Total bollocks, I am pretty sure the guy would have accepted a 3 game ban (or more) rather than make up a story about his child.
We all have drunks/****ers, just accept you probably had one who took it too far.
Off Topic The Sullivan & Gold Comedy Corner
- Thread starter Citizen Kane
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
We all have drunks/****ers, just accept you probably had one who took it too far.
To suggest that this is some kind of conspiracy against West Ham by the media is ... well...bizarre imo.
It was a known fact that Cantona was racially abused by the palace fan (the fan was convicted in a court of law over the incident and iirc was exposed as a BNP supporter) yet Cantona received a 9 month ban.
The FA would not have chosen to ignore Livermore going into the crowd because of PR reasons unless there was actual evidence to back up his version of events.
I am unable to understand your insistance that Livermore is lying or "responded to something that wasn't said" and that the fans who put stuff on social media are telling the truth.
Those sitting next to him might have been his mates so could have a reason for watering down what was said.
Finally...do you not think that he has not been called a yid before? Do you not think opposition fans haven't called him a coke head before?
I would suggest that if a player has no form for violence of any kind but one day gets so angry he goes into a crowd and has to be restrained then the chances are he has been severely provoked.
He received a lot of abuse after his son died (mocking his child's death) so it is not an unknown thing and I personally think that he has no reason to lie. He could go into counselling and accept a ban. The Fa have no reason to lie . They could of banned him for his own safety and get him support. The truth is that there were severe mitagation for his behaviour and none of West Ham, West Brom, The FA and the police have insinuated, stated or hinted that Livermore is lying or reacted "To something he didn't hear"
In my honest opinion you are letting club loyalties blind you in this matter.
Last edited:
'Disgraceful' West ham had 5 arrests at a match last year, while United v Liverpool was 'relatively peaceful' with 'only' 17. As for the banning of fans, fans have been banned for causing trouble in the OS who weren't even at the match they were supposed to have been causing trouble at, that's the state of the stewarding there, it's a ****ing joke and the club don;t have much say in it at all. No one heard the fan abuse him for his kid except him, but hey, he's black and lost a kid, so he can't be wrong, can he? He can't of misheard and over-reacted, oh no, everyone who was there is wrong except him.
carry on, w/e.
BTW when are your sad fans going to start a petition over Everton being given £100's of millions in public money for their new ground?
carry on, w/e.
BTW when are your sad fans going to start a petition over Everton being given £100's of millions in public money for their new ground?
And of course he is a Hammers supporter so must be pure as snow
Do you really believe the first thing that came into the players mind (and stayed there) was I will blame the poor abuse on my child's death?
You have a poor opinion of your fellow man if this is the case, or maybe you are just going off what you are used to.
They're not. The council are going to act as guarantor on a loan and will be paid millions in return, apparently:
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/new-everton-stadium-money-from-12788250
So...we are discussing a fan being banned for saying something about a players dead child and you bring up
1) fans arrested at a Liverpool v United match and the press calling it a peaceful match
2) stewarding at west ham
3) the colour of Jake Livermores skin
4) Everton getting public money
5) spurs fans petitions
Seriously mate you are making a mistake.
In September 2008 some spurs fans sang an infamous song about sol Campbell. Some fans were banned and others arrested. One father and son caught up in it went public and proved that they had not joined in. They called witnesses and protested their innocence very loudly from the minute they were accused.
The most telling thing in this case is the fan is silent. mocking a dead child is taboo and NO ONE would accept a punishment for it if they were innocent in my opinion cos it would make them look like scum. Only a guilty person would accept the charge quietly in the hope it will die down and be forgotten about.
I hope the person has learned that it ain't
Ok to say whatever you want to someone and becomes a kinder person as a result.
You feel West ham are treated poorly by the media and other fans but are talking nonsense in this case.
Your comment about Jake Livermore "but hey, he's black and lost a child so he can't be wrong can he" is disgraceful as it suggests you think he used his race and dead child to get out of a ban.
I do not think you have thought about this incident properly as a person...you are looking at it as a West ham fan and are refusing to think logically.
West Ham have not denied the incident took place when it would be in their interest to.
The fan has not pleaded his innocence when it is in his interest to do so.
West Brom fully backed him when it would have been in their best interests to get Livermore help if he was imagining insults about his child.
Livermore has stuck to his version of events when he would not get a serious punishment if he came out and said that he over reacted due to his grief and needs help.
The FA (who banned Cantona who was racistly abused) would not believe Livermore without reason.
The police have believed him cos they did not even warn him for going into the crowd.
You have ignored all of this and chose to believe some Twitter posts.
It is in NO ONE'S interests to let Livermore believe he is right when it is clear he is wrong.
I still struggle with my baby son' s death 23 years ago. I have had long term counselling on the NHS twice and have been referred again. I have immense feelings of guilt, self hate and guilt at times so kind of understand some of what Livermore has gone through.
I also have experience of how professionals would be responding to his emotional state of mind and NO professions would allow him to believe his dead son was used against him if it were not the case as it would damage his mental health and his ability to cope.
