Red Card for Glen Johnson?!?!?!

[DTeacher]

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.

I understand where you are coming from mate BUT surely the current rules are the real world, not what you or I want?

 

[WNRH]

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.

I understand where you are coming from mate BUT surely the current rules are the real world, not what you or I want?

With the people running our game both local, national and international it is anything but a real world mate.

 

[DTeacher]

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.

I understand where you are coming from mate BUT surely the current rules are the real world, not what you or I want?

With the people running our game both local, national and international it is anything but a real world mate.

Okay, I think I understand better now what you are actually saying - I was interpreting 'real world' differently. At this rate, they won't stop until tackling in any way is outlawed - you will only be allowed to 'jockey'....lol.

 

[citysince88]

I think it's more of a torpedo tackle than a ninja tackle. Because once he's set off he really isn't stopping until he hits something.

I don't think Vincents can be classed as bad as that, I mean Glens feet are side by side he must travel about 4 feet in his torpedo mode, Vincent had his feet apart which in my opinion means it's not really a two footed tackle, but I understand if some would disagree with the classification of vk's tackle.

Another thing anyone noticed that when VK got sent off a popular term was 'the letter of the law says' yet I was listening to the 5 Live podcast and craig burley came out with the 'it's in the referee's interpretation of the law'. Well if the letter of the the states that these sort of tackles are red cards then how much interpretation is needed ? It surely comes down to a mere observation for the referee at checklist almost, two footed yes red card, did he leave the ground yes red card etc.

rant over.

 

[Wheelsy]

And Ben Thatcher.

 

[DTeacher]

Behave
Basically identical

Identical, my foot! Well done for posting that version though.

Now, let's look at the tackle from the angle which shows CLEARLY how Vincent made the tackle with the instep of his right foot and compare with Johnson's lunge:

Now, choose an option:
1). Admit you made a mistake, as you had only seen your version previously.
2). Insist you are correct, despite the crystal clear evidence, thus suggesting you are thick.
3). Admit you are just a Rag WUM.

So, which one?

 

[Heart.net]

Behave
Basically identical

Identical, my foot! Well done for posting that version though.

Now, let's look at the tackle from the angle which shows CLEARLY how Vincent made the tackle with the instep of his right foot and compare with Johnson's lunge:

Now, choose an option:
1). Admit you made a mistake, as you had only seen your version previously.
2). Insist you are correct, despite the crystal clear evidence, thus suggesting you are thick.
3). Admit you are just a Rag WUM.

So, which one?

I feel that at least kompany has control of his body motions, whereas Johnson's just thrown himself like a catapult without any hint of control. Its just one giant motion and if lescotts leg was a little bit further in front, he'd have broken his leg without the ability to back out of it.

 

[Dubai Blue]

Nothing wrong with Johnson's tackle IMO, they should have just rescind Kompanys red. Giving Johnson a retrospective red won't solve anything in my view neither tackle was even a foul

It will make him miss the 2nd leg and give a level of consistency.

Unfortunately, the incalcitrance of the FA when it came to overturning VK's red has all-too predictably left them in a bit of a mess. Such tackles happen so often that by not overturning VK's perfect interception, they've left themselves open to all sorts of accusations.

They had every opportunity to do the right thing and rescind Vinny's ban, but they chose not to. This is the inevitable result.

 

[Dubai Blue]

Kompany's tackle didn't have intent in it, but Nani had the ball when he tackled him.

Your argument falls to pieces there because that is nonsense. Nani didn't even touch the ball, let alone have it under control.

 

[Dubai Blue]

But he didn't touch the player. I agree it was absolutely wreckless. It had the potential to be horrendus IF he had made contact. But he didn't. He got there first.
Are we now supposed to punish players on ifs and maybes?

Yes.

The laws in place governing the sort of tackle Johnson made (which, incidentally, was different to the VK 'tackle') are in place to prevent injury from happening in the first place. Flying in off the ground at speed with both feet together and studs up is dangerous and is outlawed for the very reason that it might cause serious injury. An injury doesn't have to actually occur for it to suddenly become dangerous.