₦airaland Forum

CaptainStephen:
bros its a bad tackle plain and simple, I almost got expelled from NDA for a similar kind of tackle on my colleague.

nobody is denying that. It was a horrible tackle no doubt but what I am saying here is that the ref not giving Matuidi a straight red isn't exactly a case of corruption as some are potraying it. TheGoodJoe's opinion here is that Matuidi had initially tried to injure Onazi, that is also my believe as a nigerian, but call out a french guy and he would tell you that there was no malice intended and he just wanted to win, doing his work as the destroyer in midfield and he could give reasons to back up his claim too. So you see that there are two sides to this same story, and whichever side the ref chooses in that particular point in time is not wrong, it was just the way the ref viewed it.

People seem to think that I am saying that the foul was fair or something, I would have sent him off if I am the ref no doubt, but the ref on the day had enough reasons not to send him off, thats the point

TheGoodJoe:
The Middlesbrough defender Emanuel Pogatetz today issued a public apology to Manchester United's Brazilian midfielder Rodrigo Possebon for the reckless, studs-up tackle during last night's Carling Cup tie that left the teenager in hospital. Pogatetz also accepted that he had deserved to be sent off.Possebon was kept in hospital overnight after the incident during United's 3-1 win at Old Trafford and needed stitches to a two-inch gash just below his right knee. But the 19-year-old will reflect that he actually had a lucky escape after x-rays showed there was no break.Sir Alex Ferguson, who said that he feared a long-term injury, accused Pogatetz of a "horrendous" and "terrible" challenge, while the former United and Middlesbrough defender Gary Pallister added further condemnation, accusing the guilty player of knowing he was going to hurt his opponent.

Pogatetz, however, insisted it had not been pre-meditated. "Firstly, I have to say that I went for the tackle because I thought I could win the ball. I now accept, however, that I misjudged the challenge," said the Middlesbrough captain. "Immediately after the incident, I did not think it was a red-card offence because I did win the ball. But now I have had the chance to see the tackle on television, I know the referee was right to send me off."Pogatetz said he had sent a message to Possebon and would try to contact him in person. "I am going to speak to Rodrigo by telephone and I have apologised for hurting him.

"I hope that he will make a quick recovery and that he will not be out for long."

His contrition will not spare him from a club fine and a three-match ban, while the incident will do little to improve the reputation of a player who refers to himself as "Mad Dog" and, as a Spartak Moscow player in 2005, was banned for 24 weeks, reduced to eight on appeal, after breaking an opponent's leg in two places.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/sep/24/middlesbrough.manchesterunited


Maybe you do not know players get bans for Horror tackles and what Matuidi did is a perfect picture of a horror tackle.

this is the last thing I will say about this. Check out that picture and from the news report check where he needed stitches. Then compare the location of the tackle with that of Matuidi and then check if they are the same according to the rule book. If after checking all these you still don't understand then have a nice sunny saturday

TheGoodJoe:
Please. I could not have said it better myself.

You must have a lot of nerve to not see that this is worse than Suarez.... Diego Maradona on Matuidi's tackle on Onazi.

of course it is way worse than what Suarez did. Suarez bit a player, I mean no one gets injured from a bite except the person has rabbies or he severes one of your arteries, but he was given a ban because it was not a natural move(like when Ronaldo turned to a referee and touched his *****) but Matuidi's case is way different. It is a natural occurence and you could argue that some refs would send him off but a ban?

BascoVanVeli:
I totally get were u both are coming from tbh. I don't think u are being biased but I just had to get the Onazi joke in

this man sef

TheGoodJoe:
You can disagree on the goal and I will not say a thing but on Onazi's tackle after seeing the images, sheds more light on your thoughts towards the team.

towards which team exactly? So you havent seen where I said that Rohr's team never reach Keshi's team? Abi you haven't seen where I typed that defeating Bosnia is something Rohr's team would find difficult? Abi you haven't seen me praising Keshi's team before? The thing with being sentimental is that once you start, everyother contrary opinion becomes a hate speech

Certitude:
Who b the person sef? But all through that game, our players acted like novices. They were so holy... Evra holding Osaze during the coner kick; the elbow on Mikel and Matuidi's tackle on Onazi and they all kept calm... Even when I dey play street football, you no fit mess with my team mate.

I totally agree with you. Infact when that tackle on Onazi was committed I immediately shouted red card, shouting at the players to rush the ref na. The penalty incident happened in the first half and me till now never understand how e come be say nobody, not even Osaze said anything, in fact I think the ref saw the incident because he later warned Evra but since we didn't shout and scream there was no penalty. It was after weeks of studying the tape and the rules that I got to understand the refs angle

TheGoodJoe:
“Spanish newspapers had headlines saying Nigeria was robbed; they said the referee cost Nigeria the game,” Henry Makinwa, the ex-Vitoria Setubal striker said.“Emenike’s goal should have stood and why would Matuidi earn a mere yellow card for that crunching challenge on Onazi, who was our best player on the day?“It was a career-ending tackle and that should have earned the player (Matuidi) a straight red card. The officiating was nothing to write home about.”

