FIFA anti-doping executive D'Hooghe: "Rio Ferdinand must be punished"

[redevil2]

You can shut the feck up if you don't have anything else to add but name calling and demands for someone being banned, and just because different opinions disturb your mental stability (or lack of it?) so much. It is really getting tiresome.

IF THIS is not called abuse, i dont know what is?!!!! Is Foul language allowed by someone who claimed english is his second language so he can get away with it?? I seriously would like to look up the forum's rule!! Where shall i start????

And this kind of post from this person towards united fans is not uncommon!

 

[BusbyReds]

IF THIS is not called abuse, i dont know what is?!!!! Is Foul language allowed by someone who claimed english is his second language so he can get away with it?? I seriously would like to look up the forum's rule!! Where shall i start????

You can start by shutting the feck up.

 

[redevil2]

1) I didn't bring the precedents and court room into this discussion. I merely pointed that FA are under no obligation to follow them, with this I did not imply that the court rooms would be 100% obliged to follow them. That was your extremely silly interpretation, on which basis you launched idiotic personal attacks.

2) YOU said that if court rooms followed precedents then laws would NOT change, on which I commented that it wasn't a very sharp comment, because legislatures change/remove/invent laws, court rooms interpret them.

Why in the first place did you start this stupid discussion? It has very little to do with the topic in question.

we have no time to educate you ABU/WUM who has no knowledge of what he said and just pretend, and more pretend......

Do you have any idea you know very little? Oc course you dont, you have no knowledge of that of course!!!

dont make people laugh showing your knowledge (or more appropriately the lack of) of court and law, consult someone who knows a little more before you post. But dont consult your lawyer as with your intelligence level, you wont be able to understand him.

 

[redevil2]

Don't let your bias blind your judgement. ALL OF YOU WOULD BE ARGUING THE SAME POINT (that I am now) IF IT WAS STEVEN GERRARD OR PATRIK VIEIRA WHO HAD MISSED THE TEST and YOU KNOW IT. You hate honesty, it's obvious.

all of us will not be taking the time to discuss Steven Gerrard if this happened to him, cos we dont have an interest on a player we dont support and the incident has nothing to do with united!

On the contrary, you seem to be very interested in crucifying a player you dont support, and the player who plays for the team you hated so much!!!

What has united done to you or your family to deserve this kind of treatment??? I wonder!!

 

[beycont]

As a general rule, all judges are bound by precedent which in turn is determinant on their status in the court hierarchy. However, 'creativity' is allowed to seep in via exceptions that have been created and this license to creativity is dependant on the status of the court in the hierarchy.

 

[manutdeternity]

The FIFA anti-doping executive D'Hooghe has threatened FA that if they don't punish Rio Ferdinand FIFA will use its right to intervene in the matter.

Hopefully they are wise in FA and give Rio a ban, otherwise it can become very dirty.

What is there to prove against Rio? FA and FIFA can kiss my ass.

 

[RUnited]

Careful you don't break something falling off that high horse, mate.

To be fair BusbyReds,... (it pains me to say this, trust me)... some of our Caf members have been overly abusing him too. This is probably why he remains unbanned and untouched by the MODs, because we are simply hurling more abuse at him at every remark he makes.

 

[Wibble]

Here is a hint: laws are changed, removed, invented all the time... here is another hint: court rooms don't do it.

Much of British law is based upon common law which is established by past court judgements and not laws passed by parliament. Common law evolves as courts reinterpret common law, thus setting new precedent.

So Mr "I'm the sharpest tool in the shed", you are once again wrong.

Hint: “box, now” should read “shed, nor”

If you don’t understand that maybe you are a stubby short of a six pack.

And it’s funny how much abuse you throw round for one who is so precious when people abuse you.

 

[Litmanen]

Wibble you throw around too much personal abuse to my liking... you also lie on purpose, twist arguments and in the last two days you have replied to about/over(?) 80% of my posts with this intent.
It started the moment I disagreed with your view on Jaap Stam. poor sod I think you are obsessed.

 

[Wibble]

I was talking about football players... and not "crimes" in general, but the ones that concern football. I wouldn't call missing a drug test "a crime" btw. but it isn't exemplary behaviour, and it violates FA and FIFA doping regulations.
We don't want a HIGH PROFILE precedent that you can miss a drug test and get a way with 20k fine (which is pocket money to these players). It does NOT send the right message. I proclaim the higher moral ground in this discussion.

Don't let your bias blind your judgement. ALL OF YOU WOULD BE ARGUING THE SAME POINT (that I am now) IF IT WAS STEVEN GERRARD OR PATRIK VIEIRA WHO HAD MISSED THE TEST and YOU KNOW IT. You hate honesty, it's obvious.

Missing a drug test is not a crime. It is a contravention of a FA regulation. A huge difference.

