Woodgate--should he play?

kaimera

Our man Sven decided against including Johnny Woodgate in his squad for the Italian game.

Risdale thinks it's a travesty but then again, whats new? Leeds have become the biggest whingers in the Premieraship lately.

IMHO, I think Sven is completely justiffied in not picking him. Any player who did what he did deserves it whether or not he's found guilty.
He's a professional player who should know better and tis time someone was used as a scape goat to deter anyone else from doing the same.

So, what does the floor think----

Should Woody be allowed play for England??

Bottle_of_Smoke

IMHO, I think Sven is completely justiffied in not picking him. Any player who did what he did deserves it whether or not he's found guilty.

If he's found not guilty, doesn't it mean he technically didn't do anything!?

manonthemoon

Yes, I agree Leeds are the biggest whingers in the Premiership. I saw Ridsdale complaining about Sven's decision. With Ridsdale and O'leary you just feel like saying, Oh shut Up.
Chairmen giving out about such matters, really annoys me. "Mr. Chairman, your player is a scumbag". To try and criticise the national manager for not picking the player after such a serious offence is quite disgraceful.

First of all Woodgate was found guilty of affray, for which he served his sentence of Community service. He was involved in a very serious racial, attack which left a young man in a very serious condition


Sven Eriksonn is a world class manager as his record shows
Eriksonns will not pick Woodgate because of the effects of team morale of the squad. He has dropped players such as lampard for indescretions while out on the town.



I'll put this way, How would Stephen Gerrard, Heskey and Owen feel id Jamie Carragher was ommited from the WC squad at the expense of this idiot

Xterminator

What BULLSHlT!

I'm not a leeds supporter. But

If he played for utd, liverpool, etc. many of you would be championing his cause!. How many of you man u supporters said Cantona should never play for United again?

Not 1. And he was found guilty of a similar offense. Assault. And he did it in a football pitch.

I give you an example of Graham Le Saux. Now there is a thug. Time and agian on the pitch he assaults other players.
When has Woodgate ever misbehaved like that in a match? After all it is football we are talking about, not a social worker!
Look at Roy Keane! He used to be more interested in getting stuck in than winning the ball. Remember the 'tackle' in Micks first game? Remember all the stamping incidents?
Now he was given many chances, and look at him now! An example of how the game should be played.

Johnatan Woodgate is a young man. He has made a mistake. He served his sentance. Now like every one else he should be given another chance.

Or every player ahould be treated the same. Assault
(stamp or elbow) someone, and you cant play for your country again. (That would disqualify thre following players _:

Viera, Hendry (Colin), Keane (Roy), Le Saux, Batty, Cantona, Wise, Shearer, etc.
Feel free to add more.

X

mike65

Erickson was exactly right in his action and his logic.

Football hooligans are banned from traveling, footballers who behave like thugs are subject to the law of the land should be treated likewise.

Mike.

kaimera

Woodgate assaulted an innocent foreign student outside a night club in a city

I think that differs from an elbow on the football pitch.

The two cannot be compared.

Btw....Cantona never did play for France again....and thinking about it.....Woody AND Bowyer could prolly do with 8 months as well.......

NeRb666

If the papers are to be believed, Sven wanted to pick him but was overruled by Adam Crozier from the FA.

-oRnein9-

He did the crime now he's got to do the time. + There is alot of players better than him in that position.

Xterminator

Originally posted by -oRnein9-
He did the crime now he's got to do the time. + There is alot of players better than him in that position.

He did the time, as layed out by a court of law!
100 hrs community service.
That is the whole point of this thing!

Knock Knock .. anybody there?? echo...

Woodgate assaulted an innocent foreign student outside a night club in a city
I think that differs from an elbow on the football pitch.
The two cannot be compared

Why not? At least woodgate can claim he had a few beers on him, where bergkamp, and Hendry and Roy Keane etc have no such mitigating factor. They were stone cold sober when assaulting other players, and yes elbowing someone is assault.

If your not sure it is, I can provide a demonstration (on you) of how headbutting, elbowing and stamping on someone is assault, regardless of whether it happens on or off the pitch (if you like).

Also you seem to think it less serious when it happens on a sporting field? I would consider it worse if anything.

X

Mountjoy Mugger

The mind boggles at the amount of self righteousness that is been displayed here!

bucks73

The FA have stated that because members of their travelclub with criminal records are not allowed travel then it is only right that any players with criminal records should not travel also.

