I'd say so too.Originally Posted by DeLorean
And the court has been very touchy feely sensitive to Stokes' football occupation, ahead of the interests of the alleged victim.
But I suppose if you imitate Elvis, you got to take the punches.
I'd say so too.
And the court has been very touchy feely sensitive to Stokes' football occupation, ahead of the interests of the alleged victim.
But I suppose if you imitate Elvis, you got to take the punches.
Lads, I used the word scuffle. I wasn't saying it was just a scuffle, I was saying that scuffles can spiral out of control with a lot of alcohol consumed, that things can happen that nobody intended initially. I obviously didn't explain this very well originally but I've explained it since. Nobody is saying it was just a scuffle.
That's pretty much what I meant.
Harry Arter was the example I used, not Jamie Vardy. I don't think Arter stories are that exceptional, most of the Bournemouth team have acquitted themselves well at a higher level. All I'm saying is that Hendrick is probably capable of that too.
Harry Arter has been a mainstay of that team for a long time now though. Hendrick hasn't.
I'm a bloke,I'm an ocker
And I really love your knockers,I'm a labourer by day,
I **** up all me pay,Watching footy on TV,
Just feed me more VB,Just pour my beer,And get my smokes, And go away
Just to expand on my opinion of it, guilty or innocent, I don't think either should veto Martin O'Neills choice on whether to call him up or not. But the whole situation should have an effect on whether Martin thinks it's a good idea to call him up. FAI/Media/Supporters opinions should have no influence, just what's right for the Squad, the player, and the teams chances. Anyway, I don't want to sweep the whole thing under the carpet, nor do I think we should make a big deal of it. Judgement should be reserved until, well, judgement.
When Arter was Hendrick's age he was a mainstay in League 1. Hendrick has played over 200 games since making his debut five years ago. That's an average of 40 appearances per year. He's picked up a fair few injuries and has been out of favour here and there, but for the most part he's been a regular starter and important part of their team. Anyway, the point was that if Bournemouth didn't get promoted and Arter was still a Championship footballer, would you hold it against him, saying the cream comes to the top, if he was any good why aren't other clubs trying to sign him?, etc., etc.
All that said, it is going to be tough for Hendrick to get back into the Derby team short-term when he recovers from his latest injury. They've had a couple of good wins in his absence and Hughes and Bryson are over their injuries.
I'm not even sure what we're discussing any more to be honest. I can't remember if you're saying he's not capable of playing in the PL, or that he wouldn't be a regular in the PL, or that he wouldn't be star in the PL, or what!
Last edited by DeLorean; 14/04/2016 at 3:22 PM.
Judge, jury and executioner.
Might be no harm to tone down the reporting of allegations as fact. Especially the more colourful ones. There's been a bit of sailing too close to the libel laws over the last couple of pages.
Hello, hello? What's going on? What's all this shouting, we'll have no trouble here!
- E Tattsyrup.
Don't feed the troll lads.
I like high energy football. A little bit rock and roll. Many finishes instead of waiting for the perfect one.
Hey, what I have said is public record. It's what several impartial witnesses have brought into record. I am not saying the lad should be punished by his club or national team - simply the law; same for everyone.
What you've said is to repeat allegations as fact. It's out of line and potentially defamatory in any context. And given dahamsta runs this site from his own pocket, I think it's very bad form to say anything which has the potential to bring him into legal trouble.
It is public record. This isn't rag gossip. It has been brought as evidence. If what you're saying is the case, the matter shouldn't be discussed at all really. I think it's fair game.
It's reported court testimony. It's not fact.
What happened to my last comment? Did I accidentally delete it when I was trying to edit it? Idk I am drunk right now tbh. The truth will out!
Charlie, then why talk about it at all if.it's just conjecture? Maybe there was no.confrontation at all?
Don't be silly. The court testimony has been reported by a newspaper in line with legal guidelines. You've chosen to ignore those legal guidelines and assert that testimony as fact, and in doing so could expose the owner of this site to severe financial repurcussions. I think you should be very careful about abusing the trust he places in the users of this forum.
Okay I won't talk about it any more because of the road it's going down but I don't see what's so different between this and your implying Seamus McDonagh is the reason Stephen Henderson is not getting called up to the Irish team with little or no basis in fact.
There is as much chance of you getting sued by McDonagh for that than there is of Foot.ie getting in trouble for my reciting of court testimony from a dozen witnesses.
It's not like I'm repeating second-hand allegations for Gods sake.
The difference is that there's nothing slanderous or otherwise about suggesting a player's coach is the reason why he's not being selected.
In fact, I'd go so far as saying Ireland goalkeeping coach Seamus McDonagh has a big role in the selection of all Ireland's goalkeepers.
Jeff Hendrick on choosing soccer over Gaelic and Martin O’Neill’s magic touch: http://irishpost.co.uk/interview-jef...s-magic-touch/
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks