Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

[ursus arctos]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Your respective places of residence may have something to do with that . . .

[Ray de Galles]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Come again, Ursus?

sixmartletsandaseagull wrote:

You have more faith in the legal system than me it seems.

I'm not sure that I do, my primary judgement is based on my memory of the incident ( I would like to see footage again after all this time though ) but that is backed up by the referee on the day and the judgement of the court.

Unless there is any other evidence to throw in to the mix to constantly repeat the accusation isn't really on is it?

[Sixmartletsandaseagull]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Harri Saer wrote:

Come again, Ursus?

sixmartletsandaseagull wrote:

You have more faith in the legal system than me it seems.

I'm not sure that I do, my primary judgement is based on my memory of the incident ( I would like to see footage again after all this time though ) but that is backed up by the referee on the day and the judgement of the court.

Unless there is any other evidence to throw in to the mix to constantly repeat the accusation isn't really on is it?

I'm not sure why you keep saying that I am constantly repeating the accusation. That was the first time I alluded to it and the first time it was alluded to on this thread as far as I could see. I have since referred to it as part of the ongoing discussion, with you.

Moreover, I feel given Saunders's comment about home players not making sly tackles that it was relevant to the discussion.

[Ray de Galles]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

I said that you were repeating it because, er, you mentioned it twice on this thread ("constantly" was erroneous though, sorry) and initially I was also referring to the times before this issue has been brought up on here by other people

I don't think it has that much relevance to Saunders' (admittedly banal) comment because in that incident he was the one in possession of the ball and being tackled and he was not ruled to have committed a foul, Elliot was.

[Sixmartletsandaseagull]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Harri Saer wrote:

I said that you were repeating it because, er, you mentioned it twice on this thread ("constantly" was erroneous though, sorry) and initially I was also referring to the times before this issue has been brought up on here by other people

I don't think it has that much relevance to Saunders' (admittedly banal) comment because in that incident he was the one in possession of the ball and being tackled and he was not ruled to have committed a foul, Elliot was.

I have checked and I had only mentioned it once before you claimed I had said it more than once.

Yes, I concede there is a difference between his comment and the Saunders-Elliott incident as I remember it. So I will also concede that it wasn't as germane as I first thought.

I still think Paul Elliott would have found it hard to hear but that's probably not for me to decide.

As I say I like Saunders, I also watched him home and away on many occasions over a couple od seasons and don't consider him a nasty player by any means.

[Ray de Galles]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Sorry, I thought I explained myself. My first reference to "repeat the accusation" meant you mentioning it when others have said it before ( on olf otf). My second reference to repeating it was when you, repeated it.

No problem though, I would genuinely like to see some footage as perhaps my recall is wrong.

[Guest]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Well, I remember the incident pretty well and it was indeed a shocker. Saunders got away with murder.

Elliott was coming in from behind on Saunders and would probably have fouled him (but not very forcefully). Saunders jumped up and, as Elliott slid under him, he went in really hard on Elliott's knee with his studs.

It was an awful thing to do to a fellow professional.

[ursus arctos]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

The judge in Elliot v. Saunders seems to have reached a very different conclusion:

"In the leading case Elliott v. Saunders (1994), Paul Elliott, then of Chelsea, severed his cruciate ligaments during a 50/50 challenge with Dean Saunders, then of Liverpool. He sued Saunders but was unsuccessful. The trial judge was presented with the video footage of the incident and accepted Mr Saunders’ evidence that he had raised his feet at the last moment of the tackle in an instinctive attempt to avoid probable injury to himself. He held there was no evidence to demonstrate that Saunders had been guilty of “dangerous and reckless play”. This decision was endorsed by the English Court of Appeal in Caldwell v. Maguire and Fitzgerald (2001) which held that in order to establish breach of duty the plaintiff would have to show the defendant had shown reckless disregard for his safety. The court held that it was not possible to characterise “momentary carelessness”, an “error of judgment”, or an “oversight” as negligence.

From this report from one of Ireland's leading law firms.

[ursus arctos]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Harry, SixMartlets lives in the Puglia region of Southern Italy, while you live in Leafy Suburbia (UK branch).

I wouldn't expect your personal experiences of the efficacy of your respective local justice systems to be congruent.

[Ray de Galles]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Hieronymus of Hesselink wrote:

Well, I remember the incident pretty well and it was indeed a shocker. Saunders got away with murder.

Elliott was coming in from behind on Saunders and would probably have fouled him (but not very forcefully). Saunders jumped up and, as Elliott slid under him, he went in really hard on Elliott's knee with his studs.

It was an awful thing to do to a fellow professional.

I remember the incident pretty well and my thoughts at the time (and when it was shown a lot again at the time of the trial) was that Elliot slid in , Saunders jumped directly upwards to avoid him and landed (rather than stamped) on his leg.

Like I say, I'd like to see the footage again to make a renewed judgement but this was hardly Keane/Haaland territory here.

[Guest]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

It was worse -- Haaland didn't have his career ended by Keane's hack at him.

[Nico Rijnders]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

The affect of a tackle isn't necessarily directly linked to how bad or how malicious the tackle was.

[Etienne]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

It's arguable that the damage sustained by Haaland on the one leg from Keane's challenge resulted in the career ending injury to the other leg that occured not long after. It's prettty common for people favouring one leg after injury to another to put too much strain on their "good" leg.

There, that's my best effort at turning this into a century thread.

[Guest]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Nico Rijnders wrote:

The affect of a tackle isn't necessarily directly linked to how bad or how malicious the tackle was.

Not necessarily, sure, but in this case it was a wretched challenge.

Didn't Saunders also break some lower-division player's jaw in an FA Cup tie around the same time?

[EIM]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Etienne wrote:

It's arguable that the damage sustained by Haaland on the one leg from Keane's challenge resulted in the career ending injury to the other leg that occured not long after. It's prettty common for people favouring one leg after injury to another to put too much strain on their "good" leg.

There, that's my best effort at turning this into a century thread.

Well, Haaland briefly did try to argue that. But his lawyers, and medical experts, told him to stop being such a dick.

[Ray de Galles]

Dean Saunders isn't a very bright man, is he?

Hieronymus of Hesselink wrote:

It was worse -- Haaland didn't have his career ended by Keane's hack at him.

A tackle from Ryan Giggs ended John Fashanu's career, do we take it from this that the tackle was "worse" than Keane's on Haaland, "a shocker", "an awful thing to do to a fellow proffesional", "a wretched challenge" and that Giggs "got away with murder"? Or do we accept that some players' careers are ended through challenges with no malice.

I don't think the issue can be as clear cut as you think if the ref, a court and people like me at the time didn't see Saunders' actions as deliberate. Yet again though, I'll say if you've got the footage I'd be happy to see if my recollection is wrong.