Hales and Stokes

[rentaghost]

I don't think anyone doubted too much that they got involved defending those lads. I think those, me included have always argued that Stokes went too far in continuing the fight when the bottle was out of the equation and the blokes had their hands in the air walking away. By law he could still easily get charged but he wont if there is a threat of hate crime type charges being brought against the other lads. From a cricketing point of view I hope he's on the plane.

 

[jackpunch]

The timing is poor....I was hoping we'd be 1 down in the series having lost by an innings and a thousand in the 1st test. Stokes flies out for Adelaide, scores a double off a hundred balls and takes 10 for 70 in the match, walks into a bar after and kicks the f***ing shit out of Warner. Sent home in disgrace and we draw the next 3 to retain.

 

[chunkyshanhawk53]

I don't think anyone doubted too much that they got involved defending those lads. I think those, me included have always argued that Stokes went too far in continuing the fight when the bottle was out of the equation and the blokes had their hands in the air walking away. By law he could still easily get charged but he wont if there is a threat of hate crime type charges being brought against the other lads. From a cricketing point of view I hope he's on the plane.

Fully agree with this post

 

[hudson88]

Nice of The Sun to suddenly mention that the other lads had a glass bottle and show that bit of the video now that Stokes is being painted as the hero

 

[brandon]

Well well well, Ben Stokes, defender of men, social justice warrior. Pure gentleman.

The f***ing Sun. Posted the two videos to lambast Stokes now has the story saying he's a hero. What a f***ing utter jamrag of a paper. Here's hoping...

They're f***ing cretins.

Nice of The Sun to suddenly mention that the other lads had a glass bottle and show that bit of the video now that Stokes is being painted as the hero

Yep, see post above. To be honest, all they do is follow the in crowd - it probably kills them to have to write something positive about someone defending homosexuals.

There are sure some apologies owed out to Ben Stokes. In the press, from pundits and most importantly - from people on here

 

[Voice of fair play]

I don't think anybody at any point disagreed with his version of events, as was said at the time, if his version of events was true he still went too far imo.

 

[brandon]

Oh and another thing - how f***ing bad was the timing of this article by the Grauniad?! Poor fuckers https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2017/oct/27/england-ben-stokes-ashes-first-test-brisbane

 

[Parkside]

The timing is poor....I was hoping we'd be 1 down in the series having lost by an innings and a thousand in the 1st test. Stokes flies out for Adelaide, scores a double off a hundred balls and takes 10 for 70 in the match, walks into a bar after and kicks the f***ing shit out of Warner. Sent home in disgrace and we draw the next 3 to retain.

Have you ever thought of writing novels with a sports background? Add a little about how he then turns detective and reveals mass corruption in FTECB?

 

[Steak Pie]

Load of shit. You are making an assumption first of all that there was some homophobic abuse going on when you don't know if there was. You also make it sound as if Stokes sparks the bloke to unarm him.

I don't think anyone doubted too much that they got involved defending those lads. I think those, me included have always argued that Stokes went too far in continuing the fight when the bottle was out of the equation and the blokes had their hands in the air walking away. By law he could still easily get charged but he wont if there is a threat of hate crime type charges being brought against the other lads. From a cricketing point of view I hope he's on the plane.

You did like.

Lots of people argued that it isn't so easy to turn the tap off when you're in a situation like that, and nobody who was criticising Stokes was prepared to say where they would have drawn the line. It's been very telling.

Hopefully that's the end of it. This homophobic bottle-wielding psycho crawls back into his shell and everyone can get on with their lives, just as what would have happened weeks ago if Stokes wasn't famous.

 

[rentaghost]

You did like.

Lots of people argued that it isn't so easy to turn the tap off when you're in a situation like that, and nobody who was criticising Stokes was prepared to say where they would have drawn the line. It's been very telling.

Hopefully that's the end of it. This homophobic bottle-wielding psycho crawls back into his shell and everyone can get on with their lives, just as what would have happened weeks ago if Stokes wasn't famous.

Eh I was making the point that people were assuming it as fact and using it in their arguments defending Stokes before knowing that it was a fact. The reasons for Stokes getting involved in a fight were never seriously the issue with anyone, him continuing with a bottle out of the way and the assailants backing away while his mates were telling him enough were. That’s still the issue and will still be the issue with many even if charges are dropped

 

[Voice of fair play]

You did like.

Lots of people argued that it isn't so easy to turn the tap off when you're in a situation like that, and nobody who was criticising Stokes was prepared to say where they would have drawn the line. It's been very telling.

Hopefully that's the end of it. This homophobic bottle-wielding psycho crawls back into his shell and everyone can get on with their lives, just as what would have happened weeks ago if Stokes wasn't famous.

I think tbf to Stokes.now that the version of events has been confirmed he should go to the Ashes.

And also tbf to him the papers as always went over the top.

However those of us who said he went too far ,will I imagine still think that, as that was the main debate to continue to punch and punch when people were both verbally and physically trying to restrain him was unacceptable in my book even taking into the circumstances,obviously some others did not think soo.



