Luiz should have been sent off

[Wall heath Wanderer]

I still don't think it was reckless. Yes, Raul was there but if he wasn't, Luiz had a free header he was going to crush. He wasn't looking at Raul at all, he was looking at the ball.

You just can't anticipate someone will be there in your way because if you do, you'll never score (or even try).

He was late, Raul had cleared the ball and then Luiz arrived and the clash occured, the picture shows he had his eyes closed so wasn't even looking and thus put the top of his head into the side of Rauls.

Not intentional by any means, but he was late and reckless in the challenge.

Intent, or lack of, to injure or make contact with a player, nor indeed any injury, should play a part in a red card decision for unsafe play, it is the act of the player not being in control of himself and/or possibly putting the welfare of a fellow professional in jeopardy.
For example, a player running at full speed puts his foot up to head height and wins the ball from an opponent who is going in with his head is a red card, the same as if in the same situation he fails to win the ball and kicks the player in the face, or misses the ball completely.

It is about wether the action is deemed out of control, and in this instance i believe Luiz ,setting aside he actually did, was guilty of endangering another player due to reckless play.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

It doesn't matter if Son's red card was rescinded or not.

The point is players are shown red cards for dangerous play, regardless of whether they mean it. In fact, very few mean to harm a player. So, 90% of red cards are given for 'accidents'. When a player is late, reckless, dangerous.

To those arguing for it, Luiz fits that category. He was late; he missed the ball. He was reckless; he headbutted another player. He was dangerous; the result was a fractured skull. This ticks those boxes and is the same.

I've yet to see a worthwhile argument on the other side of why it wasn't those things. Essentially, you want different rules to be applied when the ball is in the air.

In all honesty, you can't argue two of the things. He was late, that's a fact, as Raul headed the ball. And you can't say it wasn't dangerous, because a non-dangerous incident doesn't leave a person with a fractured skull.

The only debate is that he may not have been reckless, but as I said I don't get how that's a debate either because IMO if you charge at someone with your head, and more importantly, you don't get the ball, it's reckless for me.

It's purely because it's from a corner that people are wanting anything goes. If Luiz does that off a goal-kick or from a long ball - runs ten yards and crashes into a players head without getting the ball, he one million percent gets sent off and there's no debate.

Someone posted Elokobi's red card at Doncaster, which was not with the same force, yet he got a red.

I think it's so similar to the Luiz incident. Watch it. (0:57). Elokobi has a run, clatters into the guy and doesn't win the ball. How is this any different!? Please tell me. The only difference I can see, is that Elokobi has LESS of a run up, and is not travelling as fast.

Interestingly, a match report quoted this; "McCarthy, who felt, like many observers, including his opposite number, Sean O'Driscoll, that the flying aerial challenge which left both James Coppinger and Elokobi on the ground for several minutes was reckless rather than malicious."

Note, despite McCarthy's moaning after this game in that article and several others, we did NOT even appeal the red card, never mind win it. So, we didn't think an incident that is nowhere near as bad as this one was worth appealing.

Also, this was nine years ago. I'd like to think we'd all agree football is now less physical and more willing to dish out red cards for dangerous play. Yet, this was a red card not even worth appealing nine years ago, but it's laughable that some think Luiz should be sent off...

 

[Darvo]

I think that pretty much mirrors my feelings. Agreed re saying no more too. It's all getting incredibly repetitive.

Ditto

 

[I'm the Wanderer]

He was late, Raul had cleared the ball and then Luiz arrived and the clash occured, the picture shows he had his eyes closed so wasn't even looking and thus put the top of his head into the side of Rauls.

Not intentional by any means, but he was late and reckless in the challenge.

Intent, or lack of, to injure or make contact with a player, nor indeed any injury, should play a part in a red card decision for unsafe play, it is the act of the player not being in control of himself and/or possibly putting the welfare of a fellow professional in jeopardy.
For example, a player running at full speed puts his foot up to head height and wins the ball from an opponent who is going in with his head is a red card, the same as if in the same situation he fails to win the ball and kicks the player in the face, or misses the ball completely.

It is about wether the action is deemed out of control, and in this instance i believe Luiz ,setting aside he actually did, was guilty of endangering another player due to reckless play.

He was late less than 1/2 a second, though. Had he been late a full 2-3 seconds, that changes everything.

also, about the eyes being closed, that's an instinctive reaction to anything about to hit your head, especially a ball coming in fast from a corner shot.

