 | Forum
Reply | Profiteering from a ST
at 14:40 6 Sep 2012
Couldn't an ST holder with the "Super Hoops" upgrade buy an extra ticket for a home match eg. against Scum, then sell his ST on there for silly money?
That would seem to be the real danger regarding profiteering. Have to be organised & fairly amoral, but perfectly possible. |
| Forum
Reply | Another Olympic cock pu
at 23:15 30 Jul 2012
In most senior international finals (ie. quarters onwards) someone else will be starting and stopping the clock, so the ref has his/her hands free. I'm told at these Olympics it's one of the volunteers.So some poor volunteer (who'll be a young fencer him/herself) will be going home tonight knowing that her mess-up cost the Korean girl an Olympic medal. Almost worse than being the Korean girl, but not quite. |
| Forum
Reply | John Terry Case
at 15:49 25 Jun 2012
Nah, I don't think it changes much. If it is just that Anton has previous re assault and driving charges, I can't imagine that the mags will let the bad character evidence in.
There are normally two situations where the bad character of non-defendant witnesses will be let in - where the defendant's defence is that the witness did it (so obviously eg. if the offence is theft, that the witness has previous theft convictions is relevant), or where the defendant's defence is that the witness is lying/exaggerating. If it's the latter, Anton's previous is only relevant if it concerns false testimony or false allegations. Otherwise, it shouldn't be allowed in - the defence doesn't get free-for-all on the prosecution witnesses for no benefit.
However, there is one complication. Since this is in the magistrates' court, the same judges who hear the application (to allow in the bad character evidence) will probably hear the trial EVEN IF they decide to exclude it. They're supposed to put it out of their mind, but obviously that's difficult. So the aim may be, by making the application, to plant a seed in the mags' minds that Anton's not all that clean either. Sneaky, but allowed. |
| Forum
Reply | John Terry Case
at 13:38 25 Jun 2012
He must be a witness, otherwise they wouldn't be considering a bad character application. Whether he's an important witness is a different matter - but Terry's team will have his witness statement and be able to decide on that. |
| Forum
Reply | John Terry Case
at 13:05 25 Jun 2012
Hmmm. Bad character is evidence of previous convictions, cautions or "misconduct" (normally investigated but non-prosecuted allegations), or of a disposition to do misconduct. But you can only get it in if it's important explanatory evidence, or if it's of substantial probative value to an important matter in issue.
The only use I can see for this is if there's something that Terry's legal team have that relates to Ferdinand's credibility - eg. that he's previously made unsubstantiated complaints. But there's been no media coverage of anything like that. The fact that Ferdinand has previously been in trouble with the police (if he has - I don't know) is pretty irrelevant on its own. We'll have to wait and see I suppose. |
| Forum
Reply | Human Rights laws
at 10:52 1 Jun 2012
How does that work then? If someone tortures, we should be allowed to torture them? If you invade my privacy, I'm allowed to come and wander round your house?
Syria's not a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights, so obviously it doesn't apply there.
Newspapers run a lot of stories about human rights laws in the context of immigration, which is a very controversial area, but almost nothing in other areas. There are plenty of ECtHR decisions which I think most people would agree with. |
| Forum
Reply | Barton Going ?
at 17:47 28 May 2012
And this is why we've waited until the FA hearing's been finished.
As far as the law goes, there's a lot that's been aired on here. There's no requirement for Barton to have committed a criminal offence for us to sack him for gross misconduct. Fighting between co-workers is, depending on its severity, a ground for dismissal for gross misconduct, and is particularly serious in front of customers - clearly because of its effect on the company's reputation.
Here, I would say that Barton's unprovoked assaults on Aguero and (attempted) on Kompany, in front of tens of thousands of spectators and millions more on TV, was sufficiently serious for us to dismiss him.
There is a lot that isn't known about the details of Barton's contract, and particularly whether he's been subject to other internal warnings. But provided that QPR's procedure was handled professionally (and with Phil Beard in charge I think it would be), I think it would be possible to dismiss him for this in a manner that an ET would consider fair. |
| Forum
Reply | Adel to Wolfsburg
at 11:43 22 May 2012
This. Hughes isn't Pulis or Blackwell - we're not going to just have a team of cloggers playing long balls at Zamora. He likes a 4-4-2 with creativity on the wings and two tough CMs. From what Dave Mc's been saying Hughes is looking for more creativity from midfield. Adel's the only one that provides that atm.
I'm not saying we're not going to sell him - but if we do, it'll be more about the replacements/Adel wanting to leave than his perceived inability to track back and his grumpiness. |
| Forum
Reply | Stoke to be a major aerial threat to us.
at 15:37 1 May 2012
I think that's a bit unfair. Bobby's game is all about controlling with his back to goal and then laying off for runners.
Against Chelsea our midfield were consistently caught in a half-way house - too concerned with what was behind them (Torres, Mata, and a defence having a collective nightmare) to get forward, but conscious that they were a goal down and needed to get forward. Combine that with Derry and Buzsaky's lack of pace, and the end result was that there was no fluidity to our play - they were all trying to do the right things, but were consistently in the wrong place.
And it's not surprising, in that situation, that Zamora was completely anonymous - he was being asked to field long balls played at his head (which isn't his game anyway really), with no runners to lay it off to. |
| Forum
Reply | Shaun Derry hold your head up.
at 15:18 8 Apr 2012
Can we appeal that? The next 3 are pretty bloody important - two of our three winnable games, plus Spurs at home which is the next easiest. |
| Forum
Reply | “I’d put my money on Wigan” over QPR in survival race
at 19:42 3 Apr 2012
"If you were going to the final day of the season and you had to put your money on Wigan and the others who haven’t been there before — QPR being a case in point — I’d actually put my money on Wigan"
Well that's a clueless comment. Pretty much all the teams at the bottom, other than maybe Villa, have "been there before". And what if it doesn't all come down to the final day of the season? And, most importantly, who's the third team? Pretty arbitrary to pick Wigan/QPR as a "one goes down"
Overall, a "please read our site" article designed to stir up meaningless controversy. |
| Forum
Reply | Blackburn fans on Talksport
at 11:58 3 Apr 2012
Hah yeah true, but Liverpool are a different proposition from those three at the moment. Our season so far shows that you can't really predict these things, but Wigan's last couple of results have been absolute gifts - especially that win against Stoke. They're still a very very poor side. |
| Forum
Reply | Blackburn fans on Talksport
at 09:53 3 Apr 2012
I think Wigan are gone - they're going to get creamed in the next three games (Chelsea/Man U/Arsenal) and after that their goal difference/form/position will be appalling.
It's us, Blackburn, Bolton and poss Villa for the 3rd spot. We're still favourites for it, especially given Bolton's run-in, but it's in our hands, which it didn't look like being a few weeks ago. |
| Forum
Reply | Just done the predictor thingy on bbc
at 10:13 2 Apr 2012
We can beat Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea at home, but lose to Wolves and Norwich. Nothing so far this season has gone on the "predictable" results... |
| Forum
Reply | Clint Hill
at 22:37 1 Apr 2012
A lot of Premiership CBs get picked for technical skills & their ability to start play from the back. Eg. Luiz, Cahill at Chelsea.
Sod that, we're not Barca, we're in a hole and we need a couple of uncomplicated, experienced & professional defenders to lift the rest of the back 5/6. Hill & Derry are invaluable. |
| | rcap
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 0 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 0 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.