• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

BBC Johnson free to play for Sunderland

  • Thread starter Thread starter RTG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JimmyQuinn said:
He has been officially charged and has to stand trial. It's no longer simply a case of an allegation that could be total horseshit - the CPS believe there are realistic ground for conviction. His association with the club right now tarnishes SAFC - not to mention the fact that expecting him to play professional sport at the top level with this hanging over him is probably detrimental to him too.

Why, if the club are now so keen to "back him", was he suspended in the first place? There are no two ways about it - the people in charge see him as essential to us surviving and couldn't give a fuck about anything other than that. It will serve us right if he goes down and we get relegated on the same day. The people running the club are buffoons with no sense of morality or, despite proclamations to the contrary, and meaningful sense of how to run a football club.

Sunderland AFC is increasingly becoming a cesspit and the whole board needs massive overhaul, never mind the God-awful playing squad.
Click to expand...
But is he guilty? Nobody knows. He may well be an innocent man. We will not know this until the trial. They have brought these charges against him, but it's up to a court of law to prove whether he's innocent or guilty, not us. So why act like he's already been found guilty?
 

PeruzziWatch said:
But is he guilty? Nobody knows. He may well be an innocent man. We will not know this until the trial. They have brought these charges against him, but it's up to a court of law to prove whether he's innocent or guilty, not us. So why act like he's already been found guilty?
Click to expand...

Suspending him with full pay is not acting like he has been found guilty. Sacking him is, and I'm not advocating that.
 
Keawyeds said:
Once again this illustrates the point that people should not be named until they're sent to court.
If he's innocent, and let's be fair, it's creeping steadily towards a big if as he's been charged, this could ruin his career and his life.
Click to expand...
While I agree also look at another way. He is named and this isn't he first time, it could encourge more victims to come forward. As per the cases we've all seen recently.
 
Gaz said:
Was just going to post similar. If i'd been charged i would expect to be suspended pending outcome. I'm sure loads of others would too.

Are you amazed & disappointed by clubs decision or the fact hes been charged mate?
Click to expand...

Clubs decision. I have not posted until the media and the police came out with the charged story. Think that for obvious reasons. I am not amazed he has been charged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gaz
SAFC 2012 said:
To all the soggy fannies on this thread, are you really bothered what fans of other clubs think?
Click to expand...
What with this and the plane, we have overtaken millwall in the most hated club stakes y'nar!
"No one likes us,
No one likes,
No one likes us we don't care,
We are Sunderland, super Sunderland,
We are Sunderland from the sol"
Or something like that
 
Spare a thought for his lass with a young bairn also.

Even he is innocent she must going through hell at the moment.
 
Johnsafc said:
The legal experts on the smb have already decided trial means guilty.
Click to expand...

Dont think may have. Think, most have made comments on the suitability of a footballer continuing their profession as the investigation continues. I guarantee the club will face a lot of complaints and questions relating to the player and the interaction within the public.
 
Wonder how many of the fans from other clubs, who say letting Johnson play is a disgrace. Will be paying £20 to sky to watch a boxer who was convicted of beating up his wife, take his share £332 million, in one of the most pointless fights in history.
 
The Sheepfolds End said:
That would be seriously flawed.



Absolutely. However, an employer suspending an employee is not a judgement on guilt or innoncence nor is it depriving someone of their liberty.

The issues of suspension from work and guilt in a court of law are separate. If that court of law finds someone guilty, the company who allowed the convicted person to continue to represent them have been employing a guilty person from the moment he or she committed the crime.

Im no legal expert nor would I profess to be but the club have dealt with this very differently to how most employers would.
Click to expand...

Correct, not saying I agree with the clerb but they are protecting a multi million pound asset, sad as it is....
And by the way, why quite rightly, does the victim get anonymity but the alleged perp. doesn't ?
What if he's found not guilty?
 
Johnsafc said:
Aye anar that was a nailed on conviction aswell. Point is is that we're not the first club and we won't be the last club. We could be the exception to that but then what does that say? That Sunderland AFC have more morals than other clubs (even though they allowed Bramble to play) or that they think he's guilty.
Click to expand...
ellis only makes a stand on real critical issues like financial fair play, this decision shows what really matters to him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top