He personally conceded
Where the **** was the rest of the defence and the keeper
You are right about Maguire though, i see Varane as his partner if he stays fit for a couple of games in a row.
Rival watch
- Thread starter Spurlock
- 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
-
Where the **** was the rest of the defence and the keeper
You are right about Maguire though, i see Varane as his partner if he stays fit for a couple of games in a row.
Dortmund have't told Schulz not to come in to work, nor have they said anything about suspending him. All they have said is that they have held talks with the players and his representatives, which is precisely what any self-respecting company would seek to do if one of their employees was subject of such serious allegations. He can try and "sue the arse" off of them for having a conversation with him and his team and he'll be laughed out of court, even if found innocent. You clearly haven't bothered reading their actual statement properly and therefore clearly don't understand the argument I am making.
Their statement concludes with the following:
As this is a pending case in its early stages, and the factual and legal situation is extremely unclear to Borussia Dortmund as it stands today, we are not yet able to make any reliable and legally watertight decisions with regard to labour law and disciplinary measures. However, we reserve the right to do so at any time once we objectively know more.
I'm not sure what your ongoing issue with this is. Dortmund are handling this impeccably. They have responded swiftly, firmly but fairly. Have refrained from taking any decisions that may be legal in nature, and have given the player and his team the chance to explain his side of the story.
Arsenal by contrast have done **** all and I find it mystifying that you continue to defend the indefensible.
I will freely admit i know nothing of the Dortmund player/situation (didn't click the link, sorry) but am of the opinion that once a person has been told not to come into work then a decision has already been made by the company and the public (possible jurors) will react to this.
So. You would be quite happy if one of your work colleagues was accused of sexually assaulting another of your colleagues you would be happy to let him/her still come to work with you
Arsenal should at least acknowledge it, the silence from them regarding this is deafening.
I am absolutely torn on situations like this in any walk of life, in any circumstance if the company makes a statement or more (like suspending an employee) then in effect they are doubting him and implying guilt. If they do nothing they are seen to be ignoring the situation.
I would much rather things carry on as normal until justice has run it's course, very hard to take for someone who has been wronged i accept but the other way around a persons reputation could be ruined for no reason.
****e situation all round for anyone involved in these cases.
You'd lose.
People are regularly suspended on full pay while matters are investigated. The employer simply says it is without prejudice.
This happenes to nurses, doctors, childcare staff, teachers, care workers, social workers and others on a very regular basis.
If those allegations had been made against me I would be suspended from my job until the investigation was complete due to the safe guarding implications.
But you also did not answer my point about Greenwood...were United wrong in addressing the accusations against him?
Cos by following your logic, they should not have stopped him coming to training, should not have addressed the issue by issuing a press release saying they were aware of the situation and should have continued to play him.
I am not over the details of this, but I believe Greenwood has been charged and Partey has not. Could be wrong.
It’s worth pointing out that justice can’t even technically run its course in one of the cases.
Legislation at the time of the incident prevented the UK from prosecuting overseas sex crimes, this legislation changed just one week later. With the evidence the woman posted on social media and the fact Barnet police even tweeted themselves about the legislation at the time preventing prosecution, it’s damning and almost an absolute certainty that Partey raped/ sexually assaulted this woman but is getting off on a technicality.
Being investigated for two other allegations as well should ring alarm bells to any employer, as well as fellow colleagues.
Maybe it’s the cynical side in me but I can’t help but wonder what if the player in question wasn’t a £50m first choice player? What if it was an academy/ reserve player or someone on the fringes of the first team?
Legislation at the time of the incident prevented the UK from prosecuting overseas sex crimes, this legislation changed just one week later. With the evidence the woman posted on social media and the fact Barnet police even tweeted themselves about the legislation at the time preventing prosecution, it’s damning and almost an absolute certainty that Partey raped/ sexually assaulted this woman but is getting off on a technicality.
Being investigated for two other allegations as well should ring alarm bells to any employer, as well as fellow colleagues.
Maybe it’s the cynical side in me but I can’t help but wonder what if the player in question wasn’t a £50m first choice player? What if it was an academy/ reserve player or someone on the fringes of the first team?
At the time that United effectively suspended him Greenwood was being questioned while under arrest like Partey was...that's my understanding but could be mistaken.
There is no such verdict as 'innocent'. If you were found not guilty and sued your employer the case would be decided on the balance of evidence and you might still lose despite being not guilty of a crime.
Anyway you can be suspended on full pay without any reason being given so there is no possibility of either defamation or loss of earnings.
The only constraint on this should be where the work
environment of the accused on paper may be actual/
potential enablers of the crime they are accused of.
A bank worker accused of monetary theft would not be
allowed to work at the cashier desk etc.
Very different from someone accused of rape, whose day
job is clearing "fatbergs" from residential sewers.
Co-workers should be wholly professional, and keep any
prejudice they may have out of the workplace.
I don't agree. Anyone on bail having been accused of an imprisonable offence should be automatically suspended from work on full pay until the matter us resolved. That is the professional way of dealing with the situation. It prevents any bad feeling in the team and allows the accused free time to defend themselves without the pressure of having to work.
Should that pay be incurred by the state ??
Not a cost incurred by a business due to poor business execution.
Similarly, recompense in the event that the accused is not
convicted and material detriment was caused to the business ??
"and allows the accused free time to defend themselves without the pressure of having to work."
How much "free time" does a n accused person need in the prelude
period from release on bail to day one in court ??
How many man hours :
1. does the accused typically spend with legal rep (given
the latter is paid by the hour and therefore has an incentive
to make that as long as possible) ??
2. are typically taken with attending police interviews etc
You must log in or register to see media
What a ****ing shambles.
Lucky nothing like that happens in the Premi...oh who am I trying to kid?
The Man Utd decisions were so bad that even Dermot Gallagher thinks they were wrong:
https://www.skysports.com/football/...-brighton-scott-mctominay-lucky-to-escape-red
https://www.skysports.com/football/...-brighton-scott-mctominay-lucky-to-escape-red
Once the media turn then they will be in trouble.
Likewise, the media are changing their opinion on us, predicting a good season for us, and that will influence our season for the better. Teams will be wary and refs won't want to upset the media. we saw that clearly with Leicester, and maybe already we were a tad lucky with a couple of decisions on Saturday.
Don't care about any of that. If it was my team then if the person was guilty I would want them out of the door immediately and if not I would want to give them maximum opportunity to fight their case and wouldn't want them working while distracted by doing that. There are no circumstances where it would be better for them to be at work.