Watford all you done there is throw another yellow card into the mix that I cant remember. The tackle which left Barton on the ground for a while which I was referring to was without a doubt Lappin. I’m not sure which tackle for behind one you were referring to. And the tackle on Luke Young which I also referred to was off the ball and happened when the ref stopped play, before eventually sending Barton off after the lino decided to change the established way of refereeing and based his decision on a mix of reminiscing and interpretation based on pre-conceived ideas of that player. Rob. The decision was based purely on one sentence in the referee’s report that the lino told him he saw a headbutt it was not based on a reasoned review of the video footage. If Johnson isn’t a cheat then why did he rub his nose after like he had actually been hit?
But their lips didn't touch- their foreheads did. And that is a butt. A pathetic one, yes, but a butt. If you don't think he's a cheat more than any others, that's what I've been saying all along. I've admitted several times that he overdid it, just I think he could have done more. The issue was that Colin ****er was trying to make out it was the worst case ever. I'd say it was in the bottom 25%. As for Lambert having class. I agree it would have been better to say nothing, but he's been forced into commenting after NW rants. Lambert hardly goes to town. He says Johnson's not a cheat. If he'd said "no one in my team ever cheats, bla bla bla, Johnson is a role model bla" fine, that would be ridiculous. He just said that Johnson didn't cheat in this match. Comparison with NW makes Lambert look very favourable in PC's
I don't understand, how is a slight moving of one's head towards another player a "headbutt" ? Surely a headbutt requires intent to do damage, and the sufficient force to do that damage. Canary rob is redefining a word for the purpose of his argument. Quibbling over it's meaning until the definition is so twisted from it's initial purpose that it can mean anything.. This is a contact sport. Does lightly placing a hand on an opponents face in an apologetic manner count as a "slap" ? I'd suggest canary rob would argue that it is. "It was clearly a slap. Not a hard one, for sure, but X admitted contact and if you watch the video.." Sophistry and wordplay!
Because he had been hit. Barton admitted it. I haven't seen that report, but if the linesman called it, he's at totally e wrong angle to see Johnson, so it wasn't Johnson's fault. Plus, why didn't the linesman raise his flag? He's the one at fault as I've been saying all along. Blame the shoddy refereeing, not Johnson
But you're doing exactly the same thing there. Barton certainly did not touch his forehead to Johnson's in an apologetic manner, it was clearly aggressive, that's the situation they were in. Like the debate over whether Suarez's use of the word n***** was in an aggressive or friendly situation. It was clearly an aggressive one, therefore is unacceptable. I think the ref actually said it was because Barton showed intent to do damage, just fortunately he didn't achieve it* *or maybe not fortunately! Then we wouldn't be in this stupid situation!
edit: "He used his head and made contact." They both walked towards one another and placed their heads together as if they were squaring up. Johnson was just as culpable of this as barton. If the meeting of two heads was classified as a "heabutt", players would be being sent off left right and centre. You get more enthusiastic "headbutts" between players on the same side when they're trying to gee-up one another. Should they be sent off as well? What about when two players go up for a header and clash heads, is that a headbutt? Certainly more contact is made than in the Barton scenario. And quite often you can see there's some intent to "clatter" the opposition player a bit. A butt is a butt, and is clearly discernable from the above situations. It's characterised by the intent to do damage to an opponent with the use of the head. This is not what happened.
Sorry I thought you were referring to the foul just after the 'headbutt' which was Bennett on Barton. The earlier one was Lappin on Barton.
Fair point. I'll sum up and leave it at that. 1) referee has decided that "intent to head butt" is a red card offence. I don't know the rules but presumably this is what the FA have accepted is violent behaviour so it is a red (which means Dempsey should have got one) 2) Barton showed intent to headbutt- he moved his head, you can see that on the video. It was in an argument, so there's no doubt it was aggressive, to claim it was like a friendly pat on the cheek is not possible. 3) Barton made contact. He's admitted as much on twitter. Therefore there was a head butt. A pathetic one, but no matter how you narrowly define headbutt, it was one. Legally speaking unlawful force is merely brushing if permission is not given- so in the Court of Appeal this would be a headbutt. 4) therefore, irrespective of everything else, this is a red card. 5) Johnson made a meal if it. No doubt. Some have pointed out Hed just got hit in the face, but I don't buy it. He certainly hadn't got his nose broken. However, he didn't appeal and continued playing. It looks like he thought about cheating, but didn't. In any event this is significantly less than most exaggerations we see in our football. Such is the sorry state of the game. Unless you're going to brand every modern footballer a cheat(which is actually quite reasonable...) Johnson is not one. 6) this is what makes NW comments so unreasonable- he's making out as if nothing like this has been done before and Johnson is some sort of exception. He's not. If anything he was very very normal in that. 7) yes a yellow card for Lappin (or Bennett!) he had already been warned. The ref was useless. 8) the whole decision making of this episode was a farce- this is where anger should be vented
Watch the video, Johnson doesn't move his head forward, Barton does. It was harsh, refs need to be given more leeway on this, but on the rules it was a red. The problem was the ridiculous decision-making process where the game was allowed to continue
Thats the one I was taing about too! I thought it was Bennett. That was a yellow card for Bennett, which is why Holt trundled over to the linesman
No need to get nasty. After all you wummed on our board, and I'm not wumming here. If you don't like it, read a different thread.
for fooks sake. is this still going on?!?! just for the record, about 2 hours ago i met up with a mate and without telling him went straight up to him and moved my head towards him. he freaked out. it was hilarious his reaction to be honest. i didn't touch him but guess what he did... rubbed his face!! pissed myself laughing the bad news is i now face a three match ban from the pub anyway, can everyone please move on. lambert is right - johnson is not a cheat. he reacted and he slightly exaggerated the contact, but there was contact, as joey himself admitted on twitter. the major grief qpr have about the whole incident should be aimed at two parties. the first being the officials who didn't seem to see it but still gave it and with barton because he acted like a knobhead and maybe cost you some points. the end
for goodness sake, what are you trying to get out of this argument you lot? the game was over days ago. the decision was made and in my opinion, despite the dubious circumstances surrounding the decision, the red card was correct. barton was the aggressor throughout and his barge on johnson before the 'head tap' as i shall call it, was the act of a fool. if he was getting wound up - tough! learn to deal with it, don't get involved. he is a massive liability to your hopes of staying up and personally i'd rather you lot stay up without barton than with him. you're a great club - much greater than joseph barton will ever be
yeah and what about Delia slipping Stephen Fry a fairy cake at halftime, those canaries have no shame!
