Plenty of blame to go around after Gomes nightmare

by   |   04/11/2019  77 Comments  [Jump to last]

I am absolutely outraged by the rush to try to absolve Son Heung-Min and Serge Aurier from any responsibility for the potentially career-ending injury to Andre Gomes.

First, the commentary team minimized Son’s intent and ignored Aurier’s role. Then Pochettino claimed the tackle was not a red card offense, and of course the likes of Jamie Carragher gave Son a high-five for the tackle.

The fact is that both Son and Aurier should have been sent off. There is no point claiming that there was no intent. Intent, “follows the bullet” meaning that, when you commit a reckless act, you are responsible for the consequences – even if you didn’t intend every detail of those consequences. You can’t fire a gun in a crowded street and claim you didn’t intend to hit a child.

The referee also bears some responsibility for what happened. If Son had been booked, as he should have been, for diving earlier in the game, he would never have felt free to make a tackle of that level of reckless irresponsibility. Atkinson was letting Spurs get away with murder throughout the match.

I am sure Son’s distress at seeing Gomes’s foot being kept on by his sock and a couple of muscle strands was authentic but that doesn’t mean he should be let off the hook. Can you imagine the outcry if an Everton player did that to one of the curly-haired darlings of the Premier League’s Favored Five? There wouldn’t be any “There was no intent to hurt anybody” then.

Neil Taylor got a two-match ban for his horrific tackle on Seamus Coleman’s leg – one for each break. If he had spat at the referee, he would have been banned for six matches. Players play too low a price for incidents like the one that has put Gomes on crutches for months to come.

back Return to Talking Points index  :  Add your Comments »

Reader Comments (77)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer

Jim Bennings
1 Posted 04/11/2019 at 08:44:26
To be fair Peter, Seamus almost “did” at Burnley player last month with quite a nasty challenge that was lucky for him to stay on the pitch.

We’ve had Funes Mori hobble Origi and Ross Barkley caught Jordan Henderson with a studs in the ankle tackle in the Goodison derby back in December 2016.

So whilst I can understand this post, there are going to be many more instances where players break legs, ankles, elbows, shoulders either through hard tackles, nasty fouls or just genuine unlucky accidental falls (remember when Andrei Kanchelskis dislocated his shoulder after that Lee Sharpe foul).

It’s a contact sport and there are going to be nasty injuries from time to time, our players will get them, and our players will at times cause them too, that’s life in football, the referees don’t understand that it’s a contact sport and before long tackling will be outlawed along with heading the ball.

Stan Schofield
2 Posted 04/11/2019 at 09:21:34
As Jim says. It was unlucky. Things turn on a sixpence.

But the thing is, we are SO unlucky!!!

If it's not appalling officiating against us, it's long-term injuries to players who are playing well or getting into their stride. Just as Bolasie is forging a great understanding with Lukaku, his ACL goes, and he's never the same again. Bernard does his ligaments. Gbamin doesn't even get going properly before he gets a long term injury. Jimmy Husband, John Connolly, Ross Barkley, Brian Oviedo, Seamus Coleman, James Macarthy, broken limbs then not the same player.

A few days ago I said that, in my opinion, Andre Gomes is the most technically gifted midfielder we've had since Colin Harvey. His performance in the Anfield Derby last season underlined it. Then this happens, just as he's getting the machine running after a previous injury.

The officiating against Everton is another issue. The game looks, on the face of it, corrupt, and the authorities and pundits appear to have it in for Everton. How are we ever going to be able to get any momentum?

Jim Bennings
3 Posted 04/11/2019 at 09:36:35

It’s fine tuned only to benefit the top six (not including Leicester despite them winning the League more recently than Liverpool, Man United, Arsenal and Spurs).

Mark Clattenburg actually came out last year and told us that when he was referee, he made decisions influenced by players for the big teams, the 2007 derby match the biggest indicator of the corruption process.

VAR is just exposing the level of biased corruption this season.

Not one person knows why that Dele Alli handball wasn’t awarded as an Everton penalty even more so after such a long delay.

The Michael Keane penalty decision at Brighton was beggars belief.

I can assure you that Everton will not benefit from one single VAR decision this season.

Stan Schofield
4 Posted 04/11/2019 at 09:49:01
Jim, I'd got to the point before last season where I stopped watching games apart from Everton games. I've now got to the point where I don't want to watch Everton games. Not because of our bad form, but because of what appears clear corruption FIFA style. Looks to me like the beautiful game of football, the game played by Labone and Kendall, is dead.
Jim Bennings
5 Posted 04/11/2019 at 09:57:43

Again I agree!

I feel little love for the game nowadays, it’s become too much a business (a corrupt one) and less a sport.

It’s too scrutinised and based around needless technology now and the overall freedom and fluidity of the game has evaporated.

