On Mullan And The Rapids Being Thugs

Glad Plush at least put this out, it was also noted that he would not appeal the suspension in article I read.

Anyone know the contact info for MLS HQ so when I witness a "reckless" (I am not disputing that tackle wasn't) tackle that they also get 10 games regardless of injury or not.

 

Here is where I have trouble with your viewpoint. Mullan's frustration and immediate response to plow over someone is captured on video. If you are arguing that that does not demonstrate intent then there is no point in discussing this.

And, I am certainly not arguing that the extent of the injury shouldn't be factored in, nor is the MLS disciplinary committee. The outcome always taken into account when assessing penalties, in all walks of life.

I don't see how you can argue that only one element differentiates the two. I just don't get it.

 

I think it is generally a fine response. I for one will not view Mullan's entire career based on this incident. Anyone who does is an @sshole. And I agree that anyone attacking his character is similarly an @sshole.

I disagree with their view that punishment should solely be based on precedent. The league needs to change.

 

Personally, even with intention of setting new precedent, I think the punishment is heavy. That is, unless they intend to issue season-bans by default for dead-ball fistfights and such.

 

I think the 10 days comes from Brian not appealing. Had he appealed it likely would be 7 or some outher smaller number.

 

10 games seems way too extreme to me, totally unjustified by historical precedent. I'm remembering that in MLS Cup Ugo smashed into Mac Kandji after the ball had been kicked and wrecked his knee. Then proceeded to yell at Mac as he laid on the ground and pushed him when he tried to get up. The result - no disclipline.

 

This looks fall into the agree to disagree classification between you and I.

But, to make the point again. He throws up his arms in frustration and proceeds to immediately blindsided the person with the ball. That is seen on film. It is undeniable. Not too many are arguing this point. It is not an assumption, it is visible.

The only intent that people seem to be arguing is whether he intended to injure Zak. I think that is a stupid argument, because that really requires getting in his brain.

 

That's true, but it doesn't tell you anything, and it's missing a fact about the play.

He throws up his arms in frustration. - True
Zakuani just stepped around Kimura upfield with the ball - true
Mullan nails Zakuani - True?

That's all visibly true as well. Why does he go after Zakuani?

Is it because he's mad about the non-call? or...
Is it because he's recognized that Kimura just got beat and it's his job now to stop Zakuani?

To weigh the non-call into the punishment requires knowing what Mullan was thinking. Was it, "I'm mad and I'm gonna kill, kill, kill," or was it, "crap, Kimura just got beat, I've got to stop the ball"?

You can't know without getting into his head.

You also have to make a judgement about how irritated he was by the non-call. Waiving his arms at the ref is a fairly mild reaction.

 

Given the position on the field, and his angle to Zak, he could have easily pressured the ball and channeled Zak outside. That he was able to come across Zak that forcibly is clear indication he was not beaten badly. This was no desperation hook slide.

We may disagree, but the only real vociferous disagreement on intent is coming from Colorado support. So, what are you seeing that rest of the soccer community (generally) is not seeing? Are you arguing that everyone is being unreasonable and you are not?

Time of the game matters if only because it provides for no extenuating circumstances. This was no build up of small grievances over time.

 

Yes, they do call for vastly different outcomes. I'm not arguing that.

My point is that MLS purportedly said before the season that they were concerned about player safety and were going to crack down on unsafe tackles. They have failed to do so. If you're going to crack down on unsafe tackles, you can't just slap offenders on the wrist. Carassco's intent is irrelevant - his tackle was inherently dangerous, and if MLS is serious about player safety, they need to punish it by more than a 1 game suspension. They need to treat all tackles that should be red cards for serious foul play much more seriously than they currently do. Otherwise, the mentality of going in for dangerous, bone-crunching, studs-up tackles will continue, and we'll be talking about someone else with a broken leg very soon.

