Rival Watch
- Thread starter Style
- 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
-
He'll be campaigning the whole livpl team take them
FFS I'll be fully expecting Dunga to take Sakho's case up in his pretentious pseudo legal language and fight the ban coming his way. Just as he did against the Racist when the offence was proven beyond doubt and he was punished, even then the RS tried to argue that the Racist was right. The Racist who dragged the RS club into the gutter
Clock set....
FFS I'll be fully expecting Dunga to take Sakho's case up in his pretentious pseudo legal language and fight the ban coming his way. Just as he did against the Racist when the offence was proven beyond doubt and he was punished, even then the RS tried to argue that the Racist was right. The Racist who dragged the RS club into the gutter
Clock set....
Alright, I know how this works - I answer the question and Chief comes along and bans me for mentioning Rio again.
The last time we spoke about this, Fist Boy, even your own posters called for you to shut up as you were being hosed by my 'Psuedo legal language', which was only the technical term for 'objective' and 'subjective' evidence and the difference between reasonable doubt and balance of probabilities being explained to you. I appreciate that was difficult, and I may as well have tried to explain particle physics to a baked potato, but the standard of evidence for workplace tribunals, that was the status of a FA 'independent' (
) panel, is actually, or should be, what's called 'reasonable belief'. If you believe that it was shown in that investigation that Suarez was proven 'beyond doubt' to have deliberately and objectively, on multiple occasions, racially abused Evra (something the FA themselves go to lengths to point out that they do not themselves claim) then you should ask yourself why Suarez was never charged nor tried in a criminal court. The only evidence (bad in itself and never denied) was that he used racist language on one occasion and thoroughly deserved a three to four match ban, as prescribed by precedent by the FA themselves (and the same as Rio should have got for the same E3 (2) offence, and that Schiemchal avoided by being told to deny all knowledge of by SAF, before he became Martin Luther Ferguson). The rest was utter nonsense, in terms of evidence, and the only provable lie in the whole proceedings was Evra's as to why he changed his evidence three times over the 'n' word.
So you asked, and I answered. Not bothered if you ban me again (I'm really not) but at least have the good grace to admit that you people on this board started the argument this time.
Btw, I stated immediately what I thought about Sakho, one of my favourite players in the current squad, should be sanctioned for should the B test come back positive - banned and sold. Fat burners aren't exactly steroids, but they're banned substances and he has no excuse. There'll be no 'campaign' from me. But if you ask about Suarez I'll answer again - the whole process was bent and twisted, formulated to to make an example to pacify political groups because, at the time, they couldn't get Terry. And the fact that Luis is a nasty gobshite is no more relevant to the fact that Evra is a nasty gobshite too.
Alright, I know how this works - I answer the question and Chief comes along and bans me for mentioning Rio again.
The last time we spoke about this, Fist Boy, even your own posters called for you to shut up as you were being hosed by my 'Psuedo legal language', which was only the technical term for 'objective' and 'subjective' evidence and the difference between reasonable doubt and balance of probabilities being explained to you. I appreciate that was difficult, and I may as well have tried to explain particle physics to a baked potato, but the standard of evidence for workplace tribunals, that was the status of a FA 'independent' (
The only evidence (bad in itself and never denied) was that he used racist language on one occasion and thoroughly deserved a three to four match ban, as prescribed by precedent by the FA themselves (and the same as Rio should have got for the same E3 (2) offence, and that Schiemchal avoided by being told to deny all knowledge of by SAF, before he became Martin Luther Ferguson). The rest was utter nonsense, in terms of evidence, and the only provable lie in the whole proceedings was Evra's as to why he changed his evidence three times over the 'n' word.
So you asked, and I answered. Not bothered if you ban me again (I'm really not) but at least have the good grace to admit that you people on this board started the argument this time.
Btw, I stated immediately what I thought about Sakho, one of my favourite players in the current squad, should be sanctioned for should the B test come back positive - banned and sold. Fat burners aren't exactly steroids, but they're banned substances and he has no excuse. There'll be no 'campaign' from me. But if you ask about Suarez I'll answer again - the whole process was bent and twisted, formulated to to make an example to pacify political groups because, at the time, they couldn't get Terry. And the fact that Luis is a nasty gobshite is no more relevant to the fact that Evra is a nasty gobshite too.
You must log in or register to see images
Wow 0-0, that makes things interesting. Is top 4 now almost in our hands? Win all our remaining games and need a winner in the Man City vs Arsenal game, easy right lol
Sunderland's result today means that Arsenal's next opponents - Norwich, will hopefully put up a fight to try and escape relegation. Our next match at home with Vardy missing from the Leicester line-up could be the pivotal game of the season.
You're a tedious little twat aren't you Donga?Alright, I know how this works - I answer the question and Chief comes along and bans me for mentioning Rio again.