Eddie Dunn
6 Posted 04/11/2019 at 10:21:46
Listening on the radio the team of Alan Green and Pat Nevin eventually came to the conclusion that Son Wasn't that kind of player". It's funny how the Wales boss told us that Taylor "Wasn't that kind of player" when he did Seamus.
Then Match of the Day saw Chapman, Kilbane and Keown decide that it should have only been a yellow and Aurier was simply unlucky to get in the way.
The important thing that the tv highlights decided to not show was the earlier incident between Son and Gomes, for which the radio pundits were berating Son for goig down holding his face at the slightest of touches.
Context is very important in this case. Son was aggrieved at Gomes and in the heat of the moment acted with recklessness. He is therefore "that type of player". He also had show his cheating personality trying to dive theatrically after contact from Mina- which rightly spotted by others here, should have gained him a yellow card, but didn't.
on a lesser note, does anyone know who the VAR man was? He should never be on it again.
Steve Green
7 Posted 04/11/2019 at 10:28:37
Pretty much agree with all that you say Peter. What is the need to be fair. Why quote historic incidents - albeit recent Burnley game is still, in this context, historic - shall we start calling Jimmy Case to account for ending Geoff Nulty's time as a professional player, no of course we won't.
Let's call it how it is. Son was pissed off with not getting a decision against Gomes 2 minutes before. He has a nibble at Iwobi, then another go at Gomes for a ball he can not win, coming in from behind in the process. Plenty of blame to be handed out there. Whilst Aurier may be a victim of football circumstances, Son certainly is not. He has to reap what he sowed.
John Hoggarth
8 Posted 04/11/2019 at 10:39:17
Jim @ no.1, I agree all you say where tackles are fair attempts to get the ball. But Son’s “tackle” was off the ball and unnecessary - he was nowhere near the ball - so the resultant injury shouldn’t be seen as part of the game.
I ran the Sky coverage when I got home from the game and post match Carragher actually suggested all off the ball challenges like Son’s could be punished with a red card - I’d be happy with that.
Jack Convery
10 Posted 04/11/2019 at 10:44:06
So Spit the Dog is annoyed with Richarlson's diving ( so am I by the way ), talk about a BLIND SPOT Mr Carragher - ever watched LFC and the antics of Mane, Salah, Suarez, Heskey etc etc etc. EFC are no angels when it comes to bad tackles - Coleman v Burnley ), however Son allowed the Red Mist to grab a hold and went after Gomes with a professional foul - a deliberate trip - and what followed was appalling. Aurier also in my opinion was looking for Gomes by the way he went in recklessly. I have no doubt had the roles of yesterday been reversed we would be getting called ofr everything by the Sky media, wanting bans galore - it makes me sick. The VAR stuff and Refs hating EFC is now a joke a sick joke and any decent Chairman would be berating the authorities until something is done. 1st player to be banned for diving - Niasse - who else ? 1st penalty awarded by VAR - against Keane for jumping up and landing unknowingly on his opponents foot. Meanwhile over at Mordor - oh for Fs sake don't get me started. Joke Joke Joke and I'm not laughing and neither is poor Gomes today. All the best mate hope to see you back soon. A pig sick Evertonian.
Paul Kelly
11 Posted 04/11/2019 at 11:39:59
Jim, ie "Mark Clattenburg". Not suggesting anyone should set him on fire and take a selfie with his smouldering corpse, not at all, not ever, but by God does that infamous inept one sided refereeing 'performance 'still wind me up, even to this day.
Eddie Dunn
12 Posted 04/11/2019 at 11:47:33
Steve,@7, I totally agree. Son nibbled at Iwobi but he was too quick but he was determined to exact(what he saw as) retribution on Gomez. The match of the day team all exonorated Son and Aurier. The poor Spurs attitude was further exemplified after the horror show when Sanchez cynically tripped Richarlison.
Delli Ali even referred to Gomes as "the player" in his post match interview. His name escaped him.
This Spurs outfit are under a lot of pressure and rumours abound about their dressingroom problems.
We are under pressure too but they showed a cynicism that the authorities failed to punish.
Daniel A Johnson
13 Posted 04/11/2019 at 12:06:45
Was the Son tackle Dangerous "No" was it cynical "YES 100%".
It was made to bring him down...…..which it did with unfortunate consequences.

He knew what he had done and the horror that followed was ultimately caused by him. I hope Son has a few sleepless nights for what he ultimately caused.

We are all still angry but it was a 100% freak incident. That's no comfort to Gomes, EFC or us fans though. As Jim Benning mentions above Colemans tackle vs Burnley could easily have been a horror tackle on another day.

Kevin Prytherch
14 Posted 04/11/2019 at 12:20:15
John 8 - I was going to bring Carraghers comments up as well.

In my opinion, the laws of the game would simply have to be clarified rather than changed.

A player can be sent off for violent conduct - ie striking another player. Because the ball is not within reach, Son has struck Gomes with his leg. If he blatantly kicked a player he would be sent off, why is this so different?

Paul Kelly
15 Posted 04/11/2019 at 12:28:07
We have to face it, Atkinson is a prize thoroughbred 'James Blunt'!, put on this earth to only bring us blues down to the lower ebbs of existence, to bitterness (Not hard to do), or just to turn us into the UK's most psychotic serial killers after collecting the skulls of every referee in the league and wearing them as jewellery, so the FA have to employ an inept sub species of modern man to officiate over very important decision . oh, wait a minute!!!
David Pearl
16 Posted 04/11/2019 at 12:34:33
We have a full team of confidence players. Ref had a shocker but he was badly let down by the var referee and system. Why the FA did it differently to other nations is ridiculous.

I'm betting our players aren't rushing to get on the front cover of our next program. The last two are now out injured.

Lee Mandaracas
17 Posted 04/11/2019 at 12:40:11
@Eddie Dunn (6) The VAR official was Anthony Taylor. Equally inept to Martin Atkinson and the whole situation is ironically even worse than the bad old days of a bad referee making bad decisions. Now there is less of an excuse than ever yet we always seem to get screwed.
Tony J Williams
18 Posted 04/11/2019 at 12:53:31
I'm done watching football this season, it's fucking pointless.

The darlings will get all the VAR decisions, the others will always get screwed.

