Page 5 of 5

Re: Tackling

Posted: 11 Jan 2012, 22:09
by Southampton Gull
No there isn't, as proven by referee and FA, rules applied and red card stands.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 11 Jan 2012, 22:59
by stevegull
I saw Glen Johnson Matt, in what was a terrible game with Liverpool getting more negative by the second, but that is for a different rant.

Johnson was two-footed, and left the ground, which, as I agree with Dave on this, should have been a red card. He lost control of the tackle and could have caused damage. As someone said earlier, i don't know why players go in that way, it isn't natural and it only seems to be used when there is a particularly passionate game on the go and someone wants to hurt someone.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 01:57
by ferrarilover
So then Dave, if the referee and the FA choose to do nothing about Glen Johnson tonight, are you telling me it's an ok tackle, just because he won't be punished?

I keep saying, I see why the referee gave the decision and I see the screen behind which the FA are hiding to allow them to uphold it, but it doesn't make my assertion that the tackle was not worthy of a red card, incorrect. That is the opinion of maybe four people, if this is how things work, I can find 5 people who think it wasn't a red.

Matt.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 03:52
by usagullmichigan
tonights tackle RED CARD just like Komapny's now every shut the F up I am starting to spend time with the wife as there is less pain. Both tackles RED CARD AAAGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

Wheres the happy pills!

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 07:05
by Southampton Gull
ferrarilover wrote:So then Dave, if the referee and the FA choose to do nothing about Glen Johnson tonight, are you telling me it's an ok tackle, just because he won't be punished?

I keep saying, I see why the referee gave the decision and I see the screen behind which the FA are hiding to allow them to uphold it, but it doesn't make my assertion that the tackle was not worthy of a red card, incorrect. That is the opinion of maybe four people, if this is how things work, I can find 5 people who think it wasn't a red.

Matt.

I didn't watch the game.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 08:54
by ferrarilover
Hahahahaha, brilliant, I'm using that just as soon as I can find a scenario.

Matt.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 09:38
by Dave
I did see the game last night, i really do think this is where players have a problem and the F.A needs to get its act togehter, Glen Jonhson is off the floor two footed , ok missed his man, but like Kompany should have been sent off.

Said before there is no set formula for what is , and is not a red card, maybe there should be, how can one player be sent, and another not even be spoken to...consistancey.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 13:26
by cambgull
Southampton Gull wrote:I know you won't deviate from your wrong interpretation of the laws of the game, but you should, because you ARE wrong.
He gets pretty much every opinion wrong these days, Dave. I think there's some deep seated psychological problems there, Freud would have a field day!

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 14:43
by Southampton Gull
cambgull wrote: He gets pretty much every opinion wrong these days, Dave. I think there's some deep seated psychological problems there, Freud would have a field day!

His current legal education is forcing the poor lad to argue just about anything these days, unfortunately for him he can't yet put in an invoice at the end of it ;-)

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 18:40
by cambgull
Southampton Gull wrote:
His current legal education is forcing the poor lad to argue just about anything these days, unfortunately for him he can't yet put in an invoice at the end of it ;-)
Seeing his abilities, I wouldn't pay the invoice either.

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 18:43
by Southampton Gull
cambgull wrote:

Seeing his abilities, I wouldn't pay the invoice either.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Re: Tackling

Posted: 12 Jan 2012, 18:53
by Scott Brehaut
cambgull wrote: Seeing his abilities, I wouldn't pay the invoice either.
Stop the votes.

Quote. of. the. year!! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Re: Tackling

Posted: 13 Jan 2012, 23:10
by EmetEdadsBeard
Well................I've noticed something fishy in all this. Whether you think Kompanys tackle should be a red card -or not, there was a comparison when Johnson made an almost identical challenge and got...nothing. :@
Now, I love a conspiricy, so heres a beaut.....
Thieverpool are, along with Nothingcastle and Blunderland the medias favourites, dont think anyone will argue with that (except here in Gods own county where Dirty Leeds were and still are the top of the local news even when Peter Sutcliffe was knocking about). The media desperately want Theiverpool to return to former glories, having got bored with Manure winning everything for the last twenty years. :no:
But.......... those horribly lucky Mancs from the blue bit (IE most of Greater Manchester) have dropped lucky financially with a zillionaire deciding to take on ManUres domination with a bottomless pit of cash (lets face it, if he'd appeared 25 years ago he'd have bought Everton just to piss off the theiving red Scousers) and this has put the medias nose out of joint. So the FA have stepped in and Kompany, who has been Citehh's best player of late gets a 4 match ban including(COINCIDENTLY) both legs of the League Cup semi final AGAINS'T THE THEIVING PIKEY SCOUSERS! :@ :@ Meanwhile one of the hubcap stealing tvvats gets away with a similar challenge to ensure he's available for the second leg, to ensure the theiving scumbags at least get to win a cup! 8/ 8/
(and thats without mentioning the dubious penalty!!!!!)

(You might have guessed by now I'm not one of Theiverpools biggest fans) :nod: :nod: :nod:

Re: Tackling

Posted: 14 Jan 2012, 00:01
by usagullmichigan
Southampton Gull wrote:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Don't forget, Matt is going to a job where he will argue Fred West's innoccence for a pay check :~D

Re: Tackling

Posted: 14 Jan 2012, 01:24
by cambgull
usagullmichigan wrote:
Don't forget, Matt is going to a job where he will argue Fred West's innoccence for a pay check :~D
Not a chance, he'll end up representing Myra Hindley and wondering why she didn't turn up to court.