Red Card for Glen Johnson?!?!?!

[Balti]

He's not crying wolf over this tackle. It's all about the inconsistency, nothing more. The ref and FA have deemed Vinnie's tackle worthy of a straight red and 3 game ban (4 because he was sent off previously) so Johnson's needs to be treated the same (in fact IMO it was a much more dangerous straight legged, higher challenge) otherwise where is the fairness? We are missing Vinnie for games, Liverpool should be missing Johnson for games as it was the same/worse offence. It's that simple.

If only it was that simple.

The rules rely on the referee's interpretation so it is subjective and therefore based on his opinion at the time of the incident.

It is the law that is to blame not the referee or any FA panel.

Maybe, it's the referees interpretation at that time but there is nothing to stop Mancini pointing out where it is clear a mistake has been made and as the ref didn't deal with the incident (he gave a throw) then it can be corrected now with a retrospective red card and subsequent ban.

Mancini is right to point out that both incidents should be treated in the same way, whatever way that is. He is pointing out that Vinny's red should have been rescinded. But the FA have backed themselves into a corner by upholding the decision. That means they have to review Mason's decision and dish out the same punishment. If they don't do that then they will rightly be accused of bias/ favouritism/ incompetence and/or corruption. One rule for Liverpool and another for City.

What they do next will give us our answer.

 

[mancitytmdanttom]

I can't see how the FA cannot take retrospective action. Clearly the ref saw it, but chose not to act, which opens the door for the FA Disciplinary Comittee to charge Johnson.

The Fa can only act if the ref didn't see it - and twatty mason clearly did

 

[SWP's back]

I think Mancini is slightly hyprocritical to cry wolf overthis after defending Kompany's tackle.

He is neither "crying wolf" nor is he being "hypocritical".

He is simply asking for parity.<br /><br />-- Thu Jan 12, 2012 12:58 pm --<br /><br />

I can't see how the FA cannot take retrospective action. Clearly the ref saw it, but chose not to act, which opens the door for the FA Disciplinary Comittee to charge Johnson.

The Fa can only act if the ref didn't see it - and twatty mason clearly did

You can't say he clearly did at all. You have to wait for the refs report.

The FA have also intervened before when the ref has stated they saw the incident.

 

[twinkletoes]

I think Mancini is slightly hyprocritical to cry wolf overthis after defending Kompany's tackle.

He is neither "crying wolf" nor is he being "hypocritical".

He is simply asking for parity..

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

 

[moomba]

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

Rooney tried to get Kompany sent off in the 12th minute. Mancini criticised a decision after the game.

I'd rather he didn't say anything but there is a very big difference between the two.

Also I believe his gripe is that while he is criticised (twice now) for commenting on red card tackles, others (Rooney, Ferguson, Rio, Skrtl, Agger, Adam, Dalglish for a start) seem to be able to do it without any comment.

 

[Dubai Blue]

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

Rooney actively tried to get an opponent sent off during the first 15 mins of a cup tie. Mancini asked what the difference between the two tackles was.

So he hasn't been a hypocrite at all.

 

[Big Dave Watson]

I think Mancini is slightly hyprocritical to cry wolf overthis after defending Kompany's tackle.

He is neither "crying wolf" nor is he being "hypocritical".

He is simply asking for parity.

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

No he's not. He's saying either both were fouls worthy of dismisal or both were not fouls waranting no action.

 

[Frank H]

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

He hasn't done exactly the same as Rooney did!!!

He didn't run in front of the ref using a red card signal! He didn't try to influence the ref to get Johnson sent off.

I am actually not a City fan - only a sympathizer - but even I am beginning to suspect that you are either a wum, a closet "rag", visually challenged, need lessons in logic etc.etc.

 

[twinkletoes]

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

Rooney actively tried to get an opponent sent off during the first 15 mins of a cup tie. Mancini asked what the difference between the two tackles was.

So he hasn't been a hypocrite at all.

Why was he arguing with Gerrard down the tunnel?<br /><br />-- Thu Jan 12, 2012 1:48 pm --<br /><br />

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

He hasn't done exactly the same as Rooney did!!!

He didn't run in front of the ref using a red card signal! He didn't try to influence the ref to get Johnson sent off.

I am actually not a City fan - only a sympathizer - but even I am beginning to suspect that you are either a wum, a closet "rag", visually challenged, need lessons in logic etc.etc.

Grow up or fuck off.

 

[Frank H]

He is being hypocritical in criticising Rooney for what he did and then doing exactly the same himself.

Rooney actively tried to get an opponent sent off during the first 15 mins of a cup tie. Mancini asked what the difference between the two tackles was.

So he hasn't been a hypocrite at all.

Why was he arguing with Gerrard down the tunnel?

What's that got to with it - for goodness' sake?

The game was over - completely different from the situation with Rooney over Kompany!