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.

News of Ex Players

BirkenheadBlue said:
The inquiry absolutely has not said he didn’t do it. Nor has it said he did.

However the wording is telling. “Didn’t reach the CPS threshold” is almost always a very carefully chosen way of saying “we’re pretty sure he did it, but we’re not being allowed to move forward”
Click to expand...

It’s not at all.

The wording - “ Didn’t reach the CPS threshold “ is the completely standard response, that the CPS use, when there isn’t enough evidence, for whatever reason, to bring a REALISTIC chance of a SUCCESSFUL prosecution.

There is no hidden meaning, no ambiguity with this, it’s completely normal and this phrase will be used by the CPS to discontinue multiple cases, every day of the week, up and down the land.

Some of the stuff on here today is just nuts, it really is like the Salem Witch Trials.
 
Last edited:
Wizard said:
From a P&S perspective there are two things we can definitely address for the 21/22 accounts:

- £5.2m on wages (supposedly on £100,000 a week)

- £8m in amortisation (£40m transfer fee, 5 year contract)

Then it gets trickier I imagine. We can say we would have tried to sell him but coming to a figure for that is tough. A 32 year old entering the last year of his contract isn’t going for a big fee. If you looked into a load of similar transfers you could probably get a “fair value” price. Complete guess but I imagine it would be hard to argue that would be more than £5m.

We didn’t really buy a replacement but I guess we could argue Demarai Gray was an attacking replacement of sorts so could try and claim his fee (£1.7m) and wages (can’t find a reliable figure for this but seems to be around £40k a week). We could also try and argue we brought in Dele Alli as a replacement so then you could add 6 months wages from him (£2.6m).

So if the commission agree with the above that comes to roughly £20m excess costs associated with his case (not including any theoretical fee we might have got for Sigurdsson had we sold him.)
Click to expand...
I think the most we can realistically go for is the wages and the loss of book value, so between 13 and 14 million. That's a significant chunk of our 21/22 loss though, and then of course you have other deductions to get to the P&S figure. Even that would take us a lot closer to compliance.
 
Tony’s Carp said:
I think the most we can realistically go for is the wages and the loss of book value, so between 13 and 14 million. That's a significant chunk of our 21/22 loss though, and then of course you have other deductions to get to the P&S figure. Even that would take us a lot closer to compliance.
Click to expand...
I agree that’s most likely as we can definitely say he cost us that much money and we had no way of avoiding it. Adding in the players we “signed as replacements” is more of a stretch but an argument worth making to the commission. Never know, they might go for it, especially if it’s the difference between compliance or not.
 
blulouie said:
Well that certainly is not the type of society I want to live in where I could be accused of something even though I hadn't.

"Doesn't mean that he didn't do it "
Doesn't wash with me mate , that's a minds made up before any evidence society.
No thanks.

Salem witchh hunt springs to mind , if you had a cat & a broom you are guilty of being a witch.
 
Click to expand...
What on earth are you talking about Salem witch hunt. Are you alright mate

No one has said he's guilty or not I'm just telling you the facts.... unfortunately they don't care about feelings . No one will be getting any compensation.
 

BirkenheadBlue said:
The inquiry absolutely has not said he didn’t do it. Nor has it said he did.

However the wording is telling. “Didn’t reach the CPS threshold” is almost always a very carefully chosen way of saying “we’re pretty sure he did it, but we’re not being allowed to move forward”
Click to expand...
Again, we have to be careful. It's not as if the wrong person has never been convicted before and it's not as if the police/CPS are full of a superior species of humanity. They're the same as us (and sonetimes a lot worse) and have the same ingrained predjudices that we all have. I'll be honest. When i hear that a child has accused an adult of a sexual misdemeanor my gut instinct is to believe it as 'people (especially children) don't make this kind of stuff up'. However as (hopefully) a logical and rational person i accept that, in a country of millions, a minority will make malicious allegations. The law of every democracy on Earth demands that we can prove the allegation and not just believe it. If we don't we are treating the inncoent minority as 'collateral damage' - and i apologise for the emotive phrase, when i see these in arguments i feel that the need to resort to such phrases suggests that the core argument is fundementlly weak, but i can't think of another way to put it and my pizza has arrived!
 
andy4efc said:
Bit of a nothing comment really, if we were on the jury (if there was one, in this case there hasn't been one) we would be being presented with facts and accounts and we would have to follow the law to decide one or the other. Guilt doesn't even come into it. I could feel guilty of doing something, it is irrelevant to whether im innocent or guilty.

Connor isn't saying that he isn't innocent by law. He's saying that just because he's innocent by law doesn't mean something hasn't gone on and likewise it doesn't mean anything had gone on.
Click to expand...
Semantics.
If I say that you are not innocent of an offence , the implication is therefore that I consider you guilty.
It is a libellous comment unless I can provide some evidence to support my accusation.
The burden of proof lies with the accuser, and I have seen no evidence to support this suggestion.
Let us remember the type of crime being inferred here is a serious one and damaging to a person being accused of it , so we should be wary of making unsubstantiated allegations on public forums.
 
davek said:
It's hugely affected us. If he was playing at the beginning of the Benitez season do we then go and get ourselves in a mess by january that the club spend £40M which started the grasses at Leeds and Burnley pissing their pants? I dont think so.
Click to expand...

Prize money too, the season before when he was available we finished in the top 10.
 

Efcjake said:
So if someone doesn't go down for the crime then the crime never happened?

Innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law, it doesn't retroactively reverse what he's done and admitted to I will add.

Facts as we know them are the girl was underage and he confessed sleeping with her. The law is concerned over whether he knew or not but the facts remain that he's not innocent.
Click to expand...
Can I ask in all interest where have you have seen or heard these facts you refer to?
I am asking because I have not seen or heard them reported as such in any credible or legitimate news source.
Genuine interest as it may be my omission.
Also it occurs to me that if he indeed admitted to having sex with a minor then a definite offence has been committed and it is very surprising that he has not been charged?
 
14.2 mill wages and Amortisation or impairment on a potential fee. I think that’s logical and acceptable. We can point to getting 10 mill for Jamo and 8 for Bernard.

Prize money and cost of replacing - will be a hard sell - 3/4 mill prize money, 2.5 mill for Dele, 5 mill for VDB.

Just south of 25 mill - would be my take, don’t think we would get paragraph, but be arguing it anyway, it’s all leverage to mitigate scope of any potential punishment.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top