Jump to content

Graffito

Members
  • Posts

    3,330
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

9,895 profile views

Graffito's Achievements

  1. Stick that one on the back of your shirt.
  2. We need a centre forward.
  3. Would then what FIFA decided in the Canada case be a legal precedent for a decision by the FA in the TE case or just a guide?
  4. It was the reluctant Intern that requested an Eastleigh kit.
  5. He has not “proved to be dishonest”. Eckert authorised something dishonest. That does not prove him to be dishonest. Somebody was saying he lacks integrity, maybe you, maybe someone else. Again not so. You are arguing from the very particular to the general; damning someone’s whole character based on something they did wrong. It’s a logical fallacy. And I think it does matter what the players think. If Eckert didn’t treat his players with honesty and integrity they simply wouldn’t play for him. Some have gone beyond that and praised him.
  6. I’m not claiming precedent. It’s about fairness and consistency.
  7. Has the relevant FA rule changed then, since when Bielsa was not charged but merely warned as to his conduct?
  8. Only a fool would do a thing like that. Now we’re stinking the place out.
  9. They didn’t want to be associated with a big fat bird and frankly who does?
  10. Agreed. Calling what TE did “morally repugnant” probably wasn’t a good career move.
  11. Those are my principles and if you don’t like them, well I have others.
  12. Yeah quite a turnaround in 7 years (and not just the Guardian of course)which can’t be explained simply by the introduction post Bielsa of rule 127. The media onslaught instigated by Boro probably helped set the tone. Incidentally, the author of the second article says “The EFL regulation [127] refers to “sporting sanction”. It is hard to see what that could amount to and still be meaningful if it were not to award the game to Middlesbrough.” Does it? Perhaps I’m misreading it the regulation. This is one of the issues. Had the EFL introduced a clear sporting sanction with regulation 127 none of this would have happened. As it was, we know at least one club was stupid enough to think it could observe opposition training during the 72 hour prohibition and simply pay a £200,000 fine.
  13. The Mostyn KC article. Worth a read. He calls the tribunal decision a travesty of justice. https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2026/05/26/op-ed-sir-nicholas-mostyn-kc-soutampton-fc-admiral-byng-is-shot-again/
  14. You can fake intelligence but you can’t fake wit.
×
×
  • Create New...