Danns' tackle

[Jace]

From where I was sat 5 rows from the front in C1, I knew he was going off. I couldn't see if it was studs up as we were watching from behind but from the sheer momentum that he went in and as the Hull player went down like a sack of spuds, my heart just sank.

Really gutted he's out for the next few games.

Even the women Leicester fans understand its a red! Who's next to say it was 50/50?

[Legend_in_blue]

The referee got his decision wrong because imo they both should have seen the red card.

Both players go in with intent and with the rules of the game as they are today, they should both have gone.

Danns came off worse because his movement was always going to take him that way and over the ball since the ball was coming towards him whereas the other guy was chasing the ball which was going away from him.

But both go in with intent and either could have had a serious injury from that one.

So for me, yet again we are on the end of a refereeing decision which could, but didn't, cost us.

I don't get it. We're not a nasty side, we're not physical, we don't put the foot in enough and yet we always seem to come out the worst off in these situations or similar. The number of reds we have received this season is astounding.

[Haydos]

No, it's one frame before yours from the same video, and it just shows a tangle. You can't get sent off because of what your leg does post contact. I'm using that to highlight one frame does not prove anything.

I've not said that it is or it isn't a sending off. Just that I would need to see a better video to decide. Seeing the DG recorded vid isn't conclusive for me. Although it looks much worse than the angle I saw it at to be fair.

But how many times have we seen vids from different angles that don't look as bad?

It's not angles or anything like that that are forming my opinion. I simply posted that because people don't seem to understand that tackling how he did is a red card offence regardless of what happens during contact.

[JimmyJam]

Can we please start the chant 'Everybody Danns now, dum, dum dum dum dum, dum dum dum dum dum, dum dum dum dum etc' ?

[Babylon]

It's not angles or anything like that that are forming my opinion. I simply posted that because people don't seem to understand that tackling how he did is a red card offence regardless of what happens during contact.

Of course it's about angles.

Did he go over the ball, undeniable. Is it dangerous, well that depends on your view, if you want to take ONE frame from a video look how far ahead of the ball Danns was compared to their player. Danns looks almost on the ball with one leg behind, whilst theirs is one foot away. Compare their players leg and see if that's still behind him at the same stage of the tackle.

Do you think being airborn with both legs off the ground give you more control if one is slightly behind you?

As I keep saying one frame proves sod all, I can understand why a ref may have sent him off at full speed. But was it really a sending off, again I would need to see a decent video. I need more than a couple of blurry frames to decide.

[Haydos]

Of course it's about angles.

Did he go over the ball, undeniable. Is it dangerous, well that depends on your view, if you want to take ONE frame from a video look how far ahead of the ball Danns was compared to their player. Danns looks almost on the ball with one leg behind, whilst theirs is one foot away. Compare their players leg and see if that's still behind him at the same stage of the tackle.

Do you think being airborn with both legs off the ground give you more control if one is slightly behind you?

As I keep saying one frame proves sod all, I can understand why a ref may have sent him off at full speed. But was it really a sending off, again I would need to see a decent video. I need more than a couple of blurry frames to decide.

The still combined with what I've seen from the videos (read: I know what the challenge looks like, I'm not just taking the still into consideration) only shows one outcome for me. I'll leave it at that.

As for the the bit in bold, at the point you've stopped it at, he hasn't reached the challenge, his foot isn't even outstretched to try and poke the ball away at that point. You fast forward a few frames and his standing leg is planted. Fair enough it may rule out Danns being late (we're talking milliseconds here anyway), there are still all the other factors. Compare that with Danns who at no point regains a safe tackling position like his opposite number.

From my viewpoint though it's a red based on his lack of control which the law states is reckless.

[FoxyLouby]

Even the women Leicester fans understand its a red! Who's next to say it was 50/50?

Yeah I get that it was a red but don't ask me to explain the offside rule... .

[Salieri]

Deserved a red, no question.

[The Year Of The Fox]

It was the linesnan who was shit not the ref. two or three times he lagged behind the play and never flagged blatant offsides, once of which dull nearly scored from

[Jace]

Yeah I get that it was a red but don't ask me to explain the offside rule... .

Going by this thread I wouldn't listen to anyone who tries to explain it either!

[Hirsty The Blue 94]

Yeaaaaaaaaaaaah sorry about calling you a **** ref.......

