Printable View
What would you like? A statement in Font 72 Capitals?Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
The club, fans, and player were found not to engage in racist behaviour. That clears that issue up.
The punishment is bizarre, and sets a weird precedent, in what comments are constituted as "offensive behaviour"? If refs are called "fn sht" on the pitch, is that worthy of a 3 game ban? If a Corkonian brands his Dub marker as a "jackeen bastrd", is that worthy of a 3 game ban?
Strange.
What really annoys the Sligo fans is that they are the only club to have a proven racist player - Jason mc guinness . The news of Turner's exoneration of racist comments took away from sligo's win against drogheda last night. I think some of the sligo posters on this site would have swapped their team losing last night for Turner getting the same outcome as Mc Guinness. Shows what a sad bunch of fans Sligo are that they hate Shamrock Rovers more than they love their own club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nah Nah Nah Nah
Does the same apply to Bohs and Sligo who were happy enough to employ Jason McGuinness, someone who actually was found guilty of racism.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
If the punishment is for 'offensive behaviour' then it is truly bizarre. Every single football match in the entire known universe, past, present and future involves players swearing at one another. Can you imagine the chaos if such punishment became the standard response to players making offensive comments?Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Basically it's a fudge. What could they do, though?
Option 1: Not punish Turner at all. Zayed then becomes a pariah for squealing like a little pansy on a fellow player. There's uproar and accusations of FAI reach arounds for the model club.
Option 2: Punish Turner for racism. Turner becomes a pariah for being a racist scumbag. The league (and its shiny golden model club) is exposed as the KKK kickabout club.
This way, there's face saving all round: damage has been minimised for both clubs, both players, and most important of all, the league.
All in all, not a bad recovery by the FAI.
That is possibly the greatest load of rubbish I have ever heard but sure you keep thinking that anyways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuyahoga
I think most people know that whatever way this turned out it was still a great opportunity for the usual suspects from the usual clubs to try to get a dig in at Rovers. That a fact so we move on. I always smile when I hear of how the great Jason McGuinness held his hands up and admitted what he did. What a man. Of course it had abosolutely nothing to do with the fact that the ref heard what he said. Of course not. That bit always seems to get lost in translation. If it makes people that bit happier to get over all their petty jealousy's of our club to always think Rovers are wrong no matter what then by all means do. I have no particular liking for Chris Turner, but he WASNT found guilty of racist behaviour and that a fact, even though it doesn't fit into some sad, petty people's agendas. Of course when he played for Bohs and Sligo the same people who moan on here wouldn't say a bad word about him then. He was a choirboy back then of course. That's life.
As with off-field financial funny business, on field poor behaviour and general stupidity, our own club is always better than others, and there will always be other clubs we'd like to use whatever we can to get a dig in. The situation was investigated, statements given and a judgement made. Just keep your head down in case it's your own club that has a numpty spouting crap, because we'd all like for an investigation to come to a relatively decent conclusion.
I don't know if anyone's mentioned this, but Shamrock Rovers actively recruit racists because it fits in with our worldview as a club.
Seriously, take a chill pill. Nobody in Sligo cares about Turner -- barring the fact that generally the believe is he got a decent start in LOI of football here, when Cook agreed to sign him, he wanted to do a runner with up-front money. You're welcome to him. Like your welcome to Mccabe. We have others from Tallaghtfornia doing a great job in Sligo. Bit-a-Red are simply focussed on winning the league -- of course we love getting one over Shams, but we had been on the right side of results long enough.
I do think Zayed tried to get Turner in the s****e -- both of them are prats, imo. The whole thing was a storm in a tea cup.
Funny enough McGuinness will be playing along side the French Mercenary! Ironic or what!
Crap split to the bin, loads of infractions doled out. Grow up or shut up.
Now I know this probably wont be taken serious cos I'm a Sligo Rovers fan but genuine question here...Will Shamrock Rovers be dishing out any additional punishment to Turner themselves, now that he has been found guilty of offensive behaviour on the pitch? Very unprofessional of him so just wondering if he'll get a fine or anything?
They didn't even condemn Turner for his behaviour in the statement, just celebrated him not being found to be racist.
I wouldn't have thought so. Wouldn't expect them to either. 3 game ban is more then enough punishment.Quote:
Originally Posted by sligoman
To be honest would Shams consider an appeal? Now nobody really seems to know what exactly Turner said but if wasn't racist how much worse is it then anything else that is said during games week in, week out. How many games ban did McCabe get when he was sent off for abusing the linesman earlier on in the season? (genuine question - I think it was a one game ban but could well be wrong) How does that compare to giving Turner a 3 game ban?
How does any person at a game in Tallaght including club officials, players and supporters keep a straight face when it's read over the tannoy that racism will not be tolerated.
And can any of the Rovers supporters on here tell us why all Derry City supporters who have been members of their forum have been banned last week from it, just for posting some comments that were not in any way abusive, yet their own supporters have posted some of the most disgusting comments that certainly would have got a quick shift on here. Is it because they can't have a discussion on racism as it puts their club in a very bad light? My belief is that they are nothing more than a bunch of silly adolescents who are not able to debate anything.