If players are to be seen setting an example then it is only right that those with criminal records are left at home.

Anyway Woodgate is just not good enough to get in the squad ahead of Ferdinand, Keown, Campbell, Southgate and even Ehiogu.

frankly

Thread is "Woodgate--to play or not to play?"

IMO If he is good enough, which he is'nt at the moment, he should be picked to play for England. All those who think he should be crucified because of a mistake/criminal act/stupitidy/ etc should maybe think?

Originally by manonthemon
I'll put this way, How would Stephen Gerrard, Heskey and Owen feel id Jamie Carragher was ommited from the WC squad at the expense of this idiot

Jamie Carragher - This is a joke, right? Crap full back and crap darts player, me tinks

Xterminator

Originally posted by bucks73
The FA have stated that because members of their travelclub with criminal records are not allowed travel then it is only right that any players with criminal records should not travel also.

If players are to be seen setting an example then it is only right that those with criminal records are left at home.

Anyway Woodgate is just not good enough to get in the squad ahead of Ferdinand, Keown, Campbell, Southgate and even Ehiogu.

Gazza beat his wife (repeatedly), but was seen as a fit english squad candidate.
Tony Adams drove his car while so F***en drunk he couldnt avoid an elephant, and theres no problem for him to play for (and Captain) his country.

Where were the crowds of protestors when it was suggested they play again for there country?

I understand somepeople want to see sports cleaned up. But it remains that Woodgate is being singled out unfairly.

X

WhiteWashMan

i see it more in the light of the FA trying to disipline players for their 'of the pitch' transactions.
before when the players went on the tear, they got a slap on the knuckles, now they are banning them from games.
and i think they are right.
frank lampard had the exact same treatment.

Mountjoy Mugger

Originally posted by WhiteWashMan

frank lampard had the exact same treatment.

Lampard played last night though. Where's the logic in that?

WhiteWashMan

frank lampard was not played in previous games because he píssed all over some statue in public whilst drunk.
afaik this is the first game that woodgate has been eligable to play in, so he may be played in the next, he may not.

Mountjoy Mugger

My take on it is that Woodgate is up the proverbial creek. I can't see him being considered for any of England's remaining warm up games - if he's lucky, he might get a run out in the next Euro Qualifers, but then only if the current England back four have a nightmare in Japan/Korea.

The UK media seem to want the guy nobbled for good, as does Adam Crozier and his cronies at Lancaster Gate.

dobdobdo

Originally by manonthemon
I'll put this way, How would Stephen Gerrard, Heskey and Owen feel id Jamie Carragher was ommited from the WC squad at the expense of this idiot

Kinda ironic really as it was Carragher who could've blinded a supporter with the coin he threw at Highbury? - dart player - plyd frankly.

I think Woogate has "done his time" let him get on with his life, but he won't be going to Japan cos he ain't playing well enough.

Sucka

It can be argued all day that woodgate, terry, bowyer et al are being treated unfairly but no-one can deny that their non-selection is an effective deterrent to other young footballers who now may think twice before entering a fracas in public. Missing out on the World Cup is surely the ultimate punishment for a pro footballer.

ps bowyer seems to be making an effort to clean up his act, if you watched the match on sat he's got rid of his "scummer" haircut:D

Bob the Unlucky Octopus

While I agree with you in principle xterm, I think you're being slightly naive in your appraisal of the current situation. Yes, when a player commits a foul or violent act on a football pitch it's brutal, thuggish, etc- but it's not criminal. Just as when one man wearing a uniform guns down another wearing a different uniform, it is war, not murder. I realize ethically there is little difference between the circumstances, but we live in a world ruled by policy, not ethics.

A further point that not many have addressed here, is that Woodgate's attack was racially motivated, investigations conducted by the Leeds police confirmed that Bowyer was a known racist & a troublemaker, reports about Woodgate highlight a number of nasty & violent statements he uttered about racial minorities while under confinement. The argument that 'they had a few beers in them' saves their a$s in a court of law about as much as it would with Tony Adams' crashing his car into a tree while blind drunk. If you drink, it's a responsibility you bear, not an excuse for you to go kick someone's head in. Now it is true that Adams not only was convicted, but served time, and still went on to captain his country. But Venables and Erikson are very different men in the way they approach football management.

