Yes, I don't deny that is what it is, but I don't believe that it should have the right to regulate in this fashion/ to this extent.
Maybe not, but at the end of the day, if you break their rules, as Puncheon obviously has, you have to expect to be censured. I can understand why they don't want players to go public with these concerns in the first instance. Yeah I didn't want to overdo it
Well I'd draw the line at suppressing dissent with ruthless violence and destruction. Not sure that's a particularly likely outcome. I think you'd find the same concern of 'bringing the game into disrepute' in any sport, and the fine he's likely to get doesn't exactly constitute cruel or unusual punishment.
Before the violence and destruction he took away their internet. So they couldn't voice their dissent. Wouldn't want them rightly bringing Syria into disrepute. In short, they're the actions of someone who has something to hide.
The comparison is plainly ludicrous. Besides, the FA isn't taking away Puncheon's voice. He still has his twitter account. What exactly do you think the FA are hiding?
Sure, and strict limitations on what he's allowed to tweet. If Puncheon's allegations are true, or at least partially true, then that's what they're hiding. Corruption within the game.
Jason will get a forum if the FA bring him up on a charge. The thing is does he know anything or was he just so pissed off that he tweeted unsubstantiated rumours. He now has a chance to say.
There is something even more important than that here Joe and that is the "morality" of whatever Warnock was accused off, if there is any truth in it. That is where the FA should be looking and not turning a blind eye.
Jason is only bringing the game into disrepute if he is wrong. If he is right, Warnock et al are the ones bringing the game into disrepute.
If Puncheon goes through the proper channels then I'm sure they will. No, he is bringing the game into disrepute even if he is right, by making those concerns public instead of taking them to the FA first.
Agreed, he didn't go about it in the right way, but that's pretty unimportant when you look at the big picture. Whether or not the claims are true is far more important than the way in which the claims were made. If it turns out he's blown the whistle on some serious corruption, it won't be particularly important that the way he went about it was rather tactless.
Not to us, but to the FA, he's bringing the game into disrepute. From their perspective, if he had come straight to them they could have investigated without media attention and released a statement (and meted out appropriate punishment) if and when he was found guilty. Or, they could have brushed it under the carpet (at which point Puncheon could not really be blamed for going public), but I like to presume people will do the right thing.