 

[Wall heath Wanderer]

He was late less than 1/2 a second, though. Had he been late a full 2-3 seconds, that changes everything.

also, about the eyes being closed, that's an instinctive reaction to anything about to hit your head, especially a ball coming in fast from a corner shot.

If he had been a bit later he would have flown over Raul and looked like the clown he is and we could all be having a good laugh at it.

On the other hand, if we are saying he is a half second late, let's remove Raul from the equation, the ball would have continued on it's path and Luiz would have missed it and flown through the air and collided with the next person.

 

[Contrarian]

Please stop the blame culture. Blaming Luiz is not going to fix Rauls skull. Whatever your opinion on the challenge, he’s trying to win the ball and it’s a horrific accident.
just leave it there

Please stop the "Appending the word Culture to win an argument" culture! Else can you please stop the Apologist Culture?

It's nothing to do with "blame culture". Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your actions?

 

[Big Saft Kid]

Please stop the "Appending the word Culture to win an argument" culture! Else can you please stop the Apologist Culture?

It's nothing to do with "blame culture". Whatever happened to taking responsibility for your actions?

Yep. Has Luiz publicly said 'Sorry for fracturing your skull yet?' Or would that be legally ill-advised? I bet the Emirates lawyers have already been all over it like a rash.

 

[Pagey]

I've yet to see a worthwhile argument on the other side of why it wasn't those things. Essentially, you want different rules to be applied when the ball is in the air.

Nope, I want to see a game of football. I want to see players compete on the ground and in the air. I don't want to see testimonial football, without tackles and challenges.

I don't want to see players injured or worse, but you tell me the answer.
Luiz was late, a booking was warrented, but if you can't compete, you take away from a sport that is slowly losing its appeal.

 

[Hot Fuss]

Yep. Has Luiz publicly said 'Sorry for fracturing your skull yet?' Or would that be legally ill-advised? I bet the Emirates lawyers have already been all over it like a rash.

 

[WickedWolfie]

View attachment 18655

More focus on Arsenal's loss than on Raul

 

[Pagey]

More focus on Arsenal's loss than on Raul

Hardly going to apologise and admit anything in this day of litigation? Probably advised by the club.

 

[Hot Fuss]

More focus on Arsenal's loss than on Raul

12 words about Arsenal, 22 about Raul if you really want to be like that.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Nope, I want to a game of football. I want to see players compete on the ground and in the air. I don't want to see testimonial football, without tackles and challenges.

I don't want to see players injured or worse, but you tell me the answer.
Luiz was late, a booking was warrented, but if you can't compete, you take away from a sport that is slowly losing its appeal.

You're exaggerating here though.

Who called for testimonial football? For challenges banned? No one. Players can do what they like. The answer is, red card them when they are reckless, dangerous and late.

It's literally no different to a crunching tackle. Do it, commit to it, but if you miss the ball and two foot the players shin, you're going off.

 

[WickedWolfie]

12 words about Arsenal, 22 about Raul if you really want to be like that.

If we're going to play that game 12 words about Raul actually, starting at "ask for everybody...". The start of that sentence is about messages to Luiz himself.

 

[Poztin]

He was late less than 1/2 a second, though. Had he been late a full 2-3 seconds, that changes everything.

also, about the eyes being closed, that's an instinctive reaction to anything about to hit your head, especially a ball coming in fast from a corner shot.

Count to 2-3 to yourself. If he was that late it’d be assault.

 

[I'm the Wanderer]

Count to 2-3 to yourself. If he was that late it’d be assault.

Yeah, I did that after I posted. I forgot to edit it. hahaha

 

[NewarkWolf]

Red card all day long, didn't happen because he injured himself so seen as accidental. As others have stated, if it was foot against foot he would have gone.

So any form of card was held back as he was injured.....

My days! What utter bull****

 

[derbyrameater]

12 words about Arsenal, 22 about Raul if you really want to be like that.

I make it 21 for Arsenal (sad to messages) and 8 for Raul (pray to Bro).

 

[NewarkWolf]

I think, particularly with the increasing accumulation of evidence surrounding heading footballs and Alzheimers, it certainly behoves football authorities to sort out better protocols for head injuries and to clamp down hard on inappropriate aerial challenges. As many have stated “intent” is a complete irrelevance in this context, the human skull is a dangerous weapon as well as happening to house a rather delicate and most crucial organ. This clash was worst case scenario too in that the hardest part of Ruiz’ head ( forehead) impacted with the most fragile part of Raul’s ( the temple) and did so with considerble force. If that isnt dangerous play I dont know what is!!

