Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 21, 2025, 07:16:40 pm

Login with username, password and session length

Links


Join the VSC


FSA logo

Author Topic: Mateta  (Read 3979 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dutch Uncle

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 7655
Re: Mateta
« Reply #30 on March 03, 2025, 11:59:14 am by Dutch Uncle »
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



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

Filo

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 31727
Re: Mateta
« Reply #31 on March 03, 2025, 12:06:57 pm by Filo »
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

Dutch Uncle

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 7655
Re: Mateta
« Reply #32 on March 03, 2025, 12:37:20 pm by Dutch Uncle »
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

Ldr

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 3375
Re: Mateta
« Reply #33 on March 03, 2025, 01:42:45 pm by Ldr »
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

Draytonian III

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 6385
Re: Mateta
« Reply #34 on March 03, 2025, 03:12:34 pm by Draytonian III »
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

andyst79

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 1859
Re: Mateta
« Reply #35 on March 03, 2025, 03:13:16 pm by andyst79 »
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

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 21384
Re: Mateta
« Reply #36 on March 03, 2025, 04:15:54 pm by IDM »
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..

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 21384
Re: Mateta
« Reply #37 on March 03, 2025, 04:18:50 pm by IDM »
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.

andyst79

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 1859
Re: Mateta
« Reply #38 on March 03, 2025, 05:03:00 pm by andyst79 »
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.

ravenrover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11358
Re: Mateta
« Reply #39 on March 03, 2025, 05:10:48 pm by ravenrover »
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

drfchound

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 34715
Re: Mateta
« Reply #40 on March 03, 2025, 07:26:21 pm by drfchound »
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.

Chris Black come back

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 16277
Re: Mateta
« Reply #41 on March 03, 2025, 07:51:03 pm by Chris Black come back »
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.

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 21384
Re: Mateta
« Reply #42 on March 03, 2025, 08:06:01 pm by IDM »
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..

dickos1

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 17804
Re: Mateta
« Reply #43 on March 03, 2025, 11:02:29 pm by dickos1 »
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

turnbull for england

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2916
Re: Mateta
« Reply #44 on March 04, 2025, 06:53:31 am by turnbull for england »
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

Usher wide.

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 1119
Re: Mateta
« Reply #45 on March 07, 2025, 06:01:38 pm by Usher wide. »
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.

idler

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11494
Re: Mateta
« Reply #46 on March 07, 2025, 06:11:47 pm by idler »
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.

ravenrover

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 11358
Re: Mateta
« Reply #47 on March 07, 2025, 06:30:14 pm by ravenrover »
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

drfchound

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 34715
Re: Mateta
« Reply #48 on March 07, 2025, 07:15:57 pm by drfchound »
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.

IDM

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 21384
Re: Mateta
« Reply #49 on March 07, 2025, 09:17:33 pm by IDM »
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.

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012