UEFA vs WADA or LFC vs WADA/UEFA

[Paul Marin]

Look,when fighting a case,it is prudent to do so with the expertise of a lawyer.Sakho acceptance of the charge does not indicate he had access of the legal resources available to his club.

Sakho innocence is assumed until the case has been determined.

Suarez was being defended by Pool on a matter in which it would be harder to determine innocence than what Sakho is being accused of.

There was that one time the powers that be changed its rules,it was to facilitate Pool,not Chelsea.
Ev8d3nce of Pool's undue influence,maybe Terry's problem is he wasn't a player from Pool.

Regarding Sakho - you are making gross assumptions that are quite frankly ridiculous. For example, IF Sakho took the banned substance, tested positive, and knows he did, why waste resources (no matter how deep your pockets) on defending the indefensible? You sound like Sir X trying to justify his run to City. Sakho has sense, why waste time when facts will ultimately be your undoing. The integrity of the man and the club should be applauded if my assertions are correct.

Regarding Terry - You are demonstrating your ignorance on the facts and the circumstances surrounding the differences between the two cases. Suarez was NOT charged with RACISM, Terry was. There is a HUGE difference between them as one is a CRIME that is out of the FA's hands, and the other is a breach of FA policy. Get familiar with the facts before you start to draw parallels between matters that are as dissimilar in context and fact as a rat's ass to Einstein's brain.

[Rockman]

Today,the hefty sentence is under consideration of being rescinded, that determines guilt or innocence,yet for you it is a forgone conclusion he is guilty.

It is a quesion of where else is there evidence of Liverpool's undue influence..
Maybe the mischaracterization of an offence.

[Sir X]

Bwooy mi a tell yuh , when Dunce tek up things pan im ead , Rock talk to me, what is the question , be as detailed and to the point as posssible.I just did the night shift and will be in bed in an hour, i will answer in my usual clarity and to the pointedness.

[Rockman]

Get some sleep,we have ebough time to discuss things afterwards.

[Peter R]

Now, that is what they are questioning, i.e. whether the substance should in fact be on the banned list, and therefore, in retrospect, taking it is not, or would not be a violation.

Then, he took something on the banned list and therefore that was the issue, plain and straight. There was no equivocation about that. He/LFC pleaded guilty to what was (then) clearly a violation.

You are not comparing mango to mango!

[Rockman]

Point taken and distinction worth noting.
But the issue now being raised could or should have been initiated by Pool's legal defense team from the get go?

[Peter R]

Sakho acceptance of the charge does not indicate he had access of the legal resources available to his club.
How do you know Sakho didn't have legal advice??? if that is what you're saying. Your sentence is somewhat ambiguous.

Sakho innocence is assumed until the case has been determined.
I don't think anyone disagrees with this. It is standard even before the FA, I could be wrong.

Suarez was being defended by Pool on a matter in which it would be harder to determine innocence than what Sakho is being accused of.
1)Well before a kangaroo court what you say may be true... in a real court, the accuser has to prove guilt, and
2) Did you consider the fact that the Sakho/LFC team understand that this is an easy charge to get off (I'm simply suggesting a possibility) and therefore it is against their interest to drag things out, but just cut to the chase?

maybe Terry's problem is he wasn't a player from Pool.
The irony is that Terry was much better off being tried in a court of law than Suarez ever was, being "tried" before a kangaroo court!

[Paul Marin]

Look,when fighting a case,it is prudent to do so with the expertise of a lawyer.Sakho acceptance of the charge does not indicate he had access of the legal resources available to his club.

Sakho innocence is assumed until the case has been determined.

Suarez was being defended by Pool on a matter in which it would be harder to determine innocence than what Sakho is being accused of.

There was that one time the powers that be(UEFA) changed its rules,it was to facilitate Pool,not Chelsea.
Evidence of Pool's undue influence,maybe Terry's problem is he wasn't a player from Pool.

You didn't answer the question. The reason Terry was tried in a court of law was because he was accused by the Metro Police of RACISM; there was no complaint filed against Suarez by the FA who accused him of racial abuse under their statutes. Had they found him guilty of RACISM under their statutes, the matter would have gone to court. The fine line that the FA walked was one of a technicality, b/c they KNEW that Suarez's case would have been thrown out had it gone to court. I rest my case. Know the facts before you start making assumptions. Bottom line - in both instances, my club acted accordingly with the exception of the t-shirts. That was not a good idea.

[Paul Marin]

Bwooy mi a tell yuh , when Dunce tek up things pan im ead , Rock talk to me, what is the question , be as detailed and to the point as posssible.I just did the night shift and will be in bed in an hour, i will answer in my usual clarity and to the pointedness.

You calling people dunce and you don't even know the question. When eedyat deh bout...lawd...you fool no rhass. Move you nas'y self an' gwey...an 'tap shub u nas'y self eena LFC bizniz...Rafa a wait pan yu.

[Sir X]

You ansa di man a 100 times and cloud di bloody question,fi show how yuh fool ,mi nuh muss ask di bredda wha Im a ask?

Why yuh think Teacha jump in fi try bail yuh out,same almshouse yuh keep up wid mi dem ! dem man yah serious.

[Paul Marin]

You ansa di man a 100 times and cloud di bloody question,fi show how yuh fool ,mi nuh muss ask di bredda wha Im a ask?

Why yuh think Teacha jump in fi try bail yuh out,same almshouse yuh keep up wid mi dem ! dem man yah serious.

Skippy, you dyam peashead...the only cloud deh bout is the big black one above yu dat ah go rain fya an brimstone pon you turncoat head top!! Dyam eedyat. Cyan read, cyan write, cyan comprehend...fool...run galang...you too fool.

[Sir X]

Coming from you,its a compliment

[Paul Marin]

Coming from you,its a compliment

LOL!!! Remember - "ignorance deserves to be heard" - but dang...you had to corner the market on it? LOL!!!