Joey Barton

[JH]

I'd rather have Joey Barton rolling around on the floor exaggerating the slap then have him still on his feet facing up to Gervinho.

 

That's brilliant, but later on in the season it will be someone like Nani 'exaggerating' and getting Barton or Tiote sent off.

 

Read my lips: It's ruining the game.

 

Joey Barton nutting Gervinho would be 'ruining the game' more. That's my point.

[Sifu]

@Joey7Barton Joseph Barton

Its 00.12hrs and I've decided am not going to call out anymore journalists on twitter, theres no point as they all cry and moan when u question there credentials. Shame really, I was enjoying debating with most of u. Remember,"Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever."

 

 

Good idea.

[Yorkie]

Don't believe him.

[madras]

Still not cheating, there was conact, he reacted. Not cheating.

 

If there was no contact and he dropped like he'd been hit with a bat, the yeah, that would be cheating.

 

It is cheating like. It's exactly like feigning and injury or taking a dive. Just because there was contact, it doesnt mean Barton throwing himself to the ground isnt cheating. By your logic, if a player goes down after minimal contact, it's not taking a dive, it's not simulation.

 

I think the difference is Gervinho cheated by purposely trying to get a penalty when he didn't deserve one. Barton on the other hand over exaggerated the situation to ensure that Gervinho got the red card he did deserve.

 

Undeniably. Conning the ref has got absolutely f*** all to do with it - it's just so far away from the point it's untrue. Gervinho's actions, a million per cent, deserved a red card, whether Joey goes down or not.

 

It brings up another question, too. If the ref had seen that it wasn't a foul (demonstrated by the play-on) - why wasn't the guy reprimanded for diving? All in all, it would have been a crazy injustice had Gervinho finished the match. Barton just made sure of it; well played lad.

 

Conning the ref has everything to do with it. If Barton hadnt threw himself to the floor would Gervinho have been sent off? Debatable. Yes, Gervinho raised his hand, yes he deserved to go, but for me you cant deny Barton helped the ref make up his mind.

 

I do Like Barton. He's a good player and integral part of the team for me. Think he gets too much stick for his comments at times but he cheated like, without a doubt.

 

If he's helping the ref come to the correct decision I've absolutely no problem with it, in fact I'd probably encourage it. It's only if he was trying to con the ref into making the wrong decision that I'd take exception.

 

Couldn't have put it better, i agree entirely.

 

 

Zaius, if Barton's helping the ref come to the correct decision - how the hell is he 'conning' him? Dunno what planet you're on.

 

Novocastrian, 'ruining the game' ffs. Players getting away with raising their hands to others' faces is more likely to bring the game into disrepute, like.

having watched it again, does that mean you think it was ok for gervinho to dive (and i'm still not too sure it was) as there was contact and he would just have been helping the ref etc.

[Hanshithispantz]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

[madras]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did.

[Guest Rey Mysterio]

Still not cheating, there was conact, he reacted. Not cheating.

 

If there was no contact and he dropped like he'd been hit with a bat, the yeah, that would be cheating.

 

It is cheating like. It's exactly like feigning and injury or taking a dive. Just because there was contact, it doesnt mean Barton throwing himself to the ground isnt cheating. By your logic, if a player goes down after minimal contact, it's not taking a dive, it's not simulation.

 

I think the difference is Gervinho cheated by purposely trying to get a penalty when he didn't deserve one. Barton on the other hand over exaggerated the situation to ensure that Gervinho got the red card he did deserve.

 

Undeniably. Conning the ref has got absolutely f*** all to do with it - it's just so far away from the point it's untrue. Gervinho's actions, a million per cent, deserved a red card, whether Joey goes down or not.

 

It brings up another question, too. If the ref had seen that it wasn't a foul (demonstrated by the play-on) - why wasn't the guy reprimanded for diving? All in all, it would have been a crazy injustice had Gervinho finished the match. Barton just made sure of it; well played lad.

 

Conning the ref has everything to do with it. If Barton hadnt threw himself to the floor would Gervinho have been sent off? Debatable. Yes, Gervinho raised his hand, yes he deserved to go, but for me you cant deny Barton helped the ref make up his mind.

 

I do Like Barton. He's a good player and integral part of the team for me. Think he gets too much stick for his comments at times but he cheated like, without a doubt.

