• 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

Interim manager thread 2.0

.

He was charged. They couldn't pursue a trial because the key witness withdrew their evidence.
She’s still with him and it wasn’t just because she withdrew her evidence. The police said “new evidence came to light also”.

If he’s raped her or laid a hand on her, he’s scum. But none of us knows what actually happened.

Not that it’s the same or has much relevance here but I was accused by my ex wife of assaulting her and she took out a safety order against me. I can tell you now, I never did lay a hand on her (in fact, the opposite is true) and I would never lay a hand on any woman. My parents didn’t raise me like that and would have disowned me if they thought I did. However, if I was famous, I can imagine I’d have been cancelled without a second thought.
 
'She's still with him' is not a gotcha of any kind lads - as I said previously she wouldn't be the first person to stay with their abuser. That's her decision to make.
It’s no gotcha at all. It’s just a fact as is the fact the case was dropped due to her withdrawing the accusations and new evidence coming to light.

He may still have done what she accused him of. He may not. None of us knows.

But he wasn’t convicted of anything and that’s the barometer of guilt in any decent society, like it or not.
 
I might get slated for this, especially as I don’t know much about the Greenwood situation since I live in the US and didn’t follow it closely, but…

Do people not deserve a second chance? If the purported victim is still in a relationship with him, then she has obviously forgiven him... So what right does that give us to continue judgement on him and try to take his living away from him? Is anyone accused and not convicted of such a crime supposed to live in a cave for the rest of their life? The same for anyone who has chosen to associate themselves with this individual, possibly in an attempt to help the individual turn their life around and make sure they don’t repeat the mistake, which to be fair to Greenwood, it appears has been the case.

If you don’t like RDZ for a footballing reason, then fine, you don’t have to support him as a possible replacement for Tudor. But to continually beat him with this stick smacks of virtue-signaling to me. As I say above, if the victim can forgive him and he appears to not have repeated the incident, can we not forgive too?
 
It’s no gotcha at all. It’s just a fact as is the fact the case was dropped due to her withdrawing the accusations and new evidence coming to light.

He may still have done what she accused him of. He may not. None of us knows.

But he wasn’t convicted of anything and that’s the barometer of guilt in any decent society, like it or not.

Everyone is free to have thier own barometer, but then inserting an subjective opinion as a stance a club or manager should be taking is a bit of reach.

There are multiple miscarriages of justice both for and against suspects, look what happened to Mendy for example. However as unfortunate as it is at the current time the legal system is all professional institutions can be lead by.
 
It’s no gotcha at all. It’s just a fact as is the fact the case was dropped due to her withdrawing the accusations and new evidence coming to light.

He may still have done what she accused him of. He may not. None of us knows.

But he wasn’t convicted of anything and that’s the barometer of guilt in any decent society, like it or not.

But De Zerbi should've carried out his own investigation due to new evidence coming to light. Its not as if he had a football team to manage or worry about. Obviously being a football manager also makes you qualified in criminal law so no excuses for him.
 
Everyone is free to have thier own barometer, but then inserting an subjective opinion as a stance a club or manager should be taking is a bit of reach.

There are multiple miscarriages of justice both for and against suspects, look what happened to Mendy for example. However as unfortunate as it is at the current time the legal system is all professional institutions can be lead by.
Reducing football clubs to "professional institutions" is undercooking it slightly to be fair. They're unique bodies that thousands of people have followed with a lot of emotion and even more money for generations. Fans wanting their football club to "do the right thing" and align with their own values comes with that territory.
 
Yes - he doesn't have a right to anything, in the sense that football clubs aren't obliged to employ players just because they want to 'work' if the footballing world decided that he had crossed a line and was therefore unemployable he would have no grounds for claiming otherwise.
But that’s the point the football world as you say are not obliged. He’s not obliged to play either. But there is a reason as to why he has kids with the victim after the boil over. There is a reason why he is a paid professional. And there are second chances in life. I’m sure if you did something horrendous according to your moral compass, situation and were generously remorseful you would want a second chance.
 
That's her perogative and says nothing to how you or i should view the man - I'm sure she is not the only rape and domestic abuse victim to forgive their partner. In fact i believe it is sadly common in relationships where there is abuse.
That’s fine, she has forgiven and chose to move forward in life by double downing. We don’t know the ins or outs of it all. But outside looking in, she has moved on.
 
Reducing football clubs to "professional institutions" is undercooking it slightly to be fair. They're unique bodies that thousands of people have followed with a lot of emotion and even more money for generations. Fans wanting their football club to "do the right thing" and align with their own values comes with that territory.

Who decides what the right thing is though? Ipswich are struggling to answer that question right now.

Is banning pro Palestinian flags the right thing. I say no but loads would say yes.
 
Reducing football clubs to "professional institutions" is undercooking it slightly to be fair. They're unique bodies that thousands of people have followed with a lot of emotion and even more money for generations. Fans wanting their football club to "do the right thing" and align with their own values comes with that territory.
Sure if you want to believe in that film flam … it’s an entertainment business that will happily take every penny off you if they could.
 
It’s no gotcha at all. It’s just a fact as is the fact the case was dropped due to her withdrawing the accusations and new evidence coming to light.

He may still have done what she accused him of. He may not. None of us knows.

But he wasn’t convicted of anything and that’s the barometer of guilt in any decent society, like it or not.

Then why is it being brought up? It bares no relation as to whether or not what happened happened and only serves as misdirection. I mean he was also charged with controlling and coercive behaviour - the subsequent withdrawal of evidence plus whatever new evidence was brought to light (little more than a statement saying the previous was not what it appeared I'd imagine) fits right in to that, no?
 
But that’s the point the football world as you say are not obliged. He’s not obliged to play either. But there is a reason as to why he has kids with the victim after the boil over. There is a reason why he is a paid professional. And there are second chances in life. I’m sure if you did something horrendous according to your moral compass, situation and were generously remorseful you would want a second chance.

Those reasons being £££
 
Yeah I'm feeling positive about de Zebri - definitely one to put in the 'Will unite the fanbase' category :).....

AAAAQYWRLN75-CPQR7RK-xQM8-rrS7AvX1687NJkOmGMi9vezAaLpbiKyLrgThpW3e2oQga2DtA7Mhf1LX_AIOyyhR_0XNeiiicq68Cd-FphhUflp0dSgRCK4BQ5UIaxDRpmjPr4ESalix2HXu83hg.jpg
 
Then why is it being brought up? It bares no relation as to whether or not what happened happened and only serves as misdirection. I mean he was also charged with controlling and coercive behaviour - the subsequent withdrawal of evidence plus whatever new evidence was brought to light (little more than a statement saying the previous was not what it appeared I'd imagine) fits right in to that, no?
Because it’s a fact of the case. It’s not being brought up or suggested as definitive proof of anything. But if you’re going to condemn Greenwood on the basis of an accusation or evidence that was never tested in a court of law, it’s reasonable that people will offer facts that potentially point in another direction in the interests of balance and fairness.

None of us knows what actually happened.
 
Back