Bernado Silva misconduct charge: one game ban, £50k fine

GortonBlue62 said:
Rather than cut and paste my point, I'll leave you to your virtue signalling.
Click to expand...
I read your post, but I genuinely don't know what your point is. It seems that you are saying that young people today are waving their swords at imaginary foes, but then you acknowledge that the foes are real and need fighting.

I'm not virtue signalling, I am attempting to explain how I think the FA arrived at their sanctions. I have been quite polite and not insulted anyone. I thought we were engaging in adult debate here - sorry for offending you dude.
 
threadkiller said:
I read your post, but I genuinely don't know what your point is. It seems that you are saying that young people today are waving their swords at imaginary foes, but then you acknowledge that the foes are real and need fighting.

I'm not virtue signalling, I am attempting to explain how I think the FA arrived at their sanctions. I have been quite polite and not insulted anyone. I thought we were engaging in adult debate here - sorry for offending you dude.
Click to expand...

Not offended at all, and neither was Benjamin Mendy.
 
hello said:
The facts are the silly cow, brought coffee put it between her legs and spilt it, and somehow blamed them for selling the coffee which was unsurprisingly hot rather than accepting responsibility that she was a silly cow that burnt herself. I have read that lawsuit and the judge could have done with a serious kicking down a dark alley, to me and the rest of rational society, if you spill a hot drink over your privates its no ones fault but your own.
The fact the hot drink may of not have been 5 degrees hotter than it needed to be are irrelevant, if you believe that judgement was deserved then as far as I am concerned you are part of the problem with society over the last 30 years or so.
Why didn't she sue Ford for not including cup holders or her grandson for parking on a 1 degree camber?

The sheer stupidity of that lawsuit in the fact it was awarded rather than laughed out of town undoubtedly started the ball rolling for frivolous claims by the scummy companies you referenced in your original post. Indeed the only retrospective action since is that companies are forced to make the writing telling idiots that a hot drink may hot bigger rather than lowering the temperature of the hot drink.

The only people that could be offended by Silva's tweet are people with the mentality of believing its wrong for hot drinks to be hot.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen the pictures of that “silly cow” after the spill and read the key points of the verdict.

I’ll rest on the fact that justice was done.

You can characterize her and the situation any way you please....and clearly have no trouble warping the facts. Carry on....
 
ChicagoBlue said:
I hope you don’t apply for that law degree, if THAT is your case! ;-)

THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS THINK HE IS A CRIMINAL BOOB! (CAPS just for you, dear). Does the vast majority of Britain feel likewise about Boris? We shall see...

Be well.
Click to expand...
Fucking hell calm down mate lol
 
I though it was more

"I may not be offended and you may not have intended to offend, but somebody else may think it is acceptable to do similarly and cause offence, and it is deemed unacceptable by FA policy to allow such potentially promoting actions"
 
GortonBlue62 said:
I think your point is, that while you meant no offence and I took no offence, somebody might have been offended.
Click to expand...
No mate, my point is that, whilst this message caused no offence and is not racist, taking bo action would make it easier for actual racists, who do want to cause offence, to be more openly rasist.
It does this by blurring the lines of what we, as a society consider to be acceptable, allowing actual racists to easier justify their actually racist behaviour.
 
threadkiller said:
No mate, my point is that, whilst this message caused no offence and is not racist, taking bo action would make it easier for actual racists, who do want to cause offence, to be more openly rasist.
It does this by blurring the lines of what we, as a society consider to be acceptable, allowing actual racists to easier justify their actually racist behaviour.
Click to expand...

Threadkiller is an apt name.

What was it before?

Bollockstalker?
 
threadkiller said:
No mate, my point is that, whilst this message caused no offence and is not racist, taking bo action would make it easier for actual racists, who do want to cause offence, to be more openly rasist.
It does this by blurring the lines of what we, as a society consider to be acceptable, allowing actual racists to easier justify their actually racist behaviour.
Click to expand...
That is the biggest leap i have ever read on here
 
threadkiller said:
But, like I've been saying, if no action is taken, the person intending to send that tweet, with malicious intent, now can justify his or her actions as 'just a joke' and point to Silva's tweet as being perfectly fine.
So what does the person being bullied do now? Because you can't really complain can you? when everyone has already said its perfectly fine, no racism here. Now you're just being a spoil sport, not being able to take a joke, which opens you up for more abuse.
Click to expand...


You judge everything on its own merits, it’s not hard.

well let’s look at the context & relationship between these 2 & not only that they have both taken the time to write & provide further information to back this. This will make it really easy when we explain to the wider public how our decision was made.
 
Isn't it the same when a black man calls another black man a nigga. They call it racist, but how can it be? Is it racist if Bernie is black? Too many snowflakes around
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top