As Jim says, we will never get a favourable VAR review, if the corrupt ref even allows it to go to review.

Jim Bennings
19 Posted 04/11/2019 at 14:12:31
Can you just imagine if its 0-0 at Anfield going into injury time and we scored the winner, a perfect legitimate goal.


“Martin (Atkinson because it’s fitting), hang on think about it, Liverpool can’t lose at home, they don’t lose home games especially the local derby, let’s quickly think of an excuse we can use to rule it out”


“What do you suggest? Maybe say Sigurdsson stood on a sacred part of the Anfield pitch?”


“ Nah just say you already blew the whistle for full time, NOW FUCKIN QUICKLY BLOW YOUR WHISTLE! “

Dave Williams
20 Posted 04/11/2019 at 17:10:26
Son went for the man and not the ball. Deliberate, so it must be a red card. No one thinks that Son is a thug but he set out to hurt Gomes in revenge for the arm across his face and unfortunately it did far more damage than I suspect he had intended.

As ever in our society, people seem more concerned with the perpetrator than the victim:... what about poor Gomes who seems a thoroughly nice and decent young man who now faces months of rehab and the challenge of getting back to his best?

Reading over 500 posts on this site under one heading or another, we are all clearly and understandably in a bit of shock here, upset, angry and very downcast. Our players must be a lot worse seeing what happened to their mate at close quarters and we need to lift ourselves so we can lift them. We have two vitally important games coming up which we must win and we cannot go into them feeling depressed at our lot.

Marco has a lot of work to do this week!!

Danny Broderick
22 Posted 04/11/2019 at 17:26:56
I'm sorry but some of this is getting hysterical now.

Son fouled Gomes. Did he foul him in revenge for Gomes putting his arm into his face moments before? I would say he did, yes. Did he go out to injure Gomes? No he did not, in no way whatsoever. He wanted to trip him up, to put in a hard challenge in response to a perceived injustice. He wanted to give him a kick, not injure him. There is a world of difference between the two.

This is football. There is not a player on the planet who hasn't made a bad tackle at some point. Paul Scholes did it for the best part of 20 years. If Gomes hadn't have got injured, we wouldn't even be talking about Son's tackle. It was a yellow card at most.

After the tackle, Gomes took at least another stride and got his studs caught in the turf. At the same time, Aurier put in a block tackle. These two things led to him breaking his leg just as much as Son's tackle.

Look at the actions of the Everton players after the tackle. They didn't surround the referee or go to get Son. They went straight to Gomes to comfort him and get him help, and they deserve commending for doing so. They also went to console a devastated Son.

Bad tackles and injuries are part of football unfortunately. Players sometimes injure themselves when there is no contact. Son's tackle was a foul - no more, no less. You cannot increase the punishment because of what then happened to Gomes a stride or two after that tackle.

Danny Broderick
23 Posted 04/11/2019 at 17:34:28
The actions of Seamus Coleman say a lot. This is a man who has had a similar injury. I remember seeing Seamus dash 50 yards across the pitch to the left wing from right back to remonstrate with Anthony Knockaert when he put in a disgraceful tackle on Leighton Baines. That was a real leg breaking tackle, and Seamus let him know what he thought of it.

Contrast that with yesterday. All of the players knew that Son’s tackle was not in the same league as Knockaert’s lunge on Baines. If Son’s tackle had been out of order, Coleman would have been the first to give him a rocket. Coleman didn’t react the same way this time, and that is a true reflection of Son’s tackle. Was it a bad tackle? Yes. Was it an over the top potential leg breaking tackle? No it wasn’t. Of course, there was a tragic outcome a couple of strides later, when Gomes got his studs caught. But you can’t lay all of the blame for that at Son.

Danny Broderick
24 Posted 04/11/2019 at 17:39:45
Dave (20),

Not all deliberate fouls are a red card though. Fernandinho does professional fouls for City every week where he targets the man to prevent a counter attack. He gets a yellow every time. Should these yellows automatically become reds if the player tackles gets injured?

John Pierce
25 Posted 04/11/2019 at 18:20:53
Peter, whilst I won’t go on about the incident itself the wider point you raise about this type of tackle is a correct one. The punishment for not playing the ball should be heavy and far reaching.

Modern football with VAR like I always said will outmode the laws and find loop holes we hadn’t considered. The laws were never written with technology in mind, and it shows. They are totally out of sync with the game.

Some posts believe this type of tackle is one that’s regularly made and everyone makes one from time to time. Well guys that aint good enough.

If that type of tackle carried a heavy ban, starting at 4 games for a first offense then players would think twice. People claim heat of the moment but actually you can control yourself far more when there are greater goals at play. Such a system were any subsequent offences that recur within 12 months should be catered for to carry additional multi match ban.

Furthermore take City and the other lot over the road. Going to ground in any situation is stupid and dangerous. Pep especially knows it takes you out of the game. So you pressure and press, you stay on your feet.

Do they to ground sometimes? Yes, of course they do but the majority of time committing a tackle like that is indisciplined, hurts the team and they won’t stand for it.

Staying on your feet is an essential part of coaching nowadays. The crude and brutal ways of the past need to be forgotten, and tackles such as these appropriately sanctioned.

I don’t care if it’s one of our own, no professional deserves a prolonged spell on the sidelines because a player cannot keep their shit together. If they can’t well the price they pay should make them think twice. As it is that red card will be a 2/3 game ban. Not in any way sufficient.

I had one person say that any ban should include the next time the two team meet in the league. As the team often sinned against rarely benefits from the red. It’s out there and something worth considering.

