You are not connected. Please login or register

Bolton Nuts » BWFC » Bolton Wanderers Banter » The Two Footed Challenge

The Two Footed Challenge

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1The Two Footed Challenge Empty The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 18:30

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Is it just me or has football become obsessed with the two footed challenge?

A tackle that has been seen as perfectly fair for over 100 years has suddenly become "assault" and every day the papers are full of twa*ts moaning about the latest "bad" tackle.

Does anyone, especially those that have played football, really think the two footed challenge should be outlawed? Isn't football supposed to be a competitive sport with the risk of injury?

As I've said before, football will be a non-contact sport in 10 years.

2The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 18:35

jayjay23

jayjay23
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
A two footed challenge is not a foul. It's only a foul if deemed excessive force or reckless or if you take the man out in a careless way.

Yes a lot of two footed challenges are given as fouls because most of them are excessive or dangerous.

It's quite difficult for most players to jump off the floor with both feet into a tackle and claim that they were in full control of what they did. If they are not in control it is probably dangerous. And more often than not a player does not need to tackle with both feet and it is normally done by a player using excessive force.

3The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 18:48

Reebok Trotter

Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
The Johnson tackle last night was no different to Kompany's. It's the inconsistency that pees people off.

4The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 18:49

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:A two footed challenge is not a foul. It's only a foul if deemed excessive force or reckless or if you take the man out in a careless way.

Yes a lot of two footed challenges are given as fouls because most of them are excessive or dangerous.

It's quite difficult for most players to jump off the floor with both feet into a tackle and claim that they were in full control of what they did. If they are not in control it is probably dangerous. And more often than not a player does not need to tackle with both feet and it is normally done by a player using excessive force.

You big fat tart jayjay. Football is a game for men, why don't you take up curling or something?

5The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 19:08

aaron_bwfc

aaron_bwfc
Moderator
Moderator
The kompany and johnson tackles were great challenges, both players won the ball and neither player that they tackled appealed against it.....oh apart from that tosser Rooney.

You won't be able to look at an opponent without being sent off next.

6The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 19:14

Guest


Guest
The two footed challenge is a cowards way to tackle. They don't teach you that at school so why at Premiership level?

I'm fully behind the attempts to stamp it out.

7The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 21:59

Keegan

Keegan
Moderator
Moderator
I played as a defender for years without having to resort to two-footed tackles. As far as I'm concerned, you do that when you are afraid of the player you are tackling and want to take them out of the game.

https://forum.boltonnuts.co.uk

8The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Thu Jan 12 2012, 23:32

doffcocker

doffcocker
Ivan Campo
Ivan Campo
I think people over exaggerate the damage the authorities' attempts to stamp out nasty tackles is doing to the game.

I don't buy into all this "People come to football matches to see big tackles!"

The game is still good without players flying in on one another, two footed. What is ruining the game is the pressure on referees to see that these challenges absolutely get punished because when they're only 50/50 about it, they'll go with the red card. They'd rather send an innocent case off than keep a guilty case on.

9The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 09:23

wanderlust


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
Like every challenge, a two-footed challenge can win the ball cleanly or not. To remain within the spirit of the game, a challenge should be judged entirely on the outcome i.e. what actually happens - rather than systematically wiping out part of the game.

If a two-footed challenge results in a foul i.e. there's contact with the player before the ball it should be given as a foul. If it is violent conduct i.e. the challenge gives the other player no chance of not getting hit then it should be treated as such. But if the ball is won cleanly it should be allowed. Is it too much to ask refs to take back responsibility for such decisions?

I think that a bigger problem is players looking for free kicks by trailing their legs to ensure they get caught - and everyone can see when that happens as the body movement is unnatural.

All in all, there are more "fouls", bookings and sending offs than ever which slows the game and places a greater emphasis on set pieces - a fact I find irritating as FIFA use the excuse of "slowing the game down" as a reason for not allowing video technology whilst at the same time endorsing the continuous stoppages described above.



Last edited by wanderlust on Fri Jan 13 2012, 09:25; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Typos p1ss me off as I'm anal.)

