• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Adam Johnson Trial Verdict

Status
Not open for further replies.

draper said:
I am leaning towards the view that the club was lied to by the player and found itself in a position where they had no choice but to remove his suspension. As other have said though, had he been one of the lesser players he would probably been suspended regardless.

I imagine the clubs that went down last and are going down this season might want the PL to take action if they thought that the club knew and put their own interests first.
Click to expand...

Why? There's no law against them playing him while he's awaiting trial, even if they knew what had gone on, regardless of how morally repugnant it is.
 
draper said:
I am leaning towards the view that the club was lied to by the player and found itself in a position where they had no choice but to remove his suspension. As other have said though, had he been one of the lesser players he would probably been suspended regardless.

I imagine the clubs that went down last and are going down this season might want the PL to take action if they thought that the club knew and put their own interests first.
Click to expand...


Logon or register to see this image
 
haway said:
Not really a matter for the PL imo, irrespective of the rightness or wrongness of the decision.
Click to expand...

Totally agree, the lack of refutal in the majority of the accusations of Sunderland's moral standing suggests that they knew a lot more than they are saying in the statement.

It's a moral decision made by Sunderland and in no way punishable by the FA or the Premier League.
 
Sima said:
Totally agree, the lack of refutal in the majority of the accusations of Sunderland's moral standing suggests that they knew a lot more than they are saying in the statement.

It's a moral decision made by Sunderland and in no way punishable by the FA or the Premier League.
Click to expand...

Yep.

f***ing vile isn't it
 
Who said that Sunderland AFC have seen the message transcripts and police interview recordings?

Was it just the defence who claimed they had? As given the rest of the stuff that came out, I'm more inclined to believe that the club did not see the finer details.
 
Maravilla said:
Still can't believe he had the gall to run the entire length of the pitch to taunt the Mags even though he knew fine well he was guilty. The lad doesn't seem to have shown even the slightest hint of genuine remorse throughout this whole saga.
Click to expand...

I take the view here that he was arrogant enough to think he'd definitely get away with it all hence the celebrations.
 
Headingley Slog Fest said:
What's with the f***ing obsession over a PL investigation, the clubs statement and stance is very clear that they had no idea he was guilty, so drop the PL intervention shite
Click to expand...
I didn't say there would be one. If it comes out that people were more aware than they've let on then it is a possibility.
 
becs said:
Who said that Sunderland AFC have seen the message transcripts and police interview recordings?

Was it just the defence who claimed they had? As given the rest of the stuff that came out, I'm more inclined to believe that the club did not see the finer details.
Click to expand...

Then they should be denying it, especially when the accusations are a massive slant on their credibility and moral fibre.
 
becs said:
Who said that Sunderland AFC have seen the message transcripts and police interview recordings?

Was it just the defence who claimed they had? As given the rest of the stuff that came out, I'm more inclined to believe that the club did not see the finer details.
Click to expand...

so one of the UKs leading barristers would bullshit and make it up ?
 
Sima said:
Fit that around the other cases then to show where 5 years may be harsh.
Click to expand...

You must be logged on to see external links

You must be logged on to see external links

You must be logged on to see external links


First two teacher's having sex with 15 year old pupils, 2 years and 4 years, third one the exact offence johnson is up with, sexual activity, teacher with a pupil, again 15, 2 1/2 years.

Wait for the verdict. If the judge takes a very harsh view on him being a footballer etc. I can't say it's impossible but personally I'd be amazed if its much in either direction from 3 years.
 
Headingley Slog Fest said:
What's with the f***ing obsession over a PL investigation, the clubs statement and stance is very clear that they had no idea he was guilty, so drop the PL intervention shite
Click to expand...

If we start taking points off clubs for the morals of the players and owners/boards half the useless qunts would still be in deficit come the end of April. It's a f***ing shambles from top to bottom and to a degree it's just unfortunate that it's Sunderland this time. Cos there's 19th other clubs that would dealt it in the same way..... albeit wrongly in my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top