sadoldgit

It seems that most of the players support him.

I hope that you never get picked for jury service. You are supposed to listen to all of the evidence before coming to a conclusion. Before throwing anybody under the bus you should at least hear what they have to say.

It was a bold move on his part to sign for a lower league team at that point of his career but it paid off handsomely for both parties. Wishing him every success in his future career.

Killing time waiting for news… I could technically be a Cockney. I was born in King’s College Hospital in Camberwell. The distance between the hospital and Bow Bells is about 3 miles as the crow flies. Given a favourable wind and in the dead of night, it might be possible to hear the bells from south of the river. Gawd blimey guv’nor, wha’ a load of old pony!

Out of insults with a reddish hue, I’m thinking better a “radish” than a “gammon.”

Sums the situation up perfectly.

The difference being that Dyer is a real cockney and LD is a plastic one.

For those of you confused by this post, DelldaysBatmanAlex made a comment about what I consider to be “not to be the crime of the century.” BBC news-reader, Huw Edwards, was charged with being possession of child porn. A serious crime, yes, but not so serious that it was heard in a Crown Court. His case was dealt with in a Magistrate’ Court and he received a suspended sentence. The case was covered on the first spot, reserved for the biggest news story of the day, every day for a week by the BBC. I commented on the fact that it was odd for such a story to received such prominence for so long (usually big stories move down the schedule in the programme after a few days coverage) and made the comment that it was hardly the crime of the century (which it wasn’t). A couple of the forum wets decided to ignore the context of the comment and proceeded, to this day, to pretend that I was inferring that being in possession of child porn is no big deal. Stating that there are more serious crimes, such as murder, is a statement of fact, it is not seeking to minimise the seriousness of other crimes. It is just putting criminal activity into context in terms of the seriousness of the matter and the sentencing guidelines involved. Consequently the less serious cases are heard in Magistrate’s courts and the more serious cases in Crown courts. The crime of the century is not going to be dealt with in a Magistrate’s court. I have explained this several times before but clearly at least one individual still either refuses to understand my point or is too thick to understand it. Given that this particular person seems to think that sexual assaults carried out by Asians/Muslims warrant more attention on a football forum than the same crimes carried out by white Englishmen, I would argue that any comment about my having a low bar be taken in that context. My apologies for going off topic, but DelldaysBatmanAlex has previous when it comes to repeating bollox on here and needs to be corrected for the benefit of posterity. History tells us that a lie repeated often enough becomes fact.

If you are referring to my previous comment on another thread about Huw Edwards, would you like to remind us, how many people did he kill? How many people do you know who have committed the crime of the century and walked away with a suspended sentence?

As I said, the issue isn’t about breaking the rule, it is about the proportionality of the sentence. It is about the punishment fitting the crime. As far as cheating goes this was not the crime of the century was it? I can’t be bothered to go through all of the reasons again but as far as cheating goes it was low level and with zero benefit. If you take things into account you do not impose the highest sanction going.

Remind me again, do Leeds, Leicester,Hull, Manchester City and Chelsea currently have sponsors?

For all of those who are still convinced that this was the footballing crime of the century, think about this. I don’t know about Coventry’s training ground, but should Millwall and Middlesbrough have gone up with them, absolutely anybody could spend all day watching them train any time they liked and it would not be a case of “spying.” This rule that you are so hung up on is an absolute nonsense. Just think about it for goodness sake. You can watch everything the opposition does over every match in a season and as often as you like, but you can’t watch them run around up to three days before a match? FFS, on what planet does that become such a heinous crime? But, but, but….it’s the rules. I’ve lost count of how many well respected figures in football who have come out and said that this is bullshit. No one is suggesting that we did not break a (very stupid) rule. What we are saying that the penalty should be proportionate. That does not mean throwing the club out of a final that they fully deserved to be in and sacking people.

Tongue in cheek…

You blew three opportunities for promotion Gibbo. Get over it.

Not being one to miss the opportunity of starting a conspiracy theory, perhaps Dragan spelt out the financial situation to Spors and Eckert and told them it was promotion this season at all costs? 🤔