Danns' tackle

[Kitchandro]

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Beckford - Never a red, one of the worst decisions I've ever seen (rescinded)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

Vassell's tackle was absolutely nowhere near anyone's knee.

There was no way McLean was going to score when that challenge was made.

Having seen Dannzy's tackle a couple more times it's one of the clearest red cards you're likely to see.

[stix]

Is @ultra_fox aka Colin Hall Ultra off of here? Random question i know but...oh well

[acooling08]

I don't usually like stills but some people just aren't getting it.

Take note....

Hull player: One foot supporting, one foot tackling, on the ground. In control of body weight and tackle, tackle is also on the ground and to top it he wins the ball.

Danns: Greater speed, jumps, two footed, late, studs planted towards Hull players shins. No control of body weight or tackle, reckless, dangerous, stupid.

I can't make this any clearer.

The still makes it look worse than it is. But I won't complain about the Red Card, as I said earlier it was borderline Red. I doubt it will be appealed either, Danns will b a big miss.

[5waller5]

From where I sat it looked like Danns was the player going in to that tackle with more intent of winning the ball ... He's the one attempting to keep standing and take the ball the Hull player is diving in and going under Danns ... In fact if Danns had have dived in one footed and gone to ground too then they would have both had a leg break. Credit to Danns, for me, trying to stand up and avoiding putting his body's momentum to ground and therefor directly at the Hull player.

It's a sad loss for us to be losing Danns, who has been our best player since he's played in his true position. Poor bloke can't win - he goes in to a challenge completely whole heartedly, to win the ball and some of his own "fans" call him reckless. I applaud the bloke,

Well played Dannzy, great to see someone care enough to be whole hearted and committed even if you were a millisecond late - I assume some of you would rather watch Gallagher let the opponent get there and not make a challenge?

[HEGGSY]

Is @ultra_fox aka Colin Hall Ultra off of here? Random question i know but...oh well

He's also accessory

[stix]

He's also accessory

Are they one of the same though? @ultra_fox has started following me on tw@tter. i dont know why...

Daggers will probably know. Any chance of a straight, no win no fee no quibble answer though?

[HEGGSY]

Are they one of the same though? @ultra_fox has started following me on tw@tter. i dont know why...

Daggers will probably know. Any chance of a straight, no win no fee no quibble answer though?

Yes, it is.

[NeilyBoy]

I didn't see the challenge at the time (wasn't able to follow the match properly) so I asked the lads in the chat room about it who said it was 2 footed but a harsh red. I wasn't sure what that meant: 2 footed = red regardless of how much contact you do or don't make with the player. Needless to say I suspected a case of the old blue-tinted specs.

Having watched the highlights it's clear that's exactly what the case was because there's no arguing against that decision at all.

[stix]

Yes, it is.

Much more civilised on th tw@tter feed

[Daggers]

No debate, never was - straight red.

When little kids in the playground get busted they start whittling on about why 'so&so' hasn't got punished either. The answer is that sometimes life isn't fair: deal with it. Neither does it matter whether it is the worst challenge you've ever seen.

It was a red, it was given. Move on.

[StanSP]

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.

Konchesky's was a definite red vs Coventry, but it wasn't in the chest. Was in the thigh.

You are right regarding dissent = yellow. However, the referee sent off Howard for foul and abusive language, which is worse than dissent, and which is why it warrants a red card.

The 2 most ridiculous and harsh red cards were the Schmeichel and Beckford ones.

[Legend_in_blue]

If you are about to make a 50-50 challenge and the ball is travelling towards you, aren't you more likely to challenge "over" the ball?

If you are the man making towards the ball from the other direction, aren't you more likely to challenge "under" the ball?

For me, I still insist that both should have gone for it. Just because Danns came over the ball, doesn't justify the one red card on its own imo.

[coolhandfox]

Red card, two footed, no place for these in the game.

Shame as Danns has been excellent latey.

[purpleronnie]

Yep stupid tackle he got what he deserved.

[MikeyT]

I think at the last second, Danns does go to remove his feet from the tackle.

