Final Score Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

jlove said:
Don't the laws include the phrase "attempts to..."?
Click to expand...
There are 2 relevant uses of ‘attempts to’ in Law 12.

The first is that striking or attempting to strike (including head butt) results in a direct free kick or penalty if the ball is in play.

This however does not determine sanction. The sanction depends on whether the strike/attempted strike is careless, reckless or using excessive force.

The second use of ‘attempts to’ comes specifically from the violent conduct section and states:

“Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball…”

So even an attempt to strike requires excessive force or brutality.

Law 12 defines excessive force as:

“…when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off…”

Applying the above, even if you argue about the level of force, there is no situation in which it can be said that the Jacquet’s safety was endangered.

No endangered safety = no excessive force = no violent conduct = no red card

guilly said:
It's pointless to go that direction, and one of the reasons there should be zero tolerance for this kind of things. So a "gentle headbutt" in your opinion should not be considered violent conduct, but an "excessive" should? Where do you draw the line?
In your own argument, how do you qualify Pedro as excessive force, if there was not even a contact?
Click to expand...

The difficulty with ‘there should be zero tolerance’ is that the rules literally require a level of force to be established for violent conduct to occur (see above). Anything short of that cannot result in a sending off.

Pedro’s elbow by any subjective assessment satisfied this. The velocity of the elbow and the potential consequences if that elbow landed plainly satisfies this.

Yarmo’s can in no way be equated with this. Yarmo did not endanger his opponents safety and should not have been sent off.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Untouchable said:
The difficulty with ‘there should be zero tolerance’ is that the rules literally require a level of force to be established for violent conduct to occur (see above). Anything short of that cannot result in a sending off.

Pedro’s elbow by any subjective assessment satisfied this. The velocity of the elbow and the potential consequences if that elbow landed plainly satisfies this.

Yarmo’s can in no way be equated with this. Yarmo did not endanger his opponents safety and should not have been sent off.
Click to expand...
No, zero tolerance does not requires a threshold, and that's where Yarmo's actions get the same treatment of Pedro's.
Of course, Yarmoliuk was way more softer, but still crosses the line. Even accounting he was provoked, he cannot headbutt (or attempt to) a rival, not even in retaliation.
Keith Andrews acknowledged that in the post match interview, Yarmoliuk also acknowledged it in his Instagram post. Reaction was a mistake, no matter how many forensic analysis you do.

You can hardly wait until players are actually endangered, it's way too late, things can get out of control very quickly. And the end result will be much worse.

Anyway, back to work, have fun
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

guilly said:
No, zero tolerance does not requires a threshold, and that's where Yarmo's actions get the same treatment of Pedro's.
Of course, Yarmoliuk was way more softer, but still crosses the line. Even accounting he was provoked, he cannot headbutt (or attempt to) a rival, not even in retaliation.
Keith Andrews acknowledged that in the post match interview, Yarmoliuk also acknowledged it in his Instagram post. Reaction was a mistake, no matter how many forensic analysis you do.

You can hardly wait until players are actually endangered, it's way too late, things can get out of control very quickly. And the end result will be much worse.

Anyway, back to work, have fun
Click to expand...
....Jacquet got the young man sent off by his actions....both before the head to the forehead and the subsequent rolling about the ground routine....that was just as deliberate as YY was in reacting...there are an increasing number of dishonest footballers in the PL.... winning at at all costs eh.... it's just all very sad.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

guilly said:
No, zero tolerance does not requires a threshold, and that's where Yarmo's actions get the same treatment of Pedro's
Click to expand...
You’re still missing the point. You want zero tolerance. The laws do not have that. The laws have a threshold. If the threshold is not met, sending off cannot happen.

guilly said:
Of course, Yarmoliuk was way more softer, but still crosses the line
Click to expand...
But did it? The laws require Yarmo to have endangered Jacquet’s safety. Did that happen? A yes or no will suffice.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

