Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Adelaide vs. Qld - focus on Reddy

Hamish asked about what I thought about the Reddy incident in my goalkeeper round up of the weekend, and I have to admit I didn't see the incident wher he stepped on Rech for reasons outlined in the comments of the original post.

In today's online edition of the Courier Mail, there's a cute little sequence of shots from the match covering the incident. And it looks nasty. It looks snazzier on the Courier Mail website, but I wanted all 4 pictures at once, and here they are:
My comments were:
It looks like Reddy could have done more to not step on Rech. I think he could have stepped forward to pass Rech over his head and then to wherever Reddy wanted to go. Look at it this way, if Reddy saw a white shirt on the ground I doubt he would've stepped on the grounded player.

Looking at this sequence, I feel a little more strongly about my comment. Especially since passing Rech over his head would've made Reddy go into his goals a bit, which I don't think would have been detrimental. Unfortunately I still haven't seen a entire play, where the ball was, etc.

Shot #1: Reddy prepares to go over the grounded player. I can't see him clearing the player in one move from here, something which fits with what Reddy has said. But it does look like there's space to take a small step before Rech and then jumping over him.
Shot #2: This just looks nasty. Looks.
Shot #3: He's now landed on Rech...
Shot #4: And he's off.

If I was in Reddy's position I would've taken a small step beforehand to move a little inside of goal (so you stay goal-side*) and jumped over Rech near his head. However, the women's game is slower (considerably slower if I think about the leagues I've played in), and so I would have the luxury of taking the extra step.

I really want Queensland to make it to the final four, so I am hoping that Reddy is not suspended. However, should this be the case, it would be interesting to find out what kind of contract McMaster has. Farina has mentioned Danny Milosevic, but I think he could also consider Necevski.

Edit 10.17pm, 9th Jan:
I completely forgot to describe what I meant by goal-side. I had a plan to say the following, "If you don't know what goal-side is you should be shot." Simply because of the number of times I've told my defenders to get goal-side and they just stare at me blankly. Imagine trying to prepare to face a corner, and then having to try and move everyone to be goal-side, without them knowing what it means! Let alone understanding why one should be goal-side! It makes me very very angry when people don't know basics...


Hamish Alcorn said...

On the actual incident, I think the four photos are deceptive. Everything was happening at once, and having watched the actual play, several times, I'm inclined to back Reddy's story. That is, I think if it was a Roar player on the ground Reddy would have done the same thing - similarly trying to pull as much weight as possible off the step, it being impossible to change the step without tripping. That's my view, but I simply can't be certain.

There's another issue though. The Adelaide player got up and carried on, the commentors did mention it, but pretty much incidentally as if it was obviously an unfortunate accident. No official called it, the crowd didn't yell foul, the media the next day simply didn't mention it. Here I'm just setting a certain scene; pointing out that this was not an 'incident' like someone blatantly headbutting or punching someone. It was ambiguous and debatable. Certainly violent conduct is extremely debatable.

Now my point is this. If the FFA can find a debatable incident in a match - one that has simply not brought the game into disrepute - and book a player for it, we have a very serious can of corruption possibilities emerging. Every game has spiky, debatable incidents of elbows, studs in knees etcetera. If the FFA officials can find one - one that is not even being talked about - and make a massive impact on the odds of the next game - we have a problem.

If this sort of legal action is possible, we need a completely independent body to do it. One where none of the members have an interest in any of the teams for a start. Even then, it seems like a bodgy procedure to me, and more likely to bring the game into disrepute than any debatable on-field action.

Thanks Scary for your post and the opportunity to discuss this.

Cecilia said...

Hamish, it seems that you feel quite strongly about this. And I'm happy to have given you an opportunity to discuss this issue.

Every game has spiky, debatable incidents of elbows, studs in knees etcetera. If the FFA officials can find one - one that is not even being talked about - and make a massive impact on the odds of the next game - we have a problem.

I'm still not convinced with Fred's elbow against Milligan. Sure, Fred's elbows were out, but I seriously doubt that he intentionally set out to elbow Milligan. Some people naturally run with elbows out. It's not efficient, but that's their 'style'.

It was ambiguous and debatable. Certainly violent conduct is extremely debatable.

I would say that this seems to apply to Reddy and definitely to Fred. The difference between the two incidents was that none of the Adelaide players made a fuss, unlike the Sydney players.

I did watch the whole match, and noted Rech was on the ground but thought nothing of it as I simply wasn't paying attention to the game. As I was watching a non-live transmission of the match and Foxtel try to fit it into 90min, there was no replay of the incident. As you said, Hamish, the commentators mentioned that Rech stayed down for a long time, but that was about it.

Another difference between the Fred and Reddy incidents is timing. Fred's occurred in Round 2. We weren't exactly the same team without him, and struggled somewhat. But it was early in the season. Reddy's is at this crucial time. Furthermore, without the 2nd goalkeeper fit, should Reddy be found guilty, it may have some serious consequences for Queensland.

I've already had a rant about what I think have been inconsistent suspensions. If Reddy was found guilty, I would be absolutely livid if we was suspended for 2 or more weeks. This is in comparison to Bajic who I think got off extremely lightly for an unprofessional and stupid act - when the ball was safe! Idiot!

I think we'll just have to wait and see what happens. I still think Reddy could've gone about it different, but what's been done has been done. End of story.

P.S. Sorry to use the word 'incident' but I use it to describe that something has happenned. Not necessarily malicious.

john said...

Milligan is one of the great divers

Cecilia said...

Hamish! I've been converted!

I was going through the Qld Roar forum, and I found a link to a video of the incident. Hooray for Youtube - why didn't I think of going to Youtube, I usually do...

Anyway, it looks like Reddy moved first, Rech fell, and Reddy had no other option having not anticipated an obstacle.

Anonymous said...

Look its the second time he has done it. i think its about time he got punished for it