Sportswash! - Let’s oil stare at Manchester City!

[colleh]

Bit late for the dutch to be taking the moral highground over heavy tackling after their performances at the world cup.

[Davies4England]

Whilst technically, there wasnt a huge amount wrong with the tackle, it was the excessive nature of it that caused the controversy.

I don't understand this tbh. I'm also baffled by his omission from the Dutch squad on the back of it. He made a good tackle and got the ball. The fact there were unfortunate consequences does not alter whether the tackle was a good one or not. That kind of tackle happens hundreds of times over a weekend. Are they all wrong, or just the ones with unfortunate consequences? There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

It was a good tackle but with excessive force, you could hear the impact. As the article mentions he had words after the Holden tackle, and he also had the high boot v Alonso. They had a poll in Holland and 90% wanted him removed from the team. They got their wish.

He's no Van Bommel but unlike him he's not the son in law of the national coach.

[villa4europe]

Whilst technically, there wasnt a huge amount wrong with the tackle, it was the excessive nature of it that caused the controversy.

I don't understand this tbh. I'm also baffled by his omission from the Dutch squad on the back of it. He made a good tackle and got the ball. The fact there were unfortunate consequences does not alter whether the tackle was a good one or not. That kind of tackle happens hundreds of times over a weekend. Are they all wrong, or just the ones with unfortunate consequences? There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

like i said, my problem with it was there was absolutely no need to do it, it is a common tackle but not at that speed, he flew into to it, he wouldnt have known he was going to break his leg but he knew it would hurt him, screamed of roughing up the dangerman early doors

completely wrong mentality to have

and winning the ball doesnt make it a good tackle

[Shillzz]

Whilst technically, there wasnt a huge amount wrong with the tackle, it was the excessive nature of it that caused the controversy.

I don't understand this tbh. I'm also baffled by his omission from the Dutch squad on the back of it. He made a good tackle and got the ball. The fact there were unfortunate consequences does not alter whether the tackle was a good one or not. That kind of tackle happens hundreds of times over a weekend. Are they all wrong, or just the ones with unfortunate consequences? There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

like i said, my problem with it was there was absolutely no need to do it, it is a common tackle but not at that speed, he flew into to it, he wouldnt have known he was going to break his leg but he knew it would hurt him, screamed of roughing up the dangerman early doors

completely wrong mentality to have

and winning the ball doesnt make it a good tackle

I guess, as BOF said, it was arguably a fine challange.

However, I sympathise more with the latter view that there was no need for it. He wasnt trying to injure the player im sure, but I think he was trying to imprint his hard man image onto the Newcastle team. He Succeeded.

[dudevillaisnice]

Not sure whats really funny about this.

The fact his dropped from the squad is funny and good enough for me

I hate City so this adds fun to it you see.

[mcfc]

Not sure whats really funny about this.

The fact his dropped from the squad is funny and good enough for me

I hate City so this adds fun to it you see.

do you hate city or de jong

instead of de jong heading off with holland and playing 1 or 2 games risking injury he will have his feet up and will more than likely be 100% fit for city

so to hate city you should want all their players playing as many games as possiable and risking injury

[dudevillaisnice]

Not sure whats really funny about this.

The fact his dropped from the squad is funny and good enough for me

I hate City so this adds fun to it you see.

do you hate city or de jong

instead of de jong heading off with holland and playing 1 or 2 games risking injury he will have his feet up and will more than likely be 100% fit for city

so to hate city you should want all their players playing as many games as possiable and risking injury

Doesn't bother me if he stays 100% fit, I don't think any player should get injured nor do I wish it upon anyone... but that doesn't change my mentality that City is a word removed.

Don't worry though I hate SHA way more then I hate City.

[carew_villa]

Good idea! It will discipline him for Holland so that he never gets a red card while playing for Holland.

It's not like Holland are going to miss him considering they're probably playing teams like San Marino.

[CitizenBlue]

Whilst technically, there wasnt a huge amount wrong with the tackle, it was the excessive nature of it that caused the controversy.

