Cider-Head23 Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 Looks like we'll start the season with Djuric alongside most likely a new signing. Or maybe Djuric and Taylor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Cider-Head23 said: Looks like we'll start the season with Djuric alongside most likely a new signing. Or maybe Djuric and Taylor. Great. Roll on August...………… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Cider-Head23 said: Looks like we'll start the season with Djuric alongside most likely a new signing. Or maybe Djuric and Taylor. Milan on his own with an extra midfielder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big C Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 Spitting is abhorrent and if he is guilty then a six game ban is acceptable, a hefty club fine is acceptable, and a club statement stating that it is unacceptable and he will go through a process of re-education concerning it is acceptable. Drumming him out of the club on a first offence I think is a bit extreme. However considering the club statement it does not seem to be an open and shut case because lets face it no club would want to be seen defending a player in this situation if they are so clearly guilty so I feel he should be given the benefit of the doubt until such time as any guilt is firmly established. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 no place for that at the club or in the game, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiale Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 watched the match from 50 - 54 minutes. Only incident is the one mentioned, two challenges on Famara within 30-40 seconds, and there are a few complaints and one player squares up to Famara nose to nose. Then they all walk of, ref books a player for the challenge, and thats it. No one reacts like they have been spat at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 If he’s banned for 6 games, he should not be paid for the entirety of that ban. I know that won’t happen, but why should he be paid for a period when we can’t use him for something he’s brought on himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 I'm gonna wait and see if the club appeal as Fammy has 'vehemently' denied this. Spitting at anyone is utterly disgusting so I hope it isn't proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozo Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 Good news for Djuric, Taylor and whichever striker we sign this summer. They've got to see this as an incentive to have a good pre-season, especially Djuric who should see this as his chance to cement that target man role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 Took 8 days to charge him, is that normal? Had to respond by 26th April , nearly a month has past till this announcement . Is that normal? Surly if he denied it the club would have been involved before now, little bit after the event. Would make sense for any defence to be heard before sentence . All seems a bit odd, as said numerous times , if anyone is deliberately spat at they would go mental there and then. Not quietly get on with the game then go running to 'Sir' ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 59 minutes ago, phantom said: @Super the FA report mentions an incident in the 52nd minute - this was 52:30 on the clock - they are not near each other before or after this for a while But 52nd minute is between 51:00 and 51:59 on the clock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 20 minutes ago, Big C said: Spitting is abhorrent and if he is guilty then a six game ban is acceptable, a hefty club fine is acceptable, and a club statement stating that it is unacceptable and he will go through a process of re-education concerning it is acceptable. Drumming him out of the club on a first offence I think is a bit extreme. However considering the club statement it does not seem to be an open and shut case because lets face it no club would want to be seen defending a player in this situation if they are so clearly guilty so I feel he should be given the benefit of the doubt until such time as any guilt is firmly established. Even if guilty as charged the business won't kick out an asset costing millions of pounds and potentially worth at least as much as was paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 1 hour ago, View from the Dolman said: Just found the charge listing on the FA site (see post above)... Guess the video on BCTV of the full match might show something if anyone has time to take a look... I didn't see the alleged incident as I had something in my eye . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingbat Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: But 52nd minute is between 51:00 and 51:59 on the clock. If he's been charged, the FA should be able to pinpoint the exact second the gob leaves his lips. The vagueness of the timing gives hope that maybe this isn't an open and shut case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Loon plage said: Even if guilty as charged the business won't kick out an asset costing millions of pounds and potentially worth at least as much as was paid. Nor will it let the image of the product suffer . