I don’t condone breaking legs. In fact, I don’t know many people who do condone the breaking of legs, aside from maybe debt collectors in Hollywood films or perhaps your average Bond villain. Even though it was 007’s fingers that Mr. Big broke, it still doesn’t change anything. I, and most other people on the planet, don’t condone it. I’m a Manchester City fan, most of my articles are about Manchester City and I’ve just started this one about broken legs… I think you can see where this one’s going.

Now, I didn’t see the Nigel de Jong tackle on Hatem Ben Arfa live. I should have seen it live because I had arrived at the game in good time, but thanks to a mix-up involving the people I go with and our tickets, I didn’t get in until ten minutes into the game. And, as I took my seat, the people around me informed me of what I had missed (which, in the context of this game was absolutely nothing apart from the injury to Ben Arfa).

And not a lot was made of it by them, yet it happened right in front of them. None of them saw a foul, though all of them saw the stretcher and all of them saw the oxygen. The referee didn’t see a foul. Neither did the linesman nor the Newcastle players nor even Kevin Keegan, Nicky Butt, Lee Dixon or Alan Hansen, who were all pundits covering the game that day.

Having seen numerous replays of the challenge and read thousands of column inches dedicated to crucifying de Jong (and, to be fair, several – not quite as many – column inches dedicated to defending the Dutch midfielder), I’m beginning to wonder where the calls for an extended punishment have come from. De Jong has been vilified on the Dutch version of Match of the Day or Football First and has even been dropped from the national team – why? For being anti-football and a vicious thug.

But that’s all too easy to say. And wrong, obviously.

We’ll start with the anti-football accusation. I don’t believe there is such thing as anti-football to begin with. It is something that I have seen numerous times said by teams who enjoy playing quick passing football (Arsenal, Manchester United, Chelsea… Now, in all fairness, City) when they have lost or drawn against a side that is working on a much stricter budget and has set their tactics accordingly. Stoke utilise a long throw-in; it’s anti-football. Blackburn play a long ball from Robinson frequently; it’s anti-football.

It’s not. Anti-football is, in my opinion at least, a snobbish phrase coined by fans of clubs who have been bettered by a team they should, on paper, have beaten. Everybody plays to their strengths – if your team has a long throw-in or a goalkeeper with such a big kick, then use it. I wouldn’t expect Stoke to ignore their long throw-in abilities when it can be so effective. There are no rules being broken.

Now then, back to Nigel de Jong. He doesn’t score many goals, granted, but that’s not his strength. In fact, he’s never scored at all for City – and if you’ve ever seen his shooting that won’t surprise you. I mentioned recently that you wouldn’t want de Jong to be on the end of a loose ball eight yards out from goal and it’s true; the last time that happened he passed it back to Mark Schwarzer in the Fulham goal when most players would have blasted it into the net.

Continued on Page TWO

However, because a player doesn’t score many doesn’t make him part of this anti-football concept. Tackling and defending is just as much a part of football as shooting and scoring. That City have had one of the most frugal defences in the country this season tells you all you need to know about how well de Jong, Kompany, Touré et al have played. With few exceptions, anything that de Jong hasn’t stopped has been stopped by the four defenders. And anything they haven’t stopped has come up against perhaps the best goalkeeper in England.

A house isn’t built on sand for the same reason a football team doesn’t focus solely on attack. The foundations have to be right for anything to be a success; City’s ability to concede very few goals (which is unlike them, I do admit, but it’s a refreshing change) will see them in good stead when the goals dry up. And de Jong is an important part of that defence, allowing the rest of the midfield to play further forward. It’s a popular misconception that a midfield containing de Jong, Barry and Yaya Touré is one of three defensive players. Barry and Touré push forwards as well.

The challenge that broke Ben Arfa’s leg was tough, but fair; no different to a large proportion of challenges that are made in every division in every league in every country in every round of fixtures. It’s very, very unfortunate that the Newcastle player was so badly injured in the challenge and I, along with all other football fans, wish him a speedy recovery, but it was nothing more than an unlucky and freakish accident.

De Jong has previous form, however, so that must make him a thug. He broke Stuart Holden’s leg whilst on international duty with the Netherlands. Quite famously, in the previous World Cup final, he karate kicked Xabi Alonso in the chest – and should have been sent off for it. The irony there, though, is that the entire Dutch team were doing their best to foul the Spanish at every given opportunity and the manager that had instructed his players to adopt these tactics – tactics they hadn’t used throughout the rest of the tournament, mind – has now taken the moral high ground in dropping one of his own players for a fair tackle. In 20 months with City, this is the first time a tough de Jong tackle has caused an injury and he hasn’t changed his style of play since he arrived.

For there to be calls for de Jong to be suspended for as long as Ben Arfa is injured is insanely ludicrous. The severity of the foul is the only criteria on which a punishment should be decided, whether that is at the time by the referee or afterwards by a video panel. Never should the severity of an injury be taken into consideration in deciding a punishment; freak injuries can happen in the most innocuous of challenges or fouls.

After the match, the Newcastle manager Chris Hughton described the tackle as ‘unnecessary’. I understand his disappointment with his player’s long term injury, but a tackle can’t be unnecessary if an opposing playing is in possession of the ball and running towards your goal. There were covering players, but it’s de Jong’s job to make sure the defence aren’t troubled as often as they could be. I wouldn’t have expected a Newcastle midfielder to have not made that challenge should it have been the other way around.

De Jong does a vital job for City. He is strong and willing to put his body on the line, but he isn’t reckless. His challenge on Ben Arfa is no different to any other he’s made whilst with City and this is the first bad injury that has resulted from one them. He’s never been red carded for City, either.

This sudden character assassination is unjust. There are plenty of players who have made and who will make similar challenges to that which injured Ben Arfa, yet, because the freak accident didn’t occur, there will be no more words said. Many more players will be injured in fair tackles, seriously or not, in the future. But that doesn’t mean the player responsible for the injury is a vile monster.

The world isn’t as black and white as that.

Written By David Mooney