I don't understand this tbh. I'm also baffled by his omission from the Dutch squad on the back of it. He made a good tackle and got the ball. The fact there were unfortunate consequences does not alter whether the tackle was a good one or not. That kind of tackle happens hundreds of times over a weekend. Are they all wrong, or just the ones with unfortunate consequences? There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

This.

But we're not bothered now that he will return to the club fresh from a 2 week vacation injury free. 8)

[TrentVilla]

Whilst technically, there wasnt a huge amount wrong with the tackle, it was the excessive nature of it that caused the controversy.

I don't understand this tbh. I'm also baffled by his omission from the Dutch squad on the back of it. He made a good tackle and got the ball. The fact there were unfortunate consequences does not alter whether the tackle was a good one or not. That kind of tackle happens hundreds of times over a weekend. Are they all wrong, or just the ones with unfortunate consequences? There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

This.

But we're not bothered now that he will return to the club fresh from a 2 week vacation injury free. 8)

I'd call it PR mate nothing more, the Dutch side and its manager got a huge amount of stick for the way they played in the World Cup despite the fact they reached the final, in short it was classed as 'anti Dutch' or 'anti total football' and against the principles of their game.

De Jong was one of the most visible offenders in the final and this tackle or more the consequences of the tackle as the tackle itself wasn't a bad one coming as they did on the eve of the squad has led to him being left out.

Its politics in football and De Jong is the victim of people trying to make a statement, I'm sure he will be back in a Dutch squad soon enough.

In the meantime you benefit.

[jonno_2004]

If I was De Jong I'd be mightily pissed! Made a scapegoat by your own nation.

[CitizenBlue]

Whilst technically, there wasnt a huge amount wrong with the tackle, it was the excessive nature of it that caused the controversy.

I don't understand this tbh. I'm also baffled by his omission from the Dutch squad on the back of it. He made a good tackle and got the ball. The fact there were unfortunate consequences does not alter whether the tackle was a good one or not. That kind of tackle happens hundreds of times over a weekend. Are they all wrong, or just the ones with unfortunate consequences? There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

This.

But we're not bothered now that he will return to the club fresh from a 2 week vacation injury free. 8)

I'd call it PR mate nothing more, the Dutch side and its manager got a huge amount of stick for the way they played in the World Cup despite the fact they reached the final, in short it was classed as 'anti Dutch' or 'anti total football' and against the principles of their game.

De Jong was one of the most visible offenders in the final and this tackle or more the consequences of the tackle as the tackle itself wasn't a bad one coming as they did on the eve of the squad has led to him being left out.

Its politics in football and De Jong is the victim of people trying to make a statement, I'm sure he will be back in a Dutch squad soon enough.

In the meantime you benefit.

Good point.

I thought he definitely should have been suspended for what he did to Xabi Alonso. There was no unfortunate outcome like Ben Arfa, but it was by far more reckless and dangerous.

De Jong will have to change his technique a bit, make him think about the necessity of tackling a player vs. the angle he's taking. He can still be just as effective without these unfortunate outcomes. I'm sure the coaches and manager will help him to do this as he risks a serious ban if any more bad outcomes happen.

[AshVilla]

i remember de jong doing a nasty challenge on Young in the city game last season or the season before almost took his leg off

[SoccerHQ]

Won't De Jong get a 3 match ban as the ref didn't give him a yellow?

[AVFC-Prideofbrum]

No. It weren't a foul.

[PauloBarnesi]

There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

yes of course from the rule book, but I think it still would have been better if someone hadn’t been injured?

[dudevillaisnice]

Manchester City boss Roberto Mancini had a blazing row with star striker and captain Carlos Tevez as the uneasy truce between the two men exploded during half-time of the club's 2-1 win over Newcastle on Sunday.

Mancini and Tevez stood toe-to-toe exchanging verbals as the inquest into a lacklustre first half turned heated in the home dressing room at City's Eastlands stadium.

At one point it looked as though Tevez may even be substituted.