A clear intention to injure a player with a career-ending tackle and someone wants to justify it with a rule book.

someone who thinks that Emenike's goal should have been given tells you all you need to know about the person

BascoVanVeli:
My bros u are looking suspicious o. We all know about your lack of love for Onazi
Was it a red? yes but I have seen referees miss that same call in certain games. I think u guys are both right tbh no need for the extra gra gra. Save your world class debating prowess for another time.

but seriously oh, this isn't because it is Onazi but thank God you know that this wasn't some sort of bias

mank1234:
It was a red for me. Give me a link to the complete ref rules and I'll show you another rule that would have been used to send him out. You're only using one rule and in retrospect after the event had already occurred to buttress your point.

its on the fifa site, I already got banned for posting a link last week. You may probably argue that one of the rules states that if a player lunges in with the intent of injuring a player then it's a red. But I already pointed out to you that if Onazi's body position was slightly different then it wouldn't have been an injury and that negates that rule

TheGoodJoe:
No need for that. He is just a bias to the team. Even hates seeing the team win.

lol. So after losing out this is what you came up with? Pitiful really

mank1234:
Are you implying that Onazi shouldn't have moved? Besides, the referee should have given him yellow card for at least 1 of 2 earlier bad challenge and this would have been a second yellow if at all you're right. The ref protected them. France are usually protected as a physical side but not African teams.

now you are seeing the light.

I am not arguing that the ref shouldn't have given him....even a red card before that. My discussion here is based solely on this Matuidi-Onazi incident and it wasn't a red card, definetly a yellow but not a red. That is all

TheGoodJoe:
A middle finger to sentiments and rule book. We are talking of a team that already had a clear case of injuring a player on their head. A dirty player who made repeated wild lunges on our player. I think Onazi was at the end of one, left the pitch and came back, Ambrose took one.

Yet you are talking rule book in a case of a clear attempt to destroy a player.

Kompany got a red card for a wild tackle, even though he did not contact the player and also won the ball.

funny you should mention Kompany's case. Do you remember the level of uproar that followed that event? Especially since Glen Johnson did something similar the very next match day and walked away clean? So here is the thing, just because the ref in that Manchester derby made a mistake does not make it the norm

FINITO

mank1234:
So if you were a referee, you'll be giving only yellow for career threatening tackle because you're applying the rule. That was an attack on the person with malicious intent not for ball winning. There were several calls in March that the referee refused to make call. Watch it again to clear your doubt.

did you say one viral foul like that on Sane? That is a career-threatning, life ban worthy foul. The guy's studs were clearly showing and the second foot was off the ground, red card everyday of the week. Matuidi's case was a case of a body check with a stamp on the ankle.

Ok let me give you a simple assignment. Stand erect with you foot firmly on the ground, then let someone stamp you on the ankle, your leg wouldn't even come close to twisting. But if you are about to move your leg and someone stamps on it, you will twist your leg and get injured.

Now had it been that Onazi's leg was on the ground firmly this wouldn't even be a niggle, and nobody would even say yellow card, but within the split second that Onazi raised his foot off the ground, the whole scenario has changed. As a ref, you cannot say that MATUIDI deserves a red card because ONAZI moved his leg at the last minute. These are things that happen in split seconds which opposing players cannot help at all

TheGoodJoe:
Even Mikel Obi annoyed me with his statement then. This was an attempt to destroy a player. Unfortunately, Onazi was never the same after that tackle. He came back a different player.

I guess Matuidi destroyed him.

Yet someone is talking rule book.

if there is no rule book then a red card offence here may not even be a foul tomorrow, so I don't understand what you are saying. Shouldn't we consult the rule book when we are not sure?

TheGoodJoe:

Maradona asked a simple question, where is the ball. I do not need to read a rule book to know murder when I see one. This was too clear.

Matuidi had a very clear intention to injure a player and I need no rule book to know that is a straight red. That was Matuidi's studs to the ankle of Onazi.

"The French side will announce to the world before a game that we are very physical so that they can come and commit murder and get away with it, yet Fifa will fold their arms and do nothing," Onazi said."I am totally in tune with Maradona, who believes that the tackle on me was worst that what Luis Suarez did to Italian Chellini."

The energetic midfielder therefore called on Fifa to go back to review the incident and mete out necessary sanctions to serve as a deterrent to others.

