Jump to content

BREAKING NEWS - 6 Game ban for FF


Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, BeverleyOwl74 said:

I have further responded.  It won't do anything, but felt I needed to say something to them.

 

Dear Sir,
 
I have read the enclosed and still maintain the case against Mr Forestieri is unproven.  Mr Pearce THOUGHT he heard the "n" word.  The word for that in spanish is ***** meaning black.  It would be quite clear if someone had said this.  I find that from the enclosed there is no actual proof that Mr Forestieri said the word and that the charge is trumped up based on hearsay.  I understand wholeheartedly and completely that any kind of racist behaviour is abhorrent and totally wrong but there is no actual proof that Mr Forestieri is guilty of the charge.
 
It is purely based on the supposition that the reaction of Mr Pearce is down to what h THOUGHT he heard.  I am disabled, does this mean that every time someone says a word to me I have to be on my guard that they may call me spaz, cripple, freak etc?  No.  Because I'm a) not that bothered what people call me and b) I'd like to think if someone was going to try and insult me they'd do it in an audible manner to my face.  The fact that comments were said in a heated environment shows that this is not a reliable use of evidence to prosecute anyone.  This is also what was found in a court of law.  You are in effect by meting out this punishment saying that the Football Association is higher than a court of law?  The whole thing is a witch hunt based on a supposition that Mr Forestieri said something that could bring the game into disrepute.  Players swear at each other all the time on the pitch, its common place, and although there are better ways of dealing with arguments the heat of battle does this to players.  I am not saying Mr Pearce was wrong in his reaction based on the supposition of what he THOUGHT he heard.  But the whole thing is COMPLETELY UNPROVEN.  You are basing your entire case on supposition and hearsay in an effort to further punish someone who has already been punished once for the events of July 2017.  To punish Mr Forestieri twice when Jacob Mellis, a Mansfield player who it has been documented was physically violent on the pitch, was completely unpunished is proof of a witch hunt.  One would suggest your authorities and decision making committees learn something called BALANCE.
 
Yours faithfully

Jonathan Adam

You should have included the Twitter message Pierce sent to his brother advocating violence against FF (he later deleted it but not before it was copied to Owlstalk)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest The Horse
55 minutes ago, wednesdaylander said:

I have deliberately refrained from commenting on this for 24 hours to take emotion out of the equation. Now I have had time to consider and reflect on the situation, I can only say the following. The FA has now created a precedent for anyone to be accused and found guilty of racism on hearsay. Pearce himself has admitted in a court of law that he only 'thought' he heard the N word. There are no witness statements to corroborate this, and FF has vehemently denied it. SWFC & FF should take this to the High Court and sue the FA for loss of earnings, defamation of character, and possibly Contempt of Court, as they have basically ignored the ruling of a Judge. I know Irwin Mitchell Solicitors used to have close links with the club, so I hope we chuck everything at this and screw the FA for every penny. Oh, and Krystian Pearce, watch your back sunshine ! 

 

It looks like they've set a precedent but this is the FA.

They'll change the rules when it suits them, especially if it's a Liverpool player in the dock.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the role of the judge in this.

 

It seems the fact he said its likely Harris was not mistaken was pounced on by the panel.  To add weight to their reasoning so the judge hasnt really helped us here.

 

Unless he saw additional evidence I struggle to see where he would draw that conclusion.

 

What extra evidence would he see?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, wednesdaylander said:

I have deliberately refrained from commenting on this for 24 hours to take emotion out of the equation. Now I have had time to consider and reflect on the situation, I can only say the following. The FA has now created a precedent for anyone to be accused and found guilty of racism on hearsay. Pearce himself has admitted in a court of law that he only 'thought' he heard the N word. There are no witness statements to corroborate this, and FF has vehemently denied it. SWFC & FF should take this to the High Court and sue the FA for loss of earnings, defamation of character, and possibly Contempt of Court, as they have basically ignored the ruling of a Judge. I know Irwin Mitchell Solicitors used to have close links with the club, so I hope we chuck everything at this and screw the FA for every penny. Oh, and Krystian Pearce, watch your back sunshine ! 

You were doing so well until the last sentence...........could be construed as issuing a threat.  Maybe a good idea to re-phrase (for your own good);-)

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

Regarding the role of the judge in this.

 

It seems the fact he said its likely Harris was not mistaken was pounced on by the panel.  To add weight to their reasoning so the judge hasnt really helped us here.

 

Unless he saw additional evidence I struggle to see where he would draw that conclusion.

 

What extra evidence would he see?

 

 

Not mistaken in what he thought he heard is one thing (after completing his modern languages degree in Spanish no doubt!) - he heard an insult put 2 and 2 together and got 5 - a bit like the FA

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ItsAGrumbleFromImre said:

Not mistaken in what he thought he heard is one thing (after completing his modern languages degree in Spanish no doubt!) - he heard an insult put 2 and 2 together and got 5 - a bit like the FA

No, the FA got 6!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, longreach said:

You were doing so well until the last sentence...........could be construed as issuing a threat.  Maybe a good idea to re-phrase (for your own good);-)

 

 

You mean issuing a threat and advocating violence won't be good for you ?? :ohmy:

 

FF.JPG.31b62b98e0fa850ff361e6bb73e9a615.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Stevebrucebarmyarmy said:

Am I right in think ff is available till the appeal is complete?

 

Star says yes he is available until appeal heard.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody else think a recent poster should possibly change their forum name 

 

Be interesting to see if FF makes the bench today. Certainly don't think he will start but whether he travelled ?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mkowl said:

Anybody else think a recent poster should possibly change their forum name 

 

Be interesting to see if FF makes the bench today. Certainly don't think he will start but whether he travelled ?

 

morning MK  he's  prob getting fed up of waiting to change it

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...