You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ferdinand stamp on Torres?
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
dukie said:mansour's tow ropes said:seems the camel has got the hump and fucked england off. what a **** of the highest order, despicable, disgraceful human being
Why is Rio despicable and a disgraceful human being on the back of this?
It was England that fucked him about in the first place, and sided with the racist centre half instead.
As for the op, how have you managed to create a 22 page long thread about a "stamp" that doesn't exist, not even in the video you linked in your post? He pushes him in the back, fair enough, but stamp?
You are right, he didn't stamp on him. He smacked him round the head and tripped him up. 50 metres from the ball and after chasing him. Then he dragged him up and gave him a mouthful. In no way anything that would usually contravene the laws of the game. Well, according to Howard Webb on second viewing anyway.
He might not be a despicable human being. But he is a bloke in his mid thirties who is desperate to hang around with the teenage One Direction, the 'gangsta' Fifty Cent and any other wankstain who has the sniff of celebrity about them.
Can we settle on him being a sad twat, even in the fucked up perspective, up their own arse world of footballers, instead then?
Oh, and thick, did I mention thick?
In his defence, England were out of order with the Terry thing, so he owes them nothing, in my view. If he had any dignity though he'd have told them to do one, rather than being led around like a dog and told what to do by his piss artist manager.
And for someone who has never, even in the protected environment of a Premier League game where nothing is ever going to happen, got in the face of anyone who has a remotely hard reputation, how come he is so found of regularly posturing, shoving dwarfs and soft lads and generally acting the hard man. He is never anywhere to be seen when there is a whiff of trouble.
Not that that is necessarily a bad thing. It just doesn't fit with his self styled hard man, gangsta image.
In short, a total clown who would be the sort of shallow, self obsessed, thick, stereotype of a person ridiculed by society if he wasn't a decent footballer.
mcmanus
Well-Known Member
jma said:You are right, he didn't stamp on him. He smacked him round the head and tripped him up. 50 metres from the ball and after chasing him. Then he dragged him up and gave him a mouthful. In no way anything that would usually contravene the laws of the game. Well, according to Howard Webb on second viewing anyway.
He might not be a despicable human being. But he is a bloke in his mid thirties who is desperate to hang around with the teenage One Direction, the 'gangsta' Fifty Cent and any other wankstain who has the sniff of celebrity about them.
Can we settle on him being a sad twat, even in the fucked up perspective, up their own arse world of footballers, instead then?
Oh, and thick, did I mention thick?
In his defence, England were out of order with the Terry thing, so he owes them nothing, in my view. If he had any dignity though he'd have told them to do one, rather than being led around like a dog and told what to do by his piss artist manager.
And for someone who has never, even in the protected environment of a Premier League game where nothing is ever going to happen, got in the face of anyone who has a remotely hard reputation, how come he is so found of regularly posturing, shoving dwarfs and soft lads and generally acting the hard man. He is never anywhere to be seen when there is a whiff of trouble.
Not that that is necessarily a bad thing. It just doesn't fit with his self styled hard man, gangsta image.
In short, a total clown who would be the sort of shallow, self obsessed, thick, stereotype of a person ridiculed by society if he wasn't a decent footballer.
One of the best posts I read in a while.
Tim of the Oak
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 18,674
mcmanus said:jma said:You are right, he didn't stamp on him. He smacked him round the head and tripped him up. 50 metres from the ball and after chasing him. Then he dragged him up and gave him a mouthful. In no way anything that would usually contravene the laws of the game. Well, according to Howard Webb on second viewing anyway.
He might not be a despicable human being. But he is a bloke in his mid thirties who is desperate to hang around with the teenage One Direction, the 'gangsta' Fifty Cent and any other wankstain who has the sniff of celebrity about them.
Can we settle on him being a sad twat, even in the fucked up perspective, up their own arse world of footballers, instead then?
Oh, and thick, did I mention thick?
In his defence, England were out of order with the Terry thing, so he owes them nothing, in my view. If he had any dignity though he'd have told them to do one, rather than being led around like a dog and told what to do by his piss artist manager.