 

True. Who are you arguing with? It was a bad decision to go in hard like that, it wasn't a bad decision to try to make a play. It was his play to make, either by running Zak down or by clean tackle. Tell me if you think that I've been arguing that Brian should have made the hard tackle he did?

Careful with your measurements. You might accurately gauge depth of feeling but not breadth of opinion. There's a lot of voices and opinions vary on these little side issues.

For my part, I think it's difficult to read minds. This doesn't strike me as an unreasonable statement. I haven't really found anyone who will directly disagree, but I've found many who will try to find another point to argue.

You really think so? I think the only extenuating circumstance is that Brian was playing the game and trying to get the ball. Everything else would be reason to add to the punishment.

 

The Rapids definitely aren't thugs. Mullan makes a few dirty tackles here and there, but that one was unlike him. Sanna Nyassi is dirty, but unlike Mullan it's not because he's aggressive but because he's dirty. If anyone is a 'thug,' it's Conor Casey. He can't help but pick up a bunch of fouls each game and a yellow card to go along with it.

Mullan's tackle came after he lost the ball, so yes, he should have controlled his temper. But the Rapids being thugs is ludicrous. There's a difference between aggressive play and playing dirty. What our backs do is bump the attackers cleanly off the ball with their shoulders. It's not a foul if they go to ground, rather, where I come from, a good hard shoulder to shoulder challenge is encouraged.

People who label the Rapids as 'thugs' are ignorant of the game. It's no wonder soccer players are called pu**ies- without aggression that's essentially what they are.

And Mullan should be suspended for 5+ games, but no less.

 

Will go back and read the rest of this thread but to answer your question, no, the Rapids are not "thugs."

The term gets thrown around too loosely, especially on Big Soccer. Does Conor Casey throw his weight around? Sure he does (and is expected to.) Does Mastoroeni give his midfield counterparts the night off or does he battle for every ball? He battles for every ball and he does it fairly.

But unfortunately, the vast majority of Big Soccer posters wouldn't know physical play from thuggery if it bit them in the ass.

My Houston Dynamo are/were regularly accused of being "thugs" to the point that it was/is getting tiresome. Do we play a physical game? You bet. Do we have some players that go in hard? Absolutely. Do the forwards on the opposing team know they're going to get leaned on when competing for a ball? Oh yeah.

But none of our players ever looked to go after other players or went out on the pitch with the idea of headhunting (yes, even Rico Clark when he played with us...that was one off with Ruiz.)

I guess my long winded point could be concluded by saying that if you win an MLS Cup, it must put you in the thug column.

Well then I have just one thing to say to the Rapids.

Welcome to the club.

 

Buddy, you just describe Big Soccer in a nutshell in those two sentences.

Well done.

 

It'll be interesting to see what the MLS does the next time this exact same type of challenge occurs:

1) Without ending in a horrific injury and

2) Without the "egregious nature" of the tackle.

My guess? Business as usual.

 

At this point I am not sure what you are arguing. It really seems at this point the only argument being made is that Mullan is being scapegoated. You say scapegoat, the rest of us say new precedent.

Anyway, thanks for the discussion, you all were very polite to allow me to participate.

See you in July.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILCNAln_7Z4"]YouTube - Trick Daddy - I'm A Thug (Video Version)[/ame]

 

The suspension is a bit excessive. It will please the soccer moms no doubt.

 

I didn't see it, but I'll say zero games.

As I've been saying for a while, the excuses are already out there. Whatever the tackle, it won't be as bad as Mullan's.

There's no larger message other than retribution.

 

Jakovic - 2 match ban for same reckless/dangerous tackle.

remove five games because it didn't result in an injury.
remove three more since it wasn't a payback tackle.

Am i missing anything? Cuz everything else was EXACTLY the same.

 

Heh...happened pretty much in front of me. Could see the DC player coming from a distance and knowing what was going to happen.

I immediately started thinking about this thread.

 

What was up with that folding bake-sale table he got flung into? Geez, I hope you guys leave that one at Robertson when you get your new home.