comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Clever - son son son - 'The Special One' - Lukanchezba 🖒 (U18599)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 8 minutes ago
Again. Nothing to do with that. Its sad thst ur still using it in that context to suit ur agenda. So many fans of other clubs have bern banned or blocked because they dared to call you victims over the way you behaved during the evra episode because you cited a tragedy to deflect from your clubs shame of defending a racist. No doubt thisll be complained about but only the scousers have referenced a tragedy. Remember that chumpy.
—————————
I guarantee that the victim slur was never used before Hillsboro, and that it would never have been used had that incident not occurred.
Remember that, you vile bottom feeder.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still behaving like a victim. Fack off you bin dipper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing worse than an uneducated, smack addicted Manc...... You’re as low as they come 👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tara .
What a read this was.
TOOR and a few other Liverpool fans really are delusional. Their comments are the very definition of confirmation bias. They have made their mind up that Evra is a liar and Suarez is innocent, so they find comments from the report that helps prove their case.
It's laughable.
The comment I keep reading from TOOR revolves around 'a real court'.
What are you on about?
Are you referring to a court of law, as opposed to a civil court? Let me assure you, both are 'real' courts but they have very different approaches.
If you don't even understand that, how can you possibly interpret the report from this hearing.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
What a read this was.
TOOR and a few other Liverpool fans really are delusional. Their comments are the very definition of confirmation bias. They have made their mind up that Evra is a liar and Suarez is innocent, so they find comments from the report that helps prove their case.
It's laughable.
The comment I keep reading from TOOR revolves around 'a real court'.
What are you on about?
Are you referring to a court of law, as opposed to a civil court? Let me assure you, both are 'real' courts but they have very different approaches.
If you don't even understand that, how can you possibly interpret the report from this hearing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. I'm referring to a court where the members of the panel don't have links to the Fergie family, where they go with the experts and don't decide that the person proven to have lied and changed his account is reliable and the person whose story the experts said is possible, unreliable.
It was the word of one man against another, one was proven to have lied and changed account, there's no evidence from video or speech and lip readers were unable to confirm anything racially abusive was said and yet their entire judgement was founded on believing one over the other.
That's what I mean by a real court. Not a biased court who had made up their mind before it started and tried their damned hardest to find a way to make him guilty.
So certainly on the basis of probability, they couldn't have found him guilty, with the evidence at hand. They wanted to find him guilty.
The fergie family ?
You'd think you were talking about the corleones
comment by Roys Keen (U11635)
posted 54 seconds ago
The fergie family ?
You'd think you were talking about the corleones
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't. Why would you?
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Again, you're just taking snippets from what has been said because it suits you.
There was plenty that made Suarez's account unreliable and the 'experts' merely said that his use of the word was not necessarily used as a direct insult.
You didn't mean that by 'real court'.
You don't even know the differences between types of court.
There's no doubt you believe you're right, but that is simply confirmation bias and delusion.
Thanks for telling me what I meant Winston. Classic from you there. I'm out.
'Links to the Fergie family'
I read the post about Darren Ferguson having played for him - so that apparently means the guy would cheat a hearing about racial abuse.
As I said - confirmation bias.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 16 seconds ago
Thanks for telling me what I meant Winston. Classic from you there. I'm out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're out of your depth, for sure.
Ignorance is bliss.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
'Links to the Fergie family'
I read the post about Darren Ferguson having played for him - so that apparently means the guy would cheat a hearing about racial abuse.
As I said - confirmation bias.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- In 2009, Smith published his autobiography: 'Just One of Seven'. The back cover states:
"Tough-talking, candid and in places brutally honest, Smith's autobiography reveals his tough upbringing amidst the gangs of Stoke-on-Trent, and...how he helped save Sir Alex Ferguson's job.
Somebody with close ties to the Ferguson family, without doubt, can be seen as a conflict of interest. Even somebody with extreme bias like you can admit that, surely?
Anyway, continue on with your nonsense. No point debating with somebody who tells you what you think. The sheer arrogance.