JCMcBee said:
....Jacquet got the young man sent off by his actions....both before the head to the forehead and the subsequent rolling about the ground routine....that was just as deliberate as YY was in reacting...there are an increasing number of dishonest footballers in the PL.... winning at at all costs eh.... it's just all very sad.
Click to expand...
Yes, sad indeed, but it's the way it is unfortunately, not only in the PL, but also in life. Quite a few people trying to win at all costs!
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Wasn’t the offence “made a headbutting action”, does this mean the ref/VAR can then apply this across a number of law interpretations? I’m surprised the press haven’t made more of it and place refs under even more scrutiny for next weekend.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

guilly said:
Even though I don't like it, I think it makes sense from the ref point of view to be harsh on any contact, and even attempt. Things can go out of control very quickly.
A couple of seasons ago, most of the people here were fuming when João Pedro swung an elbow on Yarmoliuk, and the agreement was he should have been sent off (at every post game analysis). Same logic applies here. Of course, Joao Pedro wasn't sent off, but that was a mistake. I don't understand how people can still argue about this one tbh
Click to expand...
Maybe because Pedro could have ended Yarmos life with the elbow swing and Yarmos "headbutt" would have possibly caused a graze at absolute worst (not forsaking Jacquet staying down as though dead for over a minute)
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

guilly said:
It's pointless to go that direction, and one of the reasons there should be zero tolerance for this kind of things. So a "gentle headbutt" in your opinion should not be considered violent conduct, but an "excessive" should? Where do you draw the line?
In your own argument, how do you qualify Pedro as excessive force, if there was not even a contact?
Click to expand...
Do you think if Yarmo swung a wild punch at Jacquet that missed by a few inches, that the ref WOULD NOT have sent him off?
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

JANORAK said:
If she was that vulnerable I wouldn’t have her anywhere near the game. More danger from the ferocity of a wayward shot, than the velocity in a falling rugby 🏉.
I could understand an investigation if, say the ball was full of drugs and had been drop kicked into a prison….
Click to expand...
I really don't think so.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Banana said:
When you go to a football match you take a risk that a football might hit you. To mitigate this you can lookout for the ball and use your arms/movement to avoid that risk.

You can't account for a ball falling at terminal velocity on your 6 year old kid however. Stop being a dunce.
Click to expand...
It's not always so easy to do that. Ask the Liverpool player who stopped one shot with his knackers.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

guilly said:
Yes, sad indeed, but it's the way it is unfortunately, not only in the PL, but also in life. Quite a few people trying to win at all costs!
Click to expand...
....not all players are like Jacquet thankfully....and not all clubs owners are like those of MCFC.....at least one of those is being taken to task I guess...hey ho.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Untouchable said:
You’re still missing the point. You want zero tolerance. The laws do not have that. The laws have a threshold. If the threshold is not met, sending off cannot happen.
Click to expand...
The laws don't have a threshold. "excessive" is not measurable, and could be any arbitrary value. Whether you like it or not, at the moment, the PL is using anything >0 as excessive, and that's where both incidents cross the line and deserve punishment.

That's also the reason there's no media circus analyzing every video frame. There is a simple consensus that you cannot headbutt people in a football pitch.

