Red Card for Glen Johnson?!?!?!

[DTeacher]

Johnson has 'tackled' like this several times in his career - it is a wild two-footed lunge which could have broken Lescott's leg or his ankle.

How the hell this can even be compared to Vinny's perfect tackle, I have no idea.

Refereeing standards in England are a total disgrace.

Anyone who claims that Johnson's 'ninja' lunge is not a Red Card offence by today's rules is either blind, a deluded idiot or a lying toe-rag.

Gerrard can fook off too, the insolent prick.

Fooking disgraceful.

P.S. We didn't even get a free-kick for that 'challenge' by Johnson!

 

[Sigh]

Red. Couldn't be clearer, and couldn't be a clearer example of the bollox that passes for consistency, i.e. fairness. In this respect this area of the game is now subject both to unfairness AND injustice.

This and the hand-ball confusion is all man-made.

As to hand-ball (in the box) if strict liability without regard to fault was applied it would take hand-ball out of the referees sphere except for identifying contact. Issues of proximity, intent, advantage gained, natural movement etc. should all be removed from the issue. This WILL result in unjust decisions here and there, absolutely it WILL, as it does NOW, but it will eliminate, 100%, unfairness and that is all we can expect, and what is required if the game as a game of seasons is to played with rules applied equally across all competitions, during all matches, regardless of the "stakes" or players involved. Something must be done about this as well as eliminating the Graham Poll mind-set that actually believes the good of the game is served by treating like offences differently depending on when a foul occurs and against or by whom. Equal treatment under the law please.

 

[WNRH]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

 

[Sigh]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

I disagree, for the same reason mankind at all times and in all places has established laws and codes of a prophylactic nature. Not all law exists to redress grievance, punish, or visit retribution after harm has occured, but also to prevent injury or harm by punishing acts of a general class whether or not harm results in a particular case.

 

[WNRH]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

I disagree, for the same reason mankind at all times and in all places has established laws and codes of a prophylactic nature. Not all law exists to redress grievance, punish, or visit retribution after harm has occured, but also to prevent injury or harm by punishing acts of a general class whether or not harm results in a particular case.

So you agree Kompany's was a red then?

 

[DTeacher]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

Begging or beginning?

Find out the current RULES governing this. It is a RED - no argument.

By the way, I think it is a ridiculous rule preventing people tackling. Like the Kompany tackle. However, the flying ninja lunge by Johnson is clearly dangerous, so should be a booking at least in my eyes. BUT I don't make the rules - therefore it is a CLEAR RED.

 

[TCIB]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

I disagree, for the same reason mankind at all times and in all places has established laws and codes of a prophylactic nature. Not all law exists to redress grievance, punish, or visit retribution after harm has occured, but also to prevent injury or harm by punishing acts of a general class whether or not harm results in a particular case.

So you agree Kompany's was a red then?

Your missing the arguement here.

The basic premise here is consistency IF Kompany got a red users are saying where is the difference between the two challenges, nothing more.

Adding to that, just because it offends regarding the hypothetical "could have" talk is irrelevant.
The laws should be applied to all players equally. As much as you or i disagree on the rule does not matter.

 

[WNRH]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

Begging or beginning?

Find out the current RULES governing this. It is a RED - no argument.

By the way, I think it is a ridiculous rule preventing people tackling. Like the Kompany tackle. However, the flying ninja lunge by Johnson is clearly dangerous, so should be a booking at least in my eyes. BUT I don't make the rules - therefore it is a CLEAR RED.

Fuck the rules, if there was a rule that going to a football game meant you gained 3 points on your driving licence you wouldn't obey it and take it on the chin.

Under the current rules, yes it is a red card, but back in the real world or on planet common sense it is a perfectly good tackle.

It really is simple for the refs and regulators to understand. Win the ball = fair tackle, don't win the ball = bad tackle and tackler should receive relevant punishment.

If i speed up to a set of traffic lights then stop at the last minute, all under the speed limit, do i get 3 points for intent of running a set of lights? Load of bollocks mate it is, it will lead to a devalued game.<br /><br />-- Thu Jan 12, 2012 5:14 am --<br /><br />

I disagree, for the same reason mankind at all times and in all places has established laws and codes of a prophylactic nature. Not all law exists to redress grievance, punish, or visit retribution after harm has occured, but also to prevent injury or harm by punishing acts of a general class whether or not harm results in a particular case.

So you agree Kompany's was a red then?

Your missing the arguement here.

The basic premise here is consistency IF Kompany got a red users are saying where is the difference between the two challenges, nothing more.

Adding to that, just because it offends regarding the hypothetical "could have" talk is irrelevant.
The laws should be applied to all players equally. As much as you or i disagree on the rule does not matter.

I'm not missing it at all mate, i've already said it was a red based on current bullshit rules. Neither were red cards as both won the ball without harming the player.

 

[TCIB]

Your talking about personal ideals here bud which i fully understand.
You are though argueing from a baseless position regarding the issue.

 

[Sigh]

It isn't a Red, he won the ball.

Just like Kompany on Sunday.

All this "he could have broke his legs" is a load of crap and it's begging to piss me off. He didn't break anyones legs because he won the ball, if he didn't win the ball that is when punishment should be taken.

I disagree, for the same reason mankind at all times and in all places has established laws and codes of a prophylactic nature. Not all law exists to redress grievance, punish, or visit retribution after harm has occured, but also to prevent injury or harm by punishing acts of a general class whether or not harm results in a particular case.

So you agree Kompany's was a red then?

I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds my response might tend toward self-incrimination.

Oh, okay then: Vinnie's challenge was a controlled slide directed exclusively at a proper object. Johnson, by leaving the ground is no longer in control, can no longer apply any breaking force or turn to adjust for the movement of the ball or the other player and his action is also calculated to induce fear in the other player but do so in an improper manner, e.g. it is one thing for Hangeland to cause fear in an opposing striker as a corrollary to natural and lawful play and contact, it would be quite another matter if he whipped his elbows about or started headbutting the air around the striker for the purpose of creating a zone of danger.

In similar manner I do not think that it is correct that defenders are consistently permitted to engage in wilfull obstruction and other behaviours when they "shepherd" the ball out of play around the goal-line when the exact same conduct would cause a free-kick to be awarded where it to happen anywhere else.