Damn! Just saw how Mitchell Johnson head-butted some1 from NZ

J

jimmyj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2010
Messages
426
Reaction score
0
Location
the hills
i dig mitchell and respect his skill,
but lately he's been losing it slightly.
he clashed physically with members of
the Windies as well.
take it easy Mitch...your career is
still young, and u have a long way to
go.
 
Last edited:
I have always wondered about the intelligence of Australians but I see Mitchell has left me in even more doubt about how smart they are.... what did he really hope to achieve by head butting someone with a cricket helmet on? Duh!

925913-pn-news-mitch-johnson.jpg


And why, I ask, does an Aussie sportsman again get away with less censure than that prescribed?

Johnson appeared to head-butt Styris’s helmet after a verbal battle in the 46th over of the New Zealand’s innings, when Styris hit him for successive fours as the Kiwis closed in on victory.

The 28-year-old later pleaded guilty for the incident, which meant a full hearing was not required by match referee Ranjan Madugalle.

He was charged with a Level 2 offence of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players or Team Official, which provides for a two-match suspension, but Mudagalle opted to fine him 60 percent of his match fee.
Click to expand...
 
LancelotSA said:
I have always wondered about the intelligence of Australians but I see Mitchell has left me in even more doubt about how smart they are.... what did he really hope to achieve by head butting someone with a cricket helmet on? Duh!

925913-pn-news-mitch-johnson.jpg


And why, I ask, does an Aussie sportsman again get away with less censure than that prescribed?
Click to expand...

well, he acknowledged his wrong-doing...is he "getting away?" i dont know, but Aus lost that match
 
jimmyj said:
well, he acknowledged his wrong-doing...is he "getting away?" i dont know, but Aus lost that match
Click to expand...

Yes, he is. The prescribed penalty is a 2 match ban. What does 60% of his match fee really mean? Bugger all. Australia won the second match. Johnson scored 16 runs off 19 balls at the end. He got 4 wickets. Would the result have been different if he had been banned?
 
Last edited:
[video=youtube;K2F9Y-wXek4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2F9Y-wXek4&feature=related[/video]
 
I was surprised he didn't get banned for that, as for headbutting someone with a helmet.. well that says something about his mentality
 
Double standards clearly evident. Benn and Gambhir got 2 match bans for physical contact while mitch johnson gets away with a headbutt.
 
Looks like he's a chucker as well.
His arm didn't look too straight as he bowled that last one.

If that was Steyn or Morkel, they'd get a 6 month ban.
 
LancelotSA said:
Yes, he is. The prescribed penalty is a 2 match ban. What does 60% of his match fee really mean? Bugger all. Australia won the second match. Johnson scored 16 runs off 19 balls at the end. He got 4 wickets. Would the result have been different if he had been banned?
Click to expand...

interesting. yes, there would have been a difference. why he received such "easy" treatment i do not know.
 
stefan9 said:
Double standards clearly evident. Benn and Gambhir got 2 match bans for physical contact while mitch johnson gets away with a headbutt.
Click to expand...

Aussies always gets away with more for less... Remember the Hansie "saga" Players from most countries were banned/"Perma banned"(:p)/ fined heavily while the Aussie players walk away without really being punished.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X