The way you're wording it to make out that the guy is a baby murderer or something. Do me a favour don't talk to me, I think you're ****ing pathetic.
Why do you always try to engineer some warped form of intellectual superiority over people on here? Let's be brutally honest here, being 'smart' isn't one of your strongest attributes as a sub-standard human being is it?
No I'm not - what I am trying to do is prove to you that you would defend your club personnel - which I think I have.
I haven't defended him though, have I? What is wrong with you? Seriously, can you not read? Where did I defend him, prove it and I'll give you £100 and leave the forum. Nugget.
I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why Johnson deserved every benefit of the doubt until he was actually found guilty in court, regardless of the evidence, but Cisse should be strung up based on unconfirmed newspaper reports? Quite a few mackems have offered that viewpoint so I think it's fair enough that someone explains that?
To much fish is my guess . Hey , it's not me spewing about un explained facts . All the questions I asked in a previous posts should be answered , you just bypassing them says a lot . You know as much as the rest of us , very little
Bypassing what? To be honest I don't read much of what you write because it's usually incredibly boring and poorly composed. What facts are you saying are unexplained (what does that even mean, unexplained facts?) that I'm supposedly spewing over? try to keep it to the point though, you're incredibly boring at the best of times, but like I've said to you before, I don't mind that, it's not harming me in any way and I'm sure some people find your posts interesting for some reason
It's when you say something is a fact ....and it's obvious your talking out your arse . For one , you went through the whole thing about Byrne hiring Johnsons lawyer . I won't say she did or didn't , but do you have proof ,.. You do know what proof is don't you , I have my doubts .
I think it is you that needs to learn to read. You said you could not believe why we were defending Byrne - so I was just proving that you would (probably did) defend Giggs. Please learn to take what you give instead of having a go at every person who does not agree with you.
They won't mate. Those who condemn Cisse would have defended him as innocent until proven guilty if he was a Sunderland player. The hypocrisy is what has annoyed me as a neutral, because I got **** off a few on here for pointing out possible scenarios that could arise before his trial started. Enough of them said the girl was a slut and should be named and shamed, only Billy retracted that statement and felt guilty which I why I can respect him as a man. The fact is, Cisse is a **** and has a reputation as one so it's easy to imagine the story may not be a complete load of lies.
But I didn't defend Giggs did I? I'll defend him if you called him a *****, for example, because it's unfounded. Why are you defending Byrne? Why continue to defend a woman who has admitted a "Serious error of judgement"? She has admitted that she had info with regards to AJ kissing the girl and then putting him in touch with Orlando Pownall who she knows as a barrister who has a reputation for getting sex offenders a good result in court? Just hang the ****er out to dry she's a disgusting human being who has shown her intentions and kept vital information which has resulted in being damaging to your club, from the board. Nobody, me especially, is blaming you fans, your club, your players or your owner for any of this. It's Byrne's fault, and Johnson's fault that your club have had to deal with any of this.
Most roads to the truth on Byrne' will surface when the reasons for her suspending Johnson and reinstatement arise after meetings with others involved imo . Very important A lot of timeline stuff is unknown by all , except for a few who like to paint with a big brush .
Did I say she hired him? Where? I said she recommended him. And here is your proof you ****ing gimp... Now **** off.
Great , should she have recommended someone who didn't have the qualifications for someone who she thought was not guilty at the time ? . I never bothered looking , just wanted proof , like on all the other questions put forth . Byrne was walking through a minefield of lawyers at the time Nice to see you read my posts ....
This is like debating with a pair of farm animals. I'm done with the pair of you, at least be prepared instead of coming in, ****ting your knickers and making a huge mess.
You never bothered looking but you seem to be able to argue the entire subject with people who clearly know more about it than you? See my last post.
I've little time for research , just asking proof . Any theories on why Byrne suspended Johnson and reinstated him ? . You seem to have the answers .. Why ? What would the possibilities be ? .
There's seems to be a pretty awful trend of certain people prioritising their calling in life to defend Sunderland over a girl who has been sexually assaulted. And one Swansea lad who managed to become the first person I ever muted because he reduced the conversation about sexual abuse to point-scoring on technicalities. Football (and internet forums) will never be as important to me as that. As you know, I thought about posting again a while ago but seeing that Johnson thread really turned me off. The things said in here were morally repulsive at best, libellous at worst. All because people refuse to hear a bad word about their club. (I just figured out you're Tel by the way, please keep Typical in your name somewhere )