And you think that the situation of attacking a ball had that scenario of points of impact clear before he made a run??? **** me! He's made a run for the ball and attacked it as set out in training of imagine. If Raul had turned his head slightly and Luiz had smashed his own face on the back of Raul's head and was left unconscious then it would have been no foul or screams for a sending off on that basis! Ridiculous

I'd love to see what our reaction would have been if this had been in the other box and Raul being in Luiz's situation. None of us would be staying he should be sent if. These posts are based on bias and emotion as it's hurt us that it's our beloved key striker that's suffered.

 

[Big Saft Kid]

I make it 21 for Arsenal (sad to messages) and 8 for Raul (pray to Bro).

Still not an apology. Surprised he didn't resort to the usual meaningless mantra of 'thoughts and prayers'. He goes down even further in my estimation. Still, Hot Flush will defend the indefensible to the bitter end. They deserve each other.

 

[NewarkWolf]

Red card all day long, didn't happen because he injured himself so seen as accidental. As others have stated, if it was foot against foot he would have gone.

Yes, foot to head of course. It's no red card at all, it's an Ariel challenge of **** sake, the attacker has attacked the ball and had a sickening collision with the defending player. Ones marking space as we set up zonally while the other is attacking the area the ball was put into. It's a sickening outcome for one of the players from a terrible accidental collision.

It reckless of he's gone in with his foot at that height or led with an elbow but they've gone together with their heads to win the ball.

 

[Hot Fuss]

Yes, foot to head of course. It's no red card at all, it's an Ariel challenge of **** sake, the attacker has attacked the ball and had a sickening collision with the defending player. Ones marking space as we set up zonally while the other is attacking the area the ball was put into. It's a sickening outcome for one of the players from a terrible accidental collision.

It reckless of he's gone in with his foot at that height or led with an elbow but they've gone together with their heads to win the ball.

Absolutely spot on.

 

[Hot Fuss]

Still not an apology. Surprised he didn't resort to the usual meaningless mantra of 'thoughts and prayers'. He goes down even further in my estimation. Still, Hot Flush will defend the indefensible to the bitter end. They deserve each other.

Indefensible? The bloke tried to head a football ffs.

Amazing that still not one current or ex player, manager or pundit has criticised Luiz?

 

[SoCal_Wolf]

... it's an Ariel challenge of **** sake...

It reckless of he's gone in with his foot at that height or led with an elbow but they've gone together with their heads to win the ball.

Not sure why going in full-blast with your head is any different than a foot...or a shoulder...or a forearm...or an elbow...

 

[BarryM]

First I have seen posters question what Luiz is doing with his hands in the photo on original post.

Then tonight I have read posters saying he had his eyes closed so he wasn't even looking what he was doing.

What's next chaps?

 

[wanderer24]

Bottom line for all the gold tinted spectacle wearers. If it had been the other way round and Raul was attacking the ball and Luiz defending it, and Luiz had the fractured skull.......would any of you be saying that Raul was reckless? I think not

 

[JohnB]

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct

IFAB Laws of the Game

www.thefa.com

Personal view is that it wasn’t intentional, it was accidental but endangered the safety of an opponent. Luiz was genuinely going for the ball (IMO) but so do most red card tackles where the player has overrun the ball and lunges in. Once Jimenez heads the ball away to be taken out by Luiz is serious foul play and should have resulted in a red card.

 

[NewarkWolf]

Not sure why going in full-blast with your head is any different than a foot...or a shoulder...or a forearm...or an elbow...

Because heading the ball is a part of the game. He went to head it....... Didn't lead with elbow. It's a ****ing accident! A nasty one. It's not like howey on Thomas or carbon on ndah! Yet you lot are beating that very drum!

 

[NewarkWolf]

SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct

IFAB Laws of the Game

www.thefa.com

Personal view is that it wasn’t intentional, it was accidental but endangered the safety of an opponent. Luiz was genuinely going for the ball (IMO) but so do most red card tackles where the player has overrun the ball and lunges in. Once Jimenez heads the ball away to be taken out by Luiz is serious foul play and should have resulted in a red card.

He didn't start his challenge when the ball was cleared though so you're wrong. He was going for the same ball and timed his run to meet it, Raul beat him by a split second and the collision occurred.

 

[NewarkWolf]

Bottom line for all the gold tinted spectacle wearers. If it had been the other way round and Raul was attacking the ball and Luiz defending it, and Luiz had the fractured skull.......would any of you be saying that Raul was reckless? I think not

No! No one would. Bias as **** and glasses so tinted it's embarrassing.

No one, I repeat no one else is talking about the nature of the accident as anything other yet here we are starting threads on it!