[Bert]

It shows that Danns is late.

It shows that Danns is high.

It shows that their man got there first.

It shows that Danns has gone in 2 footed.

It shows that their man went in 1 footed.

It shows that Danns has jumped in.

I didn't think Danns was late, just that he completely missed the ball. Certainly a red.

[speedwayson]

it was a red snapper so stop carping on

[Jimmy]

I didn't think Danns was late, just that he completely missed the ball. Certainly a red.

I thought he sort of skimmed the top of the ball but either way its a red card, reckless and stupid and not the sort of thing you'd normally associate with Danns

[MC Prussian]

Danns' red card.

[Narborough_fox]

What I'm annoyed at was the challenge on Dyer that went without even a foul, straight through the back of him yet no foul was given. Yes it's a straight red but Hull did seem to get away with being more malicious than us and it's the sort of in-consistency that annoys me, he can get all the easy decisions like this right but it's the blatant decisions that he gets wrong that really annoy me and not him putting us down to 10 men, which was a good and really easy decision!

[Narborough_fox]

I don't get it. We're not a nasty side, we're not physical, we don't put the foot in enough and yet we always seem to come out the worst off in these situations or similar. The number of reds we have received this season is astounding.

Going through it these are the red cards;

Vassell - Yes, studs up near the knee, always a red!

Schmeichel - Laughable, I still don't know what it was for...

Mills (Brum) - Two footed lung, definite red

Mills (Hull) - Stupid, idiotic challenge. Denied a clear scoring challenge, certain red.

Howard - Normally a yellow for dissent, probably harsh!

Beckford - Never a red, one of the worst decisions I've ever seen (rescinded)

Danns (Brighton) - 2 bookings, no complaints

Konchesky - High foot in the chest, red card all day long.

Danns (Hull) - Lunged in, definite red.

From that we should have had 6 red cards however Konch should of had another vs Swindon so it could be 10 red cards this season.

[NewburyFox]

Going through it these are the red cards;

Vassell - Yes, studs up near the knee, always a red!

Schmeichel - Laughable, I still don't know what it was for...

Mills (Brum) - Two footed lung, definite red

Mills (Hull) - Stupid, idiotic challenge. Denied a clear scoring challenge, certain red.

Howard - Normally a yellow for dissent, probably harsh!

Beckford - Never a red, one of the worst decisions I've ever seen (rescinded)

Danns (Brighton) - 2 bookings, no complaints

Konchesky - High foot in the chest, red card all day long.

Danns (Hull) - Lunged in, definite red.

From that we should have had 6 red cards however Konch should of had another vs Swindon so it could be 10 red cards this season.

Mills' red at Hull, although ridiculously stupid, was harsh as I don't think their guy would ever have reached the ball. As for Howard's, no idea what he said so can't really claim it was unlucky or deserved.

Agree with the rest unfortunately.

[kingfox]

Looked nothing from where I was sitting, went in fairly, ball got away from the Hull player, both players got up straight away, but after watching it, it was a awful challenge.

Straight over the ball two foot, can't get much worse than that, poor challenge right call.

Actually feel sorry for the ref now, because we absolutely mullered him haha.

[themotivator]

horrendous challenge. deffo red. my first reaction = **** off hobbs!

[Corky]

Actually feel sorry for the ref now, because we absolutely mullered him haha.

I wouldn't, because generally he was crap.

[Bert]

I wouldn't, because generally he was crap.

He wasn't as bad as he normally is when we have him. But when you've had Gavin Ward ref you this season any red will look ok.

[Narborough_fox]

He wasn't as bad as he normally is when we have him. But when you've had Gavin Ward ref you this season any red will look ok.

To be fair Jon Moss made Gavin Ward look like Mark Halsey!

[ithuriel]

From my position it did not look a red and ref's here have form for making bad decisions.

Seeing it now, it was a red and Danns often rushes around like a bull in a china shop.

Guy is going to get sent off on a regular basis unless he learns some restraint.

[Saxondale]

When I saw it I was absolutely bemused because, from where I sit, all you saw was Danns charge in and come out with the ball - seemed fair.

But having seen it back, thanks to davieG's link, it was bad. The TV showed it from the opposite angle to what I saw live. Red is maybe a bit harsh but difficult to argue against.