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: Nor will it let the image of the product suffer . It doesn't mind the PR associated with its treatment of disabled fans which I suspect might affect the "brand" more than some ******* gobbing on another player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 1 hour ago, Snufflelufagus said: Good point if he did it his DNA will be on the others guys shirt................. … or little blue dress. (Monika/Bill) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 3 minutes ago, Loon plage said: It doesn't mind the PR associated with its treatment of disabled fans which I suspect might affect the "brand" more than some ******* gobbing on another player. Treatment of disabled fans doesn't make national news , footballers misbehaving does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 8 minutes ago, JonDolman said: Lack of evidence did not stop them banning Bailey wright. So wouldn't surprise me if they are guessing here too. In fairness they were right with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Army 75 Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 ******* great start to next season. Already had bad vibes . Hes shit anyway according to a few on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledAjax Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 20 minutes ago, Dingbat said: If he's been charged, the FA should be able to pinpoint the exact second the gob leaves his lips. The vagueness of the timing gives hope that maybe this isn't an open and shut case? Agreed, especially the use of the dreaded football cliché "in or around". Can't imagine any appeal will be successful, best we could hope for would be a reduction but even that is unlikely. Saiz got the same ban, although I think there was clear clear video evidence of him gobbing at someone IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 32 minutes ago, mozo said: Good news for Djuric, Taylor and whichever striker we sign this summer. They've got to see this as an incentive to have a good pre-season, especially Djuric who should see this as his chance to cement that target man role. Exactly, this isn’t just 6 matches we will have to worry about him, although it might be at least one cup round if not two so not all league matches. But quite a bit of pre-season planning etc. And for the player himself it would be hard to motivate and get fit if you aren’t part of it. Yes, I know if guilty he only has himself to blame. Also he will have tarnished his name to our own fans never mind the opposition. As I said, spitting incidents and accusations stay with players for a reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dingbat Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 6 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said: Agreed, especially the use of the dreaded football cliché "in or around". Can't imagine any appeal will be successful, best we could hope for would be a reduction but even that is unlikely. Saiz got the same ban, although I think there was clear clear video evidence of him gobbing at someone IIRC. Would a reduction be a possibility? He either did it or didn't I imagine, so either 0 or 6 game ban - can't see where the middle ground would come into it? he spat in the general direction maybe??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Natchfever Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 29 minutes ago, Major Isewater said: Treatment of disabled fans doesn't make national news , footballers misbehaving does. Understand what you say, but Famara isn't really big news is he, nor do I suspect his conduct will create a withdrawal of sponsorship deals, SC sales or a slump in hospitality bookings. To be honest, if a journo with some influence got hold of the disabled fans issue then I think it could be more damaging to the club and would be more likely to get mainstream national media attention than a spitty footballer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 1 hour ago, reddevil said: As unpleasant as this is I don’t understand the length of the ban. A violent tackle that can endanger a players career, like the Sheffield utd player on Korey Smith is considered half as bad as spitting on some one? Makes no sense to me I suspect it's because bad challenges, whether deliberate or not, are seen as an occupational hazard of the game. Spitting isn't, same as biting, racism etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 If true and I suspect as much as BCFC seem to be playing the victim once more, even the EFL/FA wouldn't just invent this without sufficient evidence, 6 matches is about right for such a disgusting offence. As far as missing him is concerned, as long as he's fit Djuric is a far more physical presence than Diedhiou imo, Diedhiou tends to go down far too tamely and is eased off of the ball tamely as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said: If true and I suspect as much as BCFC seem to be playing the victim once more, even the EFL/FA wouldn't just invent this without sufficient evidence, 6 matches is about right for such a disgusting offence. As far as missing him is concerned, as long as he's fit Djuric is a far more physical presence than Diedhiou imo, Diedhiou tends to go down far too tamely and is eased off of the ball tamely as well. That's the main problem, Sadly he never is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 SL didn't want LA here because he was was with some numpty who peed in a glass at Cheltenham races. I can't imagine he will be too impressed with FD if it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glynriley Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 He wouldn't have started ahead of Tammy anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ska Junkie Posted May 22, 2018 Report Share Posted May 22, 2018 54 minutes ago, JonDolman said: Lack of evidence did not stop them banning Bailey wright. So wouldn't surprise me if they are guessing here too. The FA don't appear to like us much do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.