Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Holgate Racially Abused By Firmino - The Guardian

Status
Not open for further replies.
SiEdmo said:
it wasn't, Rodriguez incident was 8 days after our game v Liverpool,

we played them on the 5th, WBA Brighton was the 13th
Click to expand...
I think he's saying the Liverpool - West Brom cup game was 2 weeks after Rodriguez is accused of saying something racist, therefore he wouldn't have been allowed to play, score, and knock Liverpool out of the cup if we were applying the logic that those accused of racism should immediately be banned.
 
Lanolin said:
I think he's saying the Liverpool - West Brom cup game was 2 weeks after Rodriguez is accused of saying something racist, therefore he wouldn't have been allowed to play, score, and knock Liverpool out of the cup if we were applying the logic that those accused of racism should immediately be banned.
Click to expand...

ahhhhhh fair enough
 
Lanolin said:
I think he's saying the Liverpool - West Brom cup game was 2 weeks after Rodriguez is accused of saying something racist, therefore he wouldn't have been allowed to play, score, and knock Liverpool out of the cup if we were applying the logic that those accused of racism should immediately be banned.
Click to expand...
That is what I meant.
 
just playing Devil's advocate here (and it really makes me baulk saying it) but for you lads saying Firmino should have been banned while the case was on going, shouldn't it be a case of 'innocent till proven guilty?' Also, It's a case of catch 22, if he gets found guilty, then in hindsight he should have been banned whilst the FA were looking into it, but if he had been banned from the start, and missed a fair few games for the RS, then the verdict was not guilty, then wouldn't the RS have every right to feel aggrieved because he was banned? As I say, just playing Devil's advocate.
 
LouReedwalkonthewildside said:
just playing Devil's advocate here (and it really makes me baulk saying it) but for you lads saying Firmino should have been banned while the case was on going, shouldn't it be a case of 'innocent till proven guilty?' Also, It's a case of catch 22, if he gets found guilty, then in hindsight he should have been banned whilst the FA were looking into it, but if he had been banned from the start, and missed a fair few games for the RS, then the verdict was not guilty, then wouldn't the RS would have every right to feel aggrieved because he was banned? As I say, just playing Devil's advocate.
Click to expand...

Definitely. Can't be bothered readingh back but I'm surprised if anyone is seriously calling for him to be banned from when the incident happened - due process is the best course of action.
 

LouReedwalkonthewildside said:
just playing Devil's advocate here (and it really makes me baulk saying it) but for you lads saying Firmino should have been banned while the case was on going, shouldn't it be a case of 'innocent till proven guilty?' Also, It's a case of catch 22, if he gets found guilty, then in hindsight he should have been banned whilst the FA were looking into it, but if he had been banned from the start, and missed a fair few games for the RS, then the verdict was not guilty, then wouldn't the RS have every right to feel aggrieved because he was banned? As I say, just playing Devil's advocate.
Click to expand...

Very astute point. You're totally right. I imagine if the situation were reversed, we'd be screaming if an Everton player was suspended without due process (or whatever the FA calls it). The irritating point for me (and I suspect almost every Evertonian) is it's taken far too long to reach a conclusion on this and get any penalties meted out in a timely fashion.
 
Tubey said:
Definitely. Can't be bothered readingh back but I'm surprised if anyone is seriously calling for him to be banned from when the incident happened - due process is the best course of action.
Click to expand...

Could well be right Tubey. doing this on my phone at the moment, but I am deffo sure I've read a few posts saying he should have been banned while the investigation was going on, stating that he is helping the RS win games whilst under a racist allegation, and if he is then found guilty all those teams he's scored against, and helped the RS beat would have every right to feel hard done by.
 
canuckblue said:
Very astute point. You're totally right. I imagine if the situation were reversed, we'd be screaming if an Everton player was suspended without due process (or whatever the FA calls it). The irritating point for me (and I suspect almost every Evertonian) is it's taken far too long to reach a conclusion on this and get any penalties meted out in a timely fashion.
Click to expand...


Totally agree mate. I know the FA have to leave no stone unturned in the investigation, but it's now got to the point of being comical how long it's taking.
 

LouReedwalkonthewildside said:
Could well be right Tubey. doing this on my phone at the moment, but I am deffo sure I've read a few posts saying he should have been banned while the investigation was going on, stating that he is helping the RS win games whilst under a racist allegation, and if he is then found guilty all those teams he's scored against, and helped the RS beat would have every right to feel hard done by.
Click to expand...

Pretty much there is one person who is saying that in a case like this both players involved should sit out games because they think it would make the FA act faster.

And pretty much everyone else disagrees.

I'm pretty sure if i tell you that he who shouts loudest and for longest gets noticed most you'll be able to guess who that 1 person is.
 
LouReedwalkonthewildside said:
just playing Devil's advocate here (and it really makes me baulk saying it) but for you lads saying Firmino should have been banned while the case was on going, shouldn't it be a case of 'innocent till proven guilty?' Also, It's a case of catch 22, if he gets found guilty, then in hindsight he should have been banned whilst the FA were looking into it, but if he had been banned from the start, and missed a fair few games for the RS, then the verdict was not guilty, then wouldn't the RS have every right to feel aggrieved because he was banned? As I say, just playing Devil's advocate.
Click to expand...
Tubey said:
Definitely. Can't be bothered readingh back but I'm surprised if anyone is seriously calling for him to be banned from when the incident happened - due process is the best course of action.
Click to expand...
I’ve very little faith that it’s even being looked into
 
Seamus Colemole said:
Pretty much there is one person who is saying that in a case like this both players involved should sit out games because they think it would make the FA act faster.

And pretty much everyone else disagrees.

I'm pretty sure if i tell you that he who shouts loudest and for longest gets noticed most you'll be able to guess who that 1 person is.
Click to expand...

Hang on mate, will let you know who I think it is in a mo, just eating a big juicy orange at the moment, bloody thing is going all over me!
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top