Off Topic Adam Johnson

Oh dreary me

 

It is some of you who are trying to place the onus of Johnson's crimes onto the club who followed the advice given.
I would say that Cisse deeds are far more serious but because he has never faced justice you seem to think it is OK..

 

I would say that the advice they sought from the their own lawyers was to make sure they weren't doing anything illegal in reinstating him and as for the PFA, they are in no way a neutral organisation and will always back players to the hilt. The correct thing to do morally was to uphold his suspension IMHO.

What would you have Newcastle do about Cisse? To be honest, I've not even heard this rumour before reading it on this thread so it doesn't sound like it has substance. If there were charges brought against him rather than just an old newspaper article then the club should suspend him and I'd say at the point at which it was confirmed it was going to trial then the suspension should absolutely be upheld until a resolution has been reached one way or the other. As it is, it's just hearsay.

 

He fathered a child to his future wife when she was only 13 and he was 16. It did happen, but it never went to court..

 

A bit different to a 27 year old man grooming a 15 year old. 16 and 13 years? You'd have to dig deep into Senegalese law there because it says on wikipedia there that the age of consent is 21 in Senegal so where does that leave two minors having sex?

Still, like I asked, what would you have Newcastle do about it?

 

Nothing...It was in the past and he hasn't, as far as I know it, committed other offences with minors...
The point I was making is that it is ridiculous trying to claim any moral high ground over this..

 

Why do you think anyone is trying to claim moral high ground? Just because your club is coming in for criticism? They are on shaky ground over this and they should be coming in for scrutiny. We had this earlier with Fredor. We are allowed to discuss the case. Don't get so defensive. I said earlier in the thread that I don't even think it matters whether the club knew the details of what happened, they should have upheld the suspension as soon as it was confirmed it was going to trial. Not everyone agrees (including Newcastle supporters) and that's fair enough.

 

No one is trying to place the onus of his crimes onto the club.
As far as I can see, we are saying nothing different to that already being said by many SAFC fans, and people outside the closeted world of football.
It has nothing to do with taking the Moral high ground, we can hardly take that stance with having Messrs Barton and Ranger in recent years.

Seriously, I personally couldn't care less what your club does or doesn't do.
But as an outsider looking in at how they are dealing with it now, never mind when it first came about, it comes across as a cover-up and damage limitation as far the club is concerned.

The best thing SAFC could do, is to be open and honest about what they knew and start thinking of the victim and her family, who if you recall, are actually fans the same as yourself.

 

They done this by sacking him as soon as he pleaded guilty and releasing a statement as soon as the trial was over..

 

I think the club would have been mindful of not influencing the jury before the trial

 

That's nonsense to be fair.

 

To be honest all this burying of heads is not the way to go. Its better to root out the actual problems within the club. All this carpet brushing exercise is doing is making people ask more questions, and giving the dog papers a bone. Sunderland should have just made a statement saying they were going to investigate the claims made during the trial in full, and would respond in due course. In their haste to sweep it all away and move on, they've brought a load of negative press their way. Did they honestly think that ambiguous statement was going to wash? It might do for some die hard fans who think the club can do no wrong, but to the neutral observer and fans who want answers, it was never going to pass.

 

Again, ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM alert.!! He would not have got near the first team if he had just been a clogger footballer. FACT!!!! He was allowed to play ,and morality went out the window. He saved your bacon last year and that is the reason he was allowed to continue playing. Every sensible football fan knows this to be true. Its not about having a go at SAFC, i ist having a go at the decision to let him keep playing, now knowing what they knew, which was far more than your normal fan did. Your club made a decision, a wrong one, and now they have to take all the shyte is coming their way. They deserve every bit of it as well..

 

My Twitter marra Katie Hopkins the bitch gets me going just thinking about her.

 

Louis Ck says it all for me, check this ou

thttps://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwifiqj02q7LAhWFuxQKHbCTAjsQ3ywIHjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D0O5h4enjrHw&usg=AFQjCNF35lQZcfQFUAMyIHKmKHO8TDEJgw

 

please log in to view this image

 

****in hell! You know you are on the wrong side when Katie Hopkins is sticking up for you!

 

Only in Newcastle is it nonsense to be fair

 

Put your hand on your heart and tell me that a male going with a female a few months before it was legal has not been blown out of all proportion , NO I AM NOT SAYING HE DID NO WRONG !!!!!!!!

 

Not us she's sticking up for.