|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 17, 2024 17:00:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by perryjames87 on Aug 17, 2024 17:43:06 GMT
Looks a possible Metartasle fracture and or ankle ligaments
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 17, 2024 17:54:42 GMT
Looks a possible Metartasle fracture and or ankle ligaments That's three months at least if true. |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 17, 2024 18:19:53 GMT
Dirty tackle from Clare from the replay I saw. Hope it’s more of an impact injury than ligaments! We need Edwards, he’s looked very good so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by garrynelson on Aug 17, 2024 18:49:50 GMT
I’d be surprised if it wasn’t ligament damage at the very least. He’s rolled his ankle at full speed - they hurt a lot
Hope it’s weeks rather than months as I really rate him and what he bring to the team
|
|
|
|
Post by steve2707 on Aug 17, 2024 19:43:56 GMT
Doesn't have the pace of Small, but much more solid defensively.
Better in the air, too.
|
|
|
|
Post by grapevine49 on Aug 17, 2024 20:23:00 GMT
I really hate people rushing to judgement on anybody’s injury. The scan for Monday is to the let most of the swelling recede. Then it is in the lap of the gods and Edward’s power of recovery. No two players power of recovery is the same. Injuries are part and parcel of the industry. Clare’s tackle most certainly was not. It was not only late it was dangerously and recklessly late. I would expect the clubs report on the referee to reflect his failure to exert a basic duty of care.
|
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Aug 17, 2024 20:44:53 GMT
I really hate people rushing to judgement on anybody’s injury. The scan for Monday is to the let most of the swelling recede. Then it is in the lap of the gods and Edward’s power of recovery. No two players power of recovery is the same. Injuries are part and parcel of the industry. Clare’s tackle most certainly was not. It was not only late it was dangerously and recklessly late. I would expect the clubs report on the referee to reflect his failure to exert a basic duty of care. Do the EFL still hand out bans after the game or does the Referee’s decision stand? |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 17, 2024 22:23:01 GMT
Not sure mate but I don't think anything is going to happen retrospectively. Should have been a straight red at the time. I think because he booked him it can't now be increased to a red.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1978sussex on Aug 20, 2024 11:25:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 20, 2024 12:18:30 GMT
Not great news but could have been much worse.
It was an impact injury that has left him with swelling and severe bruising. Tweaked his ankle too.
|
|
|
|
Post by addicksi on Aug 20, 2024 12:20:47 GMT
Best news of the day if accurate. Really happy for the lad. Showed real courage in that tackle unlike the coward that tried to do him. Got a suggestion of the Stuart Pearces about him and I think will be a crowd favourite.
|
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 20, 2024 12:34:02 GMT
Best we could've hope for I reckon!
|
|
|
|
Post by davelowerwest on Aug 20, 2024 13:41:57 GMT
Not sure mate but I don't think anything is going to happen retrospectively. Should have been a straight red at the time. I think because he booked him it can't now be increased to a red. The fact that Josh Edwards is going to miss several matches due to a vicious tackle surely should mean Clare should be suspended for at least 3 games. The Officials obviously missed how violent that tackle was and should be repremanded for such a poor decision? This yellow card ruling seems ridiculous to me! |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 20, 2024 13:55:24 GMT
Not sure mate but I don't think anything is going to happen retrospectively. Should have been a straight red at the time. I think because he booked him it can't now be increased to a red. The fact that Josh Edwards is going to miss several matches due to a vicious tackle surely should mean Clare should be suspended for at least 3 games. The Officials obviously missed how violent that tackle was and should be repremanded for such a poor decision? This yellow card ruling seems ridiculous to me! It's that stupid rule where refs can't be wrong (my interpretation). Ref booked him for a yellow and therefore that's all it was and it can't be changed as the red saw the incident (but got to decision wrong!). If he didn't book him then Sean could've retrospectively got a red and the associated ban. I've never seen a strong argument for why this rule exists. Other than the fact they would be reviewing more incidents. Which is kind of the point. Improvements need to be made. If a ref gets a decision like this wrong, there's really no concequences to the ref and therefore I don't see how it changes in the future. |
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Aug 20, 2024 14:05:55 GMT