If Luiz had come off worse from the same incident and Raul was ok we wouldn't either yet the action and attempt would have been the same. Its really bad what's happened but just because it's a key player let's not go clutching at straws to justify our injustice that the situation didn't result in a red card for serious foul play! Jesus!

 

[NewarkWolf]

Poor old wolves. The officials don't like us, they don't want us top 6, it's a conspiracy, var is against us, no fans effects us most and David Luiz is a criminal. May as well as this situation to the other excuses we bang on about

 

[JohnB]

Because heading the ball is a part of the game. He went to head it....... Didn't lead with elbow. It's a ****ing accident! A nasty one. It's not like howey on Thomas or carbon on ndah! Yet you lot are beating that very drum!

He didn't start his challenge when the ball was cleared though so you're wrong. He was going for the same ball and timed his run to meet it, Raul beat him by a split second and the collision occurred.

I accept I’m wrong as he wasn’t sent off and not checked by VAR nor picked up by pundits or press....but still my opinion is that he should have been. I don’t see the difference with head(butting) someone slightly late and kicking someone slightly late - indeed I’d say the head is more dangerous and reckless as the end result showed.

Having said that I remain of the view it was an accident and not intentional and definitely not criminal.

Fuerza Raul

 

[Hot Fuss]

Poor old wolves. The officials don't like us, they don't want us top 6, it's a conspiracy, var is against us, no fans effects us most and David Luiz is a criminal. May as well as this situation to the other excuses we bang on about

Don’t forget all the media hate us, we never get credit and we are never on first on MOTD. The victim mentality on here shocking. In my opinion of course.

 

[Hrothgar]

He went to head the ball, missed it and impacted in stead on another player’s head causing a potentially life- threatening injury. Fact that it was a “****ing accident” is irrelevant. Tackling is “part of the game” too- if a player misses the ball and then impacts seriously injuring the other player it is a red card. Or are brains not deemed as important as ankles or knees in footballers?

 

[BarryM]

Apart from on here and Twitter (full of morons at best of times) ... Has anyone else seen any discussion about how it should have been a red card?

Genuinely interested to see which football pundits, current pro's and ex pro's think it should have been.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

No! No one would. Bias as **** and glasses so tinted it's embarrassing.

No one, I repeat no one else is talking about the nature of the accident as anything other yet here we are starting threads on it!

If Luiz had come off worse from the same incident and Raul was ok we wouldn't either yet the action and attempt would have been the same. Its really bad what's happened but just because it's a key player let's not go clutching at straws to justify our injustice that the situation didn't result in a red card for serious foul play! Jesus!

You're missing the whole point. Luiz COULDN'T have come off worse from that challenge because it's not the 50:50 you're implying.

It's someone running into someone else. The fact Luiz had a cut just shows how fast and reckless he was. Jimenez was a sitting duck.

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Apart from on here and Twitter (full of morons at best of times) ... Has anyone else seen any discussion about how it should have been a red card?

Genuinely interested to see which football pundits, current pro's and ex pro's think it should have been.

Can you tell me how it differs to the Elokobi incident that I posted above please. (Post #242).

He was sent off, Wolves didn't think it was even worth an appeal.

 

[NewarkWolf]

You're missing the whole point. Luiz COULDN'T have come off worse from that challenge because it's not the 50:50 you're implying.

It's someone running into someone else. The fact Luiz had a cut just shows how fast and reckless he was. Jimenez was a sitting duck.

No missing the point at all. If Raul jumps with his head only marginally turned then Luiz headbutts the back of his head and could come off worse. We're talking fine lines yet you think it's black and white.

It's not as red card and 99.99999% of the nation agree so step down.

 

[NewarkWolf]

He went to head the ball, missed it and impacted in stead on another player’s head causing a potentially life- threatening injury. Fact that it was a “****ing accident” is irrelevant. Tackling is “part of the game” too- if a player misses the ball and then impacts seriously injuring the other player it is a red card. Or are brains not deemed as important as ankles or knees in footballers?

No it's not!! A 50/50 tackle is permitted, doesn't guarantee even without unnecessary force that someone won't receive any injury! If they do it's not a red card! Ban aerial challenges then, ball can't go above head height......

 

[wanderer24]

You're missing the whole point. Luiz COULDN'T have come off worse from that challenge because it's not the 50:50 you're implying.

It's someone running into someone else. The fact Luiz had a cut just shows how fast and reckless he was. Jimenez was a sitting duck.

Not really though. Goodman fractured his skull in a very similar incident and he was the one attacking the ball