Summer 2021 transfer window

[Tredman]

It’s reckless and out of control. Do that on the ground with a foot and it’s a straight red. No one says anything about intent, it’s just stupid.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Jimenez didn’t get sent off for kicking a guy in the head?

 

[Johnny75]

Jimenez didn’t get sent off for kicking a guy in the head?

The forces are hugely different. Luiz is running and jumping at speed with a 5kg weapon (his head) which has a curved hard surface which is literally designed to attack.

You are talking car crash levels of force which you won't get with a boot.

I don't think it's intentional from Luiz but when you look at that picture where he has no idea of his surroundings or where the ball is it's dangerous and reckless which should've resulted in a red card.

 

[leedswolf]

I will never understand how or why he has his hand in Raul's mouth. I have never ever ever seen that happen before or since.

I don't think his hand is in Raul's mouth. I reckon Luiz has his fingers 'folded' as is his left hand if you zoom in on the image, a natural shape the hands will take when you use your arms as a means of leverage when jumping. The camara angle isn't exactly conclusive.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

It’s reckless and out of control. Do that on the ground with a foot and it’s a straight red. No one says anything about intent, it’s just stupid.

No-one can ever run and jump ever again then?

 

[PuntsWolf]

The forces are hugely different. Luiz is running and jumping at speed with a 5kg weapon (his head) which has a curved hard surface which is literally designed to attack.

You are talking car crash levels of force which you won't get with a boot.

I don't think it's intentional from Luiz but when you look at that picture where he has no idea of his surroundings or where the ball is it's dangerous and reckless which should've resulted in a red card.

I pretty much said this earlier (the first bit). I’m well aware they are different, one ended up in a concussion, the other in a fractured skull. But kicking someone in the head offers no danger to yourself (like the high reckless challenge tredman was referring to), but a header does. So whilst they are both reckless I don’t feel they can be considered the same

There are tons of photos of players having their eyes closed for a header (same as for a hook shot in cricket). They haven’t closed their eyes and guessed, they’ve watched it the whole way. But to blink (or close your eyes) near the point of contact is just human reflex.

It was an unlucky collision, unfortunately with a lot of force, in one of the weaker areas of the skull. If David Luiz gets there first everyone’s raving about his level of commitment and how “he wanted it more” “put his head where it hurts” and any other cliche.

 

[Dinowolf]

No-one can ever run and jump ever again then?

I've said this previously, but to reiterate, when a player is jumping to head the ball, then he should jump upright and not into another player. This is clearly stated in the Laws of the game and is reinforced by pictorial examples in the Advice to referees.

If players run at someone to get a height advantage they are acting in a dangerous and reckless manner. They need to plant their feet first and jump up straight in order to challenge fairly.

Time and again we see players jumping into others to head the ball and referees do nothing. Most of the time nothing untoward happens, but then there are times when you get bad collisions such as Raul suffered, caused by an idiot like Luiz.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

I've said this previously, but to reiterate, when a player is jumping to head the ball, then he should jump upright and not into another player. This is clearly stated in the Laws of the game and is reinforced by pictorial examples in the Advice to referees.

If players run at someone to get a height advantage they are acting in a dangerous and reckless manner. They need to plant their feet first and jump up straight in order to challenge fairly.

Time and again we see players jumping into others to head the ball and referees do nothing. Most of the time nothing untoward happens, but then there are times when you get bad collisions such as Raul suffered, caused by an idiot like Luiz.

Nearly every header is a foul then by that take.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Laughable. The days of “attack the ball” will be gone. Corners will become a waste of time. WJ goal against Fulham would be illegal, as would Saiss’ against Spurs. John Egan’s powerful header against us end of last season disallowed.

May as well ban headinf rather than bring that rule in.

 

[Tredman]

And if that helps protect players from serious harm? Its the way rugby is going with regards to high tackles.