10The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 10:59

Reebok Trotter

Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
The argument against video technology is a load of codswallop. The system works perfectly fine in rugby. Goal line technology similar to the Hawkeye system at Wembley would work just as well in football.

When dodgy decisions and human error can cost clubs millions of pounds in lost revenue, it just does not make sense not to take advantage of technology.

11The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 11:29

xmiles

xmiles
Youri Djorkaeff
Youri Djorkaeff
Slightly off topic I know but the resistance of Blatter and all the other corrupt officials at FIFA to goal line camera is mystifying. The slight delay caused by a referee using this technology maybe once or twice in a game is trivial compared to the sense of grievance caused by incorrect decisions. We wouldn't have been relegated if a goal had been given against Everton in the first game at the Reebok.

12The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 12:34

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Like every challenge, a two-footed challenge can win the ball cleanly or not. To remain within the spirit of the game, a challenge should be judged entirely on the outcome i.e. what actually happens - rather than systematically wiping out part of the game.

If a two-footed challenge results in a foul i.e. there's contact with the player before the ball it should be given as a foul. If it is violent conduct i.e. the challenge gives the other player no chance of not getting hit then it should be treated as such. But if the ball is won cleanly it should be allowed. Is it too much to ask refs to take back responsibility for such decisions?

I think that a bigger problem is players looking for free kicks by trailing their legs to ensure they get caught - and everyone can see when that happens as the body movement is unnatural.

All in all, there are more "fouls", bookings and sending offs than ever which slows the game and places a greater emphasis on set pieces - a fact I find irritating as FIFA use the excuse of "slowing the game down" as a reason for not allowing video technology whilst at the same time endorsing the continuous stoppages described above.

I don't often say this unless it's to myself, but that is a top post sir.

13The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 12:39

wanderlust


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Like every challenge, a two-footed challenge can win the ball cleanly or not. To remain within the spirit of the game, a challenge should be judged entirely on the outcome i.e. what actually happens - rather than systematically wiping out part of the game.

If a two-footed challenge results in a foul i.e. there's contact with the player before the ball it should be given as a foul. If it is violent conduct i.e. the challenge gives the other player no chance of not getting hit then it should be treated as such. But if the ball is won cleanly it should be allowed. Is it too much to ask refs to take back responsibility for such decisions?

I think that a bigger problem is players looking for free kicks by trailing their legs to ensure they get caught - and everyone can see when that happens as the body movement is unnatural.

All in all, there are more "fouls", bookings and sending offs than ever which slows the game and places a greater emphasis on set pieces - a fact I find irritating as FIFA use the excuse of "slowing the game down" as a reason for not allowing video technology whilst at the same time endorsing the continuous stoppages described above.

I don't often say this unless it's to myself, but that is a top post sir.



I will redeem myself by chatting unsubstantiable opinionated bollocks for the rest of the week then.

14The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 13:09

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
As a defender many years ago I was taught to get a very early - and hard tackle in - the ref was unlikely to send you off a few minutes into a game.

The tackle had to take the ball and the man - you had to let the attacker know what the rest of the game could be like for him - many never came back for more.

Is that not just cheating / gamesmanship as well though? It's just how things were done back then. It was more of a hard man's game – but it was the players with skill who suffered the most.

I don't like the 'softy' football that they play now - but I am pleased to see 'skill' players flourish.

Somewhere in the middle of the two would be ideal football for me.

15The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 13:17

Reebok Trotter

Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
The likes of Tommy Smith, Norman Hunter, Billy Bremner would struggle in the modern game. They would be suspended more times than they played.

16The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Fri Jan 13 2012, 15:34

wanderlust


Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:As a defender many years ago I was taught to get a very early - and hard tackle in - the ref was unlikely to send you off a few minutes into a game.

The tackle had to take the ball and the man - you had to let the attacker know what the rest of the game could be like for him - many never came back for more.

Is that not just cheating / gamesmanship as well though? It's just how things were done back then. It was more of a hard man's game – but it was the players with skill who suffered the most.

I don't like the 'softy' football that they play now - but I am pleased to see 'skill' players flourish.

Somewhere in the middle of the two would be ideal football for me.



Everybody likes to see skill. Sadly, drawing fouls, diving and getting players booked are also considered skills these days.