Danny Broderick
26 Posted 04/11/2019 at 18:29:51

I possibly agree with your last paragraph but that’s about it.

You will never stop bad tackles or fouls. Because not every tackle can win the ball every time, life is not a sanitised utopia. The only way you will stop fouls and bad tackles is if football becomes non contact, in which case no challenges will be made. Is that what you want?

Stan Schofield
27 Posted 04/11/2019 at 18:44:51
Since this thread is about blame, it's worth pointing out that, if the correct decision had been given when we should have been awarded a penalty, the course of the game would have been different, and Andre Gomes would not have a broken ankle. In this respect, appalling officiating was to blame for that terrible injury to Gomes.

The immediate cause was the action of Son, but a prior cause was the officiating that changed the course of the game.

Paul Tran
28 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:01:51
I was working at Burnley FC today (not with club staff).

All amazed we didn't get two pens yesterday.
All amazed at the decision at Brighton.
All amazed how poor we were when they beat us.

Darren Hind
29 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:12:03
They're amazing people in Burnley, Paul.
Paul Birmingham
30 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:17:26
It’s debilitating and the lack of any type of interest and investigation or review by the FA of the lotto that is VAR, and the double standards shown, is accelerating the demise of what was once a special day, match day to watch EFC.

Football is a business or business have to adapt and be agile to survive but this season with VAR, and the injustice it’s causing and loss of momentum in games, will turn fans away for good.

The injustice of VAR, the luck and incredible descisions of Old Nick, are eternal.

This season it’s survival and no more. The fatal flaws in our style of football means we will rarely score more than 2 goals a game.

There’s not much more to say, other than I hope André Gomes, surgery has gone well, and he makes a full recovery.

No doubt Soton, is massive, and will we start on the offensive or replay the recent Leicester win down there, to suss them out?

God only knows, but we need a miracle.

Jason Wilkinson
31 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:17:32
Hi Guys,

I've not read every post to this article so forgive me if I repeat anything.

Spurs have been better than us for quite a while now. However on yesterdays showing they didn't look anything special. I thought they were quite physical. They tried to bully some of our more lightweight players and did not look like a quality side.

Son is a player I have admired for a time now. He is quick, skilful and has an end product. The foul was cynical, an act of revenge and the red card was fully justified. Whether or not Aurier should have been sanctioned I'm not sure.

What irks me about the game is the fact that we had an opportunity to get at Spurs psychologically by staying on our feet and making them out to be the team trying to buy fouls. Richarlison's antics were at times embarrassing. I want to see our players rise above such nonsense and I'm afraid that until we do VAR will not look at us favourably. We should have had two penalties. We didn't get them because of earlier deceptions.

I want Everton to be seen as the greatest professional sporting club on the planet unlike our neighbours and other Sky 6 darlings.

Well done, Cenk, you are a credit to EFC.

Anthony Murphy
32 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:22:32
I agree with the OP in relation to bias within media reaction. If that was an Everton player causing a potentially career ending injury to a key player for one of the Sky clubs, the media reaction would be very, very different.

On VAR, I’ll put my mortgage on it deciding either the outcome of the league winners or relegation for someone come May.

Steve Ferns
33 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:22:55
Stan, Martin Atkinson didn’t do enough to stop the tackles going in earlier in the game. Getting cards out, even one for Delph might have made a difference. Probably not much difference, but he has to accept that he could have handled this game better in so many different ways, and that’s excluding VAR.
Rob Hooton
34 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:29:54
Send the Russians to visit the refs association and watch us suddenly get “Fergie luck”.

I thought VAR would make the game more corrupt as the TV companies control all the cameras, angles etc... So far, I think I am bang on the money.

Kunal Desai
35 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:35:51
I'd really like to know what is the criteria for becoming a Premier League referee? How are they promoted and what are they appraised on to officiate at the highest level?

Atkinson has been officiating for over a decade and is consistently horrendous at officiating. I'm curious to know who is actually on an independent panel judging these numpties.

Everton should be writing to the FA/Premier League saying that we no longer entertain or welcome Martin Atkinson to Goodison Park in any capacity.

Paul Tran
36 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:38:42
Yes, Darren, really enjoying my work in such a friendly place. And it's good to get other fans' perception of what's happening with us.
Brent Stephens
37 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:49:13
Steve #33, that's exactly what I said to the guy next to me at the match. You reap what you sow.
Tony Abrahams
38 Posted 04/11/2019 at 19:58:10
That's why I think we've got to stick with this horrible VAR, Kunal, but demand change and make sure the crowd can hear what the man in the studio is saying, and also make them explain how they've come about their decisions.

The refs are poor, none from England officiated at the last World Cup, and if we can get players from all over the world, then why not referees, because the present lot are simply not good enough, and are simply getting away with murder at the minute.

I appreciate it's a very hard job, an impossible task even, so I also think that football needs to rip up the rule book and really start dealing with the cheating, because it really is disgusting at the minute.

Delefaoe, got a pen off Atkinson from the studio the night before, but Richarlison got nothing, and Son got away with a booking, and Klopp said Mane is not a diver and there was definitely contact when he went down the other day.

Let's clean up football. I read on T/W that it was definitely a foul on Delefaoe, but would him or Mane have gone down off the same contact if they had been through on goal?

Stan Schofield
39 Posted 04/11/2019 at 20:17:09
Steve@33: You're right about the earlier tackles. However, although you say the difference probably wouldn't have been much, if cards had been produced the course of the game would have been different, with different outcomes, including no broken ankle. Games can hinge on small margins, and the course of a game depends on the smallest things, which to me underlines the need to get decisions correct as far as possible.

