re: What are the chances the red card suspension is overturned?

quote:

---

pulled up the second he realized he had landed on his ankle

---

quote:

---

You obviously never played.

---

So you can stomp on a players ankle from behind for so long it buckles over.
But as long as you get off of his ankle once you realize it has already buckled over it’s not a red card?

The US is simultaneously the most loved and most hated team in this tournament. We are the host nation, so obviously sports crazy Americans are loving this team and are there to cheer or watch from home.

We are also the big bullies of the world trying to assert ourselves in the global game. Every team the US plays has the rest of the world pulling for it.

Ratings and revenue are way up!

Want that money to keep flowing, FIFA?

Maybe it's in your best interest we stick around a little longer in this tournament.

Give us Flo back. Call it fair.

It should be overturned on the fact the VAR was used incorrectly, further more that ref should be fired and we should bomb his house as a frick you

quote:

---

irrelevant

---

You think it’s irrelevant if someone intentionally lands on an ankle or not? Holy frick dude

Furthermore outcome comes into play as well. Sons tackle that broke an ankle wasn’t a red card challenge but it ended up accidentally breaking the guys ankle so he was shown red. This guy rolled around and then finished the game just fine. Had something actually serious happened I would probably agree with the red card. But to say intent is irrelevant is insanity

Yea this should be our argument that VAR wasn’t used correctly therefore this should be reversed.

quote:

---

total accident

irrelevant

---

Actually by the letter of the law it is completely relevant. The defender came through him to win the ball knocking him off balance. It was in the same motion of him regaining his balance that he landed on the ankle.

Furthermore, the VAR replays to the official only showed the clips after the initial coming together happened which is absurd. By itself the "challenge" is a red. In the total context of the play it is not

Let’s dispel the “I never played” myth. I played ODP and was in consideration for the Barcelona Olympics before I tore an ACL and had to quit playing. I am a currently certified USSF official (for over 30 years) and have officiated matches all the way up to low level professional. I still work semi professional matches in my 50s.

I’m looking at the considerations here. Did Balogun make contact with excessive force? For me, no. Did he endanger the safety of the opponent? Again for me, no, but VAR and the match referee thought so and that’s why they decided it was worthy of a sending off. I don’t agree, but they can certainly defend their decision. Intent is nowhere to be found in the Laws of the Game.

In my opinion, their justification for endangering the safety of the opponent comes from the defender’s ankle twisting under Balogun’s foot as he makes contact. That could have easily broken his ankle; if that had happened, I’m not sure anyone could argue it wasn’t a red.

quote:

---

In my opinion, their justification for endangering the safety of the opponent comes from the defender’s ankle twisting under Balogun’s foot as he makes contact. That could have easily broken his ankle; if that had happened, I’m not sure anyone could argue it wasn’t a red.

---

But it didn't happen and FIFA refs aren't fricking doctors. Refereeing on player reaction or potential result instead of the actual play is horseshite. Judging off of a still shot goes against VAR guidelines and removes the context of the play.

quote:

---

But, it didn’t. And that’s important when you’re not even looking at the guy and playing for the ball. If it’s accidental, outcome of injury does come into play. Every 50/50 header “could” result in a concussion.

---

How about that pick on Flo to open the second half if we want to use VAR to penalize "dangerous" play?