17The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Tue Jan 17 2012, 17:46

Sluffy

Sluffy
Admin
Great article on tackling here if anyone is interested.

Good read imo.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

18The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Tue Jan 17 2012, 19:36

Keegan

Keegan
Moderator
Moderator
I've played as a full back at both sides of the pitch and I've tackled the paint off opposing players using one foot at a time. I've never had occasion to go in with both feet and I've tackled hard but with no intention to hurt anyone. I've certainly never done this![You must be registered and logged in to see this image.][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

https://forum.boltonnuts.co.uk

19The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Tue Jan 17 2012, 21:57

Biggie

Biggie
Admin
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Like every challenge, a two-footed challenge can win the ball cleanly or not. To remain within the spirit of the game, a challenge should be judged entirely on the outcome i.e. what actually happens - rather than systematically wiping out part of the game.

If a two-footed challenge results in a foul i.e. there's contact with the player before the ball it should be given as a foul. If it is violent conduct i.e. the challenge gives the other player no chance of not getting hit then it should be treated as such. But if the ball is won cleanly it should be allowed. Is it too much to ask refs to take back responsibility for such decisions?

I think that a bigger problem is players looking for free kicks by trailing their legs to ensure they get caught - and everyone can see when that happens as the body movement is unnatural.

All in all, there are more "fouls", bookings and sending offs than ever which slows the game and places a greater emphasis on set pieces - a fact I find irritating as FIFA use the excuse of "slowing the game down" as a reason for not allowing video technology whilst at the same time endorsing the continuous stoppages described above.

I don't often say this unless it's to myself, but that is a top post sir.



I will redeem myself by chatting unsubstantiable opinionated bollocks for the rest of the week then.

Let me bring you both back down to earth. You said...

" a two-footed challenge can win the ball cleanly or not. To remain within the spirit of the game, a challenge should be judged entirely on the outcome i.e. what actually happens"

so what about throwing an elbow or a punch. Let's judge that on what actually happens too? "Well he did try to break the defenders jaw but he missed because the defender fell over before the punch landed. Play on..." Really?

https://boltonnuts.forumotion.co.uk

20The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Tue Jan 17 2012, 22:04

jayjay23

jayjay23
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
Correct biggie. I know why don't I bum you while Natasha bums Wanderlust? Could be fun. Anyway back on topic.

The Kompany red card was harsh and I am not sure it was done with dangerous intent. I personally would have awarded a free kick and a yellow for being a little reckless. But I would have been close to giving nothing too.

But referring back (to Wanderlust's point and Biggie's reply) no you can't just judge on the out come of the tackle and not take into account the danger or intent. The law is not there though to get rid of tackling and it does not apply to cleanly won tackles in most cases. But you cant have an idiot deliberately jumping in studs showing, aiming to injure a player and then getting away with it just because he ends up getting the ball.

Football is worth a fortune at the moment and players are valuable to teams. Unnecessary injuries are the last thing any club wants. And any player too. If we want to have the biggest and best clubs and players then they also need a degree of sensible protection from mindlessness.

21The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Tue Jan 17 2012, 22:13

jayjay23

jayjay23
Tony Kelly
Tony Kelly
I played at a good amateur level from the mid 70´s to the late 90´s. I was regarded as the best tackler in the team as a midfield ball winner.
I usually block tackled and stayed on my feet , sliding in meant you took longer to recover to affect the flow of play.
In nearly 25 years I only made 2 tackles where I jumped in with both feet. I am embarrassed to say both those tackles were made by me in retribution from earlier incidents which resulted in my team mates being injured from other bad tackles.
I went in 2 footed with the intent of hurting the other player. I only got booked for both of them but i deserved a red card.
In my opinion 2 footed tackles are a red card offence ,and should be written in the rule books so everyone understands. - from a bbc reader.

22The Two Footed Challenge Empty Re: The Two Footed Challenge on Tue Jan 17 2012, 22:27

Natasha Whittam

Natasha Whittam
Nat Lofthouse
Nat Lofthouse
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] wrote:Correct biggie. I know why don't I bum you while Natasha bums Wanderlust?

I suspect I got the better end of that deal.

Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum