Viking Supporters Co-operative

Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: IDM on March 01, 2025, 09:31:44 pm

Title: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 01, 2025, 09:31:44 pm
Just seen a clip of the Millwall goalie’s challenge on Mateta.

How the f**k did they need VAR to intervene to award a red card.?  The contact may not have been intentional but I haven’t seen anything like that in football since Schumacher on Battiston in 1982.  Deserves a lengthy ban IMHO.

Hope Mateta recovers quickly.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: drfchound on March 01, 2025, 09:39:24 pm
I have just seen the highlights on the bbc sport page and came on to write more or less what you have done IDM.
I think it shows how poor even top refs can be when he can’t see straight away how bad that challenge is.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: ravenrover on March 01, 2025, 10:16:31 pm
Was it Oliver? He's gone from being a good ref to being totally reliant on VAR
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: MachoMadness on March 01, 2025, 10:22:47 pm
That keeper should be looking at FA charges. No way you go into a challenge like that without knowing you're going to leave something on the other player. As for the ref, he can't be more than 15 yards away and he can't see it's a red. Unbelievable all round.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Dagenham Rover on March 01, 2025, 11:06:11 pm
Was it Oliver? He's gone from being a good ref to being totally reliant on VAR
   And that is part of it the upper refs are becoming reliant on VAR to take the decision out of their hands Just in case they cock up
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Pancho Regan on March 01, 2025, 11:21:23 pm
Two people who watched the game live told me the Millwall fans were singing “Let him die” when Mateta was receiving treatment and being put on the stretcher.

The usual behaviour from Millwall fans,
Shame on them.

Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Pancho Regan on March 02, 2025, 12:06:50 am
The FA have tonight condemned the chanting of “Let him die” by the Millwall fans but said they did not actually “breach their regulations”.

Mateta has been discharged from hospital with 25 stitches in his face.

And the referee needed VAR to decide a red card was required.

I despair.

Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: NickDRFC on March 02, 2025, 06:52:14 am
Watched it live. One of those where you visibly winced and couldn’t believe the ref played on. Millwall fans are a different breed - a very, very loud chorus of “let him die” when it was quite clear he was hurt and even some boos (more scattered) when he was stretchered off some 13 minutes after he’d been taken out. Sub human scum.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Donnywolf on March 02, 2025, 08:28:24 am
Just seen a clip of the Millwall goalie’s challenge on Mateta.

How the f**k did they need VAR to intervene to award a red card.?  The contact may not have been intentional but I haven’t seen anything like that in football since Schumacher on Battiston in 1982.  Deserves a lengthy ban IMHO.

Hope Mateta recovers quickly.

Yes it reminded me massively of the Battiston assault

I took my dad and dad in.law to watch the game on  a big screen at Hatfield Squash club.

I was in disgrace as the incident happened as I jumped to my feet and shouted " b******"  Neither of them had heard me swear before

I sat down dignity gone lol
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Chris Black come back on March 02, 2025, 09:30:30 am
Harald Schumacher on Patrick Battiston.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Axholme Lion on March 02, 2025, 10:00:26 am
Two people who watched the game live told me the Millwall fans were singing “Let him die” when Mateta was receiving treatment and being put on the stretcher.

The usual behaviour from Millwall fans,
Shame on them.
As did the Palarse nonce's when our player was down but the BBC chose to ignore that. Noluwdc. F 'em all.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Dutch Uncle on March 02, 2025, 11:59:19 am
Harald Schumacher on Patrick Battiston.

That was an horrific thing by Roberts yesterday, completely reckless, stupid, and with no regard for the other player's safety

But IMHO Schumacher on Battiston was worse - it was quite deliberate, a true scandal
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Jimmydee on March 02, 2025, 01:20:02 pm
Two people who watched the game live told me the Millwall fans were singing “Let him die” when Mateta was receiving treatment and being put on the stretcher.

The usual behaviour from Millwall fans,
Shame on them.
As did the Palarse nonce's when our player was down but the BBC chose to ignore that. Noluwdc. F 'em all.

I’ve also heard rovers morons doing the same chant when an opponent player was being attended to by the first aiders.

Sadly, it’s not just Millwall fans.

I also hate it when idiots around me shout to ‘snap him’

I got into an argument for rebuking such a person, he told me to go to the family stand.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: EasyforDennis on March 02, 2025, 01:29:23 pm
Whatever ban Roberts gets, they should give the same to Oliver. If he can't see that it is a red card with a clear line of vision and being only a few yards away, he shouldn't be refereeing.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: drfchound on March 02, 2025, 02:43:45 pm
Whatever ban Roberts gets, they should give the same to Oliver. If he can't see that it is a red card with a clear line of vision and being only a few yards away, he shouldn't be refereeing.

