Michael Brown on the battle of Bramall Lane

[John Street West Terrace]

Nigel Pearson is the manager I fear going to them.

From the Oinks I know NC supposedly Pearson has said he wouldn’t manage them in case it didn’t go well as he still lives or has ties in Sheff , I thought after they got rid of their charismatic Portuguese genius it would be Pearson that would be next incumbent,, apparently he’d rather manage in the Belgium domino league than take on lost causes & dillusional retards

 

[RammyBlade]

Warnock's book pretty much confirms Brown's version of events. Although Brown didn't say, according to Warnock, Brown didn't play again that season due to the injury he sustained.

Of course neither Santos or Suffo played for United ever again after that game.

Neither did Ullathorne play for rest of season - Megson was and is a complete and utter twat

 

[Revolution]

Just out of curiosity - you seem to say that it is partly Warnock's fault for playing Santos? Do you not actually think that it is Megson's fault for playing Johnson, who had actually fractured Santos' cheekbone the year before in an unprovoked assault on the Bramall Lane pitch whilst wearing the red of the scabs?

Santos had said he was going after Johnson in the run up to the game. Warnock knew that. There is no place in the game for revenge attacks. It's football not WWE.

 

[Roygbiv]

Nice one here about Kevin Blackwell

 

[Roygbiv]

Listened to a few of them podcasts this morning.

I think the fact that its mainly ex-Championship level players is what makes it. Bit more down to earth and the stories seem a bit more candid. None of the usual clichéd, anodyne responses. The Crossley/Brian Clough anecdote made me laugh out loud, likewise the one about the Bury centre forward who was so pumped up after scoring he went in two footed on his own player straight after kick off.

Morgan on Warnock was funny as well - "He just loves money".

The Morgan one was brilliant. Loved the Jagielka stuff

 

[Sean Thornton]

Neither did Ullathorne play for rest of season - Megson was and is a complete and utter twat

He did play after missing four games.

Agree about Megson.

 

[axel smeets]

Santos had said he was going after Johnson in the run up to the game. Warnock knew that. There is no place in the game for revenge attacks. It's football not WWE.

So why didn’t Megson leave Johnson out? Warnock had as much right to play Santos as Megson did Johnson.

 

[Revolution]

So why didn’t Megson leave Johnson out? Warnock had as much right to play Santos as Megson did Johnson.

Because Johnson, irrespective of what he had done last time, had a right to expect that someone would not come on the field seeking to deliberately injure him.

Warnock had every right to play Santos. But Santos said he was going to get Johnson. Warnock said he was aware of that. This was all before the game. Warnock put Santos on the field knowing he intended to commit an assault. I think that was a reckless decision that deserves condemnation.

I don't know about you, but if I am a manager and a player tells me that if I pick him for a particular game he intends to deliberately injure one of the other players, I don't let him take the field.

Ironically of course, one of the things covered in Warnock's book is the allegation that he has told players to deliberately injure opposition players on previous occasions. Warnock denies this, and then weakens his denial by referring to a number of occasions where he has been accused of this. Some of these accusers are the Stan Ternants of this world but others are people with no axe to grind against Warnock (Steve Bull is one).

 

[LoughboroBlade]

One thing hardly mentioned is that Warnock plays a big part in the whole thing by putting on Santos who was clearly going to have a go at Johnson. What did Warnock expect!?

He probably thought “Santos will be extremely motivated to get one over on Johnson and that might help us in the game.”

He almost certainly did not think “Santos is hell-bent for revenge whatever the cost, and I’d quite like to see him spark something that will result in me bombing two players out of the club as a result, not to mention the footballing world questioning my actions for years to come.”

Let’s be honest, plenty of us wanted to see Santos go up against Johnson ahead of the game. Absolutely nobody could have predicted that this would have led to what happened. It’s all very well saying it was in retrospect, but players have gone up against opponents that put them in hospital without it causing the events that resulted.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Ironically of course, one of the things covered in Warnock's book is the allegation that he has told players to deliberately injure opposition players on previous occasions. Warnock denies this, and then weakens his denial by referring to a number of occasions where he has been accused of this. Some of these accusers are the Stan Ternants of this world but others are people with no axe to grind against Warnock (Steve Bull is one).

I can actually see Warnock’s side on that one. He’s overly dramatic on the touchline and if you’re a player on the pitch looking at him respond to what he thinks has been an awful challenge on one of his players, you could understand why Warnock miming the action he’s just seen (usually the studs into the leg motion) would be interpreted by someone as “oh look, Warnock is telling his players to injure someone” but the fact this has never been actually heard by anyone is consistent in all these. At Reading when this occurred, I felt this was deliberately misinterpreted by the Reading bench (well, Wally Fucking Downes) to get Warnock – these sorts of thing have never been backed up by the 4th official standing right next to Warnock doing this.

