The Glen Johnson 'Tackle'

[The Man In Blue]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

[simon12]

Neither matters as the bar has been set. I await the fa .

[Nijinsky]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

[The Man In Blue]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

I agree - note the use of "had".

Neither warranted a red imo, my point being we cant give Johnson stick for this as Vinnie's was very similar.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

It's interesting that the general concensus is that Johnson's was worse than Vinnies. All that remains is to see if the FA do something about it or bottle it.I would expect enough of the media to say that he should be banned. Maybe even TalkShite's Adrian Durham will canvass for it although he does tend to go for the contraversial to get fans to ring in so maybe he will say it was a fine tackle.

[Nijinsky]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

I agree - note the use of "had".

Neither warranted a red imo, my point being we cant give Johnson stick for this as Vinnie's was very similar.

Fair do's.. It was the use of the phrase 'but if Vincent', as if that warranted the magnitude of the difference in punishment. As said, neither were a red but if we set the bar against Vinnie's punishment, then Johnson's deserved at the very least the same - they're very comparable (Johnson's worse) so it's a feeling of massive unjust.

[Nijinsky]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

It's interesting that the general concensus is that Johnson's was worse than Vinnies. All that remains is to see if the FA do something about it or bottle it.I would expect enough of the media to say that he should be banned. Maybe even TalkShite's Adrian Durham will canvass for it although he does tend to go for the contraversial to get fans to ring in so maybe he will say it was a fine tackle.

I agree Doug but nothing will be done and neither should it be.. in my opinion, both were great tackles. Had Kompany not had been banned for a similar great tackle, then we'd not be discussing it - it's the inconsistency.

I'm not sure what I want really, I guess I'm just still fuming from the decision against Kompany, but it surely cannot be questioned whether Johnson's was worse - he's still 2-footed, studs showing at the point of winning the ball, whereas Vinnie's left leg was nowhere near Fani. I don't want tackling taken out of the game, so both should've stood without even a foul but if we are to change that, then Johnson's was unquestionably worse (because there's a greater argument for recklessness) and Mancini was right to bring it up.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

It's interesting that the general concensus is that Johnson's was worse than Vinnies. All that remains is to see if the FA do something about it or bottle it.I would expect enough of the media to say that he should be banned. Maybe even TalkShite's Adrian Durham will canvass for it although he does tend to go for the contraversial to get fans to ring in so maybe he will say it was a fine tackle.

I agree Doug but nothing will be done and neither should it be.. in my opinion, both were great tackles. Had Kompany not had been banned for a similar great tackle, then we'd not be discussing it - it's the inconsistency.

I'm not sure what I want really, I guess I'm just still fuming from the decision against Kompany, but it surely cannot be questioned whether Johnson's was worse - he's still 2-footed, studs showing at the point of winning the ball, whereas Vinnie's left leg was nowhere near Fani. I don't want tackling taken out of the game, so both should've stood without even a foul but if we are to change that, then Johnson's was unquestionably worse (because there's a greater argument for recklessness) and Mancini was right to bring it up.

Cant accept that nothing should be done. Either the FA has to charge him to show some consistency and justify why Vinnies appeal was rejected.Or the FA has to come out with a detailed explanation regarding why nothing will be done.

And hiding behind the "fact" that the ref saw it and thought it was ok is 100% not acceptable.If they say that we ought to do the FA for bringing the game into disrepute.

[dario2739]

Think the difference between that tackle and Vinnies, is that after Glen Johnson's two-footed lunge, Jimmy Milner isn't in the ref's face like a snidey cunt asking for a red card.

[Nijinsky]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

It's interesting that the general concensus is that Johnson's was worse than Vinnies. All that remains is to see if the FA do something about it or bottle it.I would expect enough of the media to say that he should be banned. Maybe even TalkShite's Adrian Durham will canvass for it although he does tend to go for the contraversial to get fans to ring in so maybe he will say it was a fine tackle.

I agree Doug but nothing will be done and neither should it be.. in my opinion, both were great tackles. Had Kompany not had been banned for a similar great tackle, then we'd not be discussing it - it's the inconsistency.

I'm not sure what I want really, I guess I'm just still fuming from the decision against Kompany, but it surely cannot be questioned whether Johnson's was worse - he's still 2-footed, studs showing at the point of winning the ball, whereas Vinnie's left leg was nowhere near Fani. I don't want tackling taken out of the game, so both should've stood without even a foul but if we are to change that, then Johnson's was unquestionably worse (because there's a greater argument for recklessness) and Mancini was right to bring it up.

Cant accept that nothing should be done. Either the FA has to charge him to show some consistency and justify why Vinnies appeal was rejected.Or the FA has to come out with a detailed explanation regarding why nothing will be done.

And hiding behind the "fact" that the ref saw it and thought it was ok is 100% not acceptable.If they say that we ought to do the FA for bringing the game into disrepute.

I agree entirely but if I were a Liverpool fan and Johnson was punished in the same way, I'd feel a sense of injustice - both tackles were fair. That said, I am obviously wrong, as proved by Mr Foy and the FA panel.. so on that basis, Johnson should be facing time behind bars!