Assessor will probably write that he got all the big decisions correct.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: mugnapper on March 02, 2025, 02:53:24 pm
I hope the injured Palace player doesn't hold a grudge. Hakuna Matete  maybe?
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Cramby10 on March 02, 2025, 03:48:57 pm
That Mateta chap looked enormous when at our place. So it makes it more staggering that anyone could manage to boot him in the head. What was he thinking. I can only dream of getting my leg that high.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Copps is Magic on March 02, 2025, 04:07:32 pm
Boom Boom McCombe at Brentford anyone?
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: i_ateallthepies on March 02, 2025, 04:54:34 pm
I vividly remember Sulli taking out a young striker in an away game at either Sunderland or Middlesborough in our Championship days. Sulli didn't leave the turf like the Millwall idiot did, he just raced out like a chieftain tank and the striker was stretchered off.  Difference being Sulli committed no foul.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: DonnyBazR0ver on March 02, 2025, 05:10:35 pm
I vividly remember Sulli taking out a young striker in an away game at either Sunderland or Middlesborough in our Championship days. Sulli didn't leave the turf like the Millwall idiot did, he just raced out like a chieftain tank and the striker was stretchered off.  Difference being Sulli committed no foul.

Yes, it was Marvin Emnes at Middlesbrough who had to leave on a stretcher. Sully was slightly late shall we say.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Jimmydee on March 02, 2025, 06:19:22 pm
Sulli went up to collect the high ball and he left his knee up, at the time, I thought that he was lucky that he didn’t get a red card for his assault on Emnes, he was sidelined for quite a while after that incident.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Pancho Regan on March 02, 2025, 06:40:53 pm
Two people who watched the game live told me the Millwall fans were singing “Let him die” when Mateta was receiving treatment and being put on the stretcher.

The usual behaviour from Millwall fans,
Shame on them.
As did the Palarse nonce's when our player was down but the BBC chose to ignore that. Noluwdc. F 'em all.

How very predictable.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: NickDRFC on March 02, 2025, 06:42:32 pm
Two people who watched the game live told me the Millwall fans were singing “Let him die” when Mateta was receiving treatment and being put on the stretcher.

The usual behaviour from Millwall fans,
Shame on them.
As did the Palarse nonce's when our player was down but the BBC chose to ignore that. Noluwdc. F 'em all.

Was your player down after receiving a kick to the head and given oxygen on the pitch?
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Ian Nimmo on March 02, 2025, 07:14:04 pm
I agree you would have to question if there was intent, it certainly looked that way.
However how many keepers go up with their leg stretched out in front of them!
The nature of this action can only be that their studs will make contact with the incoming player, this I suggest that this is a wider issue which needs to be addressed.
Given majority of people will say this challenge was no accident, he should be charged with gosh, and has the palace manager has said he could have killed Mateta he would thus be implying attempted murder!   
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: monkeytennis on March 02, 2025, 09:04:55 pm
The FA have tonight condemned the chanting of “Let him die” by the Millwall fans but said they did not actually “breach their regulations”.



The Football Association has condemned some "let him die" chants made towards Mateta by some Millwall fans while he was receiving treatment on the pitch, but said they do not breach its regulations.
However, the FA will investigate homophobic chants aimed towards Ben Chilwell, on loan at Palace from Chelsea, from Millwall supporters.

Interesting.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Axholme Lion on March 03, 2025, 07:38:37 am
The FA have tonight condemned the chanting of “Let him die” by the Millwall fans but said they did not actually “breach their regulations”.



The Football Association has condemned some "let him die" chants made towards Mateta by some Millwall fans while he was receiving treatment on the pitch, but said they do not breach its regulations.
However, the FA will investigate homophobic chants aimed towards Ben Chilwell, on loan at Palace from Chelsea, from Millwall supporters.

Interesting.
Yawn. Heard it all before. Any other club and you wouldn't have heard about it. Because Wall are the biggest little club in the world it sells papers. He went for the ball, I want commitment from the Lions. The Palace chairman is a  joke. That club represents everything that is wrong with modern football. It will all be forgotten in a few days and they can get back in their box and toddle off back to Surrey.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Usher wide. on March 03, 2025, 09:36:51 am
The FA have tonight condemned the chanting of “Let him die” by the Millwall fans but said they did not actually “breach their regulations”.



