Ben Thatcher Should Have Been Off

Good points there mate.

No remorse shown at all. It was obviously intentional.</p>

 

How does showing remorse on the pitch show sorrow.

How often when a player has been completely cleaned up does the guy doing the foul get up to try and shake hands in order to avoid getting either booked or sent off.</p>

 

RE: Has anyone said he wasnt looking to take Mendes out?

You said he couldn't pull out of the tackle because of momentum. That surely suggests that you believe that there is some mitigation for this idiot?

The fact is that it wasn't a tackle. It was never intended to be a tackle and when Thatcher started building his momentum (for which he is soley reponsible - he wasn't thrown out of a passing car) he knew he wasn't going to get the ball.

As a result it is highly irrelevant that he couldn't pull out of the assault (what you call a 'tackle'), because he never intended to.

The fact is, that it is quite obvious to anyone watching the highlight in real time or slow motion, that Thatcher intended to harm his opponent. Well beyond the boundaries of a competitive game and a terrible example to young aspiring footballer, and in all reality, quite the criminal act.

 

RE: How does showing remorse on the pitch show sorrow.

The first reaction of the player - the first immediate reaction - is something which speaks volumes. Not the five minutes afterwards when the offending player decides to cover his tracks by either playing injured or giving his opponent a hand up - but the split seconds afterwards, maybe the next 30 seconds to a minute, where you either see utter remorse or an expression of the satisfaction of 'job done' and a short jog away. Now which did we see from Thatcher in this case?

In Thatcher's case, he didn't even pretend to be sorry.

 

Well its obvious he couldnt pull out , hence he cleaned Mendes up.

He had committed himself to the challenge, so what could he have done once he had put the wheels in motion.</p>

This is not a condoning of the tackle just telling it how it is.</p>

Sorry if you dont like it.</p>

 

RE: Harry Redknap ............YAWN!

I find it difficult to believe that you can find anything to support Ben Thatcher for in all this. You say that there will be countless more fouls like this in the coming season. Surely this can't be acceptable?

 

RE: Well its obvious he couldnt pull out , hence he cleaned Mendes up.

Well let me see? What could he have done?

How about, not crack the guy across the jaw with his elbow/forearm?

And you're wrong - committed to the challenge? It wasn't a challenge - it was a premeditated assault. The timing was so late he couldn't possibly have expected or intended to play the ball. Thatcher is a premier league footballer, any Sunday league player could tell that you couldn't cover that much ground and expect to take the ball. He went after the man 100% from the moment he ran towards him.

If the incident was an aborted tackle, why raise the elbow and take the man? Why not raise the palms - genuine human nature when confronted by an imminent collision is to try and bring the palms up cushion the impact - NOT to lunge with the elbow towards a directed point.

You're just wrong. There's no place for this in football. It sound like your saying 'Well, having realised that he couldn't win the ball, he did the second best thing, and took the man.' I hope I'm wrong about this - if that's your attitude, it's pretty damn poor.

 

I am confused as I dont think I have said it wasn't a foul or a sending off offence

 

I am guessing that he wasn't sorry , but the fact it was a very poor tackle

if he drew attention to the low quality of his challenge then he probably figured he would be going for an early bath.</p>

 

Exactly what BRF said

His instant reaction was &quot;job done&quot; and was disgusted when the ref waved a yellow card at him. If it had been purely accidental 99% of other players would have gone to the player instantly to check on them.</p>

 

It isnt acceptable , I just dont understand what benefit there is in getting the Police involved.

 

RE: Exactly what BRF said

If I had done what he did, and had seen that the guy was clearly out cold I would have gone over to the player. He looked shocked at the yellow card, and didn't make any attempt to see how the player was.

 

That sums the player up then!

He was looking to clatter him and I am guessing he decided it was job done.

 

It was the worst challenge I've seen in a long time.

As soon as he set off running, his eyes were on Mendes, and not once did they look at the ball.

Thatcher has history, as they've just shown on Sky Sports News. Mendes was unconscious before he hit the ground, had a seizure.

In a pre-season game, he punctured an opponent's lung with a horror challenge.

He needs to be stopped - and I think the police do need to be involved, in this instance. It was horrific.

 

RE: Just received a text from Ben Thatcher

how do u no him?

 

Bang on the nail!

 

There must be something evil associated with the name "Thatcher"

 

RE: It would have been a sending off in Rugby League...

let alone football. Presume that, as the ref saw it and penalised it, the yellow can't be upgraded. The ref ought to come out and say he got it wrong in that case, having seen the incident from other angles. It was only from the video that you could see Thatcher leading with his arm. I am pleased the police are involved. Had he done that in Manchester city centre of an evening, he would have been locked up for the night and been on GBH. Never mind the three-match ban - should think 2/3 months in prison would be more appropriate.

 

RE: I am confused as I dont think I have said it wasn't a foul or a sending off offence

In your original reply, you stated that Thatcher 'Couldn't pull out of the tackle due to momentum'. Which suggests that you think that if he could have pulled out, he would have, and further to that, he possibly didn't intend to injure that opponent. I think I find that infuriating because when I see the incident on television I see one person cynically and maliciously assaulting another person - with full intent to cause the other person harm - and it has little to do with football.

Yes, we agree that it was a foul (I don't think anyone can dispute that).
Yes, we agree that such a foul as that deserved a red card (again, I think anyone would struggle to argue with that either).

Where we disagree with is what you have been posting on this forum i.e. that such a foul as that happened as part and parcel of the game, that it's a regular thing in professional sports, and that the behaviour of the player responsible is understandable when you look at it from a certain perspective (i.e. cynical gamesmanship).

My opinion is that Thatcher committed the kind of 'foul' that is boarderline to a criminal offence. It was nothing to do with the game, it's not a regular part of the sport, and there is nothing understandable or reconcilable about Ben Thatcher's actions or his mentality. Nothing justifiable at all. I think that Thatcher got a rush of blood and he went after his man - the game, the ball, was an irrelevance. Put it this way, he never had any intention of playing the ball, he covered the ground to assault the opponent.

The incident was totally unacceptable - it's that black and white. Nobody should be explaining it away. Ben Thatcher should face a very lengthy ban, he should be forced to apologise to the players, the clubs involved, and the fans who were subjected to watching it in the ground and on TV. I have heard that police in Manchester are investigating what happened - I hope they do. The thugs in the game who get away with deliberately breaking other players legs (Roy Keane), breaking jaws, and puncturing lungs - should not be protected by the game. Ben Thatcher has done this kind of thing before - more than once - he's not safe on a football pitch. The F.A. shouldn't allow such an idiot to run out.

 

RE: I am confused as I dont think I have said it wasn't a foul or a sending off offence

Well said that man!