 

If he's helping the ref come to the correct decision I've absolutely no problem with it, in fact I'd probably encourage it. It's only if he was trying to con the ref into making the wrong decision that I'd take exception.

 

Couldn't have put it better, i agree entirely.

 

 

Zaius, if Barton's helping the ref come to the correct decision - how the hell is he 'conning' him? Dunno what planet you're on.

 

Novocastrian, 'ruining the game' ffs. Players getting away with raising their hands to others' faces is more likely to bring the game into disrepute, like.

having watched it again, does that mean you think it was ok for gervinho to dive (and i'm still not too sure it was) as there was contact and he would just have been helping the ref etc.

 

  Barton was just as bad as Gervinho.

[Hanshithispantz]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did.

If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded.

 

Striking a player in the face, regardless of how hard, is a sending off offence.

[Hanshithispantz]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did.

If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded.

Basically, as far as i'm aware (and I may be wrong here), football is a contact sport.

[Kasper]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

 

How is it unfair if there was contact (which I think there was and Barton said the same), you could argue that he just helped the referee see it and tried to gain an advantage to his team...like Joey. Then its up to the referee to decide if the contact was enough to warrant a penalty....

 

Could someone describe the requirements for an unfair and fair dive please?

 

 

ps. I personally thought it was a sure penalty when it happened

[madras]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did.

If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded.

 

Striking a player in the face, regardless of how hard, is a sending off offence.

obviously the player thought he was impeded enough to not go through on goal so made the most of it....as did joey. also i'm sat here watching it over and over and it's looking more like a penalty everytime i watch it.

[Hanshithispantz]

Come on man, if the contact isn't suficient enough to impede you then it isn't a foul. There isn't such thing as a "fair dive", but there is a huge differance betwean exagerating a situation and just plain diving to the ground to bring to referee into making the wrong decision.

 

If a player is actualy triped and theatrically hurls his arms about and roles about the floor like he's been shot, that could be deemed as "helping the referee make the right decision".

 

Imo Gervinho would not have been impeded/floored had he not purposefully thrown himself to the ground.

[Cajun]

Gervinho started going down around the same time we looked like signing him. The foot was out but he made the most of it the same way Brambles brother made the most of "well she doesn't come back to the hotel unless she wants me shagging her while she's asleep".

 

I was surprised Barton did what he did, however all he did was make sure the ref made the right decision.

[Hanshithispantz]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did.

If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded.

 

Striking a player in the face, regardless of how hard, is a sending off offence.

obviously the player thought he was impeded enough to not go through on goal so made the most of it....as did joey. also i'm sat here watching it over and over and it's looking more like a penalty everytime i watch it.

That may be the case, imo though it looked like the contact was next to nothing.

[Guest Heneage]

Going to be important for us against Sunderland imo.

[Sifu]

Going to be important for us against Sunderland imo.

 

Definitely.

[Dokko]

Going to be important for us against Sunderland imo.

 

Probably be banned.

[Guest axel]

Going to be important for us against Sunderland imo.

 

Probably be banned.

How? The ref gave him yellow so FA can't do shit.

[Razor]

On a side issue, if Song gets banned for 3 games my problem with the system is that really this will only benefit out competitors who play Arsenal in the next 3 fixtures, i think a system where he was banned for 2 games plus the next time he played Newcastle would be more fair, as we lost a large potential advantage with him not being sent off on Saturday. Obviously it's a practical mess for implementation, but thoughts?

[madras]

How would Gervinho diving to unfairly win a penalty be "helping the referee make the right decision"?

 

For the record I think Gervinho's dive has been a bit overplayed, he made the most of it like but i've seen much worse. Barton has admited as much since too.

players dive when there has been contact, like barton dived when the contact wasn't enough to send him over like he did.

If a challenge isn't enough to actualy impede you then it's not a foul, so diving to the floor after slight contact is conning the ref into thinking you have been impeded.

 

Striking a player in the face, regardless of how hard, is a sending off offence.

obviously the player thought he was impeded enough to not go through on goal so made the most of it....as did joey. also i'm sat here watching it over and over and it's looking more like a penalty everytime i watch it.

That may be the case, imo though it looked like the contact was next to nothing.

re watch the bit on MOTD when shearers talking about it and theres a great view of it, wasn't a dive, was a trip though not deliberate, was a pen. i'd only been watching the game footage and you couldn't tell, the shearer pundit bit is conclusive.