The Football Association has condemned some "let him die" chants made towards Mateta by some Millwall fans while he was receiving treatment on the pitch, but said they do not breach its regulations.
However, the FA will investigate homophobic chants aimed towards Ben Chilwell, on loan at Palace from Chelsea, from Millwall supporters.

Interesting.
Yawn. Heard it all before. Any other club and you wouldn't have heard about it. Because Wall are the biggest little club in the world it sells papers. He went for the ball, I want commitment from the Lions. The Palace chairman is a  joke. That club represents everything that is wrong with modern football. It will all be forgotten in a few days and they can get back in their box and toddle off back to Surrey.

“The Biggest Little Club in The World”!

Despite having a number of London clubs in your division, the “Biggest Little Club” can’t even attract gates of more than 17,000 (& that was against QPR who warrant that ridiculous tag a damn sight more than your mob) a vast majority of that attendance would have been made of travelling support so get real.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 03, 2025, 10:07:33 am
The FA have tonight condemned the chanting of “Let him die” by the Millwall fans but said they did not actually “breach their regulations”.



The Football Association has condemned some "let him die" chants made towards Mateta by some Millwall fans while he was receiving treatment on the pitch, but said they do not breach its regulations.
However, the FA will investigate homophobic chants aimed towards Ben Chilwell, on loan at Palace from Chelsea, from Millwall supporters.

Interesting.
Yawn. Heard it all before. Any other club and you wouldn't have heard about it. Because Wall are the biggest little club in the world it sells papers. He went for the ball, I want commitment from the Lions. The Palace chairman is a  joke. That club represents everything that is wrong with modern football. It will all be forgotten in a few days and they can get back in their box and toddle off back to Surrey.

“He went for the ball”..

At head height, studs first.  Probably the second worst challenge I have seen in 50 years of watching football.  And you’re trying to justify it because it was your club.

Zero credibility whatsoever..
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: andyst79 on March 03, 2025, 10:22:30 am
I thought it was a genuine attempt at the ball and just an unfortunate incident. You see keepers charging out their area all the time having to make those type of clearances where the balls at a difficult height.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 03, 2025, 11:12:31 am
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Dutch Uncle on March 03, 2025, 11:59:14 am
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 

Horrific as Roberts' action was, I still maintain Schumacher-Battiston was worse - IIRC Schumacher changed his direction to collide with Battiston well after the ball had gone
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Filo on March 03, 2025, 12:06:57 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 

Horrific as Roberts' action was, I still maintain Schumacher-Battiston was worse - IIRC Schumacher changed his direction to collide with Battiston well after the ball had gone

I don’t think Battiston played again
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Dutch Uncle on March 03, 2025, 12:37:20 pm
It was a life threatening incident, but gladly he did play again, including in the national team, although I don't think he was ever quite the same player afterwards

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Battiston
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Ldr on March 03, 2025, 01:42:45 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 

Horrific as Roberts' action was, I still maintain Schumacher-Battiston was worse - IIRC Schumacher changed his direction to collide with Battiston well after the ball had gone

https://youtu.be/tGq7VcaHoqo?si=xS_GZFZIiVsAFHAh
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Draytonian III on March 03, 2025, 03:12:34 pm
I can’t do a link so can someone please put the clip of Jason Cousins, Wycombe Wanderers 25/9/93 the “tackle “ on David Moss. It’s the worst one I’ve seen on a Rovers player ever
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: andyst79 on March 03, 2025, 03:13:16 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 03, 2025, 04:15:54 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 

Horrific as Roberts' action was, I still maintain Schumacher-Battiston was worse - IIRC Schumacher changed his direction to collide with Battiston well after the ball had gone

Agreed, hence the second worst challenge I have seen.

And no VAR back then too..
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 03, 2025, 04:18:50 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: andyst79 on March 03, 2025, 05:03:00 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
The ball was chest height when he played it with his studs facing down , it's the momentum after that's done the damage. Yes it's a red card but I personally don't think it was a malicious challenge as he was totally focused on the ball as he races out, and if it wasn't for the fact he needed 25 stitches in his ear I doubt much more would have been made of the incident.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: ravenrover on March 03, 2025, 05:10:48 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
Just ask Tommy Rowe last season
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: drfchound on March 03, 2025, 07:26:21 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 

Horrific as Roberts' action was, I still maintain Schumacher-Battiston was worse - IIRC Schumacher changed his direction to collide with Battiston well after the ball had gone

Agreed, hence the second worst challenge I have seen.