I understand what you're saying xterm- in an ideal world, whether they are racists, thugs, liars, cheats, or brutes in a jersey shouldn't matter if they're the best footballers. Well, after a racially motivated incident, surely you must realize the press were baying for blood? And that for men who live their life in the spotlight of football, a crime of this nature would deprive them of a second chance based on public opinion.

If I was England manager, I would play neither of them, for the simple reason that England have a lot better center-halves than woodgate, and a lot better and level-headed midfielders than Bowyer. In central defence you've got the pick of Southgate, Campbell, Keown(if fit), Gareth Barry and Ledley King as a hope for the future. Lee Bowyer is undoubtedly a talented midfielder, but the number of times he loses his head in match situations means he cannot be risked at the world cup. His disciplinary record on the pitch is woeful at best. You want level-headed and careful players at the World Cup, Premiership referees are often far less severe than those you will see officiating World Cup matches.

Occy

Mountjoy Mugger

Originally posted by Bob the Unlucky Octopus

A further point that not many have addressed here, is that Woodgate's attack was racially motivated, investigations conducted by the Leeds police confirmed that Bowyer was a known racist & a troublemaker, reports about Woodgate highlight a number of nasty & violent statements he uttered about racial minorities while under confinement

Can you corroborate these statements?? Preferably, with some supporting URLs. I'd be interested to know what you mean by known racist Why then did the police deem it not to be a racially motivated attack?

Xterminator

Originally posted by Bob the Unlucky Octopus
A further point that not many have addressed here, is that Woodgate's attack was racially motivated, investigations conducted by the Leeds police confirmed that Bowyer was a known racist & a troublemaker, reports about Woodgate highlight a number of nasty & violent statements he uttered about racial minorities while under confinement. The argument that 'they had a few beers in them' saves their a$s in a court of law about as much as it would with Tony Adams' crashing his car into a tree while blind drunk. If you drink, it's a responsibility you bear, not an excuse for you to go kick someone's head in. Now it is true that Adams not only was convicted, but served time, and still went on to captain his country. But Venables and Erikson are very different men in the way they approach football management.

I understand what you're saying xterm- in an ideal world, whether they are racists, thugs, liars, cheats, or brutes in a jersey shouldn't matter if they're the best footballers. Well, after a racially motivated incident, surely you must realize the press were baying for blood? And that for men who live their life in the spotlight of football, a crime of this nature would deprive them of a second chance based on public opinion.

Occy

1. I have seen no proof that the assault was racially motivated.

In fact the police found it was not a racially motivated attack.

The youths family and 'friends' , the media and so called community leaders are the ones using the race card. Claiming victimisation, unfair police handling, too light a sentance etc.

Had Woodgate been asian, and assaulted an asian youth would the same level of furore been seen. Clearly NO!

Had Woodgate assaulted a youth of his own etchnicity would he have been singled out in the manner he has? I dont think he would have.

Shouldnt the punishment for common assault be the same regardless of the color of your opponent? Yes it should.

2. If public opinion should be allowed to choose teams for England, why was Beckham picked after his argie -bargy in the last world cup? Public opinion was 10-1 against Becks at the time, yet, because he was picked for football reasons, Becks is become the Captain, and arguably their most influential player!

Again it is clear that Woodgate has been Guilty of other crimes to gain such a punishment.

A) He plays for leeds. A grevious crime for many of the posters. After all Leeds are whingers, so they should be judged by a different set of rules, as layed out in the scapgegoat handbook.

He is white. If he were a minority himself, then we could see the assualt for what it was (Common Assault) , and not for what it was alleged and unproven to be (Racially Motivated assault).

C)His haircut has upset some of the posters.

D)His form for his club. (While this should be irrelevant when deciding whether he should be available to play for his country, it has been mentioned so many times, he must be a fault for this too)

E)Internal FA politics (see also point A). Woodgate is clearly guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, as the FA seeks to reestablish some credibility.(at Woodies expense).


X

frankly

As I have already stated in this thread that I think he should be picked to play for England "If he is good enough, which he is'nt at the moment " which hopefully answers

OoRIGINALLY POSTED BY Xterminator


D)His form for his club. (While this should be irrelevant when deciding whether he should be available to play for his country, it has been mentioned so many times, he must be a fault for this too)

leeroybrown

No, he's a thug!