And if a Scouser or a Gooner had forgotten to take a drug test I'd want them banned for life BECAUSE I'm biased against them. Just as you are biased against United.

"I proclaim the moral high ground in this argument" You pompous tit

 

[Wibble]

Wibble you throw around too much personal abuse to my liking... you also lie on purpose, twist arguments and in the last two days you have replied to about/over(?) 80% of my posts with this intent.
It started the moment I disagreed with your view on Jaap Stam. poor sod I think you are obsessed.

Abuse? Where?

If you notice I haven't sworn at you at all (Unless you call the word tit swearing) which has resulted in you being totally unable to answer my posts or run whining to the mods.

I did call you a pompous tit in my last post but that was surely a simple statement of fact. And I did correct one of your sentences for you as a reciprocal favour for you pointing out a typo in the word George. And of course there is also the village comment but I doubt you will get that one. All in all I think I have been very restrained. Perhaps you should try to wind me up to give me an excuse to be nasty to you.


Obsessed? Just bored this week and you are good to laugh at.

 

[Litmanen]

man.. you are cheaply entertained

must be a joyful life

 

[Wibble]

man.. you are cheaply entertained

must be a joyful life

Yep. About 6 pounds a month for my internet connection.

And my life is very joyful even though I am bored shitless this week. Don't worry though I'm busy from tommorow onwards. Thanks for caring.

 

[redevil2]

To be fair BusbyReds,... (it pains me to say this, trust me)... some of our Caf members have been overly abusing him too. This is probably why he remains unbanned and untouched by the MODs, because we are simply hurling more abuse at him at every remark he makes.

it's really not fair there, RUnited!! I honestly believe that he brought it upon himself when people respond to his posts, and again to be fair,most of the responses are pinpointing his contractiction and flaw accusation of united fans on here!

REgarding abuse, i believe if you read them closely, the abuses he threw at anyone disagreeing with his negativity are much more than the abuse he recieved. His constant name calling and accusing others as liars are becoming very tiresome to say the least.

The mods would be right in thier decision not to ban him if Lit. said catergorically he is not an united supporter and he is baised against United (that would make all his posts appear very normal). But he hasnt initially, and in fact he tried to mislead the mods.

But things speak for themselves now since it's clear to all about his stance he can say whatever he likes but we can also rightly rebute him where appropriate. But for the benefit of new comes or those who visit only inflequently, perhaps the mods can place a special description under his handle to indicate his TRUE allegiance, so as to save the trouble of he being misunderstood!

 

[Litmanen]

The following is in full what Michel D'Hooghe (FIFA anti-doping executive) said word for word: (please notice how he underlines that FIFA are under NO obligation to follow precedents and are taking this very seriously)

This is a serious case. Ferdinand certainly has to be punished. FIFA is waiting to assess whether a serious sanction is forthcoming - one which fits the infringement. We will let the English do their work first. If everything is correct, we won't have to do anything.
Each case must be judged individually. FIFA uses their rules as a guideline but they are not binding. We are applying individual case management in these circumstances. The sanction could be less than two years or it could be more.

Call him a draconian, but does that sound like D'Hooghe will be happy with a fine and a 1-2 match ban? What you people are suggesting FA should do in this case might land Rio in even more trouble than just a 2 month ban.

Understood?

 

[fjred]

Such blind arrogance... they would sue FA for interpreting their own rules?? United would stand absolutely no chance.

They can interpret what they like but their actions and decisions are still subject to Common Law. I can interpret what I like and my actions and interpretations are, just as much, subject to Common Law. Any action I take must be in line with it and, if not, I can be taken to Court. Precedents, in the UK (which is where the FA is) are also known as 'Case Law' and as such must be taken into account. So, I'll repeat that if the FA take any action which is in contravention of their own 'case law' (previous actions in similar circumstances) and/or can be regarded as unreasonable, they can be taken to court. In these circumstances I would see MUFC doing so - with a good case - and I doubt the FA would risk it. I don't know about Finland, but here if someone says an agreement or it's implementation is unfair or unreasonable they can ask a Court to determine it. They can also claim that an action cannot be taken under that agreement. That's the score whether you like it or not!

Get it now?

 

[Wibble]

OMG!
Litmanen had just called you names Wib!
I think you should put him on your ignore list...

Maybe I should. I'm not sure I could take another savaging like that one

 

[Wibble]

You, on purpose, edited OUT BBC, which is my main source for football news.

a dishonest person like yourself has a great future in the tabloid media... you could be a star reporter for the S*n, today's top news "Robbie Williams buys a new car" provided by Mr. Wibble the Gullibble

I did indeed edit your post because I did not want to imply that the BBC was shit source of info, unlike the other 2. Now a dishonest person would have quoted you as saying "I use SkySports and Soccernet as the main sources of my football news". However, I did no such thing. I quoted you as saying "I use ....... SkySports and Soccernet as the main sources of my football news". The "...." quite clearly indicate that I have edited your post and is a widely accepted way of presenting part of what someone says to either clarify their point or, as in this case, remove an irrelevant part of the sentence. Since 2 of your 3 main sources for football info are dire I see no inaccuracy in what I quoted.

