Turn on thread page Beta

Jake Livermore watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Shed End)
    The FA lost their dignity on this kind of thing when they banned John Terry for the same thing he'd been cleared of in court.
    Don't be silly. A court has to be 'more' sure of an event happening... "beyond reasonable doubt" etc. It was perfectly fine.

    :lol: at Grealish and Sterling getting into trouble with the FA for something legal, and then feeling the FA did the right thing by not banning someone else taking cocaine.

    I think it's down to the club to punish the player, not the FA. The law is a separate issue. If I did it, the police could charge me and separately I could be sacked from work. I think he needs support and counselling. Hull banned him, and I think that's enough.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by little_wizard123)
    Don't be silly. A court has to be 'more' sure of an event happening... "beyond reasonable doubt" etc. It was perfectly fine.

    :lol: at Grealish and Sterling getting into trouble with the FA for something legal, and then feeling the FA did the right thing by not banning someone else taking cocaine.

    I think it's down to the club to punish the player, not the FA. The law is a separate issue. If I did it, the police could charge me and separately I could be sacked from work. I think he needs support and counselling. Hull banned him, and I think that's enough.
    If a court of law found him not guilty of racially abusing someone else, regardless of it was another footballer, then what grounds do the FA have the find him guilty of the same thing?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by llys)
    Ah OK. I understand the point you make about jurisdiction. Then I think it actually has nothing to do with the image of the game - otherwise other crimes would be relevant because they also affect the image of the game, even if they are also punished by the justice system (sentencing is not a replacement for a ban because FA bans could well be longer than (often only partly served) sentences - they certainly seem to be longer in the case of drug use).

    If it is not about the image of the game, then I agree that these other crimes are not relevant because they don't affect competition which is what the FA is probably concerned about. Instead the question then is whether illegal recreational drugs should be in the FA's jurisdiction if they are not performance-enhancing. I would say no, because if they are not performance-enhancing they don't affect competition. I also don't know if cocaine is classed as performance-enhancing - I thought not, but apparently there is some controversy about this. (Perhaps this is why the FA punish it, to be on the safe side.)
    Yeah was my bad, image was the wrong word/argument, realised I was essentially saying the FA was some sort of draconian body, flexing their muscle through bans, in which case you where fully justified in your argument.

    "Instead the question then is whether illegal recreational drugs should be in the FA's jurisdiction if they are not performance-enhancing."
    This pretty much nails it
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Shed End)
    If a court of law found him not guilty of racially abusing someone else, regardless of it was another footballer, then what grounds do the FA have the find him guilty of the same thing?
    That's just silly. I explained (badly) above why.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    We haven't been in his position. It's clear that he was in a bad way, and he doesn't need condemning right now. The vast majority of relationships implode after losing a child - so we should give him counselling, guidance and education, not persecution.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: September 10, 2015
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.