Racism is not a major issue in the league.
At all.
At all.
Zayed has not for the first time come across as a whinger and a cribber here.
You're a big boy Eamon, if someone slags you on the field slag them back.
All this incident has done is given the usuals a chance to have a woeful pop off Rovers and others the chance to push an anti-racism agenda against a problem that just isn't there.
Also for the record even if Chris Turner is a racist, I don't think it matters a jot.
Another raft of garbage moved to the bin. Waste my time once more and I'll bin the lot.
Ref didn't hear it, Boco had to report it. Facts :phone:Quote:
Originally Posted by hoopy
It would seem that as has already been pointed out it was a case of one man's word against another.
In such a case it would presumably be impossible to prove one or the other, so Turner was punished for what he admitted to.
The contradiction inherent between the statement issued by rovers and their inaction has already been pointed out.
So are they going to back up their fine sentiments with actions or are we going to have one provable group of hypocritical liars at the end of this whole sorry affair?
Basically a 3 game ban for hurting Zayed's feelings. Hopefully the club appeal this.
I don't know, but, as has been mentioned, Rovers have "strict policies in place to deal [abusive] activity" as well. I'm sure the club would be happy to enlighten a fan as to what they're all about.Quote:
Originally Posted by mypost
Do we know if Turner admitted to saying something, and if he did, do we know if what he admitted to saying was the same thing as was alleged by Zayed?Quote:
Originally Posted by A N Mouse
If it is the case that both players agreed that the same words/expressions had been uttered, then it isn't a case of one man's word against another, it's a case of whether what was said is racist or not.
And without knowing exactly what was said, all this talk of 'fudging' and 'helping the model club' and 'not wanting to make Zayed look like a liar' is absolutely pointless.
Turner's silence on refusing to say what he said to Zayed, shows that he does probably have something to hide.
His silence where? In public, or at the inquiry?Quote:
Originally Posted by Derry
Didn't he make a statement denying it (through Rovers). Whats he supposed to do, keep saying the same things?Quote:
Originally Posted by Derry
French Mercenary?Quote:
Originally Posted by shellyriver
As opposed to all our Irish and English Mercenarys?
How many exactly of our current squad are just playing for the love of the club, including Mc Guinness?
Zayed's written about the whole episode for ExtraTime.ie today: http://www.extratime.ie/newsdesk/art...g-racism-door/
Quote:
I had no choice but to report what I had heard. As I said, years ago, as a young 19 year old teenager, I was not able to report such an accusation but I was left with no choice after that game. Enough is enough and as an experienced player within the league, I had to stand up against such racism.
It was not so about me as I am big and bold enough to handle such comments but what about the next generation of players to come through whom, god forbid, has a mixed racial background.
Some people may think I should have let it slide giving the fact that it is only a very small number of people making such comments but I disagree, we have to cut it out altogether, not just 99% of it.
I think Zayed handled himself impeccably to be fair.
And Pats coming out of it with a bit of credit too it seems
Could not argue with that statement but hope we can all move on now. Poking away at this story not in anyones interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Surely the point of the hearing was to come to a decision about whether there was racism involved or not... the conclusion was that it was not racist, whether Eamon Zayed agrees or not that was the independent decision. Like it or not Turner was cleared of racism, but Zayed has gone on to repeat his accusation of racism. That's libelous!
Well it's only libelous if the other party chooses to sue. I doubt Turner would take action over an article on a non-mainstream website.
He wasn't cleared of anything. In no statement do they say "he didn't say anything rascist". The panel couldn't prove it. Huge differenceQuote:
Originally Posted by seand
Turner's not going to bring him to court because a) he probably said it and b) its his word v Zayed's. Courts won't decide a libel case on that
Although it would be great fun to have Turners "character" examined in court!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Glad to see you have an open mind on the subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Yea, appeared to be an element of the Scottish "not proven" about it (judging by statement) moreso than "not guilty" which would be reinforced by decision to find him guilty of something he was not charged with:confused:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Interesting also to note the praise for the way Pats dealt with the issue and an absence of any such comment about shams. Are FAI tiring of the model clubs "we did nothing, you cant prove anything" Bart Simpson like approach to every issue ?:rolleyes:
Would love to see Turner take legal action against Zayed but will not happen.
Likewise hoopy.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoopy
I choose to believe Zayed over Turner. You believe Turner. That's to be expected
Actually Turner could take him to court and win easily because Zayed has no evidence for his accusation. I imagine both players just want to move on at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodge
Win easily in a libel action? It's not like a football match where you can have a clear winner (and loser) Just ask Albert Reynolds about his action against the Sunday Times. Turner would have to be even crazier then he appears to take a defamation action.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
It would never get to court. There's no burden of proof placed on the accuser in a defamation suit.