And you really do like calling others liars or dishonest don't you.

BTW what is Robbie driving these days?

 

[BusbyReds]

You, on purpose, edited OUT BBC, which is my main source for football news.

a dishonest person like yourself has a great future in the tabloid media... you could be a star reporter for the S*n, today's top news "Robbie Williams buys a new car" provided by Mr. Wibble the Gullibble

It just occured to me that I've never seen anyone besides a scouser censor the title of the Sun...

 

[Cal?]

Link

United will take Dein's Gang to court if they ban Rio.

 

[Litmanen]

That's a joke Cal..

RIO: WE WILL SUE

United, PFA and player in threat to FA


MANCHESTER UNITED are ready to haul the FA through the civil courts in a bitter legal dispute if Rio Ferdinand is hit with a lengthy ban for not taking a drugs test.

The Old Trafford board are prepared to take the unprecedented action against football's governing body to show just how strongly they object to the way Ferdinand (left) has been treated.

While United have resisted taking legal action over the leaking of Ferdinand's name and subsequent omission from the England squad to face Turkey, they feel a ban would be a step too far. And Professional Footballers' Association chief Gordon Taylor has already consulted lawyers as the PFA prepare to launch a legal battle which would see the union suing the FA for restraint of trade.

Ferdinand could be charged in the next 24 hours with failing to take the random test at United's Carrington training ground on September 23. United accept Ferdinand must be punished for missing the test, an act boss Sir Alex Ferguson has described as "an honest mistake", and the club are understood not to oppose a fine.

But the Premiership champions feel a lengthy ban would be too harsh a penalty.

A source close to Ferdinand said: "United will take action through the civil courts if Rio is banned. The club know he has broken the rules, albeit not on purpose, and so a fine would be acceptable. But to lose him for any length of time would be unacceptable to them and they would be prepared to fight all the way."

PFA chief Taylor added: "We have taken the best legal advice and we will back the player 100 per cent. Banning a player who is innocent would be morally wrong."

I think they are playing a bully in attempt to affect the FA decision.. you don't think seriously they would sue FA, do you? FA got FIFA's backing, the rules are on FA's side.. there is not much basis for a case really.

btw. Mirror is a rag, I mean look at their source: "a source close to Ferdinand" ... possibly pure invention.

 

[Gutsy]

... possibly pure invention.

Says the king of the chip wrapper news himself...

 

[fjred]

That's a joke Cal..




I think they are playing a bully in attempt to affect the FA decision.. you don't think seriously they would sue FA, do you? FA got FIFA's backing, the rules are on FA's side.. there is not much basis for a case really.

You're a complete tosspot aren't you! Still, I can understand how bitter you must be having just lost the captaincy of Liverpool to Gerrard!

 

[Hawkeye]

If Man United sue the FA and win it may be too much for fa to take moneywise

 

[Cal?]

That's a joke Cal..

I think they are playing a bully in attempt to affect the FA decision.. you don't think seriously they would sue FA, do you? FA got FIFA's backing, the rules are on FA's side.. there is not much basis for a case really.

btw. Mirror is a rag, I mean look at their source: "a source close to Ferdinand" ... possibly pure invention.

You seem to forget that rules made up by sports organisations are still subject to the same Law that applies in the rest of the country.

 

[redevil2]

You seem to forget that rules made up by sports organisations are still subject to the same Law that applies in the rest of the country.

He just wrote anything that can wind United fans up and anything bad happened to united or his manager or players will make his day!!! I gather his birthday wish is for Fergie to get some ban from the present charge.... dont be too surprised to see his nagative response again when the fergie hearing is over!!!

 

[Gutsy]

He just wrote anything that can wind United fans up and anything bad happened to united or his manager or players will make his day!!! I gather his birthday wish is for Fergie to get some ban from the present charge.... dont be too surprised to see his nagative response again when the fergie hearing is over!!!

Actually i am a little surprised he hasnt been asking/demanding/"objectively" stating that Fergie should get a 6 month sideline ban, infact that he shouldnt even be allowed to enter the ground and should listen to the match on the radio in his car outside instead... Purely for the good of football in general you understand....

 

[mu77]

ban rio - shoot fergie

 

[redevil2]

ban rio - shoot fergie

 

[Buchan]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Who’d have thought the phone records debate would rear its ugly head again almost twenty years later?

Doesn’t look good for Ferdinand, this.

 

[Niall]

Don’t bump 17 year old threads @Buchan, make a new one!