It's comparable, worse even and I'd love to see some sort of consistency but I'll not hold my breath - and while we, as city fans, can feel aggrieved over Kompany's punishment and I'd love to see Johnson given the same - if he were to be, then it would be at the detriment of the game.

The whole point is that is was worse than Kompany's, yet still not a foul (in my opinion) - do we seek retribution or applaud the fact that some refs still know how to play the game?

[aaron bond]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

Ridiculous! He didn't mistime it though.. isn't that the whole premise of a foul?

Neither were a foul and most certainly neither were a red card but if either were reckless, then it was Johnson's

It's interesting that the general concensus is that Johnson's was worse than Vinnies. All that remains is to see if the FA do something about it or bottle it.I would expect enough of the media to say that he should be banned. Maybe even TalkShite's Adrian Durham will canvass for it although he does tend to go for the contraversial to get fans to ring in so maybe he will say it was a fine tackle.

I agree Doug but nothing will be done and neither should it be.. in my opinion, both were great tackles. Had Kompany not had been banned for a similar great tackle, then we'd not be discussing it - it's the inconsistency.

I'm not sure what I want really, I guess I'm just still fuming from the decision against Kompany, but it surely cannot be questioned whether Johnson's was worse - he's still 2-footed, studs showing at the point of winning the ball, whereas Vinnie's left leg was nowhere near Fani. I don't want tackling taken out of the game, so both should've stood without even a foul but if we are to change that, then Johnson's was unquestionably worse (because there's a greater argument for recklessness) and Mancini was right to bring it up.

Cant accept that nothing should be done. Either the FA has to charge him to show some consistency and justify why Vinnies appeal was rejected.Or the FA has to come out with a detailed explanation regarding why nothing will be done.

And hiding behind the "fact" that the ref saw it and thought it was ok is 100% not acceptable.If they say that we ought to do the FA for bringing the game into disrepute.

Doug - you are completely right here. Johnson has tackled a player in a way that was far more dangerous than what Vinnie did. The ref at the time may well have thought it was ok, and whilst I don't wish to see more red cards in matches, the FA set the standards extremely low for what constitutes a red card by upholding Vinnie's sending off.

Of course, the FA will do no such thing, but I really want the club to kick up a stink about this. We have been given no indication as to why Vinnie's ban was upheld, but can only assume that it was because he used both feet to try and win the ball. If that is now a red card offence, then Johnson should receive the same punishment as a minimum.

[john68]

No Doug, you are wrong...Kompany got a 3 match ban for that tackle with an extra match for his previous red card.
The FA should not give the scouse twat the same. His tackle was worsr so lets go for justice...he should get more.

Infact hang the bastard from the same tree as Foy...but use a slightly smaller rope.

[Nijinsky]

No Doug, you are wrong...Kompany got a 3 match ban for that tackle with an extra match for his previous red card.
The FA should not give the scouse twat the same. His tackle was worsr so lets go for justice...he should get more.

Infact hang the bastard from the same tree as Foy...but use a slightly smaller rope.

An extra game for a frivolous appeal, I think?

We all agree that it was worse than Kompany's though and in theory I'd like for the club to seek an explanation.. but it was a good tackle (as was Vinnie's), so it'd be fruitless - because the ref had a good view. It's completely ridiculous

[john68]

The extra game was because Vinnie had a previous red card. The appeal wasn't considered frivolous.

[Duckman]

No Doug, you are wrong...Kompany got a 3 match ban for that tackle with an extra match for his previous red card.
The FA should not give the scouse twat the same. His tackle was worsr so lets go for justice...he should get more.

Infact hang the bastard from the same tree as Foy...but use a slightly smaller rope.

hanging black people?!?!?
didnt know it was that serious ))

[Douglas Higginbottom]

I havent read all this thread but has anybody mentioned the key factor in why Johnson didn't get a red card?

It looked to me Vinnie wasnt going to be carded at all for his tackle until shrek butted in and told the ref what to do.Nobdoy did that last night and play just went on.

[Piccsnumberoneblue]

I don't see that these two tackles are similar. Vinnie did not go in two footed and in fact it wasn't really a tackle as such, more of an interception. Nani the fanny was nowhere near the ball. Johnson's was a text book example of a two footed lunge with feet off the floor.

I knew it was a bit iffy at the time, but seeing it this morning...Goodness gracious. If Johnson is banned, one of the beneficiaries will be the filth, as Johnson would miss the game with them possibly. So maybe we will see action taken afterall.

[Ted Hughes]

Fair comment Doug. Was I imagining it or did Andy Carroll not attempt an even worse one on Clichy (which he just skipped over) early in the game ? I couldn't see it that well from my position but the crowd went ape & it looked awful from where I was.

We are going to keep seeing this now; players getting away with it, because on the whole they do. Kompay's card was wrong. Chances are, the next red will be ours too.

[dick dastardley]

Look at it. Johnson's only intent was to get the ball. As was Vinnie's. Ok, I agree it could have fucked Lescott up but if Vincent had mistimed his nani would have been snapped in half.

your talkin bollox two footed off the ground a proper lunge, i wouldnt like to see that mistimed because we'd be talkin lescott out for the season, kompanys was not off the ground as in flew through the air to get the ball

[Duckman]

anybody seen Mancini tellin fourth official to fuck off?