The Nasri penalty claim

[Bluebee2]

I always say would you be happy if one of our defenders made the same challenge and a penalty was given ! A great tackle, I love seeing great play like that, whoever it comes from.

 

[Dakeb]

Great challenge,won the ball and momentum obviously carried him into Nasri.

I'd hate to think such good defending could be lost from the game through fear of unwarranted punishment - Webb wasn't great yesterday but he got that decision right.

Not under the current rules, he didn't. Or what seems the current rules, ie no tacking from behind.
FWIW I wouldn't give the penalty we need players to be able to tackle.

There is no explicit law that prohibits tackling from behind.

The way it may be interpreted as either "careless" or "reckless" is because the player in possession may not be able to see the tackle coming and may not be able to take evasive action to protect himself, so it is deemed dangerous. but there is no rule that specifically say you cannot tackle from behind.

 

[es1]

i thought it was a good tackle live and i've seen nothing to suggest otherwise

 

[kippaxchris]

I always say would you be happy if one of our defenders made the same challenge and a penalty was given ! A great tackle, I love seeing great play like that, whoever it comes from.

There is no doubt that if one of our players did that challenge on Lamela or somebody else it would have been a penalty.<br /><br />-- Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:54 pm --<br /><br />

i thought it was a good tackle live and i've seen nothing to suggest otherwise

It's not about it being a good tackle its about Webb not following the modern game rule book.

 

[Oystercatcher28]

In old school footy, the challenge was spot on, you see Kompany doing it often. Looked fine to me, both feet down, won ball. Perfect decision. If you punish that there, then you effectively say no tackling.

 

[kippaxchris]

In old school footy, the challenge was spot on, you see Kompany doing it often. Looked fine to me, both feet down, won ball. Perfect decision. If you punish that there, then you effectively say no tackling.

He went straight over the top of the ball and only got a stud on the ball.

 

[Timmmmahhhh]

According to law 12

Tackling (not fouling) an opponent is illegal if the referee considers it to be careless, reckless or using excessive force

A tackle that endangers an opponent (doesn't have to touch him) is serious foul play.

A tackle with excessive force from any direction using one or both legs is serious foul play.

There is no rule that specifically says you cannot tackle from behind.

So the only questions that need to be answered are

1) was it careless, reckless, or excessive force used
2) was Nasri endangered

I would say no to both.

Personally think it was a great tackle.

To those saying it should have been a foul/penalty/red card.

The De Jong tackle on Ben Arfa, he cleared the ball then emptied Ben Arfa, would you have accepted it if the ref gave a red card? Ben Arfa was in his own half and going no where, arguements could be made for reckless, certainly excessive force.

 

[BigJoe#1]

In old school footy, the challenge was spot on, you see Kompany doing it often. Looked fine to me, both feet down, won ball. Perfect decision. If you punish that there, then you effectively say no tackling.

Both feet down? Hmmmm a specsaver marketing opportunity me thinks !!

I think we could call that a scissor tackle - it was a foul!

 

[Heart.net]

Goes in with is right foot, takes him out with his trailing left. Its a penalty.

 

[markbmcfc]

If that's a foul I've lost all hope with tackling in the English game.