Brian Mullan/Steve Zakuani incident

The Seattle fans are never going to be satisified with anything related to this incident, probably forever (like when they lose to Portland in 2014 or something, someone will moan about how if they had a pre-injury Zakuani they would have won).

 

Let me know when you ass-hats are ready to stop painting all the Seattle fans with the same brush pointing back to the evidence of a couple angry posters. Until you are take it to rivalries.

 

Then we shall rebuild Zakuani, and MLS 3.0 shall be born! His return will bring about an era of super-fast wingers, half-man half-robot goalkeepers, laser-beam-guided shots, absolute zero cold spray, no more DUIs, world peace, hair for Landon Donovan, the destruction of all MLS 1.0 teams, and of course, an eternity of Sounder dominance. It shall be glorious.

 

Oh hey, let's not get crazy here! What do you think this is, Star Trek?

 

Well his leg was more-or-less planted. I'm not sure how much soccer you've played, so I'll break it down for you... Carrasco expects the ball to drop and Nyarko to play it on the half-volley, so he's leaving his foot out there hoping for a deflection... he has no weight on that leg in order to soften the deflection. Nyarko is way faster than Carrasco expects and manages to play a pass under Carrasco's leg.

Carrasco's studs land in Nyarko's shin guard, and if he had followed through with any ill-intent or maliciousness, Nyarko's leg would've snapped like a twig. But there wasn't, it didn't... And besides the obvious differences like Carrasco not going to ground, having no maliciousness, not putting his full sprinting weight into Nyarko's leg from the side, besides there being no injury... yeah, no difference.

Oh yeah, Mullan didn't even break the leg that was playing the ball... What a piece of human waste. The thing is-- if he just retired, the cap space would really benefit Colorado.

And one last thing-- don't confuse an analogy for an argument. If you have a point to make, just make it... don't obscure it with an analogy.

 

Played two years in college. Then I got sick and almost died. Since then I play rec.

Believe me, I don't need you to break down a tackle. And more-or-less planted isn't plated. If it was, you wouldn't need the qualifier.

The plain and simple point is, if MLS truly wants to clean things up, they need to start punishing the action of a reckless challenge harshly, not just when that reckless tackle results in an injury.

Mullan's tackle was a horrible tackle. I'm not arguing against that. If the league want's to make an example of him, then so be it.

But, taking into account past precedent (especially looking at the Carassco tackle) it would appear that despite what the league said they took into account, Zakuani's injury accounted for 8 of the extra 9 games tacked on to the suspension.

If MLS was serious about wanted to clean up bad tackles, then the Carrasco tackle would have warranted at least a 6 game suspension (arbitrary number).

Send a message that every one of these tackles that is reckless, out of control and could potentially lead to serious injury will be stiffly punished, and you'll quickly see players check up on those rash tackles.

Only send down a stiff penalty when someone actually gets hurt, and nothing will change, because these injuries happen so rarely despite the fact that horror show tackles happen with relative frequency.

 

What you just said was hilarious. It should be in a sig or something

*claps*

 

Yeah, GV, you're allegedly a soccer journalist, but you flat-out don't know the facts here. You're embarassing yourself.

If I'm driving down the road at the posted speed limit, and someone runs a red light and I T-bone them and kill the driver, I'm not going to be charged with a crime.

Basically, MLS is saying that if you injure someone it won't be vehicular manslaughter, it'll be 2nd degree murder and we're going for 20 years.

One last point on the DWI analogy...from time to time I've gone out partying and then I get behind the wheel and things don't feel right, so I pull over to the nearest restaurant and get something to eat. And the reason I do that is NOT because I'm afraid of a DWI. I'm not wasted. Just not right. The reason I do that is because I don't want to cause a serious accident. Maybe I'm weird that way. But I'm pretty surprised at everyone just flatly saying that the risk of killing someone and getting your whole life completely ********ed up by a long jail sentence isn't an issue.

But maybe that's just me.

 

Statistics show that you are the exception, not the rule. And kudos to you. Honestly. I mean that.

But you have to understand that you aren't the norm.

 

well said

 

When did this become a drunk driving argument?

I miss the old thread in which Colorado fans were trying to turn Brian Mullan into a victim (when will the candlight vigil be held?), and Seattle fans were trying to stretch him out "Braveheart" style.

All we have to do is read the judgement by the disciplinary committee to see why they thought such an unprecedented punishment was warranted. Reading comprehension skills are key. Yes, the severity of the injury played a role in their judgement. And that's the case in every league in the world. If Eduardo had popped right back up, Martin Taylor wouldn't have received an extra 3 match ban. We all know that's the way this works.

 

OK, we're well into four digits of posts here. I think there's been ample time for everyone to make their points and miss everyone else's.