The last time we spoke about this, Fist Boy, even your own posters called for you to shut up as you were being hosed by my 'Psuedo legal language', which was only the technical term for 'objective' and 'subjective' evidence and the difference between reasonable doubt and balance of probabilities being explained to you. I appreciate that was difficult, and I may as well have tried to explain particle physics to a baked potato, but the standard of evidence for workplace tribunals, that was the status of a FA 'independent' (
The only evidence (bad in itself and never denied) was that he used racist language on one occasion and thoroughly deserved a three to four match ban, as prescribed by precedent by the FA themselves (and the same as Rio should have got for the same E3 (2) offence, and that Schiemchal avoided by being told to deny all knowledge of by SAF, before he became Martin Luther Ferguson). The rest was utter nonsense, in terms of evidence, and the only provable lie in the whole proceedings was Evra's as to why he changed his evidence three times over the 'n' word.
So you asked, and I answered. Not bothered if you ban me again (I'm really not) but at least have the good grace to admit that you people on this board started the argument this time.
Btw, I stated immediately what I thought about Sakho, one of my favourite players in the current squad, should be sanctioned for should the B test come back positive - banned and sold. Fat burners aren't exactly steroids, but they're banned substances and he has no excuse. There'll be no 'campaign' from me. But if you ask about Suarez I'll answer again - the whole process was bent and twisted, formulated to to make an example to pacify political groups because, at the time, they couldn't get Terry. And the fact that Luis is a nasty gobshite is no more relevant to the fact that Evra is a nasty gobshite too.
Don't encourage him. Or he'll write you a six page essay on why Christian Smith is legally more tedious than him.
Top 4 looks on for you lot now ffs. That's how poor this league has been this season!!!
Top 4 and the FA cup has to go down as a decent season. UIR will be back on telling you all he was right
I dont think so, LvG will still **** it up, 5th is best UTD can hope with maybe the FA Cup
We have to win all our games and hope that Arsenal lose one. We won't beat West Ham at Upton Park. LVG will pick Depay to play at centre half in an attempt to show just what a ****ing innovator he is.Top 4 looks on for you lot now ffs. That's how poor this league has been this season!!!
Top 4 and the FA cup has to go down as a decent season. UIR will be back on telling you all he was right
Arsenal are in the middle of a meltdown, so I highly expect them to lose, or at least draw a couple of games.
Looking at you against Everton makes me think the Arsenal double could be on (FA cup and 4th place cup).
Will LVG be given more time if you do hit these targets? I'm guessing they were targets as to win the league was a bit far fetched this early in a rebuild
I think LVG is doomed. They can't trust him with anymore money.Arsenal are in the middle of a meltdown, so I highly expect them to lose, or at least draw a couple of games.
Looking at you against Everton makes me think the Arsenal double could be on (FA cup and 4th place cup).
Will LVG be given more time if you do hit these targets? I'm guessing they were targets as to win the league was a bit far fetched this early in a rebuild
He started 3 of his own signings against Everton. He's spent £250million and trusts 3 of his own players.
Top 4 looks on for you lot now ffs. That's how poor this league has been this season!!!
Top 4 and the FA cup has to go down as a decent season. UIR will be back on telling you all he was right
Maybe for the results, but not the manner in which they were achieved. Personally I would have been happy with this season had we actually showed some attacking flair during the season, and scored more goals than Bournemouth.
I think if we do get top four and win the FA Cup, what will decide LVG's future is how the board weights the top four cash plus trophy versus the general lack of attacking intent or effectiveness. Too often during the match against Everton our players got the ball in a good position but seemed to have no clear plan of how to work as a team to get the ball into the goal. We created chances and threatened due to the individual quality of our players, but without some coherent plan of attack we will never achieve anything, regardless of how good the players are.
I think the best we could hope for under LVG would be to become like Liverpool were under Benitez - consistently top four and challenging for cups, but never really threatening to go beyond that, and too defensive to ever really have a decent chance of winning the title. The question is whether the owners think that level, and the money it will bring it, will be enough for a club like Utd.
I certainly don't want us to reach the point where a top 4 finish is ever considered a 'good' result, much less develop into a side that is content each year to muddle through the early phases of the CL and then aim big in the EL. That is my big concern with LvG, he doesn't seem to have the fire for the fight, everything is relative, for example, in his view an FA Cup final appears to offset the fact that we have played crap football for 95% of the season and are out of the CL. I want someone in charge who will rip the team to shreds for a few bad passages of play in a game that we win 3 - 0.
Top 4 looks on for you lot now ffs. That's how poor this league has been this season!!!
Top 4 and the FA cup has to go down as a decent season. UIR will be back on telling you all he was right
I think it shows why LVG has underachieved. If anything it highlights how much better we could've done if we had a manager who wasnt a fcking coward.
Also, if I was on the board I'd be using a top 4 finish and FA Cup to allay the fears of the rest of the board by saying if this clueless twat can achieve that, then it's clear the squad is good enough and there really is little risk in changing managers.