The fact that Josh Edwards is going to miss several matches due to a vicious tackle surely should mean Clare should be suspended for at least 3 games. The Officials obviously missed how violent that tackle was and should be repremanded for such a poor decision? This yellow card ruling seems ridiculous to me! It's that stupid rule where refs can't be wrong (my interpretation). Ref booked him for a yellow and therefore that's all it was and it can't be changed as the red saw the incident (but got to decision wrong!). If he didn't book him then Sean could've retrospectively got a red and the associated ban. I've never seen a strong argument for why this rule exists. Other than the fact they would be reviewing more incidents. Which is kind of the point. Improvements need to be made. If a ref gets a decision like this wrong, there's really no concequences to the ref and therefore I don't see how it changes in the future. I kind of understand it. It's sport and people make mistakes. If we are going to question a yellow card can we add a goal if the TV evidence shows that the ball crosses the line? I don't like VAR, I like the idea that everything can be affected by human error. That applies to players missing sitters and ref's making mistakes. Once we allow certain things to be reviewed, everything would have to be reviewed. I, certainly, understand that dangerous tackles could demand an exception, but that can lead to the same issue that Liverpool had at Spurs last season. Had we lost with a Clare goal, late on, then if his tackle needs to be upgraded to a red there could be calls for the game to be replayed. I suspect that the current approach saves any of those discussions taking place. That said, I do want Clare punished for the tackle. |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 20, 2024 14:19:57 GMT
It's that stupid rule where refs can't be wrong (my interpretation). Ref booked him for a yellow and therefore that's all it was and it can't be changed as the red saw the incident (but got to decision wrong!). If he didn't book him then Sean could've retrospectively got a red and the associated ban. I've never seen a strong argument for why this rule exists. Other than the fact they would be reviewing more incidents. Which is kind of the point. Improvements need to be made. If a ref gets a decision like this wrong, there's really no concequences to the ref and therefore I don't see how it changes in the future. I kind of understand it. It's sport and people make mistakes. If we are going to question a yellow card can we add a goal if the TV evidence shows that the ball crosses the line? I don't like VAR, I like the idea that everything can be affected by human error. That applies to players missing sitters and ref's making mistakes. Once we allow certain things to be reviewed, everything would have to be reviewed. I, certainly, understand that dangerous tackles could demand an exception, but that can lead to the same issue that Liverpool had at Spurs last season. Had we lost with a Clare goal, late on, then if his tackle needs to be upgraded to a red there could be calls for the game to be replayed. I suspect that the current approach saves any of those discussions taking place. That said, I do want Clare punished for the tackle. Yeah that's fair enough. From the outside it just feels like it gets ignored/accepted too easily. |
|
|
|
Post by manikin on Aug 20, 2024 14:29:04 GMT
It's that stupid rule where refs can't be wrong (my interpretation). Ref booked him for a yellow and therefore that's all it was and it can't be changed as the red saw the incident (but got to decision wrong!). If he didn't book him then Sean could've retrospectively got a red and the associated ban. I've never seen a strong argument for why this rule exists. Other than the fact they would be reviewing more incidents. Which is kind of the point. Improvements need to be made. If a ref gets a decision like this wrong, there's really no concequences to the ref and therefore I don't see how it changes in the future. I kind of understand it. It's sport and people make mistakes. If we are going to question a yellow card can we add a goal if the TV evidence shows that the ball crosses the line? I don't like VAR, I like the idea that everything can be affected by human error. That applies to players missing sitters and ref's making mistakes. Once we allow certain things to be reviewed, everything would have to be reviewed. I, certainly, understand that dangerous tackles could demand an exception, but that can lead to the same issue that Liverpool had at Spurs last season. Had we lost with a Clare goal, late on, then if his tackle needs to be upgraded to a red there could be calls for the game to be replayed. I suspect that the current approach saves any of those discussions taking place. That said, I do want Clare punished for the tackle. Wait till he comes back to the Valley, he'll get some stick. |
|
|
|
Post by manikin on Aug 20, 2024 14:30:52 GMT
What's the rough outcome, at least four to five weeks?
|
|
