**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*


In one of the slow mode replays you could clearly see a stud slicing his head open, pretty grim stuff! Instantly pouring with blood.


Man started spurting like Ric Flair




He can’t help that he’s custom made.


im cringing with second hand pain. Poor guy


Head injuries tend to blood quite heavily usually, making them look worse than they are


Yep, it's why they do that so much in Wrestling, looks gnarly but more often than not it's totally harmless


Gotta love Rode's respect for the business.


Red equals green. The man knows how to work the marks.


One wrestler had tiny blades in his wrist sweat bands and would slice his own forehead to get the blood flowing


thats what they always do. although they mostly stopped doing in wwe


On the other hand.. injuries to the head have to be treated with immense care regardless of how bad they look..


I mean, no? A cut on your forehead isn't nearly as dangerous as a tackle to your knee.


No shit but a cut to the knee is not as bad as a cut to the head


It really depends on the cut. So there's really no point in saying one is worse than the other because it's dependant on the type of cut.


Of course, and we don't give red cards for tackles that cut a knee with grazing contact do we?


You replied to a comment saying that head injuries should be treated with immense care with “no” and then talked about tackles to the knee. So whats your point


Pretty sure you can get a red for that without a cut to the knee if you make it look dangerous enough


A tackle to your head is more dangerous than a tackle to your knee. A cut on your head is more dangerous than a cut on your knee.


Yes, except this wasn't a tackle to the head. It was graze of the forehead that left a painful cut. When people talk about "head injuries" and the importance of them, they're clearly talking about the brain, and not the sensitive bit of skin on your forehead.


yea let's just continue doing this until someone hits they sensitive parts that is the eyes


Just to be clear, if I jump for a header and my fingernail cuts your forehead, should I be sent off because I almost took your eye out? Vertonghen was knuckle deep in Firmino's eye and not a single person thought that was worth a sending off.


Having finger nails isn't an explicit dangerous play rule in the rulebook Going in studs first is and going in with a high boot is as well, both for good reasons


"Going in studs first" or "high boot" is not in the rulebook. If you'd read it you'd know that.


Luckily, he seems fine, just a cut, not getting hit head on. The visual can be scary.


Anyone got a replay of this?


Which replay do you mean?


I'm starting to understand some things. I'm travelling internationally at the moment, and when I do that I bring a really garbage phone with me for security reasons, its basically an old ass burner phone. On my busted ass screen it legit looks like a dive and there was no contact. Cant see any blood at all. Wondering if shit like this plays a big part in the disagreements I see on this sub about a lot of things.


Money well spent lol. (I know not really) but the ref is fucking atrocious so far


slow mo short for slow motion


shouldve been at least a yellow for sure


Very reckless, should have been a yellow.


That's a red. No 2nd opinion possible...


Weird how there totally is right? Yellow imo.


That’s not possible man how’d you do that ?


how was this not even a yellow lmao


its not been 20 minutes the cards are locked in a safe until then.


Players should just line up at the halfway line and charge the others at the whistle


Start with a 20 minute fight, then play footy once you got that initial adrenaline out of your system haha. Brings a whole new tactical element to the game too, do you put in some strong guys who can barely kick a ball at the start to rough the opposition up and sub them out? Or do you wait and sub out the most damaged players?


>Start with a 20 minute fight, then play footy once you got that initial adrenaline out of your system haha. Tony Pulis' Stoke would win against prime Barcelona in the CL final


Puyol would have dealt some damage though


Yeah but Pulis even used huge CDMs at wings, so while Puyol could stand his ground for a bit he would have no chance


Chess boxing vibes


How can the ref justify giving yellows anymore in this game after that


He isn't...Tavernier with the most blatant yellow I've seen around 35 minutes in was only a free kick.


It can... to Frankfurt. ಠ_ಠ


I felt like he pulled his foot back a bit when he realized rode was there ...and he got a little bit of the ball but again, I have seen refs give yellow for it and as such it should have been red would have been harsh


That's a red imo


Because it isn't a foul. He is playing the ball, his attempt isn't reckless, and he is clearly trying to avoid contact. Rode chose to go for a ball at chest level with his head and got nicked. It's just a coming together. Right decision, imo.


No yellow is a joke. Horrendous decision.


Wait no Card? What


... I thought for a second you argued against a red. But then I reread the title and realized 'potential red card', not a red card given. There was no card at all?!


