Danns' tackle

[Jimmy]

but it isn't 10 years ago, he knows the lay of the land and that tackles like that are no longer tolerated

[Criggers]

I don't think it's the worst sending off I've seen but by today's laws/standards/whatever the **** they are, he was always going to see red. Now you could argue that if he had hit a standing leg he'd have broken it but if the guy was standing he wouldn't have gone in like that. He just went in hard to a 50/50 and was perhaps a little too, enthusiastic shall we say. Definite red, but I don't think it was malicious or full of any intent other than to win the ball.

[ramadaone]

Can't understand the problem 50/50 challenge and Danns won it, Hull player got up and made no complaint.

I can only think you haven't seen the tackle on TV yet - if you have and still come up with that judgement then you have some serious issues to resolve

[NewburyFox]

Their guy lunged in too. Danns does deserve a red but it seems very unfair that their guy is allowed to walk away with no punishment, despite jumping in and endangering Danns.

[Halfsy]

but it isn't 10 years ago, he knows the lay of the land and that tackles like that are no longer tolerated

I'm not saying otherwise, i'm illustrating that it's a shame how the English game has changed.

For the worse, in my opinion.

Tackles like that used bring crowds to their feet in this country and galvanise teams.

[sdb]

That's a red, some people!

[Ozwin]

If he didn't send Danns off he'd have been reffing Pink Square East football for the rest of his career.

[Jimmy]

I'm not saying otherwise, i'm illustrating that it's a shame how the English game has changed.

For the worse, in my opinion.

Tackles like that used bring crowds to their feet in this country and galvanise teams.

and they can leave players fighting for their career, they are rightly outlawed

[LCFC BEAST]

My mate and I knew it was a definite red, I can't see why most people where complaining. Definite leg breaker.

[Haydos]

It was reckless and dangerous. Intent or maliciousness don't even come into into. The law is there to eradicate the two-footed challenge which is an unnecessary and dangerous part of the game. It is a red card because the hope is players will not tackle like that if they know they are going to receive one. For the life of me I can't work out why they still do.

He had no control over himself, he was coming in at a frightening pace with all his body weight off the ground which leads to an unbelievable amount of force which would snap a leg in 2 if he had made contact.

I just don't get how people don't understand this law and the reasons for it.

[MC Prussian]

Definite red card now. Didn't look like it from where I was sitting (G2).

But... where's the red card for the Hull player?

[Free Falling Foxes]

I, personally, don't think it's as bad as some people on here are suggesting.

The ball is there to be won, he's just a little over-zealous.

It's a clumsy challenge, undoubtedly, but he doesn't make any contact with Rosenior.

If both players had actually played the ball the referee would've waved play on, but you can't tackle with 'aggressive force' in the modern game.

I think 10 years ago, that would've been a booking at most.

40 years ago the ref would have told him to get up and get on with it.

[Halfsy]

and they can leave players fighting for their career, they are rightly outlawed

Rosenior's challenge on Cunningham last year was much, much worse than Danns' lunge today.

He made hardly any contact with him at all.

It was just clumsy and ill-timed, no malice in it whatseover.

You'd be no good watching Sunday football, that's for sure.

[FrankieADZ]

after seeing it again on SSN. i think it was a red, Cant complain about it.

[Craig]

Nailed on red.

[Jimmy]

Rosenior's challenge on Cunningham last year was much, much worse than Danns' lunge today.

He made hardly any contact with him at all.

It was just clumsy and ill-timed, no malice in it whatseover.

You'd be no good watching Sunday football, that's for sure.

you're an idiot so Danns needs to actually break his leg to be sent off? McKenna didn't get injured because he (and Danns) got lucky, not because it was a good tackle

[acooling08]

For me its 50/50 whether it should be yellow or red.

It wasn't studs showing, he just kind of threw his body into the tackle. Those saying it was a leg breaker, it really wasn't. A leg breaker is a high studs up contact on the leg. The hull player wasn't touched, he even shows decent sportmanship to get up straight away rather than feign injury.

As for Rosenior, shame he wasn't cropped. Hate that turd.

[1964FOX]

I can only think you haven't seen the tackle on TV yet - if you have and still come up with that judgement then you have some serious issues to resolve

I have seen it so I must have serious issues but don't want to resolve them. Being serious I was joking, like others I do believe their player should have also been booked at least.

[Haydos]

Rosenior's challenge on Cunningham last year was much, much worse than Danns' lunge today.

He made hardly any contact with him at all.

It was just clumsy and ill-timed, no malice in it whatseover.

You'd be no good watching Sunday football, that's for sure.

Read my post above. No idea what this whole 'no malice' stuff has to do with it.

[MC Prussian]

Rosenior's challenge on Cunningham last year was much, much worse than Danns' lunge today.

He made hardly any contact with him at all.

It was just clumsy and ill-timed, no malice in it whatseover.

You'd be no good watching Sunday football, that's for sure.

Still no excuse for tackles like it. Potential leg-breaker is a potential leg-breaker.

It's called football, not ploughing.

[broughtonblue]

At the time I didn't even think it was a booking, but I stand corrected after watching this, perhaps the ref did know what he was doing!

[Halfsy]

you're an idiot so Danns needs to actually break his leg to be sent off? McKenna didn't get injured because he (and Danns) got lucky, not because it was a good tackle

Please tell me firstly where i've said Danns needs to break his leg to be sent off, secondly where I've said it's not a red card and thirdly where I said it was a good tackle?

I've not once denied it's a red card.

[Haydos]

For me its 50/50 whether it should be yellow or red.

It wasn't studs showing, he just kind of threw his body into the tackle. Those saying it was a leg breaker, it really wasn't. A leg breaker is a high studs up contact on the leg. The hull player wasn't touched, he even shows decent sportmanship to get up straight away rather than feign injury.

As for Rosenior, shame he wasn't cropped. Hate that turd.

a) his studs are the things flying towards their players shins

b) are you saying that he has to actually break his leg for it to be a dangerous challenge?

c) "he kind of threw his body into the challenge"....EXACTLY, he had no control over his body weight which WILL cause you to plow through somebodys leg like it was a twig.

[Jimmy]

Please tell me firstly where i've said Danns needs to break his leg to be sent off, secondly where I've said it's not a red card and thirdly where I said it was a good tackle?

I've not once denied it's a red card.

Rosenior's challenge was no better nor worse then Danns' which you claimed it to be as Cunningham got injured, that is the only difference between them, McKenna was lucky where Cunningham wasn't.

To claim than Rosenior was was just because someone actually got hurt is just plain stupid

[dannythefox]

For me it's not the fact if it was a sending off or not but the fact that the ref was not going to send him off until the Hull players started mouthing off at him which changed his mind! Spineless ****!