Tony@38: Klopp's utterings are another example of cheating and general lack of integrity. His repugnant win-at-all-costs attitude reflects what's wrong with the game. He might be good coach, but he's a repugnant piece of work.

Steve Ferns
40 Posted 04/11/2019 at 20:22:44
Of course Stan. It could have made a huge difference. But we can’t really say that if Atkinson got his cards out earlier, Gomes walks off that pitch yesterday. Atkinson should have done more to protect the players. That’s all we can say with any degree of certainty.
Stan Schofield
41 Posted 04/11/2019 at 20:30:22
Steve, I think we can say with 'practical certainty' that if the ref had got his cards out, Gomes would have walked off the pitch.

His ankle break was a particular event in a particular course of the game, and altering the course of the game via the cards would with 'practical certainty' have led to that event not happening. Not 100% certainty, but practical certainty.

Rob Halligan
42 Posted 04/11/2019 at 20:42:51
Tony, I don't think VAR is the problem, it's the incompetent officials who are the problem. As you rightly point out, none of our officials were at the World Cup last year because they are rubbish, although I think I read somewhere that one had been selected to go but had to pull out due to an injury.

In my opinion, It would be better if the VAR official at Stockley Park had an ex-player sitting alongside him. None of the officials have ever played the game, not that I'm aware of anyway, and so they don't understand the contact that goes on in penalty areas. I've read today that the handball against Dele Alli was not given as a penalty because the presence of Mina caused Alli to handle the ball. FFS, it was a corner, where did the VAR official (Anthony Taylor) expect Mina to be? Mina was where he should have been, in or around the 6-yard box, causing havoc in the spurs defence. Surely an ex-player could explain to the VAR official there's always going to be contact from corners and free kicks around the penalty area.

On a final note, is Oumar Niasse going to be the only player in the history of football to receive a retrospective three-match ban for diving, and earning a penalty from which we scored? No longer, due to VAR, will a penalty be awarded for diving, as surely VAR will overrule the referees decision, and a player given a yellow card instead for diving. I doubt very much, a few days later, the FA will look at an incident such as Niasse's and deem it to be a dive if VAR have awarded a penalty.

So there you are, Oumar, you have your own little piece of Premier League history!!

Ray Robinson
43 Posted 04/11/2019 at 20:49:04
Stan, you're usually so logical in your reasoning but I can't follow your argument here. You could also say that if Silva had substituted Gomes, he'd have not suffered a broken ankle. In a match of random sequence of events you can only be certain of what did happen, not what might have happened.
Dave Williams
44 Posted 04/11/2019 at 22:30:19
Danny #24,

I'd make all deliberate fouls a red-card offence. You look at rugby and how strictly it is refereed and we allow tackles: “He took one for the team” as an every-day occurrence which is almost lauded by everyone.

Football could be cleaned up at a stroke if there was the will to do it – a player arguing with the ref gets sent off, a deliberate foul is a red card, simulation is a red card.

If these rules were applied, would managers not instruct their players to avoid such scenarios? Of course they would... and we would see better games for it.

Stan Schofield
45 Posted 04/11/2019 at 23:12:25
Ray, I agree with you. We can't be certain of what might have happened, but we do know that the very particular event of Gomes breaking his ankle would have been extremely unlikely if the course of the game had been changed through the ref officiating properly.

I'm really just making an observation, that if the officiating had been done well, Gomes would not have a broken ankle. It's just an observation of something (the broken ankle) that happened to result due to the particular prior events that included bad officiating.

I suppose this observation is just an expression of frustration, that says if only the officiating had been done properly we wouldn't have ended up where we are. It's just an 'if only'.

Kevin Prytherch
46 Posted 04/11/2019 at 23:14:08
Dave 44 - I fully agree and, until they get tough, the cheating, tactical fouls, remonstrating with refs and managers and pundits justifying it will continue.

The problem is...

The majority of tactical fouls are committed by the top teams.

The most frequent and high profile divers all seem to play for the top teams.

The players who get in refs faces all seem to play for top teams.

The Premier League makes money from the top teams... Nothing will change.

Stan Schofield
47 Posted 04/11/2019 at 23:29:45
Ray, just to add, the reason for the frustration is that the bad officiating against Everton does not appear to be random (of the 'you win some, you lose some' kind), but appears to be systematic bias.

In short, this systematic bias led to Gomes having a broken ankle.

Paul McGinty
48 Posted 04/11/2019 at 23:38:11
Mike Riley is the VAR supremo. He was a garbage ref, so no surprise the VAR implementation has been really poor. Jobs for the boys... he keeps his position when, let's be honest, he should be gone.

And the refs get another earner running VAR when they are not out on the pitch. They get two bites at screwing up.

As to the Alli handball, it was handball in the modern interpretation, but because he was tangled with Mina in a crowd of bodies, the ref didn't make a clear and obvious error in not giving a penalty, because in the melee he couldn't have been expected to reliably see it.

So they have managed to layer more complexity into the rules of the "beautiful game" and screw it up in the process. Brilliant, Mr Riley and his cohorts.

Bill Gall
49 Posted 04/11/2019 at 23:59:20
Did or didn't Son deserve a red card?

Take it this way: if someone punches another person and they go down but are able to scramble away, the person who punches can be charged with assault (yellow card). However, if that person punches someone and they go down and crack their head open, the person who punches can be charged with grievous body harm (red card).

That is why I believe the tackle deserved a yellow but the consequences deserved a red.