Has to be a yellow for dangerous play


I think it's cause he ducked his head down into a dangerous position when he could have chest the ball. I don't think it's a red though, but I see the argument for a yellow.


I was always taught fouls are careless, yellows are reckless, and reds are excessive force. If definitely say this stops shy of excessive force as he does realize, try to pull away, and makes minimal contact. Putting your for that high on a challengable ball is pretty reckless to me though. Even if the head wasn't down and we're talking studs to upper chest/neck it's dangerous. For me, definitely yellow and not red. Dangerous play like this can go careless only when no contact is made. In that case I'd argue that there was just enough control to not be considered reckless even though I'm fully aware the difference is frequently luck!


WAIT, it wasn't even a YELLOW??????????


Apparently the rules of football don't apply early in the game


Uuuuuuuuh but we couldnt give a red this early in a final right you guys? Amirite???????


that's not a red but should have been yellow for high foot


He kicked a man in the face studs first. It's a stonewall red card.


That’s a gross over-simplification. He’s going for the ball in a 50/50 where the opposing player is moving his head down to ball and he ducks out of the challenge last second. It’s a clear yellow card for the high boot but a red would be harsh.


Kicking the player in the chest would also be a red.


He’s pulling his foot back, if Rode isn’t dipping his head there’s a very good chance there’s no contact with Lundstrams foot at all, it is definitely a yellow not a red imo


A studs up challenge at ankle height is red


It's a red all day, at least in Ligue 1 it would be


What’s a red to you? Murder?


We learnt that in the 2010 world Cup


how this is not at least a yellow is beyond me


Scottish footballs Casemiro


Even Casemiro would be getting a yellow for this. No amount of Brazilian baby face killer smile would cut it.


Yellow is an obligation here, don‘t think it‘s a red as he clearly tries to push his leg back again. Dangerous nonetheless.


This. It seems more like a glancing blow as he tries to pull out. Looks worse than it maybe is. Either way, still dangerous. A yellow feels like the minimum.


It doesn't matter for a red if he tries to pull back.... That is a [serious foul](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fouls_and_misconduct_(association_football)#Red_card_(dismissal)) endangering the life of the player even...


Endangering the life of the player? He has endangered his own life trying to head that was not even close to first to the ball.


Even if he pulls his leg back, it's serious foul play and should have resulted in a red. If there wasn't contact it could be a yellow, but with the obvious contact it has to be serious foul play. Thankfully Rode wasn't hurt any further than he was. IFAB rules are pretty clear about this.


What constitutes 'serious foul play' isnt clear at all. It's a matter of interpretation. The player ducked into the boot, nobody but you thinks it's a red.


You say that like he doesn't have the right to play the ball with his head.


If you duck your head into an area where it's reasonable for a boot to be is that really a red?


You also cannot kick a player in the upper chest with your boot.


Is it really a reasonable place for a boot?


He had his foot above his own sholder.


Rode hardly ducks and is well within his right to use his head for a ball at that height. Lundstram raises his boot to that level and slices his forehead - any lower and it would have resulted in a far worse injury potentially to his eye. Yes, 'serious foul play' is subjective, but Rode required significant treatment and is still currently bleeding from his head. More often than not, fouls/injuries to the head are judged to be a 'serious foul play'.


He kicks him in the head its obviously a red


Disagree. Red would have been harsh especially at this stage, but the argument is a clear one and I would have accepted it.


I'm not OP and I 100% think it's a red


Fair opinion as well. Definitely a joke that there wasn‘t even a yellow given here.


It's not though. As the referee explained to Frankfurt he has lowered his head. It's a yellow at most. Particularly as Lundstrom has also tried to pull out so there is no clear intent for it to be a red.


Intent doesn't factor into serious foul play. Using IFAB's wording for serious foul play - "A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play." - Lundstram's challenge sliced Rode's head resulting in the injury and serious treatment. Lundstram endangered Rode placing his boot that high off the ground and could have caused an even worse injury by inches. Rode barely ducks his head as well. Compare how low he puts his head compared to where Lundstram's boot is - https://imgur.com/a/94L9DlS. Rode is well within his right to use his head for the challenge, Lundstram shouldn't have his boot that high and endangered the player. By IFAB's wording this should have been a red.


