Eduardo's injury

[anitabuchan]

I haven't posted about this before because I'm emotional and angry over it. I thought those feelings would have calmed down, but they haven't. And I need to say this.

First, the facts: Taylor's challenge broke Eduardo's leg. It pretty much snapped it in half. The foot dislocated and the skin was broken. Because of that tackle - because of Taylor - Eduardo could have lost not only his career, but his foot.

That's not going to happen. We have a good medical team who acted quickly. He's not going to have an amputation. But he's going to be missing the rest of the season, the Euros, and most of next season, assuming he comes back at all. His career could still be over. When he was a teenager, he left his home in Brazil and travelled to Croatia where he slept in a stadium because he wanted to be a footballer so badly. His dream, his job, all he's ever wanted - he could just have lost.

But what have people/the media focused on?

Wenger's comments. The reaction of the Arsenal team. And when not criticising those, they've made excuses for Taylor.

He didn't mean to do it. He's not a bad person. It was an accident. It shouldn't even have been a yellow card. He didn't make that much contact. Alex McLeish - a man I used to respect hugely - suggested it was actually caused by Eduardo's studs being caught in the turf. Stephen Kelly said he thought the red card was harsh. Presumably only mowing down the opposing team with machine gun fire should be worthy of a red.

Well, sorry. If you drove carelessly and accidently ran someone over and left then with an injury as severe as this, you would end up in prison. Yes, Taylor should be harshly punished. He could have just ended Eduardo's career. I don't care if he now 'feels bad'. How does he think Eduardo feels? And maybe it would help to avoid these types of injuries in future: it was only two seasons ago Diaby was out for a year after a 'careless' tackle broke and dislocated his ankle. His career could have ended then. Last season had its share as well, worst being Cech's head injury. Are we going to have to wait for a player to be killed before people start to realise that 'careless' tackles, intended or not, are unacceptable? When carelessness can result in injuries as serious as this - in injuries that are life-threatening, in the case of Petr Cech - it needs to carry serious consequences.

And now Sebastian Larsson has come out and claimed that the reason Wenger was upset is because he's a bad loser and called his comments 'idiotic and childish'. Apparently Arsenal were in a bad mood all game, which shows bad sportsmanship.

What is wrong with this game and its followers, that these comments seem to be common opinion? That its okay that a man's career could have been ended, that the problem is in fact the way his manager and teammates were emotional afterwards, something Wenger later apologised for. Wenger was wrong to say that Taylor should be banned for life, as he later acknowledged. But he was speaking in the heat of the moment. The backlash that followed made him out to be the bad guy here - not Taylor, who could just have ended Eduardo's career. But Wenger, who was emotional after seeing one of his players recieve an injury that could have ended in amputation.

It makes me sick.

Comments

[booksbagsshoes.livejournal.com]

I have to say that I disagree rather strongly with you on much of this but I respect your right to your opinion. I admire Wenger a lot for having the balls to stand up and say publicly that he made his initial remarks in the heat of the moment and now he admits he went too far. I can think of so many football managers who wouldn't be man enough to do that.

[anitabuchan.livejournal.com]

Disagree on what? I just really don't understand how injuries like this are seen as acceptable - and speaking out against them is comdemned. But yeah, I'm glad Wenger did retract his comments, because they were too much.

[booksbagsshoes.livejournal.com]

I agree with you that the focus of the media is on the wrong place. I do not think that people should be focusing on who said and bitched about what - it should be on Eduardo and his recovery and making sure he gets the best possible care.

He didn't mean to do it. He's not a bad person. It was an accident. It shouldn't even have been a yellow card. He didn't make that much contact. Alex McLeish - a man I used to respect hugely - suggested it was actually caused by Eduardo's studs being caught in the turf. Stephen Kelly said he thought the red card was harsh. Presumably only mowing down the opposing team with machine gun fire should be worthy of a red.

Well, sorry. If you drove carelessly and accidently ran someone over and left then with an injury as severe as this, you would end up in prison. Yes, Taylor should be harshly punished. He could have just ended Eduardo's career. I don't care if he now 'feels bad'. How does he think Eduardo feels? And maybe it would help to avoid these types of injuries in future: it was only two seasons ago Diaby was out for a year after a 'careless' tackle broke and dislocated his ankle. His career could have ended then. Last season had its share as well, worst being Cech's head injury. Are we going to have to wait for a player to be killed before people start to realise that 'careless' tackles, intended or not, are unacceptable? When carelessness can result in injuries as serious as this - in injuries that are life-threatening, in the case of Petr Cech - it needs to carry serious consequences.

These paragraphs are hugely emotive and this is where we disagree to an extent. Again it is entirely your right to post these views in your own journal and please don't think I am in any way attempting to say you shouldn't feel like this - it's just that your views differ somewhat from my own. I will try to explain exactly where but I'm conscious of not wanting to turn this into an essay.

