Jump to content
IGNORED

Eight Month Ban For


Never to the dark side

Recommended Posts

From what i've read and different views expressed on Sky News etc., I see amateurish behaviour on both sides (i.e. testers and Rio/Man you staff).

Under the circumstance, I think 8 months is a bit harsh. Another case of too many people expressing an opinion (e.g. olympic committee) and the authorities having to be seen to act.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you don't even get 8 months for theft, so giving the poor bloke an 8 month ban is scandulas, wow, he forgot to take a test, but when he did take it, it was negative, if he was taking something, it would still be in his system the day after, so the F.A should stop being a bunch of idiots, and sort things out that actually do matter. Brings a whole new meaning to the F.A, FU##^NG AMATURES

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. What is everyones love affairs with Man Ure, ARSEnal, Chelski? They are the reason we are struggling to survive in the football league, they are the reason so many clubs are heading to the wall.. get real, get down AG.

actually when I was little (and didn't know better) I was a Liverpool fan, it probably helped the only team ever on TV in America was Liverpool almost every saturday. So I'll pass on the Manurearseski love affair :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally i think it is an absolute disgrace. He should have been given a token ban and nothing more. yes he missed a test, which no time was gien for, nobody was there to tell him to go, and simply he forgot. He then not 30 minuites later tried to rectify his mistake, yet the testers said it was too late even thought hey were still at the ground. Name me one drug that you can flush from your system in 30 hours let alone 30 minuites.

And also name me one drug that can make you a better footballer ? performance inhancing drugs are designed for runners, people who require little skill and all power for a very short time. I do not know the exact details but any drug would olny actually effect your performance for a maximum of 10 minuites, and they would also hinder your performance far more throughout the 90 minuites than it would help for those 10 as most if not all performance inhancing drugs, affect judgement etc, not good for a footballer really.

i hope Man you absolutely destroy the Fa in the courts, which i can't see how any court would allow the Fa to uphold suh a ludicrus verdict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FINALLY A MANCHESTER UNITED PLAYER GETS WHAT HE DESURVES. ENGLAND WON'T MISS RIO, COME ON ADMIT HE AIN'T THAT GOOD AND CAN BE REPLACED WITH PLAYERS LIKE UPSON, TERRY, WOODGATE (OR EVEN MATTY HILL ) WELL I CAN DREAM CAN'T I.

calm down mate.

anyway for my opinion, I think it is very harsh, and if it had been dealt with immediately it would have been much less, but media as it is and interest from FIFA has turned it into an issue where, according to most stories and allibies, it shouldnt have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest New Zealand Pete

Cant really see it affecting us, although he may miss the first game of next season if we go up and they go down and we happen to be playing them first.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At last the FA are starting to get tough with these over paid spoilt brats, for too long these mummys boys have been getting away with their obnoxious care free attitude with no regard for the game rules, we now have a bench mark for anyone else who thinks missing a drugs test is not important, the man city reserve player wasn't dealt with Mr Palios so that's why the punishment is different, it was Crozier who was involved with that one.

Rio and his army of expensively assembled lawyers were obviously trying to put the frighteners on the FA and bully and harrass their way out of a lengthy ban, good on Mr Palios and co. for standing firm on this one, hopefully it will send out a clear message that no matter how big you think you are the rules of the game are not to be broken, my gut feeling though says they will get this ban down to 3 months after appeal with a bigger fine instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Utter balls up by the FA!! Rio should have got 2 years, end of story!!! He missed the test. Should be no excuses i.e. forgot to attend!!! As for England missing him, well there still is Sol, John Terry there is only one person you can blame for that!!! How English footballers have got away with their behaviour for so long is a mystery. Hopefully a wake-up call to all pro's in the game, including the likes of Dwayne Plummer, Carl Hutchings and many, many more.......ALLEGEDLY!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Bootylicious

Far too excessive considering a Man City player missed a drugs test and only got a fine.

Talk about double standards.

Bloody FA.

Man Utd have EVERY right to appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This in my eyes is clear cut, the facts of it are he missed the test which had been arranged for him and he knew the guidelines of taking this test, he missed the arranged appointment, therefore even if he did do another test a minute later an hour later or even a week later and passed the drugs test it doesn't matter, he missed the one that he was asked to do, no amount of bullmarsh from Gordon Taylor, the PFA, Man Utd or an army of lawyers can change that fact, this is what's wrong with the british legal system, instead of just dealing with the facts they have in front of them, lawyers are always looking for loop holes to get away from the real story.

Sorry, but i still believe in old fashioned truth and honesty and calling a spade a spade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This in my eyes is clear cut, the facts of it are he missed the test...

...Sorry, but i still believe in old fashioned truth and honesty and calling a spade a spade.

Easy to say in theory.

The fact is any ANY dispute, there are ALWAYS mitigating circumstances and, quite rightly, should be heard when deciding on the penalties involved.

Using your reasoning, somebody who has an accident which causes the death of another person is no different to someone who deliberately runs down a person and kills them.

In your black and white view, both are guilty of killing and should receive the same penalty.

How anyone can say Ferdinand got what he deserved without knowing the full story?

One fact I'm aware of is that Ferdinand offered to take the test an hour later and was refused. To me, that indicates an innocent mistake - nobody can rid their bodies of illegal substances in an hour. He has been banned for 8 months and fined £50,000, not for taking drugs, but for missing a test - ridiculous.

For that fact alone, I am of the opinion that the penalty was severe. He is only guilty of not taking the test at the time.

The absolute dross that has been spouted on this thread about 'overpaid prima donnas getting their come-uppance' is typical of the blighted view that many fans have of top class football in this country. It is pure jealousy - nothing more, nothing less. I'm willing to bet that anyone who made those comments would jump at the chance of being in their position.

:D;) :Rage:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...