Here's another comment, from Terminator:
'it's pretty difficult to defend anything when the final verdict was arrived at 'on the balance of probability'.'
That is the civil standard of proof, you buffoon.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
'Close ties'?
Seriously?
Was Ferguson on trial?
The idea that this would have influenced the hearing is ridiculous, but of course it suits your flawed argument so you will continue with it.
I would advise you to go away and educate yourself but your delusion is so bad that I think that would be a waste of time.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
'Close ties'?
Seriously?
Was Ferguson on trial?
The idea that this would have influenced the hearing is ridiculous, but of course it suits your flawed argument so you will continue with it.
I would advise you to go away and educate yourself but your delusion is so bad that I think that would be a waste of time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm saying if it was a proper court, he wouldn't have been on the panel as it is without doubt, a conflict of interest.
Of course with them deciding on a guilty verdict, without evidence, I'm inclined to believe this conflict of interest played a part. Why wouldn't I? That's the whole reason they dismiss people with a conflict of interest, in real court.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What is a 'proper court' in your mind?
What exactly is the conflict here? Ferguson wasn't accused. He didn't make the accusation. He didn't appear at the hearing. He didn't give evidence.
As I said - you start from a point where Suarez is innocent and then you try to find things that fit that narrative.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What is a 'proper court' in your mind?
What exactly is the conflict here? Ferguson wasn't accused. He didn't make the accusation. He didn't appear at the hearing. He didn't give evidence.
As I said - you start from a point where Suarez is innocent and then you try to find things that fit that narrative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say Ferguson was accused of anything. I think you're being stupid on purpose here.
The conflict is that the player who plays for his mate, was on trial.
With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. The only way they could create a guilty verdict was by painting one as reliable and one unreliable and siding with that person. Which is what they did, despite the evidence suggesting otherwise.
Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this. It's delusional to suggest otherwise.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
His mate?
Where did you get that from?
His son played for him so now they're best mates?
You're making this into something it isn't because you're desperate. There's no conflict of interest there - that's another term you don't understand.
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this"
More confirmation bias. A nonsense statement with no basis whatsoever.
"With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. "
And another.
You've convinced yourself but I'm afraid you're talking utter nonsense.
I saw Evra got 3 stitches in our game. Jurgen should pay who ever did it a huge bonus
comment by T Bone Steak Roysters (U3947)
posted 33 seconds ago
I saw Evra got 3 stitches in our game. Jurgen should pay who ever did it a huge bonus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a pleasant thing to say.
This is a complete mess from everyone who has been posting for 2 days
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
His mate?
Where did you get that from?
His son played for him so now they're best mates?
You're making this into something it isn't because you're desperate. There's no conflict of interest there - that's another term you don't understand.
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this"
More confirmation bias. A nonsense statement with no basis whatsoever.
"With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. "
And another.
You've convinced yourself but I'm afraid you're talking utter nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR makes up his own facts, this is the only fact in this article
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
His mate?
Where did you get that from?
His son played for him so now they're best mates?
You're making this into something it isn't because you're desperate. There's no conflict of interest there - that's another term you don't understand.
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this"
More confirmation bias. A nonsense statement with no basis whatsoever.
"With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. "
And another.
You've convinced yourself but I'm afraid you're talking utter nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR makes up his own facts, this is the only fact in this article
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you give me some examples, just so we can confirm your fact?
Thanks.
I'll start:
Made up fact number 1:
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this".
Made up fact 2
The idea that this would have influenced the hearing is ridiculous
Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
I don't think you understand the game.
That's not offered as a fact. It's an opinion.
Let me know when you catch up.
Evra
Page 21 of 23
19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23
posted on 25/2/18
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Clever - son son son - 'The Special One' - Lukanchezba 🖒 (U18599)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 8 minutes ago
Again. Nothing to do with that. Its sad thst ur still using it in that context to suit ur agenda. So many fans of other clubs have bern banned or blocked because they dared to call you victims over the way you behaved during the evra episode because you cited a tragedy to deflect from your clubs shame of defending a racist. No doubt thisll be complained about but only the scousers have referenced a tragedy. Remember that chumpy.
