• 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.
black-cat said:
What a load of shite man. I've got no bearing as to whether he's innocent or guilty given I've obviously never seen or heard any evidence of any sort regarding the matter. However, the fact the police have charged him does clearly suggest that there is a case to investigate. And given the nature of the crime coupled with the nature of our sport I just don't feel it's right that he should be in a position to represent us whilst this situation is ongoing.
Click to expand...
Aye. Guilty until proven innocent.
 

Maravilla said:
The PR backlash against the club will be huge if he's found guilty, very surprised that we haven't suspended him.
Click to expand...
But we already suspended him and then it was made apparent that we didn't need to suspend him and he could play. The club aren't going against the rules by playing him. He's got a contract to play for us. It's not the club's fault that this is all going on.
 
My missus made an interesting point. The actors who play Ken Barlow and Kevin Webster were not on the screen for months while their case was prepared and heard. She disagrees with my view on whether Johnson can play, but there's nothing new in that. Perhaps like ITV Sunderland should have erred on the side of caution. If he's convicted then this could backfire on the club enormously.
 
prehab26 said:
He hasn't but I know if I was charged With such offenses I wouldn't be allowed into work until the case was resolved.

I am amazed and disappointed by the decision TBH. We know the position of a footballer and their interaction within the public circle and their role as role models.
Click to expand...

Couldn't disagree more

He's been found guilty of nothing, if he is then he will be gone, until then he's innocent

He's an employee, and if he's fit and his head is right he should play

This moral thing is absolute shite and I'm suprised by the reaction of many to be honest. You are entitled to your opinion though.
 
johnson said:
Couldn't disagree more

He's been found guilty of nothing, if he is then he will be gone, until then he's innocent

He's an employee, and if he's fit and his head is right he should play

This moral thing is absolute shite and I'm suprised by the reaction of many to be honest. You are entitled to your opinion though.
Click to expand...

Same to you mate. Obviously, it is a subject that will divide opinion.
 
riffraff said:
It already has marra. Innocent or not theres nee coming back to "poster boy" status from this stuff.

SAFC fucked up from the off by their usage of the word "suspension". The term shouldve been summit like "Leave of absence to fight any charges if made". The fact that theyve backed themselves into a corner by nowt more than a lack of common sense is mindboggling.....but is anyone surprised?



FFS man even Sima hit the nail on the head.
Click to expand...

Sorry it doesn't mean you are right, you are entitled to your opinion but I don't agree. Until proven otherwise he should be treated like every other employee
 
I'd lean towards letting him play, mostly because money runs the game and we can either stay up or go down by a very small margin. It's a difficult situation for everyone and I think I understand basically every viewpoint people have.

Wouldn't want him to play in away games, though, think it might actually be a net negative. Not sure fans of Stoke, Everton, Arsenal and Chelsea will have much of a reason to give a fuck about their games with us otherwise.
 
draper said:
My missus made an interesting point. The actors who play Ken Barlow and Kevin Webster were not on the screen for months while their case was prepared and heard. She disagrees with my view on whether Johnson can play, but there's nothing new in that. Perhaps like ITV Sunderland should have erred on the side of caution. If he's convicted then this could backfire on the club enormously.
Click to expand...

A lot more riding on Johnson not playing for us than actors not performing in a soap opera. It could cost the club millions potentially. It's a bold stance but absolutely nothing wrong with it until its proved beyond reasonable doubt Johnson committed those crimes. Im sure the club will act accordingly as things proceed as they have issued in their statement.
 
If Johnson was a reserve team player who couldn't get in first team would sunderland have suspended him?
 
It could be months before it goes to trial, infact we probably have time to save ourselves and find ourselves in the same situation this time next year, before it goes to trial
 
Free to play doesn't mean he will play. Perhaps they can't legally suspend him. Will be interesting to see if he does actually play.
 
Look, the club pay Johnson to play football, he has contractual obligations, by letting him play football they are not doing anything wrong. It might be an unwise decision in the minds of many people, but we can't change the fact that they want him to fulfil his duties as an employee. Can you really blame them for wanting one of their players to do what they signed him for? They are not paying him to sit on his arse while he waits to be summoned to court.
 
So were potentially looking at the situation where a player charged with grooming and other things pulls on our colours tomorrow. Club should have suspended him, not bothered how key he is to our survival.
 
Father Jack Hackett said:
Whilst I fully agree with innocent until proven guilty, I can't see what he'll contribute contribute. He's looked terrified when coming on as sub of late, it'll be even worse now he's being charged.

As I said earlier, I can't see any positives for the club at all.
Click to expand...


agree, his head will be battered..i'd play him in the 2 home games and keep him away from the abuse he'll obviously get at the away games, as someones already said he'll not recover from this even if he's found to be innocent.
 
Still can't work out how being arrested and questioned gets him suspended but being charged is seen as a lesser issue by the club.
 
Angelos said:
So were potentially looking at the situation where a player charged with grooming and other things pulls on our colours tomorrow. Club should have suspended him, not bothered how key he is to our survival.
Click to expand...

What has changed since the last game against Palace? Why do you suddenly have a problem with him playing now?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top