 

[Johnny75]

I pretty much said this earlier (the first bit). I’m well aware they are different, one ended up in a concussion, the other in a fractured skull. But kicking someone in the head offers no danger to yourself (like the high reckless challenge tredman was referring to), but a header does. So whilst they are both reckless I don’t feel they can be considered the same

There are tons of photos of players having their eyes closed for a header (same as for a hook shot in cricket). They haven’t closed their eyes and guessed, they’ve watched it the whole way. But to blink (or close your eyes) near the point of contact is just human reflex.

It was an unlucky collision, unfortunately with a lot of force, in one of the weaker areas of the skull. If David Luiz gets there first everyone’s raving about his level of commitment and how “he wanted it more” “put his head where it hurts” and any other cliche.

David Luiz attacks the ball with his head in the same way you would headbutt somebody so it clearly is more dangerous. Attacking in that way limits the danger to yourself to it's lowest form.

It is reckless as his eyes are shut (not blinking) and he can't see where he's going. He has also jumped into the same space that a player is. That is dangerous.

I don't think it's malicious but it is reckless and dangerous and to compare it to an overhead kick misunderstands the severity of head injury and the forces involved.

 

[Johnny75]

I've said this previously, but to reiterate, when a player is jumping to head the ball, then he should jump upright and not into another player. This is clearly stated in the Laws of the game and is reinforced by pictorial examples in the Advice to referees.

If players run at someone to get a height advantage they are acting in a dangerous and reckless manner. They need to plant their feet first and jump up straight in order to challenge fairly.

Time and again we see players jumping into others to head the ball and referees do nothing. Most of the time nothing untoward happens, but then there are times when you get bad collisions such as Raul suffered, caused by an idiot like Luiz.

You've said this before and it just isn't true. The laws of foul play are here and it isn't listed in the 20/21 version (the jumping from two feet straight up bit).

 

[Johnny75]

And if that helps protect players from serious harm? Its the way rugby is going with regards to high tackles.

It's not the same thing but I see where you're coming from.

There needs to be better player protection for the players and sanctions for dangerous play. Oddly enough I think this is where VAR should be involved.

 

[Dinowolf]

Nearly every header is a foul then by that take.

Yes you're right.
Refs have let players get away with poor, dangerous heading habits for far too long, and need to tighten up on them.

 

[Dinowolf]

You've said this before and it just isn't true. The laws of foul play are here and it isn't listed in the 20/21 version (the jumping from two feet straight up bit).

Jumping at a player is a foul resulting in a direct free kick.

I don't say anything about 'jumping from two feet', what I was trying to explain was when a player runs to head a ball, before he takes off he needs to plant his feet before jumping for the ball, not just fly recklessly at his opponent.

There is movement by the FA to try to improve the situation after reports that repeated heading is causing dementia.

 

[Johnny75]

Jumping at a player is a foul resulting in a direct free kick.

I don't think anybody is arguing that. Your two foot and straight up bit is just not in the laws.

 

[Dinowolf]

Laughable. The days of “attack the ball” will be gone. Corners will become a waste of time. WJ goal against Fulham would be illegal, as would Saiss’ against Spurs. John Egan’s powerful header against us end of last season disallowed.

May as well ban headinf rather than bring that rule in.

Rubbish.
You're just being controversial.

 

[Dinowolf]

I don't think anybody is arguing that. Your two foot and straight up bit is just not in the laws.

You're right. I didn't mean to say it was; I didn't explain it properly.

 

[Johnny75]

.There is movement by the FA to try to improve the situation after reports that repeated heading is causing dementia.

The incident and what you describe above are not related.

 

[AndyWolves]

Laughable. The days of “attack the ball” will be gone. Corners will become a waste of time. WJ goal against Fulham would be illegal, as would Saiss’ against Spurs. John Egan’s powerful header against us end of last season disallowed.

May as well ban headinf rather than bring that rule in.

I think a ban on heading will be inevitable, but won't happen for a long time. The research into dementia suffered by footballers shows the risks.