—————————
I guarantee that the victim slur was never used before Hillsboro, and that it would never have been used had that incident not occurred.
Remember that, you vile bottom feeder.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still behaving like a victim. Fack off you bin dipper.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing worse than an uneducated, smack addicted Manc...... You’re as low as they come 👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tara .
posted on 26/2/18
What a read this was.
TOOR and a few other Liverpool fans really are delusional. Their comments are the very definition of confirmation bias. They have made their mind up that Evra is a liar and Suarez is innocent, so they find comments from the report that helps prove their case.
It's laughable.
The comment I keep reading from TOOR revolves around 'a real court'.
What are you on about?
Are you referring to a court of law, as opposed to a civil court? Let me assure you, both are 'real' courts but they have very different approaches.
If you don't even understand that, how can you possibly interpret the report from this hearing.
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
What a read this was.
TOOR and a few other Liverpool fans really are delusional. Their comments are the very definition of confirmation bias. They have made their mind up that Evra is a liar and Suarez is innocent, so they find comments from the report that helps prove their case.
It's laughable.
The comment I keep reading from TOOR revolves around 'a real court'.
What are you on about?
Are you referring to a court of law, as opposed to a civil court? Let me assure you, both are 'real' courts but they have very different approaches.
If you don't even understand that, how can you possibly interpret the report from this hearing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. I'm referring to a court where the members of the panel don't have links to the Fergie family, where they go with the experts and don't decide that the person proven to have lied and changed his account is reliable and the person whose story the experts said is possible, unreliable.
It was the word of one man against another, one was proven to have lied and changed account, there's no evidence from video or speech and lip readers were unable to confirm anything racially abusive was said and yet their entire judgement was founded on believing one over the other.
That's what I mean by a real court. Not a biased court who had made up their mind before it started and tried their damned hardest to find a way to make him guilty.
So certainly on the basis of probability, they couldn't have found him guilty, with the evidence at hand. They wanted to find him guilty.
posted on 26/2/18
The fergie family ?
You'd think you were talking about the corleones
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Roys Keen (U11635)
posted 54 seconds ago
The fergie family ?
You'd think you were talking about the corleones
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't. Why would you?
posted on 26/2/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Again, you're just taking snippets from what has been said because it suits you.
There was plenty that made Suarez's account unreliable and the 'experts' merely said that his use of the word was not necessarily used as a direct insult.
You didn't mean that by 'real court'.
You don't even know the differences between types of court.
There's no doubt you believe you're right, but that is simply confirmation bias and delusion.
posted on 26/2/18
Thanks for telling me what I meant Winston. Classic from you there. I'm out.
posted on 26/2/18
'Links to the Fergie family'
I read the post about Darren Ferguson having played for him - so that apparently means the guy would cheat a hearing about racial abuse.
As I said - confirmation bias.
posted on 26/2/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 16 seconds ago
Thanks for telling me what I meant Winston. Classic from you there. I'm out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You're out of your depth, for sure.
Ignorance is bliss.
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
'Links to the Fergie family'
I read the post about Darren Ferguson having played for him - so that apparently means the guy would cheat a hearing about racial abuse.
As I said - confirmation bias.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
- In 2009, Smith published his autobiography: 'Just One of Seven'. The back cover states:
"Tough-talking, candid and in places brutally honest, Smith's autobiography reveals his tough upbringing amidst the gangs of Stoke-on-Trent, and...how he helped save Sir Alex Ferguson's job.
Somebody with close ties to the Ferguson family, without doubt, can be seen as a conflict of interest. Even somebody with extreme bias like you can admit that, surely?
Anyway, continue on with your nonsense. No point debating with somebody who tells you what you think. The sheer arrogance.
posted on 26/2/18
Here's another comment, from Terminator:
'it's pretty difficult to defend anything when the final verdict was arrived at 'on the balance of probability'.'