Ken Kneale
50 Posted 05/11/2019 at 08:22:07
Spurs are now appealing the red card, apparently.
George McKane
51 Posted 05/11/2019 at 08:48:27
Like most fans at Sunday's game, I felt rather under- and over-whelmed by the whole atmosphere and feeling at Goodison. Absolutely dreadful officiating that for me made some form of terrible situation inevitable – sadly it was Gomes who suffered and paid a woeful price for the dirge and pathetic officials on and off the pitch – something that has been brewing for a while.

Already the “establishment” is defending itself with the inevitable “appeal” against the red card.

If I had anything to do with Everton, I would this week host a total staff meeting and issue a “pulling together” speech. Moreover, I would immediately call for a high-level meeting with Referees and VAR Officials.

I would like to see this as a wake-up call to our management structure and a real turning point.

Well, I can dream, can't I?

John Keating
52 Posted 05/11/2019 at 08:58:14
As Ken mentions I see Spurs are appealing the red.

I mentioned it on the "Horrible..." thread after seeing it after getting home on Sunday night not to be surprised if it was appealed.

At the time of the incident everyone knew Son was out to bring him down deliberately, I remember straight away thinking yellow. It was only after a few seconds later when the players started reacting that we realised something far worse had occurred.

Obviously not with the consequences of Gomes, but we see these tackles every game, by us as much as any other team. Most times the player gets a yellow and we play on.

What would happen if Son fouled Gomes and he suffered no injury. The intent by Son was still there.

What would happen if Son fouled Gomes who gets up and tries to run off, say, the sore knee he suffered in the tackle but after about 5 minutes can't shake it off and has to be subbed.

One stage further. Gomes goes for a scan the next day which shows he's out for 6 weeks. Does Son get a retrospective red card? I really don't know the answer. It was a tackle we see every game but this time the consequence was far worse than normal.

I did expect the red to be appealed, however, because of the uproar of other fuck-ups in the game, VAR, I think the authorities will not overturn the decision. I think they would overturn had the other contentious decisions not happened.

Ernie Baywood
53 Posted 05/11/2019 at 09:12:49
Danny Broderick 24 - yes, they should.

If you foul someone while trying to get the ball (–and without doing something dangerous) then fair enough.

If you kick out at someone with no intent for the ball and you end up injuring them, then of course you should.

The real problem here is the codification of the rules. Anyone who has played understands what a dangerous tackle, or a deliberate foul looks like. But we don't have those people running the games; we have people who need a black and white set of criteria.

The Son - Gomes example is common sense. We have people trying to apply whatever rules Sky reported from the PGMOL (or whatever they're called). They've been convinced that only 'studs up' is a red card.

My measure is that if someone deliberately went through my mate without any intent for the ball – I'd be straight over.

Stan Schofield
54 Posted 05/11/2019 at 09:13:29
Regarding the inappropriate officiating, I believe there may be a case under the Health & Safety At Work Act 1974 (HSWA) with regard to systematic failures of the Premier League to ensure that all reasonable steps have been taken to protect players from hazards such as the tackle on Gomes.

Son's actions are an immediate cause of Gomes' injury, but the systematic bias in the officiating appears to represent a systematic failure of the Premier League. It could be argued, and I would argue, that this failure is a failure to ensure a Duty of Care. The systematic failure can be argued to be an organisational failure. A root cause of players having an increased risk of injury, in contravention of the legal duty on the Premier League, as a Duty Holder under HSWA, to ensure that that risk is reduced to a level as low as reasonably practicable.

Just a thought. As George McKane says, something needs to be done.

Si Cooper
55 Posted 05/11/2019 at 09:55:53
Of course intent matters and making consequences the main consideration is grossly unfair. Tripping a player is absolutely not the same as firing a gun into a crowded area (and why would it matter more if the person affected was a child).

Players are tripped deliberately and accidentally God knows how many thousands of times in their careers and only on a miniscule number of occasions will serious injury ensue.

Son tripped him; he didn't put in a ‘leg-breaker'. Cynical and deserving of a yellow card but nothing more in my opinion.

Rob Dolby
56 Posted 05/11/2019 at 09:57:13
I can't believe Spurs have appealed the red card.
Steve Brown
57 Posted 05/11/2019 at 10:05:22
Michael Ball in his Echo column describes it well...

“It was a challenge in which Heung-Min Son wanted to bring him down, he was maybe thinking of the tackle on him from Gomes a little earlier on.

Obviously he wasn't expecting that to happen, but if he didn't make the challenge Gomes' leg wouldn't be broken. It's as simple as that really.”

He might be a lovely lad off the field who is devastated by the consequences of his decision. But there has to be consequences for deliberate actions that cause long-term harm to someone.

Stan Schofield
58 Posted 05/11/2019 at 10:10:36
Si, agreed. Son's challenge was inappropriate but without clear intent to harm. Possible intent to harm, but not clear intent.

Regarding intent, and in contrast to the above, the officiating bias appears, on the face of it, to be clear intent to favour some clubs over others, with a clear and 'reasonably foreseeable' consequence of increasing the risk of injury to players of clubs unflavoured by the bias.

Ernie Baywood
59 Posted 05/11/2019 at 10:37:09
Si, intent still matters. No-one is making the consequence the main consideration.

If you have intent and cause something then you are responsible for that outcome.

And you don't need to intend that outcome – it just needs to be clear to a reasonable person that it could happen. If you kick someone then it's perfectly reasonable to think that it might cause an injury. Didn't want to injure him badly? Then don't kick him!

