Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Maybe FF should modify his behaviour instead of being the centre of attention for all the wrong reasons he should let his footballing ability do the talking or we could sell him and find someone else

  • Like 1
  • Disagree 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, akbuk said:

Maybe FF should modify his behaviour instead of being the centre of attention for all the wrong reasons he should let his footballing ability do the talking or we could sell him and find someone else

 

What the hell has that got to do with him being charged ten months after the incident, months after the acquittal, and months after serving the ban?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, LiamAP22D said:

If I was Fernando i'd get my legal team together and sue the FA for deformation of character, slander or harrassment, in fact whatever I could! it's getting silly now.

I dont understand why this hasn't happened yet... Unless they have more evidence than we know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Daizan10 said:

I dont understand why this hasn't happened yet... Unless they have more evidence than we know?

 

Because there's no defamation or slander involved in any of their actions so far. All that the FA have basically done is act on an allegation (and made it clear in their own press release that it is only allegations at this stage) and issued a charge pending further investigation.

 

What folk have to accept here that the FA themselves were recently involved in allegations of racism made against the England team.

 

One golden rule of pursuing action against another party on any issue is you have to be seen as a paragon of virtue yourself vis-a-vis the topic of the allegations. There was a pretty good chance that the next player that came up against the disciplinary panel on an allegation of racist behaviour was going to have the book thrown at him/her. I have said in many posts where I expect the FF incident to finish but he was always going to be a target for a backlash, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times in this thread, do people need telling Mellis copped a fine and a 3 match ban for his assault on Tom Lees before it sinks in.

 

At least do a bit of research before you post lads.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, akbuk said:

Maybe FF should modify his behaviour instead of being the centre of attention for all the wrong reasons he should let his footballing ability do the talking or we could sell him and find someone else

 

You mean like score the goal of the season against Norwich?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mr Hooper said:

 

You mean like score the goal of the season against Norwich?

 

He can't Iive off 1 good goal or performance each season.
 

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Club should stand fully behind FF. Take a full on protest stance and refuse to comply with any FA ruling and counter sue the FA. 

FA have tried to bully teams too many times, they need to learn that they can’t make up sanctions whenever they feel like it without clubs standing strong! 

He has been found not guilty, end of the matter! Either they don’t agree and appeal in the courts or they respect the courts decision

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, matthefish2002 said:

 

He can't Iive off 1 good goal or performance each season.
 

 

He doesn't though.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Belfast Owl 2 said:

 

He doesn't though.

5 games would be a bit fairer.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Belfast Owl 2 said:

 

He doesn't though.

 

Nowhere near justifies his star player status last couple of seasons.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Belfast Owl 2 said:

 

He doesn't though.

 

True, he turns up every time the TV camera's appear.

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Whitechapel Owl said:

 

But they don't charge everyone who is accused though, they investigate and then bring charges if they feel there is a case to be answered. 

 

I should hope they do have zero tolerance towards racism, who on earth would disagree with that? 

 

Even if they do ignore the institutional racism that's hardly a reason to ignore incidents such as this is it, that's another problem that needs addressing as well. 

Absolutely zero tolerance, however wheres the evidence that FF was racially abusive , because for me if that was the case I would not want him near the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Big Jack said:

Absolutely zero tolerance, however wheres the evidence that FF was racially abusive , because for me if that was the case I would not want him near the club.

 

To me if FF has been racially abusive to another player he should be kicked out of the club.
However the evidence would have to be pretty conclusive for us to do that, beyond reasonable doubt which I don't think will exist in this case.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Big Jack said:

Absolutely zero tolerance, however wheres the evidence that FF was racially abusive , because for me if that was the case I would not want him near the club.

 

But in a "zero tolerance" situation, surely it is right that the incident should be investigated. And from where I sit on the situation, that is now the stage that is reached. Reading the press release outlined in the OP, the FA are merely responding to allegations, made it clear that they are only allegations and issued a charge pending a response from FF. On any of those points, I fail to see that the FA have done much wrong. The only question for me is why it has taken so long for them to get around to dealing with it.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have preferred for the FA to have gone about their business without the blatant PR.

