Match Day Thread 2017/18 Premier League, Cups & Euro Watch

Twat.

 

#calledit

 

It’s tricky because you don’t want a situation where if nothing is found, you end up punishing the accused for fear of stopping them reporting things in the future.

Similaly, you can’t leave any doubt on the accuser either.

What they need to say is that there was no evidence to find the person guilty so they are proven innocent, but we believe the accusation was made in good faith etc.

Saying all that, fans will ignore any of the actual detail to suit their agenda and chants so only takes a few to start some chant / boo in the crowds before everyone else chimes in.

 

Then the FA can grow a pair and say no evidence was found etc etc so please refrain from booing or club will be fined or docked points.

Soon fecking stop then!

 

Kane brace tonight then...

 

We'd get loads of Man Utd and Everton fans attending our games

 

Be just like being on this forum then

Better start wining and they go into hiding lol.

 

Yes the assist from Dele Alli was over the Watford line before 'Arry got his nostril on the end of it.

 

The converse argument is that without any evidence either way, if you gave a definitive ‘not guilty’,you’d be potentially persecuting the victim for making the authorities aware of the incident which could discourage others. The unproven verdict is correct, if that what it is imo, as it isn’t a court of law.

 

You can never get a ticket though......lol

 

I have to disagree I’m afraid. Not proven does not equate to false. Not proven means exactly that. It does not mean that the accuser lied. In fact the accuser could well be right and the accused could have said the offending words, but it couldn’t be proved. To punish the accuser with a fine would be the height of injustice . It would discourage anyone who was abused to come forward in case no one else heard it too. There may be occasions when it can proven either way like for example a witness was present during that period and the witness could have confirmed the accusation or dismissed it completely leading to either punishment of the accused or condemnation of the accuser for malicious lies.

It is one man’s word against another’s. Either one could be true. Why do you think Bong lied and Rodriguez told the truth?

 

Very true, and by all means disagree Carl, my take on it is that the upper hand will always be with the accuser as he's guaranteed at least a "not proven" verdict with a "it wasn't a malicious accusation etc" from the FA for good measure, but if as you say it's one man's word against the other why is it assumed that the accusation wasn't malicious, there are unscrupulous people of all colours and creeds about.
But it's all just down to opinion and ours differ, I just personally wouldn't be satisfied if I was "innocent" but accused of racism and after the verdict the player making the accusation could continue to do so(as in Bong's case)with no recriminations.

 

Speaking from experience Tobes?

 

I think there are situations when malicious accusations are made, and they are proven in court. The accuser gets condemned as a liar and could even be punished by a fine or prison. When the malice cannot be shown or proven, it is only right to say it. It is basically not proven. We just have to accept that we can’t take none of the two as the truth and neither can be condemned. It is unfortunate we can’t exonerate Rodriguez if he is innocent. On the other hand, it is unfortunate we cannot exonerate Bong from making false accusations. Neither guy are winners in this situation. And it is only right.

 

But...."it is only right" in reality for one of the two, the only way around it is to mic every player up, which will never happen, as we know racism was rife in football and society not so long ago and these kinds of cases never reached the FA disciplinary panel, so it's for the betterment of the game and society in general that racism is taken more seriously in this day and age.
Here's hoping that one day it's totally eradicated from our game at least.

 

There was not one iota of evidence to 'prove' that Suarez had done anything other than he said he did - used the word negro (once) to Evra. I accept, and always have done, that this on its own is enough for a mandatory four match ban, regardless of whether he used it in the context it was said, but otherwise the FA did call Suarez a liar for determining that he used the word seven times, with not a shred of evidence to justify that verdict.

 

Must have got in the queue for the chippy again.

 

Not to be charged also .

 

I agree with your sentiments

My own view is that putting this specific case aside, the more such cases are brought and talked about the more likely racist abuse will frowned upon and will be reduced. Many will be dismissed as non proven sure because if I said the offending word (s) into the ear of another player it will be my word against his. But would I run the risk he might publicise this by complaining to the FA? Probably not.