And for someone who has never, even in the protected environment of a Premier League game where nothing is ever going to happen, got in the face of anyone who has a remotely hard reputation, how come he is so found of regularly posturing, shoving dwarfs and soft lads and generally acting the hard man. He is never anywhere to be seen when there is a whiff of trouble.
Not that that is necessarily a bad thing. It just doesn't fit with his self styled hard man, gangsta image.
In short, a total clown who would be the sort of shallow, self obsessed, thick, stereotype of a person ridiculed by society if he wasn't a decent footballer.
One of the best posts I read in a while.
Excellent post jma. Rio is a poor man's Ali G without the brains, charisma and sense of humour.
Also, even Cashley Cole must think Woy's a tw** for bringing Rio back after his choc ice jibes.
Bump
Where is the retrospective ban for Ferdinand on 2 counts.
1. Using the precedent of McManaman's foul. The FA could not act retrospectively because one of the officials saw the incident. The Ferdinand assault on Torres wasn't witnessed by any of the officials but was clearly recorded by the TV cameras and reported in virtually every national newspaper the following day. Ferdinand faces FA ban etc etc.
Yet I can't even find any statement from the FA about the incident. All i can find is anecdotal:
MUEN: "Ferdinand appeared to barge the Spain international to the ground before helping him to his feet in an off-the-ball collision which went unseen by referee Howard Webb.
However, a spokesman for the FA told has said that Ferdinand would not face retrospective action." What spokesman? Where's the official statement.
2. Camel says he can't play for England because of treatment regime then does a James Bond impression flying to Qatar to bore people to death with his insightful punditry. Where's the retrospective ban from football in general for that.
The Independent: "Matt Todman, a physiotherapist with London-based Six Physio who has worked with many elite athletes, believes Ferdinand has made an odd decision.
"Anyone who is serious of making the best chance of a recovery or having less pain, you wouldn't advise them to go on a trip they didn't have to make," Todman told Press Association Sport.
"It is contrary to sensible advice.
"He's an elite-level athlete and he doesn't need rest. His job is not like yours or mine sitting in front of a computer all day, he needs to keep moving. That is what he's used to doing.
"The problem is if you don't move and you're enclosed in a cabin - even if it's in first class - for the eight or nine hours getting there, it's actually a very unusual thing to do considering you've got a bad back."
Is Ferdinand immune because of the whole Terry affair?
Where is the retrospective ban for Ferdinand on 2 counts.
1. Using the precedent of McManaman's foul. The FA could not act retrospectively because one of the officials saw the incident. The Ferdinand assault on Torres wasn't witnessed by any of the officials but was clearly recorded by the TV cameras and reported in virtually every national newspaper the following day. Ferdinand faces FA ban etc etc.
Yet I can't even find any statement from the FA about the incident. All i can find is anecdotal:
MUEN: "Ferdinand appeared to barge the Spain international to the ground before helping him to his feet in an off-the-ball collision which went unseen by referee Howard Webb.
However, a spokesman for the FA told has said that Ferdinand would not face retrospective action." What spokesman? Where's the official statement.
2. Camel says he can't play for England because of treatment regime then does a James Bond impression flying to Qatar to bore people to death with his insightful punditry. Where's the retrospective ban from football in general for that.
The Independent: "Matt Todman, a physiotherapist with London-based Six Physio who has worked with many elite athletes, believes Ferdinand has made an odd decision.
"Anyone who is serious of making the best chance of a recovery or having less pain, you wouldn't advise them to go on a trip they didn't have to make," Todman told Press Association Sport.
"It is contrary to sensible advice.
"He's an elite-level athlete and he doesn't need rest. His job is not like yours or mine sitting in front of a computer all day, he needs to keep moving. That is what he's used to doing.
"The problem is if you don't move and you're enclosed in a cabin - even if it's in first class - for the eight or nine hours getting there, it's actually a very unusual thing to do considering you've got a bad back."
Is Ferdinand immune because of the whole Terry affair?
cant spel forgive me
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 238
If design Jong or someone done that he would of been murdered by the media<br /><br />-- Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:39 pm --<br /><br />Despise that druggy