It is understood that the mood turned sour on Sunday when Mancini entered the dressing room after his players and heard Tevez saying something he didn't like.

City's Italian manager then made a comment of his own and Tevez jumped up from his seat to confront him.

Words were exchanged and other members of the team and backroom staff had to intervene.

On Monday City sources were at pains to stress that the incident did not get physical and that it is not expected to threaten Tevez's standing at the club or in Mancini's team.

However, it was intense enough for Mancini to threaten Tevez with substitution and at one point the Argentina international did have his shirt off as though he was preparing for his afternoon to be cut short.

It is understood that, once the situation had been defused, Mancini delivered a rollicking to the rest of the team before spending the last few moments of the interval in his office. Tevez then followed him there and the two men made up privately.

Tevez went on to play a full role in City's second-half performance that saw them edge a narrow win and shook hands with his manager when he was substituted late in the game.

Subsequently Mancini agreed to Tevez's request to take an extra day off after the international break so that he can visit his daughter who is currently in South America.

On Monday night City assistant manager Brian Kidd said: 'There was an awful lot said between the group at half-time but the lads showed a great response in the second half.'

But the incident will bring fresh focus on the nature of Tevez's relationship with his coach. Last season, Tevez was the most outspoken critic of Mancini's controversial double training sessions and chose the eve of a Manchester derby to spell out his reservations and claim that his good form at City had nothing to do with the Italian.

At the end of last season, Tevez and Mancini had a meeting to clear the air and subsequently the City manager surprised everybody by naming him captain.

Certainly, the relationship between the two men had been good enough for Tevez to continue producing his very best football.

Sunday's goal against Newcastle - a first-half penalty - was his fifth of the season.

http://tinyurl.com/3xbg5qk

[BOF]

There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

yes of course from the rule book, but I think it still would have been better if someone hadn’t been injured?

Injuries can result from absolutely every kind of tackle - as the de Jong tackle demonstrates. Of course it would have been better if Ben Arfa didn't get injured (karma notwithstanding) but that has no bearing on whether de Jong got it wrong or not. Poeple need to look solely at the tackle rather than getting whipped up in the frenzy over it's outcome. Otherwise next thing you know, Wenger will have got his way and tackling (not just the bad ones) will be illegal.

[PauloBarnesi]

There was nothing wrong with that tackle.

yes of course from the rule book, but I think it still would have been better if someone hadn’t been injured?

Injuries can result from absolutely every kind of tackle - as the de Jong tackle demonstrates. Of course it would have been better if Ben Arfa didn't get injured (karma notwithstanding) but that has no bearing on whether de Jong got it wrong or not. Poeple need to look solely at the tackle rather than getting whipped up in the frenzy over it's outcome. Otherwise next thing you know, Wenger will have got his way and tackling (not just the bad ones) will be illegal.

Well actually the idea that injuries can result from any kind of tackle isn’t well illustrated by this. We know that people can get injured by the most innocent of challenges. I am not saying anything about whether he got the ball, but this challenge involved huge amounts of force and movement, which is part of football. A split second either way and the injury wouldn’t have happened. I am not getting into a frenzy about it, just find it rather sad when footballers or any sportsman gets injured, particularly when they caused by others. People get obsessed by the ‘winning the ball’ argument, which seems to forget someone gets injured.

I am not agreeing with Wenger; imo football is a lot cleaner than it used to be, which throws into focus when tackles do cause injuries.

[BOF]

No-one is obsessed by 'winning the ball'. You said it yourself that there was nothing wrong with the tackle and that it involved force and movement which are part of the game. I just don't see how any of that then justifies de Jong being omitted from the Dutch squad. That's something you do to someone who has done something wrong. It quite clearly apportions blame on the player for something which was unfortunate but which was neither illegal nor unsporting. It wasn't like Terry 'winning the ball' from Milner in the cup semi-final last season. de Jong's was a perfectly good tackle which was neither mis-timed nor malicious. He has absolutely zero to answer for.