I ain't sharing cos I want your sympathy but cos I think you should have a better insight into what else is involved.
Sorry if I have bored anyone worse than the Chelsea v Arsenal game with this mammoth post
S
Spur of the Moment
Guest
So...we are discussing a fan being banned for saying something about a players dead child and you bring up
1) fans arrested at a Liverpool v United match and the press calling it a peaceful match
2) stewarding at west ham
3) the colour of Jake Livermores skin
4) Everton getting public money
5) spurs fans petitions
Seriously mate you are making a mistake.
In September 2008 some spurs fans sang an infamous song about sol Campbell. Some fans were banned and others arrested. One father and son caught up in it went public and proved that they had not joined in. They called witnesses and protested their innocence very loudly from the minute they were accused.
The most telling thing in this case is the fan is silent. mocking a dead child is taboo and NO ONE would accept a punishment for it if they were innocent in my opinion cos it would make them look like scum. Only a guilty person would accept the charge quietly in the hope it will die down and be forgotten about.
I hope the person has learned that it ain't
Ok to say whatever you want to someone and becomes a kinder person as a result.
You feel West ham are treated poorly by the media and other fans but are talking nonsense in this case.
Your comment about Jake Livermore "but hey, he's black and lost a child so he can't be wrong can he" is disgraceful as it suggests you think he used his race and dead child to get out of a ban.
I do not think you have thought about this incident properly as a person...you are looking at it as a West ham fan and are refusing to think logically.
West Ham have not denied the incident took place when it would be in their interest to.
The fan has not pleaded his innocence when it is in his interest to do so.
West Brom fully backed him when it would have been in their best interests to get Livermore help if he was imagining insults about his child.
Livermore has stuck to his version of events when he would not get a serious punishment if he came out and said that he over reacted due to his grief and needs help.
The FA (who banned Cantona who was racistly abused) would not believe Livermore without reason.
The police have believed him cos they did not even warn him for going into the crowd.
You have ignored all of this and chose to believe some Twitter posts.
It is in NO ONE'S interests to let Livermore believe he is right when it is clear he is wrong.
I still struggle with my baby son' s death 23 years ago. I have had long term counselling on the NHS twice and have been referred again. I have immense feelings of guilt, self hate and guilt at times so kind of understand some of what Livermore has gone through.
I also have experience of how professionals would be responding to his emotional state of mind and NO professions would allow him to believe his dead son was used against him if it were not the case as it would damage his mental health and his ability to cope.
I ain't sharing cos I want your sympathy but cos I think you should have a better insight into what else is involved.
Sorry if I have bored anyone worse than the Chelsea v Arsenal game with this mammoth post
Thanks for posting that, RCL!
there's no evidence that anything was said about his kid, other than Livermore using it as an excuse to escape a lenghthy ban. The fan has been banned simply due to media pressure reporting Livermore's excuse, as whoever gets their story out first is usually the person who people will believe, throw **** and some will stick, much like with pleb-gate when Mitchell said nothing but had to resign and had his career ruined.
IF it was said, he's right to be banned, but according to the West Ham fans in the vicinity, his kid wasn't mentioned at all, just that he was ****, his coke habit and the fact he was a yid. you'll believe what you want of course because we're West Ham and therefore guilty of every crime we're ever accused of.
IF it was said, he's right to be banned, but according to the West Ham fans in the vicinity, his kid wasn't mentioned at all, just that he was ****, his coke habit and the fact he was a yid. you'll believe what you want of course because we're West Ham and therefore guilty of every crime we're ever accused of.
I'm eternally grateful that you're the only West Ham fan on the whole of Not606.
What a pathetic thing to say.
To be honest this sums up his attitude...
"you'll believe what you want of course becausewe're West Ham and therefore guilty of every crime we're ever accused of."
One of his fellow has been accused and so its a conspiracy.
He KNOWS and West Ham, West Brom, The Met, The Premier League, The FA And Livermore are all involved in a conspiracy against this poor man who has done nothing wrong...and he KNOWS this cos he read it on twitter.
The lack of humanity in this is appalling. I tried to reason with him which is why my previous post was so detailed but some can't be reasoned with and resort to posting filth like you have highlighted.
I can't respond to his last post cos we have rules about courtesy on this board (which I agree with).
I hope he never feels the pain that Livermore feels as his disgraceful attitude here could well come back to haunt him
S
Spur of the Moment
Guest
His last personally abusive appearance on our board ended in his post getting removed by PNP......... Some things and some people don't change!
The problem with this line of thinking is that the bloke would've been banned for what you're claiming he did.
As West Ham's official statement says, he "violated a number of ground regulations".
"After a full investigation conducted by the Club, which included statements from supporters in close proximity of the incident..."
They asked the fans near him what happened and then banned him.
It seems that he did enough for the club to react.
Is this what Newham did (act as loan guarantor for the
money gap that Everton have) , or did they actually blow
real taxpayer money gambling that the Spanners would
generate the "30% of that" within a certain time frame ??
Not enough, should be 10 for first offence plus fine, a whole season for any subsequent offences. As should biting.
Similar threads