It's not that hard, but I guess you might be as bored at work as I am to keep going in circles with the argument.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Though YY moved chest and was victim shoulder barge, he definitely makes a move with his head towards pool bloke. Moving the head in that manner has and will get you sent off. I was disappointed that he did it, but understand why he was pissed doff and maybe,as watching the ref, he thought it wouldn't get noticed. What did leave me fit to be tied, was that the pool bloke deserved a booking for play acting. But that's never going to happen. It should though. That may stop all the rolling around.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Quiet word in YY’s ear next time you head butt someone make sure you knock them out especially if it is Jacquet who seems to like lying on the ground anyway.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Fomer player Pat Nevin wrote for the BBC ”I am pretty sure Jeremy Jacquet was not nearly as badly injured as he affected. It was all a sad outcome, particularly when considering the incident leading up to it.Jacquet was winding Yarmoliuk up and had deliberately stuck his shoulder into the Brentford defender's face seconds before the headbutting reaction. Had Yarmoliuk gone down first, perhaps feigning a terrible injury of his own, the referee might have sent Jacquet off.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Vid said:
Fomer player Pat Nevin wrote for the BBC ”I am pretty sure Jeremy Jacquet was not nearly as badly injured as he affected. It was all a sad outcome, particularly when considering the incident leading up to it.Jacquet was winding Yarmoliuk up and had deliberately stuck his shoulder into the Brentford defender's face seconds before the headbutting reaction. Had Yarmoliuk gone down first, perhaps feigning a terrible injury of his own, the referee might have sent Jacquet off.
Click to expand...
💯
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Vid said:
Fomer player Pat Nevin wrote for the BBC ”I am pretty sure Jeremy Jacquet was not nearly as badly injured as he affected. It was all a sad outcome, particularly when considering the incident leading up to it.Jacquet was winding Yarmoliuk up and had deliberately stuck his shoulder into the Brentford defender's face seconds before the headbutting reaction. Had Yarmoliuk gone down first, perhaps feigning a terrible injury of his own, the referee might have sent Jacquet off.
Click to expand...
The ref would have booked Yarmo for simulation.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Vid said:
Fomer player Pat Nevin wrote for the BBC ”I am pretty sure Jeremy Jacquet was not nearly as badly injured as he affected. It was all a sad outcome, particularly when considering the incident leading up to it.Jacquet was winding Yarmoliuk up and had deliberately stuck his shoulder into the Brentford defender's face seconds before the headbutting reaction. Had Yarmoliuk gone down first, perhaps feigning a terrible injury of his own, the referee might have sent Jacquet off.
Click to expand...
Where was this?
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Vid said:
Fomer player Pat Nevin wrote for the BBC ”I am pretty sure Jeremy Jacquet was not nearly as badly injured as he affected. It was all a sad outcome, particularly when considering the incident leading up to it.Jacquet was winding Yarmoliuk up and had deliberately stuck his shoulder into the Brentford defender's face seconds before the headbutting reaction. Had Yarmoliuk gone down first, perhaps feigning a terrible injury of his own, the referee might have sent Jacquet off.
Click to expand...
....that Scottish git knows nothing about football...as for Bill Shankly....yet another jock.... totally overrated....life and death indeed🙄
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Vid

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

Untouchable said:
But did it? The laws require Yarmo to have endangered Jacquet’s safety. Did that happen? A yes or no will suffice.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about, he nearly killed him. He was in a medically induced coma for abut 5 minutes.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

mhead bee said:
What are you talking about, he nearly killed him. He was in a medically induced coma for abut 5 minutes.
Click to expand...
I'm told that he was making odd noises, strange slurring of words and generally just taking unintelligibly. Physios were worried for a while then remembered he was French.
 
Last edited:

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

For a 6ft 2in centre back, Jacquet is a proper soft lad. Not only was there the Yarmo incident, he went down like a sack of spuds twice in the second half under challenges from Thiago : the first one got Igor booked and the second one (Igor pulled up when he was through on goal) resulted in Vitaly’s first booking when he simply pointed out how ****ing useless Brooks is…
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

JCMcBee said:
....that Scottish git knows nothing about football...as for Bill Shankly....yet another jock.... totally overrated....life and death indeed🙄
Click to expand...
Didn't you used to talk sensibly? That "Scottish git" is the best and most knowledgable commentator on the telly.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

larrysigny said:
Didn't you used to talk sensibly? That "Scottish git" is the best and most knowledgable commentator on the telly.
Click to expand...
Unlike the other one on Sky.
I have to watch with subtitles because I sure as hell can't understand what McCoist is saying half the time.....
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

larrysigny said:
Didn't you used to talk sensibly? That "Scottish git" is the best and most knowledgable commentator on the telly.
Click to expand...
...tbf Larry my old friend... I've never been sensible my whole life....no point in changing now... take care mate.
 

Brentford 1 (KLP) Liverpool 2

HMDBFC said:
Unlike the other one on Sky.
I have to watch with subtitles because I sure as hell can't understand what McCoist is saying half the time.....
Click to expand...
....I shouldn't worry mate... don't think super Ally McCoist OBE can understand himself either tbf....btw.... he's simply the best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom