I know its difficult to find a brain cell in dipperland, but
If you believe you're innocent which City do, why wouldn't you pay the best lawyers to prove you're innocent over paying a fine. Even if that fine is a penny, you're admitting guilt.
IPTV all the wayOh look,..Sky sports showing best of Prem League for 95/96 season once more!It’s f’kin pathetic isn’t it?!Who would pay that much for such irrelevant,happened almost 30yrs ago content!?Who else is remotely interested apart from them lot?It must be a hard watch for the cunts themselves nowadays,when you consider their recent demise.I’m on the f.stick and can’t understand why a Blue would hand a penny over to that stench ridden organisation anymore…
Quite sure the Dippers used top lawyers for Heysel to muddy the waters , Hillsborough to get justice and Paris to prove their feral fan base innocent of trying to blag their way into the game with beer mats for tickets.This is one of the more bizarre ideas the idiots have. Charged, just accept it, don’t defend yourself. It’s so bizarre. They seem to think anyone should just accept the findings of a kangaroo court.
You ask them, if you are wrongly accused of something and you have evidence that you are innocent, would you use a top solicitor to present said evidence? There’s only one answer.
Guilty till proven innocent, but if you use fancy lawyers to prove said innocence, you’re guilty..
Client journalism is one thing, but this is pretty grotesque from James Ducker in the circumstances:
This is the shit were fighting against.
No mark you tube cunts making accusations which cunts like Harris stroke their dicks to.
Id agree with most of that but would also add Webb made up some personal reasons to disallow the goal which aren't currently in the laws of the game.Talk sport and so many other pundits have got this decision all wrong.
Firstly, I’m old school and it should be offside.
Then they changed the rules. So it onside.
The keeper could see the ball as clearly as I could.
Ake had the full goal to aim at.
The question was. Which side was he going to put it?
It took an age for the ball to sit nicely for Ake. So much so, that he leaned back and put everything through the header.
Once the keeper realised where it was going. He dived.
Best thing the keeper could hope for, would have been contact with Akanji.
Because there was no way he was getting anywhere near it.
Webb said it was a mistake to allow the goal.
Than when pressed. He said only under these set of circumstances.
Which means that it will never be resolved.
Unlike back in the day when it was given as offside.
I also blame Akanji for being lazy. Lol
Not sure a dipper would understand the concept of innocence.You ask them, if you are wrongly accused of something and you have evidence that you are innocent, would you use a top solicitor to present said evidence? There’s only one answer.
Yeah and he's from Sheffield where there are no football teams apparently.Well I think the Telegraph have a (behind the) Time Machine.
View attachment 92951
I know we’re top of the table…
How can he ‘provide evidence’?
All of this at the moment is simply she said/he said.
Each time appearing to land on her tittyI wonder if his evidence compares with the Raggy Dr report….
“Visited Antony partner as she was complaining of walking into the bathroom cupboard & falling down the stairs, up the stairs & down the stairs…..again.”