As was pointed out to me many times it was 50/50 hopefully it can be it to bed now and help us win the Ashes.

 

[brandon]

Lot of backtracking on here this morning .

 

[rentaghost]

Lot of backtracking on here this morning .

Not from me matey If the plod drop all charges. Stokes has a record breaking Ashes series and he gets a knightghood for services to protecting the Bristol community you wont get me believing he didn't go to far.

 

[Steak Pie]

Eh I was making the point that people were assuming it as fact and using it in their arguments defending Stokes before knowing that it was a fact. The reasons for Stokes getting involved in a fight were never seriously the issue with anyone, him continuing with a bottle out of the way and the assailants backing away while his mates were telling him enough were. That’s still the issue and will still be the issue with many even if charges are dropped

If you start with the phrase "Load of shit. You're making assumptions" then you're doubting it!

If it's still an issue with you then fine. I've said that everyone's silence over how and when they would have reigned themselves speaks volumes, but such is the nature of message boards.

Best thing about the whole thing was that we had a massive thread with opposite opinions that was, for the most part, civil.

I think tbf to Stokes.now that the version of events has been confirmed he should go to the Ashes.

And also tbf to him the papers as always went over the top.

However those of us who said he went too far ,will I imagine still think that, as that was the main debate to continue to punch and punch when people were both verbally and physically trying to restrain him was unacceptable in my book even taking into the circumstances,obviously some others did not think soo.

As was pointed out to me many times it was 50/50 hopefully it can be it to bed now and help us win the Ashes.

We should all concentrate on the real enemy in the whole thing, the Australians.

 

[Brexit]

If you start with the phrase "Load of shit. You're making assumptions" then you're doubting it!

If it's still an issue with you then fine. I've said that everyone's silence over how and when they would have reigned themselves speaks volumes, but such is the nature of message boards.

Best thing about the whole thing was that we had a massive thread with opposite opinions that was, for the most part, civil.



We should all concentrate on the real enemy in the whole thing, the Australians.

Reined. Come on, you know your nags.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Lot of backtracking on here this morning .

it's all about been fair for me,I never at any point disputed his story, however now it's been proven, tbf to him it is more understandable, however certainly not acceptable.

It's very telling that his own mates who knew the full facts at the time did not accept it was acceptable and were trying to stop him and telling him it was enough.

Continued violence should never be accepted and as a society we should not be condoning it, that was main point of my argument and still is, he simply went too far.

If you start with the phrase "Load of shit. You're making assumptions" then you're doubting it!

If it's still an issue with you then fine. I've said that everyone's silence over how and when they would have reigned themselves speaks volumes, but such is the nature of message boards.

Best thing about the whole thing was that we had a massive thread with opposite opinions that was, for the most part, civil.



We should all concentrate on the real enemy in the whole thing, the Australians.

Yeah fair dos

 

[brandon]

it's all about been fair for me,I never at any point disputed his story, however now it's been proven, tbf to him it is more understandable, however certainly not acceptable.

It's very telling that his own mates who knew the full facts at the time did not accept it was acceptable and were trying to stop him and telling him it was enough.

Continued violence should never be accepted and as a society we should not be condoning it, that was main point of my argument and still is, he simply went too far.



Yeah fair dos

So you're still of the opinion he should be given a harsh jail sentence so as deter future violent attacks?

You can argue you were always 'fair' but I think the evidence is there in your posts - never has a username been more of a fallacy .

 

[rentaghost]

If you start with the phrase "Load of shit. You're making assumptions" then you're doubting it!

It's it's still an issue with you then fine. I've said that everyone's silence over how and when they would have reigned themselves speaks volumes, but such is the nature of message boards.

Best thing about the whole thing was that we had a massive thread with opposite opinions that was, for the most part, civil.

'Load of shit' was directed at the poster for his full post but mainly two things:
1) Most significantly his argument made it sound as if Stokes punched the kid as he was directly under threat from the bottle at the time. To disarm him if you like.
2) He was using the 'defending the gay lads' as a statement of fact in his argument which he didn't know for sure at the time. Whether him, you or I believed it to be likely is neither here nor there.
It was a shit post tbf

 

[mackembhoy]

The f***ing Sun. Posted the two videos to lambast Stokes now has the story saying he's a hero. What a f***ing utter jamrag of a paper. Here's hoping...

Have a look at sun apologies on twitter.

Question how anybody working at that paper can sleep at night.

 

[brandon]

'Load of shit' was directed at the poster for his full post but mainly two things:
1) Most significantly his argument made it sound as if Stokes punched the kid as he was directly under threat from the bottle at the time. To disarm him if you like.
2) He was using the 'defending the gay lads' as a statement of fact in his argument which he didn't know for sure at the time. Whether him, you or I believed it to be likely is neither here nor there.
It was a shit post tbf

I thought it had been universally accepted, even by the shitrags (Sun and Mail etc) that Stokes was indeed defending himself (and others) from an assault with a weapon? That part has never been in question . Hardly a load of shit is it?