If Elliott’s going to say anything at all he can’t really say anything else, can he? He’s certainly not going to claim that it was worthy of a red card because then he comes across as a fragile cry-baby (even if he’s right). He’s taken the approach of the black knight and that’s admirable.
I think more importantly, he’s probably trying to help defuse some of the inevitable backlash on social media against Struijk. No way he went in with the deliberate intention to injure Elliott, but no doubt we will see the usual bunch of people abusing him. In a way this helps to remove some of the emotion driving the abuse, but then again, dicks will be dicks.
I saw that, which was why I was curious about the break position. He seemed to say it was even worse if it was in a particular place.
I find it difficult to believe that Elliott actually watched a video of himself getting injured, and 99% sure if he did, it wouldn’t have been before his first social media post. I assuming he is recalling from reliving the tackle, which didn’t look bad when watching the game, but did look bad when reviewing it.
to the ref’s defence, he wouldn’t have had a clear view of the trailing leg from his positioning on the pitch. from his angle, all he would see if Struijk go down for a tackle and come up with the ball cleanly. the contact was behind his body and impossible for him to see, hence the assist from either VAR or the linesman for the foul/card.
The answer to these questions on why the ref, at first didn’t think it was a foul, would be resolved through one simple change.
Mic the fucking refs up already.
I like how it works in Rugby. You get the views of all the officials and the decision made clear for all to see - you can argue the facts and opinions after the game, as we do already, but at least we know how the decision was reached in the first place.
100% and it would also soon improve the general behaviour of the players too. It’s really long overdue.
I thought it looked fucking awful and as soon as it happened was screaming for a red. It was horrendous and I was preparing myself for the replays and banding my eyes so I didn’t have to watch that again. Thankfully there were’n’t any replays.
At 1st I thought it was his knee that had gone but seeing him lying there caused me to realise it was his ankle.
Yes I know I’m a big wimp, it’s interesting how different people see completely different things.
Yeah but it introduces accountability, who wants that?
This, Letting the game flow was an off the cuff description from Mike Riley in his description of the directive, not the directive itself. That was focused on not calling soft fouls for minimal contact, and that caused by the attacker, and was focused more on penalties than general play.
Apart from the one on Mane literally 5 minutes later.
Mike Riley is the single reason the referees in this country are appalling.
The standard of referees in this country is generally appalling.
Was it Graham Poll who showed someone 3 yellow cards before he sent him off?
Muppets.
Yeah, Poll showed 3 yellow cards to Josip Simunic.
The story a few players give, is Simunic was an Aussie playing for Croatia and called him a pomy bastard just before his first yellow, so Poll assumed that it was an Aussie player that called him a pom and wrote it down as No.3 for Australia who was Craig Moore. I have heard this directly from both Viduka and Cahill, and a few mates have also heard the same story from other Australian players
I love Elliott’s post. Warrior to warrior stuff.
If he thought he was called a pomy bastard by one of those shackle draggers it should have been an immediate red, surely? 
Lol, never heard that one before.
Courtesy of Brian Moore, the former England Rugby Union player 
I read that as draggers, my oops or typo?
My typo! Should be draggers 
Think my phone wrongly autocorrected it and I didn’t notice. Bastard.