It's a pretty important legal principle, but also one that exists in everyday life; we teach it to kids from a very early age. Don't throw a rock, look both ways before you cross the road, don't leave toys on the stairs... you might get away with it lots of times but you might also get unlucky once.

All that and, well, it's in the rules. He's bang to rights.

Does he feel terrible? I'm sure he does. There might be a clue in the way he feels as to his culpability.

Steve Brown
60 Posted 05/11/2019 at 12:51:11
Ernie @ 59, a good summary.

So much effort is being put into multiple posts on threads since the incident to justify a clear intent to foul on an Everton player. The result of which is a potentially career ending injury. We are just so reasonable. aren't we?

John Keating
61 Posted 05/11/2019 at 12:56:11

I know what you are saying but if you actually believe that then we could say that about every tackle. I mentioned in another thread that if we follow that train of thought we will make it a non-contact sport.

When someone goes in to a tackle how do you prove there is malice, a split second late and catching someone happens every game. How do you prove there was or was not malice?

In every single tackle during a game, there is a possibility that you could cause an injury. That being the case, nobody would tackle.

Jamie Crowley
62 Posted 05/11/2019 at 13:08:02

You're absolutely spot on in my opinion. I think those saying there's thousands of tackles like the Son - Gomes tackle, that happen without injury, are missing the point.

And those who say the tackle wasn't vindictive or malicious? For me, I'm reminded of a title that Lyndon used recently for one of his articles: There are none so blind that will not see.

I'm hoping Everton come out publicly and on record, that they are disappointed with Spurs contesting the red card. Everton won't. They are a very nice club.

But when one of your own is chased and hacked down, resulting in horrific injury, I'd like to see a strong defense of our player, and admonishment from Everton towards Spurs. We really are too nice sometimes.

Jamie Crowley
63 Posted 05/11/2019 at 13:12:16
John Keating,

I just realized my comments, directly after yours, read as a rebuke of your opinion.

That wasn't my intent. I'm sick of arguing about all of this, I only wanted to comment on Ernie's posts.

John Keating
64 Posted 05/11/2019 at 13:28:18
No problem Jamie. Everyone entitled to their own opinion.

It's a great pity this incident happened.

Had it not, we could concentrate on the actual game, performance and result.
Oh yes, and Silva's future...

Andrew James
65 Posted 05/11/2019 at 15:24:16
One thing which has been noticeable is the greater focus on Son than Gomes.

When it happened, Nevin and Green on 5Live mentioned Son and Aurier but it took ages to establish other than it being an Everton player, who had been the victim of what they were describing as a bad injury. Finally, after what felt like ages, did Andre's name come up.

Then all we have heard is how upset Son was. It's even been mentioned in 5live's news headlines today about he's progressing in regards to playing in Europe this week.

Oh and the media and fans saying he's "not like that"??? He's got previous for diving and a few bad challenges. He might be lovely to interview and generally a good person but come on. He is "like that" because he went for an opponent in a dangerous manner. And this is not the first time.

There are extenuating circumstances because Andre was unlucky as to what happened in the chain of events as in other times he might not have got his studs caught and been able to fall away from Aurier.

But why is the media so keen to focus on the guy (in a sympathetic way) who basically brought about this mess? They maybe can't focus with forensic detail on Andre's injury but they could ask more about the lamentable record of Spurs who show poor discipline when under pressure - diving, bad challenges, on pitch melees.

They have at least 3 known divers who the media turn a blind eye to while the histrionics of Richarlison has meant he has been earmarked by the FA as someone not to give anything to despite clear fouls in some moments.

Eric Paul
66 Posted 05/11/2019 at 15:38:59
Spot on Andrew,the way it’s going there will be retrospective action against Gomes, there is a picture doing the rounds that shows without the Aurier tackle it would have been a serious injury
John Keating
67 Posted 05/11/2019 at 19:59:38
Well I see, as expected, Son's red card has been rescinded.
It was odds on regardless of what was said by the authorities immediately after the game.
Once everyone had calmed down and they had thought about it there was no other option.
The thing is now they have to keep consistency after their daft remarks opened the can of worms.

In a way I am glad that they admitted their mistake and now I would like to see them admit the mistakes they made not giving Richarlison a penalty - though his theatrics hardly helped his cause. And their even more atrocious decision of Alli's handball.
Don't hold your breath

Mike Gaynes
68 Posted 05/11/2019 at 20:06:57
Aurier was completely blameless. All he did was stand there.
Si Cooper
69 Posted 05/11/2019 at 21:06:57
Ernie, I don”t think that actually is the legal principle. The whole point of laws is to be as objective as possible. If you cause a fatal car crash it is your actions that are judged not how many people died (or how old they were). It is human nature to layer on the subjectivity and make some things more tragic. The nature of the victim is only a legal consideration if the act is deliberate, where obviously vulnerability comes into play as an exacerbating factor.
In the case of a fair fight why would you judge the person who landed a punch where the recipient fell and hurt themselves badly because of how they fell as worse than someone who threw an equally weighty punch where the recipient just happened to miraculously land on the only bean bag in a thousand miles? Do we judge the boxers whose opponents have died as any worse than any other boxer? Not unless there is a specific reason to.
I stand by my assessment that this was simply a yellow card offence that had unusually severe consequences.
Stan Schofield
70 Posted 05/11/2019 at 23:05:21
Si, although Son's challenge might not have had intent to harm, his action was irresponsible by the very way he tackled from behind. I could be wrong, but I believe there are duties on individuals to not act in ways that cause undue danger to others, and an irresponsible tackle from behind could be seen as unduly causing danger. This is surely based on the possibility of an adverse consequence, even if in an actual situation the consequence turns out to be benign. In this sense, I would have thought Son deserved a red even if Gomes had not had his ankle broken.

