Bluesteel Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, Hirstys Salopettes said: Or just judge performance based on the result of a hardly indefensible case They already got him off a criminal charge. It says more about the nature of the FA and their panel than it does about others involved in my view given the nature of the decision. Fingers crossed for the appeal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Toni Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 minute ago, McRightSide said: In an appeal against a charge of racism you think the defendant would make part of his appeal that there are black people on the independent panel? Oh my days. I think you must be smuggling that junk inbetween your ears He wouldn't but his team would, that's what they're paid for. Anyone with an unbiased opinion could look at it the other way and say in a racism trial why are the panel swung in favour of one side? You carry on with your fabulous analysis and name calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wall Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, McRightSide said: In an appeal against a charge of racism you think the defendant would make part of his appeal that there are black people on the independent panel? Oh my days. I think you must be smuggling that junk inbetween your ears Do you not see how it’s racist that you’re saying the white person can be independent but the black person cant? Serious question. I think the original comment was regarding the fact that one of the panel is a trustee of 'kick it out'. You could see how such a person may be motivated to say "look, we found a racist and punished him" 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Toni Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 minute ago, emersonthome said: I think the original comment was regarding the fact that one of the panel is a trustee of 'kick it out'. You could see how such a person may be motivated to say "look, we found a racist and punished him" Thank you for doing your research, unlike some who just jump on the racism train. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRightSide Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 1 minute ago, Bluesteel said: They already got him off a criminal charge. It says more about the nature of the FA and their panel than it does about others involved in my view given the nature of the decision. Fingers crossed for the appeal. I don’t agree with the decision but I do have some sympathy. Race is such a sensitive issue that they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t. They either throw down a judgement with flimsy proof, or face accusations of favouring the perpetrators with the same flimsy evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTacoSWFC Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 At the end of the day this should be an open and shut case.. whether Fessi said something racist or not it cant be proven. He said he did, he said he didn't. No evidence, no video, no audio... how can any organisation with a disciplinary process accuse and punish someone with lack of evidence. It opens up a can of worms, crazy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 6 minutes ago, McRightSide said: I don’t agree with the decision but I do have some sympathy. Race is such a sensitive issue that they’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t. They either throw down a judgement with flimsy proof, or face accusations of favouring the perpetrators with the same flimsy evidence. Yep, even more reason to let the criminal court decide in my view. The moment the FA got involved I think the outcome was already tilted against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 10 minutes ago, Bluesteel said: Yep, even more reason to let the criminal court decide in my view. The moment the FA got involved I think the outcome was already tilted against him. And the reason why, despite the fact I can understand him wanting to- any appeal is futile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Binky Griptite Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 The judgement is bonkers. Essentially, because Forestieri managed to transition from speaking Spanish to saying 's*it' in English he probably also said the n word... I can say 's*it' in French, Spanish, German and Italian... it's amongst the first words I looked up when I started GCSE French and it'll be a commonplace term in a dressing room... Nuhiu dropped the F Bomb live on the radio... that's another word commonplace in a dressing room... footballers will very quickly pick up English swear words, they won't quickly pick up the n word, unless it's widely used in the dressing room. Are the FA therefore: A) accusing the Sheffield Wednesday dressing room of being inherently racist, such that the n word is thrown about like an adverb and that someone has further explained its context and when to use it against black players (after all, what is any word but a noise unless its used in the correct context and the context is abundantly clear?) B) suggesting Forestieri has been taught the n word by his English teacher C) suggesting Forestieri gone out of his way to learn the word and put it into use All three variants are inferring a level of racism which goes beyond simply believing Pearces testimony over Forestieris. I'd be absolutely SEETHING if I was Fernando... I'm shaking writing this at the implication of the judgment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRightSide Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, emersonthome said: I think the original comment was regarding the fact that one of the panel is a trustee of 'kick it out'. You could see how such a person may be motivated to say "look, we found a racist and punished him" Then kick it out is totally discredited 21 minutes ago, Junk Smuggler said: Thank you for doing your research, unlike some who just jump on the racism train. Thats your train and youre welcome to it. Edited August 1, 2019 by McRightSide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 5 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said: And the reason why, despite the fact I can understand him wanting to- any appeal is futile Probably yes given that they and most governing bodies in football seem incapable of backing down. We saw that when Hull admitted FF didn’t dive on sky that time and they banned him anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy bunny Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, McRightSide said: Thats your train and youre welcome to it. Unnecessary comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Snooty Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 7 minutes ago, Bluesteel said: Probably yes given that they and most governing bodies in football seem incapable of backing down. We saw that when Hull admitted FF didn’t dive on sky that time and they banned him anyway. I just fear they will bump the punishment and charge him the administration for doing so. And in a case like this even more so than usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hirstys Salopettes Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 16 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said: And the reason why, despite the fact I can understand him wanting to- any appeal is futile I would expect the make up of the appeal panel to be completely independent I.e. devoid of any association with the FA and any associated bodies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRightSide Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 38 minutes ago, emersonthome said: I think the original comment was regarding the fact that one of the panel is a trustee of 'kick it out'. You could see how such a person may be motivated to say "look, we found a racist and punished him" By the way. Junk Smuggler made the comment on the lack of independence in another thread before he even knew of the kick it out affiliation. Check the Mark Cooper thread. Its a perfect example of unconscious bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wall Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 4 minutes ago, McRightSide said: By the way. Junk Smuggler made the comment on the lack of independence in another thread before he even knew of the kick it out affiliation. Check the Mark Cooper thread. Its a perfect example of unconscious bias. Ok, I'll take your word for it. I was just referring to the comment made earlier on in this thread. For the record, I have no issue with the race of the members of the panel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McRightSide Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Just now, emersonthome said: Ok, I'll take your word for it. I was just referring to the comment made earlier on in this thread. For the record, I have no issue with the race of the members of the panel All good...just pulling up the one example that I saw in the other thread, which then led me here. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happy bunny Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 51 minutes ago, McRightSide said: They either throw down a judgement with flimsy proof, or face accusations of favouring the perpetrators with the same flimsy evidence. Or they stop making up their own rules and pass a judgement based on fact 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluesteel Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 36 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said: I just fear they will bump the punishment and charge him the administration for doing so. And in a case like this even more so than usual. Maybe but can’t see this borderline matter on something as defamatory as racism being deemed frivolous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brommers Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 4 hours ago, royalowlisback said: I've just told you why as above. He was banned for 5 games, increased by 1 for the N word. Was in all the papers this morning the reason why. Thanks but why has he been banned for 6 games........................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now