He aimed for the ball

> He aimed for the ball.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=1UnMBH3EGWM
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Refs are racist desu. Had it been a hard working white lad like good ol ' Arry Kane it do had been a slap on the wrist and 60 excuses by commentators.

>Dat guilty look up

he had his eyes 100% on the ball the entire time though

Are you fucking retardet? All the commentators were defending this dindu.

>de gay

>I dint see im

*Looks directly at him*

>implying intent matters

Why do people who love soccer never just read the fucking rules? It is super short, just read the fucking thing.

Objectively, OBJECTIVELY, soccer fans are the most retarded bunch, and I say that as a soccer fan.

The hui played dead. If he'd gone up like a real man it's be a TAA free kick peach goal.

Doesn't matter if he intended or not, you can't lift your foot that high,that alone should get him a yellow card, for murdering the hue he deserved a red as well.

He deserves to be banned for as long as the player he injured is out for

>emre can will steal it and then belt it 100mph 10 miles wide

So about half an hour then?

Shit lads, grandads escaped from the old folks home

t. ABL

Goalkeepers Union actually

Glad to see someone actually referencing the laws of the game in here instead of talking about race

>Victim Mentality Union actually

ftfy

mane endangered his opponent going for the ball the way he did and it's probably a rightful red, but why does everyone ignore the goalkeeper full-on bodying him, outside his area, with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?

lol I'm retarded

>lé gruff English "journo" voice

BACK WHEN I WAS AH PLAYAH

Because hes a goalie

they always can do whatever they want

did the keeper slip ?

>with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?
Why would you comment without watching the incident? The keeper got the ball.

>with no attempt to play the ball in the slightest?
But the keeper was the one who got to the ball first.

>literally being this much of a dumb nigger
wow lads, look at this dumb cunt

It's a Football match with clear and defined rules, not a war, you pathetic moron

If that was the case Ederson should have charged with his foot forwards also so as not to be the "Victim"

>going for the ball is an excuse to commit attempted murder
Also intent is nowhere in Law 12. All you have to do is have acted recklessly and had no regard to your opponents safety with excessive force to be sent off.
Excessive force is defined as any force that would be in danger of injuring an opponent.

Your intent doesn't matter, If you acted carelessly and recklessly and with excessive force it's an auto sending off.

Based ederson won the game with this move, stopped a 95% chance on goal and got rid of liverplops best player

people implying this isnt a straight red card are baiting right?

>saying the N word

kill yourself, asshole

He sees to be looking up

C'mon, now we know you're baiting.

You have to be 18 or above to post on this site.

Some commentators were actually trying to argue it's not a red.

>I didn't see im

Is exactly the point. He should have looked before planting his foot randomly.

Try giving the excuse that you were looking at a hot girl's ass and didn't see them while plowing through pedestrians at a zebra crossing.

"he had the eyes on the ball" is the most retarded lying trash I've heard from football fans/coaches/players in a while. If he didn't think the keeper was coming at him, which he knew because he clearly looked, then he would have no reason to jump that high to catch the ball.

Most pundits are Liverpool, no surprise they're biased to the point of idiocy.

>no attempt to play the ball
>he's the only one who plays the ball

He had to try. This is the EPL.

what he did was dumb, but you see in this replay he really only had eyes on the ball.

Mane would have played the ball if he had got to it first. Then it would have been Ederson headbutting the side of Mane's leg and people would have said, "Gosh, lucky they didn't collide. That could have been bad. Well, let's get back to playing 11v11."

The goalie deserved it. Fuck goalies and their entitlement, always rushing into situations like that with no regard themselves either. The striker needs to defend himself, otherwise the goalie is going to lay him out and there wouldn't even be any consequences.

1) even if he did get the ball high foot is dangerous play, yellow if he doesn't hit a player red if he does.
2) but he didn't. therefore you're retarded.

>let me defend myself by extending my leg towards your face

Actually it's a tactic for goalkeepers to draw fouls in 50/50s like this where the GK is the last line of defence. It's easier for them to get fouls given for them. If anything, going for the ball in this scenario is the worst thing to do. Ederson is a smart lad.

That's dumb. Things aren't less dangerous because something bad takes place. If I shoot up a crowd, I should be given the same amount of punishment regardless of how many people I hit.

>American
>footy fan

haha no. you don't know shit about football, jog on ya cunt

Cahill didn't intend to go studs up into that Burnley players shin but if you play recklessly you will get a red, intent doesn't even come into it.

>if I speed on a road I should be given the same amount of punshiment regardless of whether I kill someone or not

it's the laws of the game, period. You never played football if you think high foots are fine.

>he dindu nuffin
>almost murders the keeper

Ederson should get done for dangerous play as well. He was just as much the cause of the foot to the face as Mane.

But the outcome does seem to come into it. That's why people are judging it based on fact that Mane did make contact. If he had missed him just slightly they wouldn't have cared.

>it's the laws of the game
Is it the laws of the game or is it just the way referees feel at that moment in time? It just seems to be completely within the referee's discretion.

>if I speed on a road I should be given the same amount of punishment regardless of whether I kill someone or not
That's not quite the same. It's like I threw keys at your face. You'd be pissed regardless of whether or not I hit you. If Mane had missed only slightly, if Ederson had clattered him, no-one would have cared.

Yes, he dangerously led with his head to head the ball and managed to do so while going nowhere near mane except the nigger stuck out his studs and caught his face.

>being this much of a retarded scouser actually trying to pretend it's 'refball' because you didn't get away with murder again

Why is he putting his head in that position?

The guy was knocked out only. Not such a big deal. Stop being such a pussy.