You can't use a still as evidence he clearly ducks his head and the referee acknowledged that and that was his explanation to the Frankfurt player. And the tackle does not use excessive force. So that rules both out.


Here's the challenge clipped then to show how little he ducks his head - https://imgur.com/a/CQm69jn. Rode is well within his right to challenge with his head at that height, while Lundstram raises his boot high and endangers Rode and causes a serious injury. I'm not disagreeing with what the referee said/acknowledged - that doesn't mean it shouldn't have been a red still. It was a mistake to not review this as a red card offense under the rule of serious foul play.


He has a right to go for it but so does Lundstrum in the manner he did and he did not go in with any force so you can't rule it as serious foul play.


I didn't say force had anything to do with it - he seriously endangered Rode with the challenge and caused a serious injury, which is why by IFAB's wording it should be a red card.


By this logic any contact with any boot against any head is an immediate red card.


Can't believe not even a yellow


How can late studs to the foot be a red card but studs down the face isn't?


That has to be a yellow minimum, no excuse for lack of a card.


Rangers players have in contract that they have to kick someone to the head every single game or what


Is it a Rangers special? Not watching any of their games.


I remember that they kicked a golie to the head last year. The golie is not back in his form at all. He had skull fracture.


It'll be a reference to the Slavia game last season.


Right below 'Guaranteed penalty'


Understand being cautious for slapping out a red. Early in the game and clearly no malicious intent. But this has to be a yellow to set the tone for the game. Poor from the ref.


Refs keep bottling these calls. Like the city real madrid game. Vallejo gornkixked in the head. Nothing.


Never thought I knew Basque autocorrect


I say again... If that was Xhaka...


Imprisoned in Arkham Asylum in a second


If he's lucky.... Azkaban seems more likely for Xhaka


You know what the worst part would be? The Dementors


Police would have come on the pitch to arrest him


Firing squad in the center circle


Nah. Snipers already in place at the roof of the stadium, ready to go.


They'd have given him a blindfold and stood him against a wall.


Rob Holding now. Try to keep up.


Griezmann got a red for way less in CL


Nah but Griezmann went full Bundesliga logo! You never go full Bundesliga logo!


He didn’t connect tho.


What? Firminio was looking out his ear hole for a second fam!


Clearly John Lundstram is of Brazilian decent


That appears to be against the rules.


Not even a yellow is actually madness


Oh shit here we go again


Has to be a red. Studs showing directly on the player. He couldved got the guy on the shoulder, chest, leg from the angle he approached. He knows the opponent is there and still enters in like that, definition of wreckless


Nigel de Jong did something like this. It's clearly a red card and the game is fucking gone. Too bad the immensity of the game had distorted the refs perception.


Not sure how this wasn’t a yellow.


Referee was 1000% told to not book players this early as it can ruin the finals.


Clear yellow. Pathetic decision.


Still a red card in my opinion.


The fact that the defender ducks into the ball turns this from a “dangerous” challenge to a “reckless” challenge, thus a yellow


Lmao what The defender ducks to head the ball and a "dangerous" challenge is coming his way. The defender's actions here don't play any part in changing the adjective. Could be yellow or red but I think your argument is a bit off base


the defender ducks to try and header the ball - he moves towards the high foot which is a real shit way to try and avoid it regardless of whether you think its a red or a yellow, the defender ducking to avoid the challenge is clearly bollocks


Fair. Either way, why the defender ducks doesn't matter here. To head the ball or to avoid the challenge are both perfect reasons to have ducked. The point is, him ducking has no bearing on dictating yellow or red here, because he's well within his rights to slightly bend his neck - it's not like he's gone to his knees to bring his head into someone's boot.


Yes it does. The high boot only makes contact with the defenders head because their head moves downwards, this is why the foot is at a reckless height (where this collision can happen if they duck) and not a dangerous height where the collision would happen regardless. Reckless = yellow, dangerous = red


What lol. There are no defined heights for "dangerous" vs. "reckless." I mean a high boot could literally still be dangerous if you hit someone in the chest, abdomen, etc with your studs up. Doesn't really matter how high it is. This is inherently dangerous because he's putting his foot up to a level where he could hit someone in the head, and he's going at speed. It's not like the defender bends his body at the waist to bring his head down to 1 meter off the ground, you typically move your head when you challenge for a ball with your head. The defender slightly changing his head orientation does nothing to the fact that the boot is high enough to hit his face and doesn't change the nature of this tackle. Think you're a bit too focused on the whole "dangerous" vs "reckless" thing, as they're not mutually exclusive. Many reckless things in football are dangerous.


