Real Madrid - Manchester United Post Match Discussion

I wanted to get a couple things off my chest after some heated Twitter discussion during the game today.  All of it of course had to do with the straight red card awarded to Nani.

Here's the rule:

Careless Reckless, Using Excessive Force

Using Excessive Force means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of foce and is in danger of injuring his opponent.

A player who used excessive force shall be sent off

I've seen yellows for high boots that don't even make contact with a player. It is well known in football that you don't attempt to take possession within arms length of an opponent with high cleats or cleats exposed.

Nani came in high with his boot straight into Arbaloa's chest. He missed the ball, made no contact with it and could have seriously injured his opponent. We wouldn't be having this debate if he broke Arbaloa's ribs.

The referee interpreted the rule correctly. That type of foul doesn't call for a yellow. It calls for a straight red. Ibrahimovic's foul for stomping on his opponent's foot earned him a direct red which was less excessive than this.

Bottom line is no matter how you cut it, the referee interpreted the rule correctly. There was physical contact by means of cleats into the chest without any ball contact. It was excessive and reckless and as per the rule, is a direct red.

In my view, it was a direct red card. Even former Mancheter United Captain Keane tweeted that "it was the correct call".

The bigger debate should be about Manchester United Skipper Sir Alex Ferguson deciding to keep Rooney on the bench to try to defend the full 90'.  Instead of starting his best team, trying to go up 1-0 and then perhaps subbing out Rooney late, he tried to defend and though he could hold Madrid.  That deserves great discussion as well.

As for the foul, it was a direct red as per the rules.  You don't come in cleats to chest and expect to walk away without being sent off. Had Nani missed his opponent, he could have been given a yellow nonetheless but where the direct red comes into play is when he caught Arbaloa in the chest with his cleats. 

I hear yiy GSP10 but the rule covers careless or reckless play as well and what Nani did was careless.  We've seen players get carded all the time for high boot infractions where there was no contact with the opponent.  No different than a player slide tackling an opponent with clear eyes on the ball but misses the ball and goes right through a player with cleats up and gets carded or tossed for a reckless or careless play.

If Madrid player had his ribs broken should Nani should have been allowed to stay in the game? 

The play was careless and resulted in contact to the oppnents chest with a high boot. As former Manchester United captain Keane said "it was the right call".

I have no skin in this game. I hope Barca recovers in their match.  But plenty of others have said the ref made the wrong call with the red card.

And personally, I have no issue with shelving Rooney.  Man U built a 1-0 lead without him  with 25 minutes left.  It took an utterly fantastic goal by Modric that hit the post to give RM the equalizer.

------------------

Reaction to the sending-off of Manchester United winger Nani during their Champions League last-16, second-leg match against Real Madrid at Old Trafford.

* Manchester United assistant manager Mike Phelan:

"The manager is not in a state to talk to the referee about the decision. I think it speaks volumes I am here (in the post-match news conference) speaking now and not the manager of this fantastic football club. The decision seemed very harsh, possibly incredible at that moment in the game."

Real Madrid midfielder Xabi Alonso:

"It was a difficult decision to take from the referee, but we have seen in many previous games that it can be harder playing against 10 men."

* Everton manager David Moyes:

"I think tonight Sir Alex Ferguson will be rightly as angry as he has ever been. The decision changed the game.

"I am looking from a manager's point of view and Manchester United have had a hard time tonight. I think they have a right to surround the referee. The decision was poor and it has cost them the biggest prize in football."

* Former Manchester United midfielder Roy Keane:

"In my career I would think 'did I give the referee a chance to send me off?' If I did, then it is out of my hands. I think that is the right decision. It is irrelevant if Nani meant to do it. He should be aware of the players around him. Does he think that he will have 20 yards to himself?."

* Former Premier League referee Dermot Gallagher:

"(The decision was) harsh to say the least but in fairness the Real player did Nani no favours whatsoever. At worst Nani catches the underside of his arm, certainly not the ribs as the guy has gone down and shown.

"I can't reiterate enough that he (Nani) is watching the ball over his shoulder, there was no malice in him. At worst it was a yellow for dangerous play, but if I was refereeing that game I cannot see what stretch of the imagination where I would have sent him off for that."

* Former Liverpool and Germany midfielder Dietmar Hamann:

"He wants to bring it down, I think no Real Madrid player expected it, nobody was claiming a red card. He didn't see him he didn't mean to do it, it's not even a booking."