"I want to please beg that Fifa should go back and watch the tape of the game and apply necessary sanctions for the good of the game, otherwise it’s Nigeria today, it could be another big country tomorrow. Justice must be done," he added.

so if you are a ref you will be using sentiments? Oga, there is nothing like 'I know murder when I see one', you are the ref, you are meant to enforce the rules not make the rules, I am strongly going to believe that you have never been to any referee refresher course, infact, here in Nigeria, coaching courses also come with a healthy dose of referee tutorials and you probably didn't attend either. This is what the referee asks; has this player done anything contrary to the rules? The ref does not say 'in my mind I think this guy deserves a red card, why? Because I THINK so'. I already showed you the rules and yet you now want to argue with the rulebook.


Oh, if you are still looking for the ball, watch the extended highlight and you will see it, if you still don't understand then check what a 'follow-up' means

Icon4s:
Oga, I don't know what you are saying.

90% of pundits world-wide who reanalyzed that incident called it a straight Red card.

I am more vexed with Mikel because due to his position as one of leaders of the team and also his experience in the game, he should have made the best of that incident.

Common, we are not talking about a WAFU competition or an AFCON qualifiers. This was a Works cup 2nd round game for goodness sake's. A game we were having the upper hand in terms of ball possession and chances created and you know with France being one man down we stand a better chance of carrying the day. Is it every day you get to play at the 2nd round of a world cup?

Rohr better teaches his boys about some of these acts o. They can make the difference in critical games. Look at Kaita's case at the 2010 WC and how the Greek player made the best of it.

I was really vexed at that Matuidi vs Onazi incident and I am still pained. We were robbed.

ehm, no offence Sir, but bar Maradona and one other guy like that, who else said that the foul was worthy of a red card?

PS: Maradona isn't even a proper analyst but let's just add him.

TheGoodJoe:
Stop dribbling. It is simple, the referee failed to issue a deserved red card.

if this is the only thing you could come up with after going through the rules I stated clearly for you to read and digest then I can conclude that you know the truth but you just want to key into this 'white man feeds on black man' mentality

Icon4s:
If I pour my venom on Mikel this morning una go say I wicked.

See his statement.

Little wonder why he reacted the way he did. He is not his brother's keeper at all. Even if he thought it was a fair challenge couldn't he have made a big deal out of it? He should not try that rubbish in Russia o.

Onazi was a strong young player. Mikel should just praise God that it was not him that was tackled that way. His career would have ended that day.

the truth is that we were not there. We merely watched it on tele, Mikel was there so was the ref and Mikel too decided that the foul wasn't red card worthy, close scrutiny of this foul shows that it actually isn't a red card. Matuidi's second foot was clearly on the ground and his studs were not even showing, they were at ankle level. This foul is just like someone stepping on you, just that the position of Onazi's leg made it easier for his leg to bend in that horrible way, on another day if Onazi's leg was firmly on the ground he wouldn't even get a slight bruise from this same tackle

TheGoodJoe:
How can someone call this a yellow card offence?

see the rule here:

“If a player slides to challenge the ball
and he exposes his studs, it’s a yellow
card regardless of whether he wins the
ball; if he doesn’t win the ball and
connects with the opponent it’s a red
card; if he exposes the stud above the
ankle it’s an automatic yellow card
regardless of intent; if he exposes the
stud above the knee it’s an automatic red
card,”


Question time:
1) Matuidi's studs were at which level? Ankle level.

2) Was he sliding? No

3) According to the rule book, since he was not sliding and clearly went for the ball although he ended up catching his man on the ankle is it a red card? Absolutely not.

This is the rule that governs football so I do not know the argument here at all.

TheGoodJoe:

Blaise Matuidi deserved to be sent off in the France vs. Nigeria match. The PSG midfielder deserved a straight red card for this brutal challenge on Onazi, but the referee only put his name in the book.The French midfielder went in extremely late and his studs clattered Onazi's ankle, the player then being forced to go off injured. The Nigerian was stretchered off and unable to come back on to continue... From Marca

first off, you are the one who always drives it down our throat that once someone who is a professional in a particular field says something then it is exactly like that. Here is what Mikel, a DMF,had to say about the tackle(and he has definetly seen it all before)

Super Eagles midfielder, John Mikel Obi, said
a yellow card was the fair punishment for
Blaise Matuidi for his tackle on Ogenyi Onazi.
The Frenchman’s ill-timed challenge left the
Nigerian midfielder with a fractured ankle,
which required a cast and is expected to
keep him out of action for at least six weeks.
But despite widespread condemnation from
home and strong words from Argentina’s
legend Diego Maradona, Mikel has risen to
the defence of the French international,
saying Matuidi is not a d...


Maradona was just trying to use it to defend Suarez's bite

Mujtahida:
Don't you think Matuidi ought to have received a red card for his harsh tackle on Onazi?

no he didn't. It was a poor tackle no doubt, but it was a stamp on the ankle, it was a yellow card offence everyday of the week.

