub is judged on outcome rather than intent why shouldn't the same apply on a sports-field?

Because sport is a defence for assault. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aidan said:

It's a poor, nasty challenge and one that Gomes will have made several times in his career without the intent to seriously injure someone. 

No, the challenge was not an accident, the outcome of it was. Son was reckless, but not malicious. 

If you act recklessly in the eye of the law you are guilty, being reckless does not make you innocent it proves your guilty. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MikeO said:

So why was Dunc sent to prison?

Serious question? Do I even need to answer that. 

3 minutes ago, Palfy said:

If you act recklessly in the eye of the law you are guilty, being reckless does not make you innocent it proves your guilty. 

Guilty of what? A bad challenge or purposely breaking someone's ankle? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Aidan said:

Serious question? Do I even need to answer that. 

Guilty of what? A bad challenge or purposely breaking someone's ankle? 

You are guilty of the outcome of your recklessness which is breaking his ankle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These laws are in place to prevent reckless behavior. The more serious the outcome of that behavior then the more serious the punishment. 

Think just speeding versus speeding and hitting someone. It's the same behavior with different outcomes and punishments. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...