 

[CrookesBlade]

The Morgan one was brilliant. Loved the Jagielka stuff

I was laughing my head off at the line "people like you play centre half".

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

I loved how Michael Browns initial reaction to Santos' two footed assault was 'great tackle' lol.

 

[axel smeets]

Because Johnson, irrespective of what he had done last time, had a right to expect that someone would not come on the field seeking to deliberately injure him.

Warnock had every right to play Santos. But Santos said he was going to get Johnson. Warnock said he was aware of that. This was all before the game. Warnock put Santos on the field knowing he intended to commit an assault. I think that was a reckless decision that deserves condemnation.

I don't know about you, but if I am a manager and a player tells me that if I pick him for a particular game he intends to deliberately injure one of the other players, I don't let him take the field.

Ironically of course, one of the things covered in Warnock's book is the allegation that he has told players to deliberately injure opposition players on previous occasions. Warnock denies this, and then weakens his denial by referring to a number of occasions where he has been accused of this. Some of these accusers are the Stan Ternants of this world but others are people with no axe to grind against Warnock (Steve Bull is one).

Disagree. I think it is a grey area with no black and white answers. Megson should have been savvy enough to not play Johnson.

 

[Revolution]

Disagree. I think it is a grey area with no black and white answers. Megson should have been savvy enough to not play Johnson.

They were in a promotion race. They wanted their best team out.

Santos planned an assault and I can't condemn that in strong enough terms.

 

[niktheblade]

I loved how Michael Browns initial reaction to Santos' two footed assault was 'great tackle' lol.

Theres another podcast that you might have heard of: "Dave's Magic Sponge" There's an episode with Mark Halsey and he says that Browny is one of the most annoying players to referee cos he was always moaning and digging at the ref... maybe Browny was just a bit of a twat on the pitch....

 

[axel smeets]

They were in a promotion race. They wanted their best team out.

Santos planned an assault and I can't condemn that in strong enough terms.

Because we were in mid table then, we had no right to play Santos?

 

[Revolution]

Because we were in mid table then, we had no right to play Santos?

No, we had a right to play Santos. I already said that. It was foolish to play Santos because he had announced he was going to assault one of the opposition.

 

[axel smeets]

No, we had a right to play Santos. I already said that. It was foolish to play Santos because he had announced he was going to assault one of the opposition.

Ok then. Fair enough. Megson still was an idiot for playing Johnson.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

Good thread

This is good too - relevant cos it has two links to the Blades in it - and it's funny

Funniest football related story ever IMO .

I've watched it at least a dozen times and nearly pissed myself on every occasion .

 

[Booker4]

He probably thought “Santos will be extremely motivated to get one over on Johnson and that might help us in the game.”

He almost certainly did not think “Santos is hell-bent for revenge whatever the cost, and I’d quite like to see him spark something that will result in me bombing two players out of the club as a result, not to mention the footballing world questioning my actions for years to come.”

Let’s be honest, plenty of us wanted to see Santos go up against Johnson ahead of the game. Absolutely nobody could have predicted that this would have led to what happened. It’s all very well saying it was in retrospect, but players have gone up against opponents that put them in hospital without it causing the events that resulted.

I obviously don't know what was said to Santos from Warnock before the game, if anything, but in the circumstances that Johnson did Santos, I'd fully expect Santos to have a go back, given the combative player Santos was too. I still think it was harsh on Santos to bomb him out.

 

[CrookesBlade]

I obviously don't know what was said to Santos from Warnock before the game, if anything, but in the circumstances that Johnson did Santos, I'd fully expect Santos to have a go back, given the combative player Santos was too. I still think it was harsh on Santos to bomb him out.

Warnock was sacked after the game and talked his way back in over the next 24 hours. Suffo and Santos never playing again for the club was probably his plea bargain.

 

[nopigfansintown]

Megson lied. United and the members of staff involved should have sought legal redress citing the physios reports on the injured players.The only bad thing we did in this game was perform abominably and get a player sent off for a headbutt. All in all, I think Johnson got off lightly. The utter coward of a man.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

As for the Battle of Bramall Lane, one thing Warnock does not mention in the section of his book about the matter is that the club fired him during an emergency board meeting held after the game. He managed to talk his way back into the job over the next 24 hours. For this reason, amongst others, I always take Warnock's version of what happened that day with a pinch of salt.

Warnock was sacked after the game and talked his way back in over the next 24 hours. Suffo and Santos never playing again for the club was probably his plea bargain.

I haven’t read that Warnock was sacked after the game anywhere before.