[Alberto2005]

On a side issue, if Song gets banned for 3 games my problem with the system is that really this will only benefit out competitors who play Arsenal in the next 3 fixtures, i think a system where he was banned for 2 games plus the next time he played Newcastle would be more fair, as we lost a large potential advantage with him not being sent off on Saturday. Obviously it's a practical mess for implementation, but thoughts?

True.

[toontownman]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/columnists/view/206162/You-have-got-it-all-wrong-Joey-Barton/#comments

 

How about you do your job as a journalist and listen to his interview today that answers all your pathetic questions.

 

YOU HAVE GOT IT ALL WRONG JOEY BARTON

ABOVE: Joey Barton and Gervinho clash at Newcastle

15th August 2011

By Brian Woolnough

WOOLY'S WORLD

 

 

IN the build-up to the new season I started to feel sorry for Joey Barton.

 

Dumped on the transfer list by Newcastle, told to train with the kids and revealing through Twitter just what a sensible, well-informed ­character he is.

 

 

The Working Man’s hero, that’s me, was the message. A reformed character and it was time to believe him.

 

 

Then came Saturday evening at St James’s Park and we saw Barton for what he really is.

 

 

A good – not great – ­footballer with a problem. A mixed up guy who can’t ­control his anger.

 

 

He should not have made the first weekend headlines yet just couldn’t help himself.

 

 

Here is someone with talent who is unable to channel his skills in the right direction.

 

 

An interesting person in so many ways and yet someone who is never going to be able to walk away from ­controversy. It is a sad story.

 

 

He spent yesterday abusing and rubbishing me on ­Twitter but I have no ­intention of getting into a slanging match with him.

 

 

I would like him to ­answer these questions ­after the ­disgraceful scenes.

 

 

Why did he get involved with Arsenal’s Gervinho?

 

 

Why did he go down as if hit by Mike Tyson when all Gervinho did was slap him?

 

 

Why did he say to an ­Arsenal player, ‘he punched me’, when he clearly did not?

 

 

Why did he march ­angrily off the pitch and confront the fourth ­official?

 

 

Why didn’t he get on with trying to beat Arsenal?

 

 

Why, why, why? It is a word that has followed Barton’s career.

 

 

If we examine all of ­Saturday’s incidents, ­Barton had no reason to be the centre of attention.

 

 

Yes, earlier he was stamped on by Alex Song, who deserved to be red carded.

 

 

No doubt the FA will ­examine the incident this morning and the Arsenal midfield player can expect to be charged.

 

 

When Gervinho went down it wasn’t a clear dive. Barton didn’t even make the tackle and when you examine TV replays there was contact.

 

 

Barton had no need to grab Arsenal’s debutant by the neck and haul him to his feet. This was ­red card behaviour.

 

 

Gervinho had to go ­because you can’t raise your hands and make ­contact with an opponent. But it wasn’t a punch, as Barton claimed.

 

 

And what was the Toon’s ­Steven Taylor doing ­prancing around indicating that Gervinho had ­elbowed Barton?

 

All this after repeated warnings from the ­authorities for players to show more respect.

 

 

At last Thursday’s ­Premier League launch the FA, LMA, PFA, the ­Referees’ Association and the Premier League all announced proudly that dissent and bad player ­behaviour would be ­improving this season.

 

 

Song must be disciplined for deliberately stamping on Barton’s calf.

 

 

It was a premeditated act and you wonder what goes on behind the scenes at the Emirates?

 

 

Is there no one talking to the ­players about such ­loutish behaviour?

 

 

Do the board not speak to Wenger about publicity that is damaging the club?

 

 

What, also, do the ­Newcastle board do about Barton?

 

 

Manager Alan Pardew tried to defend him after Saturday’s wretched 0-0 draw. It appears to be ­owner Mike Ashley who wants Barton out.

 

 

Who would buy him? He is a talented ­ midfield ­player and yet you know what you are going to get from him. Trouble. Big trouble.

 

 

The list of incidents against his name is too long to believe he will ever change. Saturday ruined that.

 

 

He has been given every opportunity and there will be those who still ­defend him.

 

 

He is not a reformed character and Barton should look in the mirror rather than spend so much time Tweeting and abusing people.

 

 

His anger on and off the pitch means that nothing has changed with him.

 

 

These were disgraceful scenes and again we ask, why Joey?

 

 

Why, why, why?

