No Fixed Abode The FA think they can punish a player on 'probability'.
Alexander LitvinenkoNo Fixed Abode The FA think they can punish a player on 'probability'.
The FA are right, though - they can.
The requirement for a guilty verdict in a hearing like this are much less onerous than in a court of law - "more likely to have happened than not" rather than "proven beyond all reasonable doubt."
The latter, as we've seen, means that in a fair few cases the defendant is found not guilty purely on grounds of there being insufficient evidence to prove their guilt.
larry1971 IMO he's A thoroughly loathsome individual and personally I find if offensive that anybody can compare Terry, to the great England captains of the past such as Billy Wright and Bobby Moore
No Fixed Abodelarry1971 IMO he's A thoroughly loathsome individual and personally I find if offensive that anybody can compare Terry, to the great England captains of the past such as Billy Wright and Bobby Moore
I suspect Billy Wright and Bobby Moore were no angels back in their day. It just wasn't spread all over the papers.
Barry the bird boggler Good riddance.
larry1971 IMO he's A thoroughly loathsome individual
Stuboo Don't like him as a person, but I think he will be a loss to the England team in our World Cup qualifying campaign. We should still qualify though.
No Fixed Abode How can you punish someone on 'probability' though without sufficient evidence? If 'top' solicitors can't find JT guilty, how can some old cretins at the FA?
Alexander LitvinenkoNo Fixed Abodelarry1971 IMO he's A thoroughly loathsome individual and personally I find if offensive that anybody can compare Terry, to the great England captains of the past such as Billy Wright and Bobby Moore
I suspect Billy Wright and Bobby Moore were no angels back in their day. It just wasn't spread all over the papers.
While of course there's some truth in that, I suspect that they didn't have the money and leisure time to be quite so odious.
Ideallarry1971 the day after the terroist attack on the Twin Towers Terry, with a group of other players shouted disgracful and offensive comments at American tourists at Heathrow tells you all you need to know as to what kind of person Terry is.
This!!!!
The man has no shame.
StubooIdeallarry1971 the day after the terroist attack on the Twin Towers Terry, with a group of other players shouted disgracful and offensive comments at American tourists at Heathrow tells you all you need to know as to what kind of person Terry is.
This!!!!
The man has no shame.
Are you certain that this actually happened?
With their flight to an away match at Levski Sofia grounded in the aftermath of the Terror attacks on New York and Washington in September 2001, Chelsea players found themselves at a loose end. Some went home to watch CNN, but Terry Eidur Gudjohnsen, Frank Lampard and Morris had other ideas.
After visiting a couple of pubs - where a "hammered" Gudjohnsen stripped off and threw peanuts at punters while Lampard and Morris urinated in a rubbish bin outside - the group went on to a local bowling alley where they hurled themselves down the lanes and saw former colleague Frank Sinclair, who by now had joined the party, almost decapitated by the pin-changing mechanism.
Finally they ended up in the bar of the Posthouse Hotel at Heathrow, where stranded travellers, many of them Americans, had gathered to watch events unfold on TV. Instead they were treated to the players throwing food around while pictures were shown of sobbing firemen searching through the rubble for the dead, before one player exposed himself to the appalled throng.
Chelsea FC subsequently fined the trio for their behaviour.
StubooIdeallarry1971 the day after the terroist attack on the Twin Towers Terry, with a group of other players shouted disgracful and offensive comments at American tourists at Heathrow tells you all you need to know as to what kind of person Terry is.
This!!!!
The man has no shame.
Are you certain that this actually happened?
No Fixed AbodeAlexander LitvinenkoNo Fixed Abode The FA think they can punish a player on 'probability'.
The FA are right, though - they can.
The requirement for a guilty verdict in a hearing like this are much less onerous than in a court of law - "more likely to have happened than not" rather than "proven beyond all reasonable doubt."
The latter, as we've seen, means that in a fair few cases the defendant is found not guilty purely on grounds of there being insufficient evidence to prove their guilt.
How can you punish someone on 'probability' though without sufficient evidence? If 'top' solicitors can't find JT guilty, how can some old cretins at the FA?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 83 guests