Former Bayern Munich and Aston Villa striker Alan McInally:

"It's a disgrace, a shocking decision, that has put Manchester United out of the Champions League." (Compiled by Toby Davis, editing by Ed Osmond)

Sure a Real Madrid Fanboy?   ROTFL ... stick around my friend ... I don't think you follow me much ...I bleed Red and Black .. AC Milan ... I watched this game from a neutral perspective and had no money on either side (only the total).  Don't make assumptions because I laid out my argument that you necessarily don't agree with.

I suggest you brush up on the rules of the game then.  A high boot is always a foul .. a high boot with contact to the player and not the ball is almost always carded and a foul of the sort that was careless and reckless has led to many a direct red card.  I'm not only a card carrying coach in the Ontario Coaches Federation but also a qualified referee and have officiated many under 19 matches. Don't assume to know me.

I really hope you are joking here because this is the silliest thing I've ever read.

Abaloa has every right to stand there to chest the ball down.  I suggest you read the rule and UNDERSTAND that it is open for interpretation by the referee. A high boot that makes contact with a player is a bookable offence. If the referee determines that the action was careless and "endangered the health of the opposing player" then it is a direct red card. THAT is the rule ... not my interpretation of it.  The wording cannot be clearer. 

READ THE RULES BEFORE YOU GUYS go off the rails and understand the rules.

https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf  mages are even shown for examples.

Rule 12.8

“Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or consideration when making his challenge or he acted without precaution.  (usually results in just a free kick)

“Reckless” is defined as the player has actied with complete disregard for the danger to, or consequences for his opponent.  A Player deemed guilty of reckless play shall be cautioned (yellow card)

Rule 12.9

Excessive Force means that the player has far exceeded the necessary use of foce and is in danger of injuring his opponent.  A player who used excessive force shall be sent off.

Here’s the difference … a hard tackle that is reckless … like a cleats up slide tackle where the player is missed and no body contact is made is deemed reckless.  If that player coming in with both cleats up misses the ball but makes conact with the player, the referee can deem this excessive because dangers the safety of his opponent.  A direct red can be shown.

Rule 12.10 Charging an opponent

The act of charging is a challenge for space using physical contact within playing distance of the ball without using arms or elbows.   It is an offence to charge an opponent in a carless manner, in a reckless manner and using excessive force. 

Again the distinction must be made by the referee of which 3 the act falls under.

In Nani’s case, it can be argued that he charged the player without his arms or elbows (high boot) using execessive force because his cleats struck the player in the chest.  A player must be aware of his surroundings at all times.

Playing in a dangerous manner is defined as any action while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone.

Rule 12.61 Sending off offences

There are seven offences for which a player, substitute or substituted player can be sent off and shown the red card if he

1. Is guilty of a serious foul play
2. is guilty of violent conduct
3. Spits at opponent or another person
4. denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball
5. denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent moving forwards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or penalty kick
6. uses offensive gestures, or insulting or abusive language and or gestures
7. receives a second yellow card

Rule 12.64

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of foul play.

AUTOMATIC RED CARD FOR THIS ... this is what Nani got booked for.

Sorry the quote got mixed with my reply so I want to avoid confusion.

Here was my response.

My intent is not to argue with anyone .. simply to discuss my interpretation of the rule.

Nani knows there are other plays on the pitch.  Nani's stud were exposed and he went cleats first into the opposing player.  Arbeloa had every reason to go for that ball but Arbeloa's actions were not 'dangerous' as defined by the rules. 

The referee didn't immediately pull out the red .. he thought about it, analyzed it, discussed it with his linesmen and at that point the card was shown.

You can't go studs up into a player's chest.  Ever,  This is considered dangerous play by the rules. Again, rule 12.64 discusses dismissals vs yellow cards and it clearly states....

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs with excessive force and endangering the safety of an opponent is guilty of foul play.

The rule is as clear as day ... now the intepretation is up to the individual.  I've seen straight reds for less, no yellows for worse. The magnituede of the game is why were are discussing it becuase if it happened between two mid-table teams in any league, we wouldn't be discussing it right now.

GSP10 ... with resepect, your interpretation of the rule is way off.  If both players ran for the ball and collided that's different.  See the part in the rule that clearly discusses lunging with one or both legs? 

As I said, I watched this game from a neutral standpoint having no rooting interest for either side. 

Where the foul was committed was with Nani coming in studs high.  You don't come into a player with studs high.  Ever.  Youv've seen it called countless times.  The interpretation of carding a player for it is at the discretion of a referee but if two guys go for the ball and happen to collide that's one thing.  Putting your body in a position that endangers another player is another.