Personally I don't think that anyone is saying injuries like this are acceptable as such. They are most certainly horrible, totally regrettable and everyone would be happy if they never happened at all. But I also think that injuries are part of football, indeed all sports, and that if you choose to participate then you are accepting that there is a risk, however small, that you may be the unlucky one. It's unfortunately not a new thing - look at Ian Durrant, who basically had his career curtailed by a bad tackle and Theo Snelders getting his cheekbone totally smashed by Ally McCoist's knee - but thankfully it doesn't happen very often. I don't know how you could prevent it other than by banning tackling completely, because where there is a human element involved there is always going to be the chance of error. And even then it wouldn't necessarily stop injuries - it's not unknown for players to do themselves serious harm simply when their studs have stuck as they turned, with no one else anywhere near them.

I think there is also a huge difference between someone deliberately and recklessly setting out to cause harm and an accidental action which has disastrous consequences and I think that punishments need to reflect this. To me, there should be a difference between how the authorities punish a mistimed tackle compared to how they treat someone stamping/blatantly fouling someone as revenge (I'm thinking of the Roy Keane/Alf-Inge Håland incident here). I believe intent has to play a definite part in deciding someone's punishment. This isn't out of line what happens outside of football - it's simply not true that an accident with the same consequences in the real world would necessarily result in imprisonment, even running over someone and killing them doesn't guarantee a custodial sentence - and has even happened in football before, when Duncan Ferguson was jailed as a result of assaulting a fellow player on the field.

[booksbagsshoes.livejournal.com]

(It was so long I had to post as two comments)

The commentators at the time of the match and during the half time made remarks about whether or not it was a booking/red card, David Platt was suggesting it wasn't either of those things. I personally think the red card was the correct decision given the consequences and I assume it will (and should) carry some kind of suspension, but I am uncomfortable with the idea that there should be further punishment when in my opinion there was no intent behind the act.

In respect of Alex McLeish's comments, I thought he had made those without the benefit of video replays (even with those, it was difficult to tell what had happened from certain angles) and if so am not inclined to count them against him. Larsson's comments, however, are just mince and he needs to STFU. It would be far more concerning to me if the Arsenal players hadn't been distressed by what happened - not only has a teammate been injured but 'there but for the grace of God go I' and all that. They're human, FFS. You could see how upset they were on their faces, it's entirely understandable that they wouldn't be in the mood for football after that.

And this has turned into a bit of an essay. Sorry about that.

[anitabuchan.livejournal.com]

No, I'm glad you wrote a lot, because it does help me see where you're coming from. And I suppose helps me look at this a little more clearly, because I am a bit emotional when just thinking about Eduardo.

Quick point first - I was disappointed in Alex McLeish because, as far as I know, he made no comments sympathising with Eduardo, only comments excusing Taylor. Whether he had seen video replays or not, I wish he'd come across as a little more concerned about the injury. I still respect him as a football manager, just a little less as a person.

As for the rest...I suppose I feel that even if accidents will always happen, everything possible should be done to try and avoid them. I don't mean banning all tackles, but dangerous tackles of the type Taylor made. It was high, late, straight-legged, studs-up (the first photo here shows it, but the rest are of the injury so be careful (http://thegoonerforum.wordpress.com/2008/02/23/eduardo-da-silva-injury-pictures-two-footed-tackles/)) - the type of tackle that, as a professional player, he should have known not to make. I in no way believe he intended to break Eduardo's leg, but three minutes into the game, I do wonder if he might have been trying to scare him. Injury or not, tackles like that are punishable because the danger is always there.

But I think that too often they are ignored, or only given a yellow card which isn't much of a punishment. The offending player might never intend to hurt their opponent - but whenever a tackle like that is made, the danger is there. And by harshening the punishment whenever a player is injured - because trying to do so after every such tackle would just be impractical - would perhaps act as a bit more of a deterrant. I'm not saying a ban for life, but a ban of more than three matches.

And I suppose it is partly emotional, because it does make me angry to think that in three games Taylor could be playing again, while Eduardo is lucky to only be facing a wait of at least nine months - if he ever returns. And even if he does, he might never be the same player again. I think when there is an injury involved punishment should be harsher, simply because there is still this attitude that it's acceptable for players to 'get stuck in' and kick their opponents. One of the most recent examples being Arsenal during our 4-0 loss to Man U - I know we can be as guilty as any. I suppose I hope that if players faced harsher punishments after injuring opponents, they'd be less eager to take that approach.

Now I've written more than I meant :). Though this is something we're probably just going to have to agree to disagree on!