And no VAR back then too..

And even worse, Schumacher showed no remorse or care for the injured player.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Chris Black come back on March 03, 2025, 07:51:03 pm
I can’t do a link so can someone please put the clip of Jason Cousins, Wycombe Wanderers 25/9/93 the “tackle “ on David Moss. It’s the worst one I’ve seen on a Rovers player ever

Really terrible assault. Moss got straight up though! He was only a part time player as well. Insurance broker by day.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 03, 2025, 08:06:01 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
The ball was chest height when he played it with his studs facing down , it's the momentum after that's done the damage. Yes it's a red card but I personally don't think it was a malicious challenge as he was totally focused on the ball as he races out, and if it wasn't for the fact he needed 25 stitches in his ear I doubt much more would have been made of the incident.

I don’t think there was malice either, but dangerous and reckless nonetheless..
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: dickos1 on March 03, 2025, 11:02:29 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
The ball was chest height when he played it with his studs facing down , it's the momentum after that's done the damage. Yes it's a red card but I personally don't think it was a malicious challenge as he was totally focused on the ball as he races out, and if it wasn't for the fact he needed 25 stitches in his ear I doubt much more would have been made of the incident.

It was being spoken about everywhere long before the stitches were done.
He went for the ball no doubt, but it is still a ridiculous challenge
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: turnbull for england on March 04, 2025, 06:53:31 am
I can’t do a link so can someone please put the clip of Jason Cousins, Wycombe Wanderers 25/9/93 the “tackle “ on David Moss. It’s the worst one I’ve seen on a Rovers player ever


https://x.com/wwfcofficial/status/1256501450924003332?t=XUz1Kf1VzjmC7IDJMsC-Vg&s=19
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: Usher wide. on March 07, 2025, 06:01:38 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
The ball was chest height when he played it with his studs facing down , it's the momentum after that's done the damage. Yes it's a red card but I personally don't think it was a malicious challenge as he was totally focused on the ball as he races out, and if it wasn't for the fact he needed 25 stitches in his ear I doubt much more would have been made of the incident.

It was being spoken about everywhere long before the stitches were done.
He went for the ball no doubt, but it is still a ridiculous challenge

Been given a further 3 match ban. It wasn’t a ridiculous challenge it was a dangerous one however, the flack he & his family are receiving on ‘the good old’ social platforms IS ridiculous.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: idler on March 07, 2025, 06:11:47 pm
Maybe if the ref had given it immediately and sent him off there would have been less controversy. It was a challenge that should never have been made and though he never intended to hurt him he was out of control once he jumped in. Imagine if his studs had hit his eye instead of his ear.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: ravenrover on March 07, 2025, 06:30:14 pm
Just seen it today for the 1st time, impossible to be anything other than a red even though in my day it would probably just have been a telling off and a free kick
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: drfchound on March 07, 2025, 07:15:57 pm
Maybe if the ref had given it immediately and sent him off there would have been less controversy. It was a challenge that should never have been made and though he never intended to hurt him he was out of control once he jumped in. Imagine if his studs had hit his eye instead of his ear.

I think that sometimes players could do themselves a big favour when they hurt an opponent by going over to see if they are ok and not just walk away as if they don’t care.
Title: Re: Mateta
Post by: IDM on March 07, 2025, 09:17:33 pm
Even if it was a genuine attempt to play the ball, you just can’t do that at head height with an opponent close by.  A header would have been OK and in the penalty box a punch. 
If the keeper goes in with his head what's to say the attackers not gonna put his foot in & try to nick the ball past? Keepers played the ball and protected himself I'd expect our keeper to do the same. Just unfortunate for me but you're entitled to your opinion

Would still be the same offence.

Trying to play the ball at head height with the boot studs out is dangerous and reckless, when another player’s head is in close proximity.  It’s not just an opinion it’s reality.
The ball was chest height when he played it with his studs facing down , it's the momentum after that's done the damage. Yes it's a red card but I personally don't think it was a malicious challenge as he was totally focused on the ball as he races out, and if it wasn't for the fact he needed 25 stitches in his ear I doubt much more would have been made of the incident.

It was being spoken about everywhere long before the stitches were done.
He went for the ball no doubt, but it is still a ridiculous challenge

Been given a further 3 match ban. It wasn’t a ridiculous challenge it was a dangerous one however, the flack he & his family are receiving on ‘the good old’ social platforms IS ridiculous.

The extra ban is justified; the abuse is not.