The intent is there, but it's also from the Hull player as well. It was a 50/50 in terms of the ball was there to be won by both players - Danns just went in with a bit (maybe too much) conviction.

It's not harsh that he got a red. It's just harsh that the other player escapes with nothing despite not making any contact with the ball, despite Danns doing so (but with 2 feet, I know).

Same here. If you look closely he pulls his right foot away.

[Jace]

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

Oi easy now

[Guest ttfn]

I don't usually like stills but some people just aren't getting it.

Take note....

Hull player: One foot supporting, one foot tackling, on the ground. In control of body weight and tackle, tackle is also on the ground and to top it he wins the ball.

Danns: Greater speed, jumps, two footed, late, studs planted towards Hull players shins. No control of body weight or tackle, reckless, dangerous, stupid.

I can't make this any clearer.

Danns undoubtedly deserved to go, but I've just watched it again on Goals on Sunday.

Your photo actually backs this up (in so much as a still can). Both of the Hull player's legs are off the ground (look at the shadow under his leg). He's gone in with one leg (studs showing) but his trailing leg is clearly off the ground. Whilst that trailing leg may do no damage, he is not in control of his body weight and could do some serious damage.

Both deserved to be sent off, even if the Danns challenge was more dangerous.

But then again, life's not fair.

[Jimbo]

No one can argue in the defence of Danns. It was a red.

At the time though all I saw was both players lunge in, neither were in control. I couldn't make out why Danns had been sent off. It's one of those that in the 70's wouldn't have even been a booking. It did seem to me that because Danns came out with the ball the ref deemed his challenge as the harder of the 2. I was wondering if he hadn't come out with the ball if the ref would have punished the hull player.

But as I've said, watching it back there are no complaints about the red card. Can't be doing that

[smallpauldj]

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

he still should be in my opinion, moments before danns tackle dyer got chopped from behind on the touchline 2 footed and it went unpunished and before that dyer took a dive to win us a free kick which he gave, the ref was shocking and not good enough to be in the championship.

[Bert]

I wish people would stop saying "it would've only been a booking x amount of years ago" - we don't live in the past, the players have to adapt to the rules that have been implemented for this season.

[Guest Col city fan]

Just confirms how biased some football fans are. Turn it round and we'd be outraged if McKenna was ever allowed to play again.

Said at the time from the Kop, say it again now, horrible tackle.

Will be missed for 4 games.

Couldn't agree more.

At the time I thought it was harsh and it was right in front of me!

But the ref, fair play to him, got it spot on.

It's not surprising their players were a tad upset!

The four match ban is a sod though, he's become an important player.

[MGLCFC]

Yes Bert, but the way we are going with the rules it will soon be a non contact sport. Those sorts of crunching tackles lift the crowd. If there weren't so many cheats in the game rolling all over the place, perhaps it could become a man's game once again, rather than who can cheat best. I'm not saying Danns' challenge didn't deserve a red having seen it again, but the good hard tackling midfielder, much like the dodo, will be a extinct breed in the not too distant future.

[NeilyBoy]

Yes Bert, but the way we are going with the rules it will soon be a non contact sport. Those sorts of crunching tackles lift the crowd. If there weren't so many cheats in the game rolling all over the place, perhaps it could become a man's game once again, rather than who can cheat best. I'm not saying Danns' challenge didn't deserve a red having seen it again, but the good hard tackling midfielder, much like the dodo, will be a extinct breed in the not too distant future.

Wrong. The aggressive, horrific challenge making midfielder will be an extinct breed - replaced by the good hard tackling midfielder.

[RonnieTodger]

I still think McKenna should have received at least a yellow for going in later, and with his studs showing. However, at such high-speeds I think it was always going to be impossible for the ref to give both players the correct punishment. By law, it's a red card. I do, however think, had McKenna come away with the ball then the ref would've punished him. I was more positive it was a red card, watching it live than after watching the footage.

[MANFACE]

They both should have got yellow cards.

That camera angle makes it looks worse, it it was above or from behind or it wouldn't have looked so bad.