[Mr. Snrub]

Steven Howard says ‘loathsome’ Joey Barton is a nasty piece of work

 

IF FOOTBALL had a choice, it would have washed its hands of Joseph Anthony Barton many moons ago.

 

But for a genetic fluke whereby he was able to kick a ball more or less in a straight line, Barton would probably have spent some considerable time at Her Majesty's pleasure.

 

As it is, he's still done some 74 days behind bars as part of a six-month sentence for assault in his native Liverpool in December 2007.

 

CCTV showed Barton punching a man umpteen times - knocking him out - and attacking a teenager.

 

Earlier in the same year he got a four-month suspended term plus 200 hours' community service after assaulting Manchester City team-mate Ousmane Dabo in training.

 

The indulgent liberal elite will have us believe Barton is yet another victim of social deprivation and a troubled upbringing.

 

Others suggest he has an admirable willingness to speak his mind (I did once) and the sort of overall intelligence that saw him quote George Orwell, George Washington and Nietzsche on Twitter last week.

 

The vast majority, though, believe he is a totally nasty piece of work. To call him a bully, cheat and coward would not exactly have you up on a disrepute charge.

 

In fact, Newcastle legend Alan Shearer is believed to have once summed him up in four letters. The ex-England skipper called him a 's**t'.

 

Shearer also called a Barton challenge on Xabi Alonso that saw the so-called hard man sent off in May 2009 'a coward's tackle'.

 

And so to St James' Park on Saturday and the start of another eagerly-awaited football season.

 

Only for it to be blackened by the all-too recognisable behaviour of a man who, in the joyous event of his retiring from the game, could have a huge future in the acting profession.

 

Yes, there is no love lost between Arsenal and Barton - Abou Diaby was sent off last season for retaliating after a typically robust Barton 'challenge'.

 

And Barton had already been stamped on by Alex Song, who could well have been sent off. Then, again, this is the sort of incident Barton has escaped from without punishment on numerous occasions.

 

But rather than the accepted 'live by the sword, die by the sword' philosophy adopted by most players who operate in a physical twilight zone, Barton ran off the pitch to 'report' Song to the fourth official.

 

Then, when Arsenal new boy Gervinho went down in the box, Barton totally lost his head.

 

Furiously manhandling Gervinho back to his feet in an unwarranted action that prompted a mass bust-up, Barton then threw himself to the ground, clutching his face, after a half-hearted slap from Gervinho that didn't even disturb his mascara.

 

Barton went down as if felled by an 18 stone lumberjack. It was painful to watch. If Barton had anything about him at all - like a conscience - he would be too ashamed to show his face in public ever again.

 

Hopefully, the FA will issue a retrospective red card that, at least for three matches, will spare us Barton's loathsome and boorish behaviour. Nor should the visually-impaired Peter Walton escape.

 

His amateur and incompetent handling of the game was another reminder of the wretched level to which Premier League refereeing standards have plunged. But the real villain of the piece is Barton.

 

The would-be intellectual who was banging on about freedom of speech last week after Newcastle owner Mike Ashley commendably said he could leave the club for nothing.

 

Freedom of speech wasn't something Barton allowed the Manchester City trainee when he stubbed a lit cigar out in his face. Nor the young Everton fan he was sent home from a pre-season tour for assaulting.

 

George Orwell famously said: "Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play. It is bound up with hatred, jealousy, boastfulness, disregard of all rules and sadistic pleasure of witnessing violence."

 

How well Barton would have understood all this.

 

Wow, I've never seen such a bitter, hateful article.    What a disgusting piece of work, how does he get away with this?

 

Wonder who he supports. 

 

[madras]

i'm not bartons biggest fan, think he's overrated on here as a player and as person....but that is one spiteful piece.

[toontownman]

On a side issue, if Song gets banned for 3 games my problem with the system is that really this will only benefit out competitors who play Arsenal in the next 3 fixtures, i think a system where he was banned for 2 games plus the next time he played Newcastle would be more fair, as we lost a large potential advantage with him not being sent off on Saturday. Obviously it's a practical mess for implementation, but thoughts?

True.

 

Like that idea. Especially if there is going to be bad blood. Like DeJong, not beyond the realms of possibility one of our players would have been out to snap him when we played again. If Pearce was still playing for us he would have been! 

 

The defence is that it could break up a run of form or a vital match. However thats nullified but the fact the misdemeanor should never happen anyway. Every action has a reaction regardless of when it happens.