I am so angry


Missed it live but how the fuck is that not even a yellow


Nani got red for less (in a time without var)


Thats a red


nah it's close, the fact that Rode goes head down a little and it's just a scratch rather than full contact just about saves him should've 100% been a yellow mind you


Doesn't matter, his foot is way too high so it's a dangerous play and normally a red card


Dangerous play is yellow. It's different from serious foul play which takes into account the force of a foul.


Guess it's a matter or whether you think his head is "too far" down, but you're right, no card at all is wild


The ball is chest high when they both attempt to play it, it's insane to say his head is "too far down"


Reds are never given for this, if he leaves his foot in and connects flush then he gets a red


How is that at least not a yellow?! I hate refs that promote such brutal game and/or do not give cards because it is the beginning of the match


Red car


THAT WASNT RED???? THAT WASNT EVEN A YELLOW ???????????????????????????????????????????????


Wait, I've seen this one before.


Not surprised


He's about 1/8 of a inch from destroying his face.


Well, frankfurter player certainly didn't fake the hit...


Gives back the nightmare memories


Not sure how that's not a clear red card for serious foul play. Regardless of the minimal contact there still was, IFAB's wording has it as "A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play." Lundstram clearly went for the ball and I doubt he intended for that, but it seriously endangered Robe and could have caused a far serious injury.


It could and probably should have been a yellow, but Rode ducked down into Lundstram's boot a bit, and despite the blood it looked like just a glancing blow. It was accidental and I don't think it's reckless enough to merit a red card at all.


You say that like you're allowed have your boot that high in vicinity of someone anyway


A high boot is a yellow, as he says.


not one that cuts an opponent face open with the studs


head still very high in a very normal place to challenge the ball though ​ it's like blaming an attacker for breaking his leg because he accelerated into a slide tackle


Clearly just a yellow, but a testament to the fact that VAR should be able to give yellows


Nani was sent off for less.


Nani was literally flying through the air.


Nani hit someone's chest that he couldn't have even known was there, this was a boot to the head while seeing the person the whole time


Nani was MUCH worse than this


it definitely wasn't ​ De Jong was much worse than this ​ Nani simply didn't get away with it because it wasn't early in a final


Never forget


... was no card at all I expecded at least yellow


It was definitely a booking, but the ref didn't award anything.


Lundstram goes in studs first at shoulder height. Red as the blood coming from Rode's skull.


EPL VAR: I’ll allow it.


Griezmann got a red vs Liverpool with a softer outcome.


Lmao should probably watch it again...Firmino definitely got hit harder than Rode did...just because Bobby didn't get cut


still both red cards though


At least a yellow


not a red. wouldnt even call it a yellow. Straight to prison.


That ref is so pro r*ngers its disgusting


Very dangerous but not a red for me. Yellow card for sure.


But the guidelines in the rules say Red if it’s as dangerous as that: Careless = Foul Reckless = Yellow Dangerous = Red


Now imagine decisions like this in their favor every match, thats what we're up against.


That’s not a red That’s jail time for attempted murder


Never a red


Rode looking like Ljungberg after that one




That's a potential red, mate. Minimum yellow. Can't fling a high boot at someones head because you've misjudged a touch.


are you crazy? his studs are shoulder-height, it's clearly dangerous play


Yeah it's a yellow, that's about it.


Why? VAR did check for a potential red card and decided it isn't one


And we all know VAR never makes mistakes!


It's not a coincidence that this horrible shit team keeps injuring opposing players. They need to start receiving long time bans.


Both guys were going for the ball and accidentally happened to connect. No yellow. Nothing wrong with that




> It's either a red or it isn't Cards are quite subjective a lot of the time. A ref could convincingly justify either a yellow or a red here depending on their interpretation of the incident.


Peter Walton, what's your view on this? *oh why do I even bother*


Red card or not, was this guy alright?


Unless some player's head rips open the ref won't issue a card. Same was the case with Felipe's challenge on Phil Foden.


Yellow if u ask me. Rode was low with his head and Lundstram tries to pull back it seems like. No card is a joke tho.