[booksbagsshoes.livejournal.com]

As for the rest...I suppose I feel that even if accidents will always happen, everything possible should be done to try and avoid them. I don't mean banning all tackles, but dangerous tackles of the type Taylor made. It was high, late, straight-legged, studs-up (the first photo here shows it, but the rest are of the injury so be careful) - the type of tackle that, as a professional player, he should have known not to make. I in no way believe he intended to break Eduardo's leg, but three minutes into the game, I do wonder if he might have been trying to scare him. Injury or not, tackles like that are punishable because the danger is always there.

But I think that too often they are ignored, or only given a yellow card which isn't much of a punishment. The offending player might never intend to hurt their opponent - but whenever a tackle like that is made, the danger is there. And by harshening the punishment whenever a player is injured - because trying to do so after every such tackle would just be impractical - would perhaps act as a bit more of a deterrant. I'm not saying a ban for life, but a ban of more than three matches.

I think where I see the difficulty arising is when you get down to the practicalities of deciding what is considered punishable and how you actually go about providing additional protection. I wonder where you (in a general sense, not you specifically) draw the line on something like this. I think generally football is already a lot less physical than it ever used to be - if you watch footage of old games people seem to be forever hacking lumps out of each other. Rules have been introduced to try and cut down on bad tackles and people sticking the boot in - goalkeepers get a lot more protection now when you consider that bundling into them when they were going up for the ball was once positively encouraged and they've already introduced stricter rules around two-footed tackles and tackles from behind. If you bring in more rules, is there a danger that you stifle the game due to continually stopping for fouls of any kind, erring on the side of caution? Would that also introduce further subjectivity in terms of how different referees interpret the rules and put undue pressure on their instant decision making abilities? What about a case where there was an innocent but mistimed tackle which has severe consequences during the match and a horrendous, deliberate tackle which didn't cause any harm? Would you deal with the latter on video evidence? And how do you determine whether there was in fact real intent?

I don't think there are any easy answers to this from either side, but it's certainly interesting to think about. While I don't think further punishment for someone who made an innocent but costly mistake is necessarily the way to solve the issue - as you say, we agree to disagree!

[burn-so-pretty.livejournal.com]

It's a truly horrendous injury for Eduardo and watching it makes me feel a little sick. In fact I've only been able to watch it once it's that bad. The guy is an amazing talent and I hope against hope he is able to retrn at some point. I also think the media focus is in entirely the wrong place, it should be on Eduardo himself and not all of this other nonsense.

That said I honestly do not believe that Taylor set out to cause deliberate harm. I don't believe any player delibarately sets out to seriously injure a fellow professional, no matter how bad the tackle seems. I think Taylor was simply caught out by Eduardo's fast turn of pace, and by the time he realised this it was too late to stop his momentum. If Eduardo's career is over (which I pray it is not) then Taylor will probably never be able to recover from the guilt that will bring, and I do feel he also deserves some sympathy in all of this.

[anitabuchan.livejournal.com]

Thankfully they say that if everything goes well, he could be back training in around nine months. Although of course there's no guarantee, and he might not be the same player. I just really hope he makes a full recovery :).

I have about zero sympathy for Taylor, as you might guess! He made a foolish, dangerous challenge - high, studs-up, straight-legged tackles like that are banned for a reason. As a professional footballer he would have - or should have - known that. Even if he didn't intend to break Eduardo's leg, it was a possibility the moment he tackled so carelessly. I just hope this teaches him something.

[sky-77.livejournal.com]

personally, i agree with you. I think its disgusting that the media focussed on who said what and the reactions of the team instead of the fact that eduardo got horrificly injured by a careless tackle.

"Apparently Arsenal were in a bad mood all game, which shows bad sportsmanship."
Obviously they had a right to react the way they did, its completely understandable! I'm so sick of the press right now

For the moment, im just hoping that Eduardo recovers quickly!

[anitabuchan.livejournal.com]

I'm sick of the press most of the time, though they've outdone themselves on this. I'm just trying to stay away from newspapers at the minute! And yeah, I'm just praying he manages to make a full recovery.

participation in questionnaire

[alfituri.livejournal.com]

Dear Ms anitabuchan

My name is Abdel Alfituri, and I am a Masters student at Napier University in Edinburgh, Scotland, writing a dissertation on blogging.
The study aims to identify the motivations that lead bloggers to create and maintain their blogs, and to assess how these differ in different parts of the world.
The success of the project is completely dependent on sufficient numbers of active bloggers agreeing to take a few minutes to complete a short questionnaire. This has been designed to have as few questions as possible, while also collecting useful data on which I can base my analysis.
You can be reassured that the data is collected and held completely anonymously – I only require some very basic information about yourself (e.g. age, gender).
If you could spare me a little time to complete the questionnaire I would be very grateful. If you would like to find out more information about the project then please contact me on 05014886@napier.ac.uk, or else my supervisor, Dr Colin Smith, at cf.smith@napier.ac.uk


http://www.polldaddy.com/s/169B8746B3D8DFFD


With many thanks
Abdel Alfituri