Hamza

[Sol thewall Bamba]

Love the kid. He's giving the opposition reasons to worry without really doing anything, he's not been sent off for the first team or made any fouls that have really cost us. It's nice to have the hard bastard on our team rather than constantly trying to play round him like we had to for about 10 years. 

 

Looking forward to him snapping Ashley Barnes in a couple of weeks as well. 

[moore_94]

I actually think Choudhury just got really unlucky, and that Salah was just a bit quicker off the mark than Choudhury expected
 

He has obviously gone in for the tackle to try and wrap his foot around, like he did to Mane last season, but Salah’s foot just gets caught under Hamza’s body, no way he would have meant that

 

 

Edited 7 October 2019 by moore_94

[Countryfox]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

If he continues to dive in, he’s going to continue to draw criticism. Yesterday was a poor tackle, but also a freak accident catching him how he did. 

 

But his style is going to keep getting him in trouble and keep him in the headlines as you can’t expect to time all tackles right. Diving in and getting it wrong is going to end up costing him and us.

 

7 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Love the kid. He's giving the opposition reasons to worry without really doing anything, he's not been sent off for the first team or made any fouls that have really cost us. It's nice to have the hard bastard on our team rather than constantly trying to play round him like we had to for about 10 years. 

 

Looking forward to him snapping Ashley Barnes in a couple of weeks as well. 

 

I agree with both but this ‘cold light of day’ comment from Hackett shows that Babs last sentence will happen soon if he doesn’t temper his aggression ...  other refs will be reading this and there is no way it will not be in the back of their minds.  

 

And he is easy to spot ! ..   

 

 

Edited 7 October 2019 by Countryfox

[Sol thewall Bamba]

12 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

 

I agree with both but this ‘cold light of day’ comment from Hackett shows that Babs last sentence will happen soon if he doesn’t temper his aggression ...  other refs will be reading this and there is no way it will not be in the back of their minds.  

 

And he is easy to spot ! ..   

 

 

He's being playing like this since he was 5 years old, he's not going to change and nor should he. 

[Babylon]

5 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

He's being playing like this since he was 5 years old, he's not going to change and nor should he. 

When he starts getting red cards and we start playing games and losing points because we're down to 10 men, I don't think you'll be so forgiving. 

[Babylon]

18 minutes ago, Countryfox said:

 

 

I agree with both but this ‘cold light of day’ comment from Hackett shows that Babs last sentence will happen soon if he doesn’t temper his aggression ...  other refs will be reading this and there is no way it will not be in the back of their minds.  

 

And he is easy to spot ! ..   

 

 

Amazed he thinks that's a red, there was no excessive force IMO. 

[Dahnsouff]

Why is this a red? You cannot judge a tackle on the result, only on the intent which was not to injure, but to catch and slow.

Ye Olde Top 6 "professional tactical foul. "

Other team "clumsy, intended to injure and maim"

 

And on another thread, @ThaiFox (I think) mentioned about the media and probably the PL wanting then usual suspects to win - agree, its obvious.

 

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Why is this a red? You cannot judge a tackle on the result, only on the intent which was not to injure, but to catch and slow.

Ye Olde Top 6 "professional tactical foul. "

Other team "clumsy, intended to injure and maim"

 

And on another thread, @ThaiFox (I think) mentioned about the media and probably the PL wanting then usual suspects to win - agree, its obvious.

 

Intent has nothing to do with it. But I still don't think you can call it a sending off based on the actual laws of the game.

[HighPeakFox]

Slightly concerned how many people want him to hurt opposition players, or at least give that impression... 

[Dahnsouff]

2 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Intent has nothing to do with it. But I still don't think you can call it a sending off based on the actual laws of the game.

Don`t agree - a player with intent will act to injure, controlling the way they interact with then player/ball.

 

He did not - and referencing the later post, frustration is one thing, but no-one should wish injury on another.

Edited 7 October 2019 by Dahnsouff

[Sol thewall Bamba]

18 minutes ago, Babylon said:

When he starts getting red cards and we start playing games and losing points because we're down to 10 men, I don't think you'll be so forgiving. 

OK, we'll revisit this when it happens. Until then I'll keep supporting our homegrown 22 year old lad who smashing it at the top level. 

[Strokes]

It was a bad challenge, I don’t think it was a red but if committed against us, I probably would do. 

It was hardly a horror challenge though, mostly clumsy, with a unfortunate outcome. 

[Babylon]

14 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Don`t agree - a player with intent will act to injure, controlling the way they interact with then player/ball.

Disagree or not... the laws have nothing to do with intent. It's either excessive force, or it's not... whether it was meant or was an accident has nothing to do with it in the eyes of a ref or the laws. 

[Manwell Pablo]

13 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

OK, we'll revisit this when it happens. Until then I'll keep supporting our homegrown 22 year old lad who smashing it at the top level. 

 

Quite literally 

 

[Countryfox]

47 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Amazed he thinks that's a red, there was no excessive force IMO. 

