Blog: Marseille join legal action against de Jong as violence increases in football

By James McLean on 14 October 2010 at 22:58

Bob: The speed of the game does indeed affect players' accuracy in going in for challenges - though I would dispute your claim that rash tackles are less prevalent in the modern day. As I said, I feel the rules have changed more than the mindset, though footballers as a breed have changed drastically, most notably in the respect that speed is now more commonplace than physical build. The point of my mentioning David Busst was both the fact that it was accidental AND that it was 14 years ago. Perhaps I didn't make it as clear as I'd have liked in the article, for which I apologise, but my aim was to prove that these things have always happened - hence this is not a new occurrence, which is something you seem to be hinting that I'm aiming at, which I'm not at all. The primary focus is that Marseille have a fair right to seek compensation, but De Jong is unfortunate in that he was essentially doing his job and now appears to be being punished for it, regardless of the nature of his challenge. Yes I say that these accidents are becoming so commonplace that their very nature is in question - I do feel that is inevitable though, when modern players are built for speed rather than physical aggression. The effect, however, is that more players are suffering more serious injuries for this very reason - which I stand by.

By Bob Smith on 14 October 2010 at 04:18

I think what you completely neglect to mention in this article is that the speed players approach tackles in the modern game is the key factor in these kind of injuries - not any sudden rise in malicious intent. Indeed, your article seems to conclude that most of these of these incidents were deemed accidental - i.e. both players go in hard for the ball, one player misses the ball and arrives a fraction of a second too late and the other incurs a horrendous injury. And I really can't see the point you're making with David Busst: 1. it was an accident, as you point out; 2. it was 14 years ago. Are leg breaks really more common now than they were 30 years ago? I've yet to see the evidence to prove that. Minor fractures such as the metatarsal style injuries do appear to be more commonplace, which is likely a facture of the lightweight boots players now where. In general I would say malicious tackles are far less prevelant than in the 70s and 80s, but the game has sped up and that mains on the rare occasions when a tackle is badly timed and hard, there's a greater risk that a player will get hurt. I also think modern pitches play a part in this, where good quality surfaces offer more grip to players than the mudbaths and uneven surfaces of old. The flip side to that grip is that a player can more easily jar a knee when landing from a jump slightly off balance, i.e. the surface means that rather than their footing giving way, the studs grip the surface and the knee or ankle bears the weight of the unbalanced landing - just a theory mind you...

By James McLean on 12 October 2010 at 16:03

No arguments in some respects John, as you say - mistimed tackles don't make someone a thug, despite what many in the press say. My comment on violence forcing a place in football has always been the case - it's largely been the rules that have changed since the Harris era, and I also think you are right with regards to saying that things perhaps don't change from one season to the next. However, I stand by my point that both Marseille and Newcastle have a right to feel aggrieved at what has happened, but nor was I implying De Jong did anything deliberately. My primary point, though, is that there are few deterrents to prevent players from simply lunging in. As you say, Chopper Harris and co. were hard men who played a hard game, but the fact of it is that footballers as a breed have changed - essentially tying in with what you say about the game being much quicker these days.

By John Baines on 12 October 2010 at 13:06

can't agree here i'm afraid. There have been a couple of bad tackles of late but to state that 'violence appears to be trying to force a place in football' is just a kneejerk reaction. You ask Ron HArris or Tommy Smith what they think and you'll get laughed out of town. Players from that era have no gripes about admitting they loved to launch their man into touch, give him a 'reducer' and so forth. Todays incident largely are borne out of the speed of the game. the Aaron Ramsey/Ryan Shawcross and Eduardo/MArtin Taylor ones are proof of this. Each and every season something is on the increase whether it be spitting, diving, elbowing or anything else. If, all of a sudden, there are one or two iscolated and seperated incidents the papers jump all over it claiming that this, that or the other is on the rise. In the prem alone this season there must have been close to 100 matches, and a handful of what i'd say were bad tackles. Watch the chelsea-leeds 1970 replay and Chopper Harris did more than that in the first half. If players stand off tackles they are mercennaries, playing for the money, uncommitted and unconcerned. Go in for a tackle and mistime it and your a thug. The Karl Henry ones were bad, De Jong's a bit heavy, but essentially are things worse this season than they were last? or the one before? not in my book they aint.