well you can take his licence and he cant drive, but he can still go to the pub and get [censored] and turn up to training half cut, the bloke is a loose cannon and its only up to himself to pull his head in if you ask me. he has been given far too many chances anyways, evryone deserves a second chance, but this guy surely has mischief following him. im just glad he isnt a demon.

He has had two incidents and he probably is a bit of fool off the field. If he deserves a second chance then how can he have been given too many chances? But christ he can play football and I would have him in at MFC in a heartbeat. His issues are manageable and yes it does involve him taking the big step to maturity.

Geelong's brand has been tarnished because Johnson is a representative of the club and his actions affect people's perceptions of the club and its culture.

I think it is the potential for the brand to be tarnished and any perceived lack of action or failure to appropriately punish the player by the Club would be seen as tacit approval of the behaviour. Its a no win situation for any party associated with these incidients

Johnson was a fool for the traffic incident. Its probably not a big rebuke involved. But where do you draw the line in the incidents that Club will be punish and wont punish? I dont think the Club has a choice but to implement some form of review of the incident and discipline.

Johnson was a fool for the traffic incident. Its probably not a big rebuke involved. But where do you draw the line in the incidents that Club will be punish and wont punish? I dont think the Club has a choice but to implement some form of review of the incident and discipline.

Totally agree. By not disciplining Johnson the club is virtually saying if you are good enough it doesn't matter how you behave. I truely believe this is the wrong message and would like to think in the same position our club would act.

Totally agree. By not disciplining Johnson the club is virtually saying if you are good enough it doesn't matter how you behave. I truely believe this is the wrong message and would like to think in the same position our club would act.

And it then leaves the Club open to the perception both inside and outside the Club that it condones the behaviour regardless of how good the player is and is subject to not upholding community standards to which it is a high profile part of.

Can't believe so many people in uproar over a traffic offence.

Like TheShaft said, it was done on a relatively safe and quiet piece of the road, quite possibly a number of people who are now whinging on the internet would of pushed the speed limit in the same situation.

Like TheShaft said, it was done on a relatively safe and quiet piece of the road, quite possibly a number of people who are now whinging on the internet would of pushed the speed limit in the same situation.

The number of people who have or may have done it is irrelevant and does not make the act any less stupid nor change the fact that he broke the law.

I dont see any justification to be travelling 120km in a 50 zone anywhere anytime.

However, nor do I see the need for a ritual hanging of the player for the offence.

He was a fool and will be accountable for the reckless actions under the law and to the Club.

Can't believe so many people in uproar over a traffic offence.

Like TheShaft said, it was done on a relatively safe and quiet piece of the road, quite possibly a number of people who are now whinging on the internet would of pushed the speed limit in the same situation.

Are you serious? The road toll in our country is a disgrace. Every day people die needless deaths as a result of speeding, drink driving etc.

The fact that Johnson was on a seemingly safe road is no excuse. He was 70km/h above the limit. It has been said earlier in this thread that if he had crashed and killed his passenger or somebody else he'd be looking at some serious jail time.

i spose its sorta like saying he punched a bloke, but only cause he was big and i thought he could take it...

Can't believe so many people in uproar over a traffic offence.

Like TheShaft said, it was done on a relatively safe and quiet piece of the road, quite possibly a number of people who are now whinging on the internet would of pushed the speed limit in the same situation.

There's speeding, then there is 70km OVER the speed limit.

And what the hell is a 'safe road'? Do other people not drive on that road?

What I think some people fail to understand is the danger of what Johnson did. He can drink and take drugs as much as he wants, and not harm anyone but himself. If he had got into a fatal car accident, he would have most definitely killed himself and the people in other vehicle.

But hey, it was a safe road and everyone speeds...

My biggest issue is the incosistency. How can you punish a bloke for being drunk in public, and not for endangering countless lives? What, is one a bigger problem than the other? Does it only matter what a player does if it affects his playing or if it reflects badly on the club? Does dying or killing another person not do both those things?

It all comes down to football clubs protecting their own arse. They don't really care about the players, they just care about their image and their success.

My biggest issue is the incosistency. How can you punish a bloke for being drunk in public, and not for endangering countless lives?

jaded, i think these are different issue. being drunk isnt illegal speeding is (disclaimer, being drunk on a licensed premises is illegal, and being drunk and disorderly is, so is drinking in many public places). therefore in the case of speeding johnson is responsible in the eyes of the law, but did not affect johnsons ability to play football. getting drunk affects his bodies ability to play football and is therefore a work related matter.

My biggest issue is the incosistency. How can you punish a bloke for being drunk in public, and not for endangering countless lives?

Lets stick with the facts. He undertook behaviour that could have endangered lives. In this instance it did not. The outcome and results of his actions do have an impact in the punishment handed out. He was stupid and should be punshed for that. His actions on this occassion did not fortunately have negative outcomes. It does not reduce the stupidity but its mitigate the public outcome of the crime.

Both his misdemeanors are reprehensible actions but lets not apportion outcomes that did not actually happen. He was lucky. He was at real risk of not being so.

I think your judgement on the Club is harsh.

Lets stick with the facts. He undertook behaviour that could have endangered lives. In this instance it did not. The outcome and results of his actions do have an impact in the punishment handed out. He was stupid and should be punshed for that. His actions on this occassion did not fortunately have negative outcomes. It does not reduce the stupidity but its mitigate the public outcome of the crime.

Both his misdemeanors are reprehensible actions but lets not apportion outcomes that did not actually happen. He was lucky. He was at real risk of not being so.

I think your judgement on the Club is harsh.

i think the club were soft. i thought they were being soft when they talked about suspending him for the nab cup, but they didn't even do that. they set a strong example when they suspended him for being drunk which i admired, but for a second offense even if if is not seen to be as bad as the first, must come harsh consequence. then again he's a much better player now, funny how that works.