Escargot

I don't think we're of a mind to "let this lie" so LFC could be the end of that archaic institution, the sadly regretted FA. Good riddance if so.

It is b******s.

Except that in the preamble they say this : This means, as the Regulation states, that the more serious the allegation, taking into account the nature of the Misconduct alleged and the context of the case, the greater the burden of evidence required to prove the matter. This is sometimes described in this way: the more serious the allegation, the less likely it is to have happened, and therefore the greater the burden of evidence required to prove that it did. and then proceed to ignore it over 50 odd pages of guff.

i think that is spot on, unfortunately.

I tired at article 214 but this is my take on some of the nonsense This means, as the Regulation states, that the more serious the allegation, taking into account the nature of the Misconduct alleged and the context of the case, the greater the burden of evidence required to prove the matter. This is sometimes described in this way: the more serious the allegation, the less likely it is to have happened, and therefore the greater the burden of evidence required to prove that it did. Shame they start with that and then proceed to show the opposite. Mr Evra made a complaint to the referee during and immediately after the game about what Mr Suarez is alleged to have said to him while they were waiting for the corner to be taken That doesn't tally with Marriner's report. do we consider the words or behaviour to be abusive or insulting? We have to form our own view. We are, in effect, the jury for that purpose. There's the nub, some silly old sod decides that a word is insulting (T-shirts don't exist cos some old duffer of a judge once asked "what's a T-shirt") and that judgement is applicable for everyone regardless of race or culture. "It is for the tribunal which decides the case to consider, not as law but as fact, whether in the whole circumstances the words of the statute do or do not as a matter of ordinary usage of the English language cover or apply to the facts which have been proved." English language. It seemed to us to be a deliberate foul, and the referee awarded a free kick. That's utterly irrelevant to the case. Mr Evra explained that he had previously had a bad problem in that knee. And more so. It was Mr Evra's job to mark Mr Suarez at corners even though he was not marking him generally throughout the game. Is that a judgement? The fact that Mr Marriner did not hear what Mr Evra said is not inconsistent with Mr Evra's evidence that, as he walked towards the referee, he said "ref, ref, he just called me a f***ing black". Excuse me? Moreover, it would make no sense in the circumstances for Mr Evra to accuse the referee of only booking him because he was black. Apart for the "red mist". Once he had finished his report, Mr Marriner threw away Mr Dowd's notes. That's dodgy. In French, he said, it is common to say something like "more than 10 times" but for you not to mean that it was actually over 10 times. It was just a figure of speech. That's total b******s. There's no such "figure of speech". It is important to grasp that the word "negro" is ambiguous in all countries and regions of Latin America. So there is reasonable doubt. They were right to do so, no doubt recognising that whilst it is legitimate and helpful for the experts to give their opinion on whether or not the word might be used to offend in Uruguay and Latin America, it is the Commission's task to decide whether the use of the word in England is abusive or insulting. The use of the word in a particular way might be seen as inoffensive by many in Uruguay. The same use of the same word in England might nevertheless be abusive or insulting. That is just such utter nonsense. This case is not simply about one person's word against another. From everything that has been presented, I think that is exactly what the case is.

Dalglish 7 Case 8 Heighway 9 McDermott 10 Morelike vs FC Bruges 1978

It's all Rafa's fault anyway - according to some who go to matches; and they're the only ones allowed an opinion.

14 for me is Big Jan but that was under Souness so probably a bit painful for some..................... 1 Bruce 2 Lawler 3 Kennedy, A 4 Thomo 5 Kennedy, R 6 Hansen 7 Kenny 8 Case 9 Rush 10 Barnes 11 Cally just passing by................... 2, 4, 10 could also be Tommy Smith from various points of view

Just to throw in my humble two-penneth on the design fees I'd estimate the overall fees (ie the full sum to be paid) demanded for the design of the stadium at 10% of the building cost. If the estimated construction cost is 450M£ that would make 45M£ for the whole design up to and including construction. This would be split about 7% architect, 1% structural engineer, 1% mechanical and 1% QS and other fees (these may not be exact as I've been away from the UK for years...but the general order of magnitude should be correct). For the scheme design (as I assume the design hasn't gone beyond that stage) the fee would be about 10-12% so around 5M£ tops. Depends whether there was one (or more) redesign(s) but in any case a long way short of 22M£. A breakdown would indeed be interesting.

It'd be nice if they added a couple of replays and some discussion of the marking system............

Full body kevlar needed for Rafa quick 'cos the snipers will be out in force after that. Head shots forbidden. As Danny Blanchflower once said, get your retaliation in first, so to all those who are going to offload all their frustrations in the next 24 hours. Tough f***ing s*** if your lives revolve around a game of football. If Rafa goes we'll only live to regret it, unless Colin becomes available....................

I like your style

Positives to be drawn from all this :- Aqualani plays 120 minutes so he is approching match fitness err well I don't live in the Uk so I'm not subjected to all the b****x if we lose negatives :- prolly Ant and his dad will be back on wailing away and we're one step nearer getting shot of Rafa our days are numbered........................

Laughable refereing(?). Stonewall pen on Degen not given and then he blows for that. Jaysus the refs are effing atrocious.

Just thought I'd slip in a quiet YES! before this thread goes stratospheric. (thread so long I forgot the sense? of the original question)

we really plumbed new depths tonight. that really really hurt it was so insipid.

They're starting to look dangerous. We'll get Aquilani ready for the preseason friendlies at this rate.

where's the badboomtish icon when you need it?

I'm beginning to think Aquilani was bought to sell shirts.......

In the shining that'd be "Kerb Murder"

streamy thingy

he may have a twin..........

don't disagree, and I'm not bleating. I agree Almunia was stupid but it was a dive.

twas a dive, far more subtle than the Eduardo one but a dive nonetheless.

fecker was on his way down before Almunia touched him......funny how it always works out for the scum.