...

still better than bravo

Probably to avoid getting decapitated by the impact of mane's foot?

Watch the clip.
He see's mane flying towards him and tries to evade but can't.
>Why was his head in that position
He's trying to head the ball away out of danger. It think he's entitled to expect not to get kicked in the head by an opponent.

And why does he need to avoid that? Did he fuck up so bad that his best option was less pain? Why did he put himself in such a dangerous position in the first place?

Are you trying to say it wasn't a 50/50? That's the only way they're not both responsible.

I give a fuck.

>why does he need to avoid that?
Because liverpool is a shit team that doesn't teach it's players the basics of sport.

This is why keepers need to stay in their fucking box and not fly around the pitch head first

>50/50
>Ederson won the ball
How was that a 50/50?
That's a 51/49 the the very least. He got nothing of the ball and all of Ederson's face.

His sacrifice killed the livershit title hope meme.

clear red card

One person always gets there first in a 50/50. You're twisting words.

If Ederson had slightly missed Mane's boot and went into his shin and been okay, there wouldn't have been a red card. Do any of you red card twats disagree?

Yeah, and the one that gets there first wins the prize of net getting sent off.
BUT HERP DERP WE MUST DIVE INTO 50/50 CHALLENGES BECAUSE MUH EPL PASSION AND FIRE

Protip: The best central midfielders and central defenders never dived into 50/50s because only retarded brainlets do that and get sent off because of it.

All you have to do to get the other player sent off is throw your fucking face into the path of a kick.

>Is it the laws of the game or is it just the way referees feel at that moment in time?
it's the laws of the game

>Yeah, and the one that gets there first wins the prize of net getting sent off.
That's your argument. That's fucking retarded. They are both equally put the other person in danger. You're stupid.

if you lower your head down to shin level and get kicked in the face, you're the one who is supposed to get a punishment for dangerous play, in this case the nigger threw a head high kick

Why are they so inconsistent then? They only seem to apply it when contact as made. Take something that's actually consistent: two footed tackles. Players get sent off regardless of whether contact is made. When it comes to high feet they don't have a clear-cut way of saying what is okay and what is not. And that's why I ask if it's in the laws of the game.

>equally put the other person in danger
cool story brah, ederson's head really put mane's foot in danger.

>being this much of a brainlet

Typical case of Liverpool claiming "We dindu nuffin". Pathetic club

Players do that all the time to get to the ball though. In this case Mane was already behind the entire opposition and still outside the box. it's not a situation where you can expect the goalkeeper to be and shove his face into the path of your foot.

>one person got hurt therefore that person was more put in danger than the other
If we meet at high noon and my bullet goes into you but not yours into me, do I thereby put you in more danger? You stupid.

It matters on the color of the card. I celebrate Hillsborough but that wasn't red.

you can't be this retarded, the only reason mane kicked that high was because he saw the goalkeeper coming and he saw that ederson would get to the ball first if he didn't do that shit.

high foot is dangerous play you dumb scouser, heading a ball at head level isn't.

He was going for the ball you retard. That's why he kicked that high and as I said before it happens a million times. Only reason it was a red is because Ederson went down like a sack of shit and english refs being amongst the worst on the planet.

Anyone remember Toni Schumacher killing French NT?


youtube.com/watch?v=1UnMBH3EGWM

>They are both equally put the other person in danger.
Please tell me you don't actually believe this.

>He was going for the ball
completely irrelevant, read the rules of game.
also he missed it.

So if no-one is around him and he controls the ball he should be sent off.

>inb4 he knew Ederson was there
And so did Ederson know Mane was there. He endangered himself. It's a 50/50 which means no-one is more responsible for Ederson being endangered.

Consider a player trying to kick the ball with another player in between and the player in between getting hit in the face. Everyone would blame the kicker. Consider the kicker being closer to the ball and the other player 'putting his head in'. Everyone would call the second player brave ('blaming him'). IF IT'S A 50/50 THEY ARE EITHER BOTH TO BLAME OR NEITHER IS TO BLAME.

>dumb scouser
Not a scouser you dumb Hue monkey. Check your digits, faggot.

Is this the first time someones got a red without there being any intent?

last man reds i guess. and 2 footers but 2 footers are always reds

You have to apply the rules to the individual situations. If you want consistency then you have to card the players any time they put their foot up.

Anyone who thinks it wasn't a red is a literal retard.

How much do you need to be crouching down before it counts as your fault?

Id guess most reds are unintended

>read the rules of game
And they say 'dangerous' and 'reckless' which is vague. There has to be a consensus about what constitutes dangerous and reckless and is this case there is not. It's not like the case of two footed tackle where the player is sent off irrespective off hurting the other player. Here the standard is: Well, he knocked him out so it must be bad! If he missed by 2 inches and Ederson got a shin in the mouth it's only a yellow card because I don't feel so bad!

learn to read please:
>high foot is dangerous play you dumb scouser, heading a ball at head level isn't.

You can't lift your foot during a tackle, moron.

>high foot is dangerous play
Except in the cases where it isn't. Thanks for clearing that up!

Literal refs know more than spee desu

If someone were to fly in like this at someones knee, there would be no arguments at all that it was a red. It was reckless and not controlled. Because he hit him in the head for some reason retards are defending him.

See Ederson has both knees bent, leaning over with his head down. He's way under head height.

It's not a tackle you fucking idiot.

yes

>a player who was running had his knees slightly bent

how the fuck do you run you fat imbecile

A ball dispute, wathever. You can lift your foot to reach the ball as long as you isn't in a ball dispute.