I must admit I'm amazed that some are comparing to the 70's and 80's! Footballers are like Gazelles in comparison to footballers of the past and the game is played at a pace no side from that era would live in. IMHO a broken leg is massively more likely now than then regardless of how games were played then.
Spot on.
As for intent, unless there is an open-and-shut case, as with De Jong's challenge on Alonso, then the only person who really knows is the man making the tackle. The Manchester City player has been vilified since his challenge on Ben Arfa, with Newcastle even demanding retrospective punishment, but on first viewing it is easy to see why referee Martin Atkinson let play continue.
It was a good tackle but proving De Jong intended to cause the eventual damage is a tough job.
Where Murphy is absolutely on the mark is with his criticism of players failing to weigh up the potential consequences of their challenges.
He says: "The pace in which some players go into tackles now is ridiculous. There's no brains involved in the players who are doing that.
"I don't believe players are going out to break another player's leg but there has to be some logic and intelligence involved. If you are going at someone at a certain pace and you don't get it right you are going to hurt them."
No names from Murphy but allow me. Step forward Henry, whose challenge against Wigan was everything Murphy was referring to. Uncontrolled, at pace, lacking any semblance of common sense and very fortunate not to result in serious injury for the tumbling Gomez.
Sadly, there have always been bad tackles in football. And the growing acceptance of what some laugh off as the early "reducer" - clumsy code for a hefty challenge usually inflicted on the opposition's most gifted player - is crass.
So is the Premier League too dirty or any dirtier than in the past? Not in my opinion. Is there a problem of growing recklessness from players without thought for what might result from rash tackles? Definitely.
Author