The only debateable instance in that match was a penalty Osaze should have been awarded when he was grappled by Evra but such things happen constantly so nothing there.


I mean Dzeko hada perfectly legitimate goal ruled out against us, is that bias against European teams?

bengine:
I'm all for any technology that would make the game transparent..especially it would expose biased officiating against African teams

can you pin-point an instance, any instance, of biased officiating against African teams?

Mujtahida:
Not that I like the Jersey but there's nothing that cannot be changed. No condition is permanent. I read one time about the history of the England football kit. They've changed several times. Even Brazil in 2002 changed. There's nothing sacrosanct about home or away color to the extent they can't be changed

there is something called culture. Yes sociology teaches that culture is dynamic but there are some parts of it that should not be touched. After running around, Brazil finally came back to their old jersey and although 4th place isn't really outstanding for them at a world cup but hey, it was way more than they used to get in other years. Portugal won't go from wearing dark red to wearing.....eh.....peach, it does not work that way. This thing we are wearing isnt even green, as a male I am color blind but I do know that the name of this color isn't even green

Icon4s:
Wait, what if Shehu did actually displace Agu why would you say it is not good for the SE? Is Shehu not part of the Super Eagles or what are you trying to say?

in their previous game the two of them started, that would be the ideal scenario going forward

Mujtahida:
Oliver khan best gk ever? Who awarded him that distinction?

you get better name?

Icon4s:
What is bad there?

Shehu is about the most underrated player in that Super Eagles squad.

An asset to any team he finds himself. He plays, DM, RB, CM, and also CB. Such kind of player will always make the team.

One very good attribute of his is he is level headed and works very hard and also keeps to instructions. Every coach will always like such a player.

I am sure we want all our players to be sure starters, Shehu coming all the way from Cyprus to come and bench Agu isn't good for the SE. Meanwhile I have been corrected that he was suspended

So Shehu Abdullahi is now keeping Agu on the bench? Well that's bad.

somehow:
Oh I now got your point, while I used Bojan's name? I did that because Bojan was the most troubled when we won. The cam kept showing him off field while the game was ungoing (Finals).

lol. That was actually true then. If you see how we celebrated Bojan's red card then eh, you would think Barca just won a champions league

somehow:
2007 was the era of the Yemi Tella's boys.

Was that not when we played Spain?

Bojan was sent off in the semifinals and didn't play the final, I think he was either tied on 7goals with Chrisantus or he was a goal behind but he never played the final, which was the spanish team's excuse for losing.

Then at the next U20 Ajiboye was not the first choice, and Miranda was leading the line for Spain, Bojan was not invited

Kog45:
I don't see Uzoho beating Ajiboye with what i saw yesterday but Uzoho's height is tempting even Alampasu too,so likely Rohr go for Uzoho.

I am not sure height should be necessary here. Enyeama the best GK that Africa has ever produced wasn't exactly a man-mountain. Casillas, the best GK in the early 2000s wasn't that tall either. Then Oliver Kahn, the best GK ever was hardly taller than 6'1, not exactly tall in this sense

soetanoreoluwa:
Today is my birthday!

Happy New month to you all!!!

you for tell them make them squeeze you into January babies anyhow anyhow Happy Birthday

TheGoodJoe:
Ajiboye is no way rated among the top best goalies in the World. If that is grooming well in your books, no problem.

How can you ask about Spanish National team and grooming De Gea. You are clearly off track. Get the point.

The Europeans have a system that helps in grooming their top talents. We have been fortunate to have some of our special talent groomed in the same system. Iheanacho is a clear case.

Some of our special talents will not have the opportunity to get into such system, and we need to make conscious efforts to help groom and expose them.

Ajiboye was outstanding. We do not produce keepers like him regularly but we did not make efforts to help him grow despite his immense talent. We should do more.

The point is too simple.

Vanzekin is and was no where in talent close to Akpan Bassey, let alone Ajiboye. I wonder why you are bringing him into the picture.

should I run you through a long list of Gks who showed top class promise at the U17 but left much to be desired later on? Chrisantus was groomed abroad, what happened to him? Akinsola was also great then, whatever happened to him.

What is even the meaning of grooming to you? I said Ajiboye has been groomed by the NPFL and yes he has, he has been posting consistent performances in the NPFL, that means the coaches have noticed his progress. Ok Alampasu that is also another talent where is he? Third choice is a club I don't even know, wouldn't he be better off in the NPFL developing himself? Enyeama was developed in the NPFL with little or no national team experience and he only got his chance because we had a dearth of good Gks, such a situation does not occur all the time. Like I said, Ajiboye has been groomed by the NPFL. When we talk about world class keepers why do we not include Ajiboy? Because he plays for Plateau United and not because he cannot, currently, perform better than other world class keepers.


Meanwhile I still do not understand how I went over the line with De Gea, do you even know where he started his career?