Intent is important, but I don't think it's just intent to harm, but includes intent to do something that has a good chance of causing harm. Perhaps 'negligence' is a term that might capture this.

Andrew James
71 Posted 05/11/2019 at 23:12:40
Spurs should have shown some honour and not challenged the red. They got away with a whole host of stuff on Sunday and should have taken it on the chin.

Instead they have the look of "well we realise our player's hissy fit led to the debacle but we still want him available ASAP". "Oh and please feel sorry for him."

I was of the understanding Son was inconsolable. But he's good to step out ASAP for them.

But as I said, the ref messed this up with the card change.

This will only make for bad blood between the clubs now.

Jim Harrison
72 Posted 06/11/2019 at 03:32:30
I can understand it being overturned, but think it stinks!

Okay, the challenge isn't the worst, but he's made no play for the ball. Call it a freak landing, but Gomes would not expect to be challenged like that from behind when clear. He would also have known Aurier was there so likely have been shifting his body to get past him. So it's a set of circumstances that ended up with one player missing 20 minutes of play after taking out another player who won't kick a ball for months.

I think Pochetino is being a bit spoilt in complaining about the outcome of the game being changed. Overall, I think they have come out okay! Yes, Son missed the last part of the game, but our most influential player in the middle just got brought down and had to leave the game. Even if it wasn't as bad an injury but he still couldn't continue, it would look like a hatchet job, because it wasn't a genuine attempt to tackle. He was never getting the ball.

Matt Traynor
73 Posted 06/11/2019 at 03:38:21
I was under the impression that Atkinson only changed his mind about the tackle after a VAR intervention, rather than seeing the severity of the injury.

Either way, the subsequent overturning either proves Atkinson's incompetence, or VAR's shortcomings. Or both.

Jay Harris
74 Posted 06/11/2019 at 03:54:36
No, Matt,

It stinks of the media and the FA overruling VAR and Atkinson because it is a top 6 club.

We are still the only club to have a player banned for simulation even though Mane, Salah, Rashford and James do it every opportunity

Jamie Crowley
75 Posted 06/11/2019 at 04:54:30
I've not seen an official report of the red being overturned, but have no doubt of the truth of it, from posts by reputable contributors.

I am absolutely disgusted with this. Disgusted.

Anything I say will just turn into an incoherent rant, filled with expletives.

This is absolutely disgusting for me. It smacks of crooked favoritism, and a lack of bravery by the FA. They rarely, rarely overturn decisions. To overturn a premeditated tackle where a man was hunted down, from behind, with the ball no where near him (the player executing the filthy tackle), whose end game was only injury and maiming, is absolutely disgusting.

Supremely shameful for me. I read folks a bit older than I, talking about how the game is going down the tubes. This a a perfect example of that for me.

Where in the world is the justice for the outcome of this wicked tackle?

Jamie Crowley
76 Posted 06/11/2019 at 05:04:40
One last point -

If this doesn't galvanize this team, nothing will. They've had one of their own chopped down and severely injured. Then the league governing body basically removing any punishment for the heinous act.

Were I Silva, I'd use this as the greatest "us against the world" motivation.

I so desperately want to upset the Big 6 / Darling apple cart. The league itself is protecting them in every way possible. God I'd love to bust up their party at their posh Country Club.

I'm seriously infuriated by all of this. Outraged is an understatement.

Jim Harrison
77 Posted 06/11/2019 at 05:30:54
Jamie 76

I think if you listen to the ex players on sky and how they thought about it that I wouldn't put too much emphasis on how the players will react. They are professionals and appreciate the risks involved. They probably won't pay too much attention to what has happened with Son as it has limited impact on them

But I have to agree with your previous post. Any panel looking at the incident will have seen the swipe at Iwobi beforehand. It's the actions of a guy who has lost it. He wasn't in control, took a swipe at another player. If Gomes gets up and walks away it's a booking. He doesn't. It's not like it was a legitimate tackle that had freaky outcome

If you are driving your car recklessly and have a crash but no-one is injured, then you face basic charges. If, in a similar incident, you end up killing someone, your reckless driving could result in a more serious charge, can't it?

Ernie Baywood
78 Posted 06/11/2019 at 05:46:56
Si 69 - what I said was almost the legal definition of criminal intent. I could quote it word for word but it's got a fair bit of gobbledygook in it.

In your example your actions would be judged but so would the outcome. Did you drive dangerously? Did you drink drive? And then, are we looking at traffic violations or multiple deaths? It's the act, the outcome and some form of intent.

Son didn't intend to specifically break Andre's ankle (that's very specific) - but he should know that hacking him down could cause an injury.

Again, don't want to seriously hurt someone then don't hack them down. There's a ball there to be won and that's the game.

Phil Lewis
79 Posted 15/11/2019 at 01:27:36
It was an accident nothing more. It's supposed to be a contact sport. Such shocking injuries are therefore inevitable. The tackle itself was nothing by comparison to what you would see years ago, week in week out, at every match played in every league in football. Sanitise the game further and you strip everything from our traditional National sport. It will be unrecognisable from the footballI grew up with, or wish to be associated with. It could just as easily been Gomes committing the foul. Son is not a dirty player. Your comments distort the reality of what occurred.

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

About these ads

© ToffeeWeb