The Football Thread

[Roger Allott]

Originally Posted by victor meldrew

Its typical of the governing bodies of football, these two sides should never have been in the same group in the first place because of the history between the two countries.

The sad thing is both countries are being charge by UFA, when they themselves are the culpable party.

God forbid that one day football will be run by people who care about the game rather than the money.

If UEFA were to keep countries apart based upon historical ethnic enmity, as you suggest, then Serbia would also have to be in separate groups from Croatia, Bosnia, and a fair few others as well. Turkey would presumably be kept apart from Greece and Cyprus, and Greece would also be kept apart from Macedonia. Russia would never play Georgia or Ukraine, either.

How far would you like UEFA to go back to search for problems? Would Germany play in a group of one?

.

[pierrelm]

Originally Posted by Roger Allott

How far would you like UEFA to go back to search for problems? Would Germany play in a group of one?
.

It might be more entertaining...if you timed it right, the Alsatian Arsene Wenger would then become German and the Arsenal team would consequently have a far more Teutonic look to it.

Ireland would have one side and never play England; Italy and France would go all regional, Parisians would refuse to play in the same side as the unsophisticated peasants from the regions and the Italian Dukedoms would be having interminable dust ups between the cat eaters and the donkey fondlers. The Swiss would just be a bunch of Cantons. I want to see the Walloons take on the Flems - it should be done!

Come on you Sudatenland!

Coo, big shorts, brycreem and no shirt sponsors. Where's me rattle?

[blazes]

Originally Posted by Roger Allott

...How far would you like UEFA to go back to search for problems? Would Germany play in a group of one?.

Well, considering how our team is faring at the moment this would be the perfect solution.

In earnest, the UEFA/FIFA should do the draws strictly based on sporting results without any political considerations. If a team or it's supporters are uneligible to others they should then justfully be banned from the actual event.

[Meini Hirion]

An interesting interview with BFS a couple of days ago:

Sam Allardyce fears England will NEVER win the World Cup in his lifetime

"The FA made a massive rick when they allowed the Premier League to break away in the first place. It was a massive mistake.

And the consequence is we have the biggest football brand in the world but we won't win the World Cup in my lifetime.
"It was Sky driving it all - it could have been done with the FA on board and leading it.

Now we are not doing enough to develop young players."

"Don't forget the home-grown rule won't make any difference, because foreign coaches with no affinity to this country are filling in all our academies with players from their own countries –
- French, Spanish and now South American," said Allardyce

"They are all classed as 'home-grown players'."

http://www.express.co.uk/sport/footb...n-his-lifetime

Daily Express.

[snowy25]

I see Ched Evans is to be released later today after serving 2 years of a 5 year sentence for rape. He still claims he is innocent and his release has caused a lot of media attention in the last few days. Sheffield United, the club he was with, didn't actually sack him when he went to jail they just let his contract run out. Its widely rumoured that he will sign back with them upon his release and continue his football career. Footballing authorities say he should show remorse and admit guilt to even have a chance of playing again, however they cannot actually stop a club signing him. Thousands of fans have signed a petition for the club not to sign or even attempt to sign him.

The issues regarding his release have divided opinion it seems. Some think that according to the law he has served his time and is now free to resume his career. Other feel that due to the nature of the offence and the fact he will be a role model of sorts to kids it would be inappropriate for him to play again.

[Meini Hirion]

Re- Evans.
Yes, he has served his time and his rehabilitation should be supported.

Some years ago I worked with ex-offenders,- {as a volunteer for a charity} - many with violent actions on their resume, but the majority were just illeterate and badly educated petty-crime recidivists.
And it was a total uphill battle to get them placed anywhere, even get them to aggree to learn how to read and write. Or even get some basic skills.

My club had one player wearing an electronic tag during matches after his release for drunk driving. {Wrecked a lampost thankfully, instead of a child}
We also had Marlon King.

When he joined Coventry, a long standing and respected councillor/committee member returned her Season Ticket and never set foot in the Ricoh again. Some did the same at Blues when he arrived.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...m-emily-428389

Personally I was sick. I was grateful for the goals he gave us, but wouldn't clap and felt ambivalent in trying to explain to my granks why I wasn't as happy as them ~ they wouldn't understand.
King always claimed it was someone else who beat up the girl.
Evans is still seeking an appeal against his verdict.

Both see themselves as victims of the law.

We used to try and place our ex-offenders outside their old 'habitats' and environments.

Footballers seem to want to stay in football.

Do some people thrive on abuse, it's really weird.

"She Said No" was a universal chant at every Away game, even some Home games had some of our supporters joining in with the visiting fans.

King, when we had him was a good Championship finisher...Evans was only ever average.
Both believe they are innocent and both want or wanted to stay in football.

WHY ?



Lee Clark knew that the "dressing room" suffered. Team cohesiveness suffered when Marlon King was around ~ but his work rate and goals saved Blues time and again ~ till enough was enough.
Team trust was more important and he was paid off. Blues plummeted down the league.
What affect will Evans have on his future dressing room?

Rehab ~ YES. But in the same industry and workplaces ~ imo ~ is not a sensible idea.

Two and a half examples of football dilemnas.

[Jeff Vader]

Originally Posted by Meini Hirion

Re- Evans.
Yes, he has served his time and his rehabilitation should be supported.

OK, based on your time with offenders, can rehabilitation ever happen if they are not sorry for what they did ?

[Roger Allott]

Originally Posted by Jeff Vader

OK, based on your time with offenders, can rehabilitation ever happen if they are not sorry for what they did ?

Would you apologise for doing something you didn't do?

Juries sometimes make wrong decisions, and this particular case was extremely tenuous. The girl drank alcohol completely voluntarily and there was never any suggestion in court that she had expressed any hint of refusal to have sex with Evans. Indeed, the only evidence that was presented was of her being rather eager to get laid.

She only regretted her actions a few days after the event, as a result of which it evolved into a rape case.

The case was one of the first to convict an accused on the basis of there being a lack of evidence that he had secured consent, which the court decided was impossible because the girl was intoxicated.

Previously, the prosecution had to demonstrate that the girl had denied consent. Now, if you're a man having casual sex, you're guilty until you can prove yourself innocent. It is a totally unacceptable change in law, in my opinion.

.

[Jeff Vader]

Originally Posted by Roger Allott

Would you apologise for doing something you didn't do?

Juries sometimes make wrong decisions, and this particular case was extremely tenuous. The girl drank alcohol completely voluntarily and there was never any suggestion in court that she had expressed any hint of refusal to have sex with Evans. Indeed, the only evidence that was presented was of her being rather eager to get laid.

She only regretted her actions a few days after the event, as a result of which it evolved into a rape case.

The case was one of the first to convict an accused on the basis of there being a lack of evidence that he had secured consent, which the court decided was impossible because the girl was intoxicated.

Previously, the prosecution had to demonstrate that the girl had denied consent. Now, if you're a man having casual sex, you're guilty until you can prove yourself innocent. It is a totally unacceptable change in law, in my opinion.

.

Here is the judgement on why the appeal was turned down.

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-...-chedwyn-evans

[Roger Allott]

Originally Posted by Jeff Vader

Here is the judgement on why the appeal was turned down.

https://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-...-chedwyn-evans

Thanks, but there's nothing there that convinces me that the original verdict was sound.

.