Have either of you got a source for this rumour?

 

[Revolution]

I haven’t read that Warnock was sacked after the game anywhere before.

Have either of you got a source for this rumour?

It's mentioned by Matthew Bell in his Fit and Proper book.

 

[Revolution]

Bumping this old thread as Andy Johnson has given his version of events on the Undr the Cosh podcast this week.

He said that:

• Santos went into his elbow in 2001 by accident (hmm..) and he initially thought Santos was faking until he saw the damage
• Robert Ullathorne told Johnson that the week before the game Warnock had told Santos that he would be released at the end of the season and that he didn't need Santos against WBA but that he would put him on the bench and bring him on and give him enough time to get his revenge
• Megson asked Johnson if he wanted to sit the game out, as there were rumours that Santos was out for revenge. Johnson declined to sit out
• Johnson was subbed after the sendings off, and Santos tried to attack him in the tunnel and dressing rooms
• Johnson was told that when WBA went on tour after winning promotion at the end of that season Santos was at one point in the same airport and was looking for him.
• Johnson has not seen Santos since
• Santos' had always had a reputation as a quiet and mild mannered bloke prior to the incident.

Make of that what you will.

Someone should make a talking heads documentary about that game.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

Bumping this old thread as Andy Johnson has given his version of events on the Undr the Cosh podcast this week.

He said that:

• Santos went into his elbow in 2001 by accident (hmm..) and he initially thought Santos was faking until he saw the damage
• Robert Ullathorne told Johnson that the week before the game Warnock had told Santos that he would be released at the end of the season and that he didn't need Santos against WBA but that he would put him on the bench and bring him on and give him enough time to get his revenge
• Megson asked Johnson if he wanted to sit the game out, as there were rumours that Santos was out for revenge. Johnson declined to sit out
• Johnson was subbed after the sendings off, and Santos tried to attack him in the tunnel and dressing rooms
• Johnson was told that when WBA went on tour after winning promotion at the end of that season Santos was at one point in the same airport and was looking for him.
• Johnson has not seen Santos since
• Santos' had always had a reputation as a quiet and mild mannered bloke prior to the incident.

Make of that what you will.

Someone should make a talking heads documentary about that game.

Fair play to Johnson for not sitting it out. That pussy Ainsworth always did.

"He ran into my elbow" - come off it. That's like saying Iain Hume headbutted Morgan's.

We all knew what was going to happen when Santos came on.

 

[Revolution]

Fair play to Johnson for not sitting it out. That pussy Ainsworth always did.

You're not the first person to say that, but it's not true. Ainsworth played against us 5 times after he did Whitehouse, with 3 of those games at the Lane, including the return at the Lane in 1997-8 when Whitehouse's father tried to attack him.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Bumping this old thread as Andy Johnson has given his version of events on the Undr the Cosh podcast this week.

He said that:

• Santos went into his elbow in 2001 by accident (hmm..) and he initially thought Santos was faking until he saw the damage
• Robert Ullathorne told Johnson that the week before the game Warnock had told Santos that he would be released at the end of the season and that he didn't need Santos against WBA but that he would put him on the bench and bring him on and give him enough time to get his revenge
• Megson asked Johnson if he wanted to sit the game out, as there were rumours that Santos was out for revenge. Johnson declined to sit out
• Johnson was subbed after the sendings off, and Santos tried to attack him in the tunnel and dressing rooms
• Johnson was told that when WBA went on tour after winning promotion at the end of that season Santos was at one point in the same airport and was looking for him.
• Johnson has not seen Santos since
• Santos' had always had a reputation as a quiet and mild mannered bloke prior to the incident.

Make of that what you will.

Someone should make a talking heads documentary about that game.

I’m quite shocked that the testimony of Andy Johnson paints Andy Johnson as the completely innocent victim.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Nigel Pearson is the manager I fear going to them.

Do you really "fear" him going there? I couldn't give a damn myself. I think Pearson is a good manager. I was surprised actually to hear him speaking so articulately about football when he took over at Watford recently, and he's done really well for them. But do you really think a manager like Pearson, with the track record he has, currently managing in the Prem, would want to take on the poisoned chalice of S6 and a club that is pointing more in the direction of League 1 than the Premiership? I think it's extremely unlikely to happen.

Pearson has said on more than one occasion, that he wouldn't want to manage in Sheffield, because he lives here. He'd have peasants round his house smashing his windows several times a week and twice on Sundays, managing that shower of shite.

 

[KeyffSmyff]

That's reassuring to read about Pearson not wanting to go back to the pigs. I like listening to him, he doesn't tell all he is thinking, but doesn't dumb it down either. He is ruthless enough to clear the decks and telling a few home truths if given the chance.