• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Vinai Venkatesham - CEO

braineclipse said:
To those of you critical of wanting to see a football club act through a suspension or otherwise before someone is found guilty:

Would you say the same about murder or attempted murder accusations? Would you say the same about match fixing accusations?
Click to expand...

He left arsenal and we don't know why.
Maybe he left because of their actions over partey.
He can't say that, there's a legal case being prepared, he'd be prejudicing the case, he'd also be open to legal action from the player and arsenal I would be imagine.
There is nothing but Internet speculation and lots 2+2 = guilt by association.
Let's not hang someone out dry just to make ourselves look righteous.
 
Grays_1890 said:
I think its likely a better way of handling than it has been. I would think having full pay and stood down for the time would benefit everyone IMO. Its not a sign of saying "you are guilty" more, you are unlikely to perform under the scrutiny" If and when found not guilty, they can still return to work with a clean slate.

The alternative is whats happened here with statements of "with what he has been through" which leaves a far greater bad taste
Click to expand...

The key thing is it’s not about guilt at all. It’s purely from the view of “you’ve been charged with a serious crime that holds a minimum sentence of 11 or more years, you’ve brought the game into disrepute.”
 
Lilbaz said:
Would it? They are not a police force. If it's an ongoing inquiry they can't get any evidence or witness statements for fear of interfering.
So all you would have is an allegation.
Click to expand...

There is/was clearly more to it than a rival fan poison pen letter which was the original point made.

They would have the legal team involved and know whats coming down the pipe even if not charged. Spurs knew what was in the offing thats why they went ahead with Bissouma
 
Grays_1890 said:
There is/was clearly more to it than a rival fan poison pen letter which was the original point made.

They would have the legal team involved and know whats coming down the pipe even if not charged. Spurs knew what was in the offing thats why they went ahead with Bissouma
Click to expand...

They would have had the legal team involved. The legal team obviously advised them not to suspend him.
That may change now he's been charged.
 
Lilbaz said:
They would have had the legal team involved. The legal team obviously advised them not to suspend him.
That may change now he's been charged.
Click to expand...

I suspect the legal team gave options and they took one, you can give paid leave and still remain within the legal requirement.

If footballs taught me anything ala people killing their GFs in drink driving, racism, adultery and rape, it values success on the pitch above moral obligations
 
Grays_1890 said:
I suspect the legal team gave options and they took one, you can give paid leave and still remain within the legal requirement.

If footballs taught me anything ala people killing their GFs in drink driving, racism, adultery and *struggle cuddle*, it values success on the pitch above moral obligations
Click to expand...

Gosh! How do we possibly know whether Party is guilty or not? You’re forming opinions on a hunch. You’ve not heard Party’s side of the story story. And you probably do t have all the details of the allegations either. But why let that stop us forming a judgment!
 
SpurMeUp said:
Gosh! How do we possibly know whether Party is guilty or not? You’re forming opinions on a hunch. You’ve not heard Party’s side of the story story. And you probably do t have all the details of the allegations either. But why let that stop us forming a judgment!
Click to expand...

Where have I said he is guilty?

And whoever the Cnut is on here who keeps changing rape to struggle cuddle, can it be changed back? @Glenda's Legs has asked before and I am assuming some clown keeps changing it back.

1751707830626.png
 
Grays_1890 said:
Where have I said he is guilty?

And whoever the Cnut is on here who keeps changing *struggle cuddle* to struggle cuddle, can it be changed back? @Glenda's Legs has asked before and I am assuming some clown keeps changing it back.

View attachment 19996
Click to expand...

You said that being a footballer or being involved in football makes abuse of women more likely. No facts. Just pre judgement. Another word for pre-judgment - prejudice.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Gosh! How do we possibly know whether Party is guilty or not? You’re forming opinions on a hunch. You’ve not heard Party’s side of the story story. And you probably do t have all the details of the allegations either. But why let that stop us forming a judgment!
Click to expand...
Not sure how you've drawn that conclusion from Grays post?
 
SpurMeUp said:
You said that being a footballer or being involved in football makes abuse of women more likely. No facts. Just pre judgement. Another word for pre-judgment - prejudice.
Click to expand...
No he hasn't. He's said football clubs as an entity puts results above anything else, seemingly no matter how serious the issue, potentially or otherwise
 
Lilbaz said:
He wasn't involved in the depp heard case. That seemed to get a bit of coverage. As did weinstein. Epstein....
Click to expand...

Apples and Oranges. If it was just an Arsenal situ it would be a different convo. Depp Heard had nothing to do with footy rivalries. I'm sorry if you missed thst this was the point I was trying to make.
 
LutonSpurs said:
Apples and Oranges. If it was just an Arsenal situ it would be a different convo. Depp Heard had nothing to do with footy rivalries. I'm sorry if you missed thst this was the point I was trying to make.
Click to expand...

My stance would still be the same. We have a judiciary for a reason. We shouldn't have a trial by social media.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back