Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

TOOR and Hoody, the dipshit twins.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bellendfrombelmonty will show up soon too

......................

Dipshit triplets.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Correct. I'd say we have as much chance as Spurs.

......................

Then as usual, you would be wrong.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 8 minutes ago
Correct. I'd say we have as much chance as Spurs.

......................

Then as usual, you would be wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm entitled to my opinion. Am I not?

I'm entitled to my opinion. Am I not?

...............

You sure are, but you might want to check that it is correct first before publishing it for all to see.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 22 seconds ago
I'm entitled to my opinion. Am I not?

...............

You sure are, but you might want to check that it is correct first before publishing it for all to see.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOOR the creator of the #FakeNews

There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

You're not entitled to your opinion about what the experts said at the Suarez hearing.

They either said it or they didn't and what you have claimed they said, they didn't.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 1 hour, 39 minutes ago
I'm entitled to my opinion. Am I not?

...............

You sure are, but you might want to check that it is correct first before publishing it for all to see.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks.

I'll stick to us having as much chance as Spurs then.

I'll stick to us having as much chance as Spurs then.

...............

Why would you stick to something that you know is incorrect? What makes you do such a thing?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

What a thread.

Anyone considering that panel as a fair quasi-judicial entity is blinded by football.

Nowhere outside of blinkered fandom can such a kangaroo panel be taken seriously.

For instance, I quote from one of the excerpts by a Manc...

"Given that he has spent some considerable time in Europe it is possible that his use of Spanish alters between Uruguayan and European contexts."

Now, for the judge and jury to be coming out with comments like this is madness. In a normal court there'd probably be immediate and forceful recusal.

That sentence is an admission that Suarez is unlikely to use such words unless he alternates between European and Uruguayan contexts when he speaks.

To assume he alternates in the absence of evidence input by witnesses or experts to suggest he does so is the panel introducing damning evidence all on its own accord to force the dots to join. It happens throughout.

In any case, how can an assumption be made to the detriment of the accused person? Any legal mind reading that will laugh their head off.

Are the rules of natural justice, nurtured over millennia, and nurtured out of necessity, now an irrelevance? These principles are there for a reason.

The panel is nothing but assumptions and derivations in a futile process of bias confirmation that ignores all contradictory evidence but highlights and even laughably augments evidence.

And that, ladies and gentlemen is how you end up with Mancs like Elvis and Winston quoting the panel, only the panel, and nothing else, like Benny Hinn and Reinhard Bonke quoting Bible verses in an evangelical crusade in Lagos or Phuket.

Absolute joke and it would be in any other situation except in football.

And that, ladies and gentlemen is how you end up with Mancs like Elvis and Winston quoting the panel, only the panel, and nothing else

...............

Well they were the people who were part of the FA report on which Suarez fate was based.

So quoting something from the FA Report is better than quoting something pulled from TOOR's ar$e.

Even a ret@rd like you, Mamba, can figure that one out.

.................

Absolute joke and it would be in any other situation except in football.

.........................

The only joke was that the little racist nibbler didn't get a longer ban.

"In the interview with Mr Suarez the transcription
indicated to the experts that he uses the "tu" form of the verb, though there are other filmed interviews published on the internet in which he uses the "vos" form of the verb."

So available actual videos indicate he uses vos, which agrees with what Suarez said.

The FA's experts relying on a transcription decide he uses tu.

The panel then goes on to add that since he's played in Europe, he 'possibly' alternates between the two. And there you have it. It's therefore more likely he used tu as opposed to vos and that likelihood satisfies the burden of proof eliminating all reasonable doubt that he used vos

The sort of assumption that is made at the local pub when everyone is drunk.

Can this get anymore Kangarooey?

Well they were the people who were part of the FA report on which Suarez fate was based.

So quoting something from the FA Report is better than quoting something pulled from TOOR's ar$e.
=========
I didn't say it was or wasn't. This is irrelevant.


Even a ret@rd like you, Mamba, can figure that one out.
=======
OK. Thanks for the info.

The sort of assumption that is made at the local pub when everyone is drunk.

......................

Really? Knowing Nibbles previous despicable behavior, you wouldn't need to have any beer at all come to the correct answer here.

It is only a good handfull of Liverpool fans that still have their head in the sand over the incident.

OK. Thanks for the info.

..............

You are welcome.

The only joke was that the little racist nibbler didn't get a longer ban.
========
Not really.

They needed a ban that would be just about acceptable to Suarez too as they didn't want him appealing and having their Kangaroo exercise exposed like a naked mole rat.

When Suarez weighed the value of an appeal against the value of taking it in the chin, they had to make sure the chin won.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
The sort of assumption that is made at the local pub when everyone is drunk.
......................
Really? Knowing Nibbles previous despicable behavior, you wouldn't need to have any beer at all come to the correct answer here.
========
Judgment of previous character to decide guilt.

That's exactly how Kangaroo courts work.

So ignore the videos and all the evidence indicating he uses vos and instead you decide he uses tu because of previous bad behaviour.

Be honest, would you think like this if it wasn't footie related. It's ret arded

I know you ain't that stupid. The blinkeredness is cute as well.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator