Neymar makes racist abuse claim

ancoats

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 Aug 2005
Messages
11,904
Lose the lot? Except the FA or whoever the governing body of the league is doesn't have the power to seize someones assets. That only happens in extremely serious criminal cases and in this case the footballer isn't even committing a crime. That's before we even get onto evidence and the standards in football being a lot vaguer and shadier than being proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
i know that
somebody quoted me on contracts and how would a player lose out because he would still get paid
what i should have said he would be in breach of contract and it terminated if found guilty
 

ancoats

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 Aug 2005
Messages
11,904
Season ban if found guilty,
No questions asked.
Put him on a racism awareness course and have him apologise to Neymar also.
A perfect opportunity to make an example of him and make a statement that racism will not be tolerated .
you see i don't get that

a season ban ok ? would that really send out the right message even the racism awareness course is a weak call
because you can say all the right things but meaning them is another, ok i was a bit hard on a lifetime ban and everybody should be given a 2nd chance. but again what are the chances he would change in the hate of the moment and fall back on his real feelings

its about time football said enough is enough and if you want the message to hit home it has to be a hard punishment
yes a season ban would be hurtful ? but how hurt is the player being called this and that, its going to stay with him forever and really could affect him long term

maybe the punishment should be based on the player that has being affected ? then maybe just maybe people will get the message that you can break all my bones but the pain of that racist remarks hurts more
 

Bigg Bigg Blue

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Sep 2010
Messages
5,642
Location
In a hole that just keeps getting deeper.
Team supported
Manchester City
Lose the lot? Except the FA or whoever the governing body of the league is doesn't have the power to seize someones assets. That only happens in extremely serious criminal cases and in this case the footballer isn't even committing a crime. That's before we even get onto evidence and the standards in football being a lot vaguer and shadier than being proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
If it's true then it's a hate crime
 

Uncle Wally One Ball

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 Jan 2009
Messages
12,799
Location
Orca
Lose the lot? Except the FA or whoever the governing body of the league is doesn't have the power to seize someones assets. That only happens in extremely serious criminal cases and in this case the footballer isn't even committing a crime. That's before we even get onto evidence and the standards in football being a lot vaguer and shadier than being proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
Of course he is committing a crime. Well he would had it happened in this country anyway. Dont know about France, do you?
 

Bazza_Talks

Member
Joined
13 Sep 2020
Messages
20
Of course he is committing a crime. Well he would had it happened in this country anyway. Dont know about France, do you?
I'm not trying to be awkward but people throw around terms too casually. He is only guilty in the court of public opinion, no doubt based upon his reputation.

No court has charged and convicted him. No jury has sat in judgment weighing the evidence. What law has he broken beyond a reasonable doubt?

He's guilty of nothing. The evidence that will be presented will be of no substantive quality and will be highly subjective proving nothing one way or the other.

The reason I dislike the extreme punishments being suggested is because in this moment, society seems to have lost its collective mind. It actually puts pressure on people or organisations to censure people based on things seen or read on Twitter. The authority in this case may end up acting on the basis of a vocal minority of people on social media baying for blood and threatening sponsors and shareholders of partner organisations to push for action. They don't want cool, collective analysis and reflection. It's a recipe for miscarriages of justice galore. People need to be tolerant, calm and patient. They should want the outcomes to be correct, accurate and proportionate - not quick and tough outcomes just to satisfy some extreme reactionaries.
 

Uncle Wally One Ball

Well-Known Member
Joined
3 Jan 2009
Messages
12,799
Location
Orca
I'm not trying to be awkward but people throw around terms too casually. He is only guilty in the court of public opinion, no doubt based upon his reputation.

No court has charged and convicted him. No jury has sat in judgment weighing the evidence. What law has he broken beyond a reasonable doubt?

He's guilty of nothing. The evidence that will be presented will be of no substantive quality and will be highly subjective proving nothing one way or the other.

The reason I dislike the extreme punishments being suggested is because in this moment, society seems to have lost its collective mind. It actually puts pressure on people or organisations to censure people based on things seen or read on Twitter. The authority in this case may end up acting on the basis of a vocal minority of people on social media baying for blood and threatening sponsors and shareholders of partner organisations to push for action. They don't want cool, collective analysis and reflection. It's a recipe for miscarriages of justice galore. People need to be tolerant, calm and patient. They should want the outcomes to be correct, accurate and proportionate - not quick and tough outcomes just to satisfy some extreme reactionaries.
Microphones caught him calling a black player a monkey. Ffs
 

Vienna_70

Well-Known Member
Joined
18 Jun 2009
Messages
25,032
Location
100, 32, 106, +79, 19
Team supported
The Only Team in Manchester!
I'm not trying to be awkward but people throw around terms too casually. He is only guilty in the court of public opinion, no doubt based upon his reputation.

No court has charged and convicted him. No jury has sat in judgment weighing the evidence. What law has he broken beyond a reasonable doubt?

He's guilty of nothing. The evidence that will be presented will be of no substantive quality and will be highly subjective proving nothing one way or the other.

The reason I dislike the extreme punishments being suggested is because in this moment, society seems to have lost its collective mind. It actually puts pressure on people or organisations to censure people based on things seen or read on Twitter. The authority in this case may end up acting on the basis of a vocal minority of people on social media baying for blood and threatening sponsors and shareholders of partner organisations to push for action. They don't want cool, collective analysis and reflection. It's a recipe for miscarriages of justice galore. People need to be tolerant, calm and patient. They should want the outcomes to be correct, accurate and proportionate - not quick and tough outcomes just to satisfy some extreme reactionaries.
And are those using racist slurs being tolerant?
 

RayCTID

Well-Known Member
Joined
10 Dec 2016
Messages
8,155
I'm not trying to be awkward but people throw around terms too casually. He is only guilty in the court of public opinion, no doubt based upon his reputation.

No court has charged and convicted him. No jury has sat in judgment weighing the evidence. What law has he broken beyond a reasonable doubt?

He's guilty of nothing. The evidence that will be presented will be of no substantive quality and will be highly subjective proving nothing one way or the other.

The reason I dislike the extreme punishments being suggested is because in this moment, society seems to have lost its collective mind. It actually puts pressure on people or organisations to censure people based on things seen or read on Twitter. The authority in this case may end up acting on the basis of a vocal minority of people on social media baying for blood and threatening sponsors and shareholders of partner organisations to push for action. They don't want cool, collective analysis and reflection. It's a recipe for miscarriages of justice galore. People need to be tolerant, calm and patient. They should want the outcomes to be correct, accurate and proportionate - not quick and tough outcomes just to satisfy some extreme reactionaries.
No excuses. Gonzalez shouldn't be getting away with that.
 

catalyst

Well-Known Member
Joined
24 Jul 2017
Messages
836
Team supported
Manchester City
Shame Neymar was not sparked out, his sister could have rushed on to given him the kiss of life, they are that close.

Neymar was fortunate when at Barcelona that he did not come up against Andoni Goikoetxea, he would have snapped him in two. Goikoetxea, for a Basque he seemed to have a hatred of Barca and their star players, as Maradona and Bernd Schuster will attest.

Made the nightmare 11's back 4 along with Italian master of the dark arts Caluidio Gentile.
Totally, exactly what this is about!
 

Don't have an account?

Register now!
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.