 

They could've waited until after they've reached a verdict.

 

They still get to be seen to be doing something - if that's all they're bothered about - but they also adhere more closely to a principle that many hold dear; that innocence is assumed until found otherwise.

 

The inevitable 'pre-trial' before public opinion is needless, but far worse is that the FA will subject a player to it without any regard to the personal and lasting consequences in the event (and in this case, the likely event) that they'll merely conclude that the evidence is inconclusive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

Read what it says - the FA conducted a lengthy investigation before exonerating the player!

 

Again, there is nothing to suggest that Forestieri's case will go to a full disciplinary hearing. He has been charged and asked to respond. After hearing his side of the story and looking at the evidence available, the FA will still have the option of dropping the case if they feel it would be in the best interests of fairness to do so.

 

Perhaps you should also read what it says ...

 

The FA conducted a lengthy investigation before deciding there was INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CHARGE Firminio. 

 

Forestieri has ALREADY BEEN CHARGED. 

 

So either:

 

a) The FA has already conducted a thorough investigation and HAS CONCLUDED THERE IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CHARGE FORESTIERI, or

 

b) Is applying a different procedure to the handling of the Forestieri case than the Firminio case

 

i know which option my money’s on. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not unexpected

 

Apologies if someone else had posted it, but this Guardian article predicted the issue - https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2019/mar/30/football-double-jeopardy-racism-cases-fernando-forestieri

 

" it boiled down to one man’s word against another and, on that basis, nobody should be surprised it ended as it did: not guilty. Even though – and this bit is important – the district judge, Jonathan Taffe, made it clear in his conclusion that he was not certain whatsoever that Pearce had, as suggested, misheard. “It is possible, albeit in my judgment unlikely,” Taffe said. Yet the fact it was possible meant he could not be satisfied “to a criminal standard” that the offending word was used.

 

And fair enough: Forestieri’s version of events, like Pearce’s, was described as “clear and consistent”. It would have been difficult for any court to convict him without any corroborative evidence and, as Forestieri has subsequently pointed out, the question should probably be asked of the Crown Prosecution Service why it charged him when the judicial system requires cases to be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
 

That is the difference with the Football Association’s disciplinary system, which determines cases on the balance of probabilities and, as such, has a much wider scope to rule in favour of the player making the allegations."

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As the word of one man against another, isn't the balance of probabilities 50-50 here?

 

Unless we want to start trying to quantify the likelihood of someone mishearing something in a heated situation...

 

After all, the implied verdict of the case involving Rodriguez and Bong is that Bong misheard - so that's one case straight away - balance that with the Terry case and even if you want to take Terry to have said what he was accused of, then the balance of just these two high-profile cases is still 50-50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hirstys Salopettes said:

 

Perhaps you should also read what it says ...

 

The FA conducted a lengthy investigation before deciding there was INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CHARGE Firminio. 

 

Forestieri has ALREADY BEEN CHARGED. 

 

So either:

 

a) The FA has already conducted a thorough investigation and HAS CONCLUDED THERE IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CHARGE FORESTIERI, or

 

b) Is applying a different procedure to the handling of the Forestieri case than the Firminio case

 

i know which option my money’s on. 

 

 

 

As I said in a post above, given the issues in Montenegro and the England football team, the FA were always likely to adopt a firmer approach to incidents involving accusations of racist behaviour. They have to be seen to be dealing with the issue and not taking a different path outside the standard operating procedure. The next player brought before the commission was always likely to face a backlash.

 

I will go alone on this one and put my own interpretation on the word "charged" in this context. It is used in the form of "Charged with bringing the game into disrepute" or like Eoin Morgan, "Charged with slow over rates". To me it means nothing more than the player or coach has been informed that disciplinary procedures are likely to follow and for them to prepare a response. It doesn't, in my view, constitute a finding of guilt at that stage.

 

I do not believe that the FA have sufficient evidence to progress this case and it will subsequently dropped after FF's response to the allegations.

  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...