Jump to content

Forestieri


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Costello 77 said:

"Finding" one person more believable than another isn't good enough.

You've got a special talent for packing a lot of nonsense into a short post..

I think you’ll “find” on the balance of probabilities it is. Pots, kettles and grimy arses sir. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rickygoo said:

I think you’ll “find” on the balance of probabilities it is. Pots, kettles and grimy arses sir. 

I hope that if you're judged in life in an arbitrary way.. that you're as sanguine as you appear when behind a keyboard and it's not your reputation on the line..

But you won't be .. because you'll bleat..

This assumption game is easy.. isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Costello 77 said:

I hope that if you're judged in life in an arbitrary way.. that you're as sanguine as you appear when behind a keyboard and it's not your reputation on the line..

But you won't be .. because you'll bleat..

This assumption game is easy.. isn't it?

I don’t recall there being much sympathy for Ched Evans on here when his appeal succeeded.

 

I don't know whether Fessi was guilty or not. We weren’t in that room. We didn’t hear that evidence. Credibility in the witness box is a huge part of any case. You disbelieving the panel and the appeal committee or questioning their motives is pretty arbitrary too. 

 

I just don’t believe in a vendetta or a witch-hunt or have any reason to doubt the panel’s integrity. It’s just the way the cookie crumbles - in my opinion. But it takes all sorts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, waddleisgod said:

Can some explain to me (and I’m been deadly serious here)

 

How a court of law can find FF NOT GUILTY and yet the FA can go against the same charge and find him guilty

 

?!???!?!!!!

 

 

Legal court,  beyond a reasonable doubt. 

FA, balance of probabilities. Do you think he's done it? Yes. Guilty.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

I don’t recall there being much sympathy for Ched Evans on here when his appeal succeeded.

 

I don't know whether Fessi was guilty or not. We weren’t in that room. We didn’t hear that evidence. Credibility in the witness box is a huge part of any case. You disbelieving the panel and the appeal committee or questioning their motives is pretty arbitrary too. 

 

I just don’t believe in a vendetta or a witch-hunt or have any reason to doubt the panel’s integrity. It’s just the way the cookie crumbles - in my opinion. But it takes all sorts. 

This post is rambling nonsense.. it's not worth picking apart..

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, room0035 said:

But we all know the EFL and the FA are a complete joke how many times in the last 10 years have we won an appeal for anything.

 

I understand him standing up for his name but he was always going to lose the appeal. Lets hope we don't miss him or lose other key players he would have played instead of.

Don't worry Bullen won't play him anyway.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Beauchief Owl said:

Have to say it defies belief that no retrospective action was taken after his antics at Huddersfield were there for all to see. Definitely a case of bringing the game into disrepute.

 

Forestieri, fined, 6 game ban and branded a racist because 1 person thought he heard a racist term said in a foreign language. Zero corroborating evidence.

 

Huddersfield fined £50k for having an improperly sized shirt sponsor logo in a friendly.

 

Bury (and almost Bolton) allowed to go to the wall.

 

Financial "Fair play" rules which mean owners aren't allowed to spend what they can afford whilst a third of the league receive tens of millions more than the rest in parachute payments.

 

Mitrovic caught on camera cheating and trying to get a fellow pro red carded, no retrospective action taken because the ref saw it and didn't do anything. 

 

The EFL :ghoulguy:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, A12owl said:

The main point surely about all this is that The Queens Court of Law found him (and it wouldn't matter who it was) NOT GUILTY after considering all the evidence available to them.

Then Mickey Mouse's investigation are saying that the Court of this country is wrong and make their own opposite decision. 

The more you think about it and discuss it then the more ridiculous it gets.

 

 

Apparently, ridiculous is the new norm! Even the government doesn’t think the law applies to them so why would the EFL!?

Link to comment
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...