 

Thats my point ...   I didn't see a red either but others who didn't see the game will take his opinion as gospel and assume this 'dirty' player has got away with it ...   and as you say, when he next dives in, the refs decision might be ever so slightly tainted.

[Dahnsouff]

21 minutes ago, Babylon said:

Disagree or not... the laws have nothing to do with intent. It's either excessive force, or it's not... whether it was meant or was an accident has nothing to do with it in the eyes of a ref or the laws. 

Think we are at cross purposes.

My point was that any intent would be visualized by the way the player tackles the player/ball (Something you yourself highlighted earlier reading back)

Not that some crazy ass mind control is required to detect intent...

[Deeg67]

57 minutes ago, Babylon said:

When he starts getting red cards and we start playing games and losing points because we're down to 10 men, I don't think you'll be so forgiving. 

That's the gist of it.  "He didn't mean to injure the guy" isn't going to be in ref's minds once Hamza's got the tag "dirty player" hanging around his neck.  Last I checked changing the way you play is something all young players should do as they ascend the ladder and learn the ins and outs of the game at the top level.  Why should a tackling style that's going to hurt both the player and his team be exempt from that?

[Babylon]

6 minutes ago, Deeg67 said:

That's the gist of it.  "He didn't mean to injure the guy" isn't going to be in ref's minds once Hamza's got the tag "dirty player" hanging around his neck.  Last I checked changing the way you play is something all young players should do as they ascend the ladder and learn the ins and outs of the game at the top level.  Why should a tackling style that's going to hurt both the player and his team be exempt from that?

Thankfully we have VAR, that might save him now and again (when it actually starts being used properly). You can guarantee Rodgers will be having a word with him. 

[Innovindil]

The irony of it all is that that tackle is probably the most composed I've ever seen from hamza. He did exactly what he meant to do, which was take that quick footed bastard out. Job done. 

 

It's a cynical tactical foul. You see them every game. The only reason people are crying about it is because it was on current golden boy salah and he got a slightly twisted ankle (unluckily). 

[RowlattsFox]

Hamza just needs to cleverer, in that situation you can foul them cynically without taking him out completely and risking injury. I think I remember a Bournemouth player doing to Vardy a couple of seasons back, basically volleyed him and only got a yellow, think it might have been Gosling.

 

There were tackles just as bad though without anyone noticing, Ndidi on Milner which got him a yellow was probably the more dangerous tackle, Milner flew in on Barnes but luckily Barnes was able to ride it and of course there is the Trent A-A one. Guarantee people wouldn't be talking about it if Klopp hadn't brought it up.

[AKCJ]

The Bamba tackle has been the only real one where he was out of order. Had no business flying in like that in the penalty area. If he didn't get the ball it was always going to be a penalty.

 

That's the only one where I think he was in the wrong.

 

The Salah tackle is one he has to make and the Ritchie one was a case of Hamza being committed to a 50/50 and Ritchie pulled out of it. 

 

Klopp is so far out of order for calling him out on it. Hate the way he's spoken about it too, the tone of it all. As though he's the leading authority of how to tackle. Plus the way the media have lapped it up. Tanner was right to call him out for it in his The Athletic article.

Edited 7 October 2019 by AKCJ

[talking_goldfish]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

The Bamba tackle has been the only real one where he was out of order. Had no business flying in like that in the penalty area. If he didn't get the ball it was always going to be a penalty.

 

That's the only one where I think he was in the wrong.

 

The Salah tackle is one he has to make and the Ritchie one was a case of Hamza being committed to a 50/50 and Ritchie pulled out of it. 

 

Klopp is so far out of order for calling him out on it. Hate the way he's spoken about it too, the tone of it all. As though he's the leading authority of how to tackle. Plus the way the media have lapped it up. Tanner was right to call him out for it in his The Athletic article.

 

The Athletic UK article is now getting hammered with comments by clueless Liverpool fans!

[Koke]

He does need to tone it down a little tbh. Ndidi tackles a lot but I dont see him going OTT.

[KFS]

Best thing is his little smirk when he’s clattered someone. Lovely.

[filbertway]

22 hours ago, Manwell Pablo said:

 

Or maybe it was Steve Bruce that started it, Or perhaps Sylvian Ripoll. Klop has the angle to go after him over a lesser ( but still bad, there’s no attempt to play the ball and it’s a blatant yellow) tackle because he’s had one red and another potential red see two other players side lined for months through reckless out of control tackles in the last two months (and less than 10 games he’s played in). When this happens again the next manager will go after him, pundits will start trawling through his past tackles, it’s not good news.

 

Maybe it is everybody else that’s wrong, or maybe, just maybe, he needs to control his tackles better and stop snapping opponents ankles before he is a marked man and gets sent off every week.

 

embarrassing lack of IQ from some people on here (not you). Wanting him to play in a manner that keeps him on the pitch and off the suspension list isnt ganging up on him actually it’s going to be a good thing, for him and the club, try and twist your tiny mind around that for a moment.

Are you saying you would have preferred that he let Salah stroll on through.

 

I assumed every football person would have expected him to make that challenge and take the yellow for the team.