That is the civil standard of proof, you buffoon.
posted on 26/2/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
'Close ties'?
Seriously?
Was Ferguson on trial?
The idea that this would have influenced the hearing is ridiculous, but of course it suits your flawed argument so you will continue with it.
I would advise you to go away and educate yourself but your delusion is so bad that I think that would be a waste of time.
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 4 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
'Close ties'?
Seriously?
Was Ferguson on trial?
The idea that this would have influenced the hearing is ridiculous, but of course it suits your flawed argument so you will continue with it.
I would advise you to go away and educate yourself but your delusion is so bad that I think that would be a waste of time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm saying if it was a proper court, he wouldn't have been on the panel as it is without doubt, a conflict of interest.
Of course with them deciding on a guilty verdict, without evidence, I'm inclined to believe this conflict of interest played a part. Why wouldn't I? That's the whole reason they dismiss people with a conflict of interest, in real court.
posted on 26/2/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What is a 'proper court' in your mind?
What exactly is the conflict here? Ferguson wasn't accused. He didn't make the accusation. He didn't appear at the hearing. He didn't give evidence.
As I said - you start from a point where Suarez is innocent and then you try to find things that fit that narrative.
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 26 seconds ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What is a 'proper court' in your mind?
What exactly is the conflict here? Ferguson wasn't accused. He didn't make the accusation. He didn't appear at the hearing. He didn't give evidence.
As I said - you start from a point where Suarez is innocent and then you try to find things that fit that narrative.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't say Ferguson was accused of anything. I think you're being stupid on purpose here.
The conflict is that the player who plays for his mate, was on trial.
With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. The only way they could create a guilty verdict was by painting one as reliable and one unreliable and siding with that person. Which is what they did, despite the evidence suggesting otherwise.
Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this. It's delusional to suggest otherwise.
posted on 26/2/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
His mate?
Where did you get that from?
His son played for him so now they're best mates?
You're making this into something it isn't because you're desperate. There's no conflict of interest there - that's another term you don't understand.
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this"
More confirmation bias. A nonsense statement with no basis whatsoever.
"With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. "
And another.
You've convinced yourself but I'm afraid you're talking utter nonsense.
posted on 26/2/18
I saw Evra got 3 stitches in our game. Jurgen should pay who ever did it a huge bonus
posted on 26/2/18
comment by T Bone Steak Roysters (U3947)
posted 33 seconds ago
I saw Evra got 3 stitches in our game. Jurgen should pay who ever did it a huge bonus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a pleasant thing to say.
posted on 26/2/18
This is a complete mess from everyone who has been posting for 2 days
posted on 26/2/18
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
His mate?
Where did you get that from?
His son played for him so now they're best mates?
You're making this into something it isn't because you're desperate. There's no conflict of interest there - that's another term you don't understand.
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this"
More confirmation bias. A nonsense statement with no basis whatsoever.
"With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. "
And another.
You've convinced yourself but I'm afraid you're talking utter nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR makes up his own facts, this is the only fact in this article
posted on 26/2/18
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
His mate?
Where did you get that from?
His son played for him so now they're best mates?
You're making this into something it isn't because you're desperate. There's no conflict of interest there - that's another term you don't understand.
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this"
More confirmation bias. A nonsense statement with no basis whatsoever.
"With the evidence given, there was no way they could find him guilty. "
And another.
You've convinced yourself but I'm afraid you're talking utter nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR makes up his own facts, this is the only fact in this article
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you give me some examples, just so we can confirm your fact?
Thanks.
posted on 26/2/18
I'll start:
Made up fact number 1:
"Everybody apart from United fans who actually reads the evidence agrees with this".
posted on 26/2/18
Made up fact 2
The idea that this would have influenced the hearing is ridiculous
posted on 26/2/18
Pâî§Lë¥'š _P䆆ê®ÑëÐ_ÐrÊåm§ (U1541)
I don't think you understand the game.
That's not offered as a fact. It's an opinion.
Let me know when you catch up.
Page 21 of 23
19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23