|
|
Post by DJTom on Aug 27, 2008 19:41:42 GMT
No they don't  Sooty has proved that he didn't. And even if they do, you have to remember, they don't have enough brains to fill a fish bowl. As I said to halftimebeer "Even if United fans call ex. United fans that now support Histon 'glory hunters', they may be, but at least they have the brains to know to use the lifeboats to get off a sinking ship." My advice Sweep is ignore them. We'll prove them wrong time and time again like we did with Kings Lynn, Bedford and Cambridge City. We'll eventually come out on top. We allways do what happend with us and Kings Lynn, Bedford and Cambridge City. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2008 21:19:19 GMT
First of all I'd like to express how utterly unsurprised I am by the highly predictable u-turn of Craig Pope. Guys, whether you think he's innocent or not, you must surely know that this quitting story was smokescreen? It was to take attention off the fact he'd been found guilty, Histon needed a new angle on the story...it's called spin, everyone is at it, though it's slightly distasteful to employ it on such a sensitive issue.
I respect your right to deny the FA charge all you like, and support Craig if you wish...but you have almost certainly been misled over this retirement story. A very cold and cynical move by Histon FC.
Further to that, I'd like to contend these comments:
''both Histon fan's and Sooty (a Cambridge United fan) have come to the conclusion that he did NOT say anything racially abusive. That is a fact.''
Firstly Sooty is an independent person, not representative of anyone, and not in anyway a conduit for the opinions of United fans. Take a look at our forum, he is a source of ridicule and his word is by no means taken as truth by our fans.
There is absolutely no ''fact'' which says Pope didn't make a racist comment. Please do not cloud the argument with such innacuracies. It is common OPINION amongst your fans, but it is not fact. Ok?
That is all over and done with now though, Craig Pope is back (I'm sure the shrewd amongst you knew he would be) The damage is done, he'll be harrangued for years to come, mud sticks. The club has handled this terribly and many have lost respect. In many ways Histon will pay for this saga.
Back to football then.
|
|
|
|
Post by ftm on Aug 27, 2008 22:30:38 GMT
Guys, whether you think he's innocent or not, you must surely know that this quitting story was smokescreen? It was to take attention off the fact he'd been found guilty, Histon needed a new angle on the story...it's called spin, everyone is at it, though it's slightly distasteful to employ it on such a sensitive issue. I refute that utterly. It's so easy to scoff while safely standing at a fair distance from this affair. Having not had the guts to attend the recent showing of the video tape and listening to the facts of the case, you are basing your opinions on rumours that fester on your own club's message board. Until you can bring yourself to address the facts then you really should hold your piece to keep yourself any trace of respectability. The player in question was devasted by the FA's incomprehensible decision. I find it more than "slightly distasteful" that you can make such sweeping statements on a subject about which you obviously have little real facts. Ignorance must be bliss. What an easy world you must live in. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2008 23:02:50 GMT
I said at the time he would be back, I'm simply repeating the fact that many strongly believed the whole thing was staged. If you think such things do not happen, or that men would hesitate to do such a thing, then it is you who lives in blissful ignorance.
You think everything your club has done has been carried out with almost superhuman dignity, it's incredibly naive, but obviously easier for you to believe than it is to accept that something rotten has taken place. Your picture perfect little football club does have a cynical streak afterall...but they've glossed over it well, at least to the untrained, or should I say, unwilling eye.
|
|
|
|
Post by ftm on Aug 28, 2008 7:15:17 GMT
I said at the time he would be back Well a 50:50 choice is hardly rocket science. He would either return or he would not. All of the Histon fans hoped he would be back too. So yeah - well done for choosing heads and not tails. Where you are wrong is the with the motives. You can spout on all you like about your opinions. None of them are based on the full facts. Until you can bring yourself to fully examine the case in question then your opinions are worthless and to be honest stink of a chip on the shoulder. At least Sooty had the guts to come along and see/listen to the full story for himself. I respect him for that. |
|
|
|
Post by jasper on Aug 28, 2008 8:38:37 GMT
Don't waste your breath FTM. If he checked the full facts and reasons behind HFC's actions he would have to find another stick to beat the club with. Best ignored mate.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1993stutes on Aug 28, 2008 8:51:55 GMT
what gets up my nostrils is all you so called fans of utd didnt have the bottle to turn up to the meeting and express your views. if you had done then you would believe that craig is innocent, which i must say i doubted before the meeting. therefore shut it until you know the facts!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2008 9:37:17 GMT
Yes and it was 50/50 that Craig Pope was guilty, but you were only ever going to believe one outcome.
I didn't go to your fans forum for a variety of reasons, but the key one is this...if every football club held it's own inquests, no player would ever be found guilty. This is why the FA do it, because they are not biased...do you see?
The decision was left to the FA, the decision was made...Craig Pope was and is guilty, as charged by the FA, and upheld. That'll do.
|
|
|
|
Post by ftm on Aug 28, 2008 10:14:13 GMT
Yes and it was 50/50 that Craig Pope was guilty, but you were only ever going to believe one outcome. I didn't go to your fans forum for a variety of reasons, but the key one is this...if every football club held it's own inquests, no player would ever be found guilty. This is why the FA do it, because they are not biased...do you see? The decision was left to the FA, the decision was made...Craig Pope was and is guilty, as charged by the FA, and upheld. That'll do. As Jasper has suggested, this conversation is pointless. Ignorance must be bliss my black and amber friend. What an easy life you must lead. |
|
|
|
Post by histonboy on Aug 28, 2008 10:59:51 GMT
"Yes and it was 50/50 that Craig Pope was guilty, but you were only ever going to believe one outcome"
As were you.
|
|
|
|
Post by kinfan on Aug 28, 2008 12:35:43 GMT
So localfan your not biased then?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2008 15:41:47 GMT
Histonboy...I was going to beleive the outcome of the FA hearing, I've stuck that that principle all along. Many on here said 'wait until the hearing, all will be revealed'...now they've changed their minds. I'm not the one being inconsistent.
And Kinfan...what? Where did I say anything about my bias, or lack thereof? The only unbiased party concerned in this whole affair are the FA...they found Craig Pope guilty. What you or I think pales in light of that fact.
Say what you want about what you beleive, it's an actual categorical, demonstrable fact that Craig Pope is guilty.
|
|
|
|
Post by ftm on Aug 28, 2008 16:44:50 GMT
The only unbiased party concerned in this whole affair are the FA...they found Craig Pope guilty. What you or I think pales in light of that fact. Say what you want about what you beleive, it's an actual categorical, demonstrable fact that Craig Pope is guilty. Thank goodness the FA don't rule over our law courts! I have found a picture of our two resident United fans who still refuse to examine any of the evidence and facts. Sums them up.  |
|
|
|
Post by bobby on Aug 28, 2008 19:11:36 GMT
Surely you have common sense to realise that a player further away than 4 others can NOT hear something as well as the ones closer. How come then only he seemed to hear it? How can several people from the Habbin all say they heard one thing said, and yet not be able to write it down to mathc up with others accounts? This is pointless. If you won't listen to COMMON SENSE then you certainly won't listen to reason. Do I need to spell it out. Oh, wait just did.
L-I-S-T-E-N T-O C-O-M-M-O-N S-E-N-S-E
Oh, and Sweep, when you've been supporting Histon for as long as I have you will know that Kings Lynn, Bedford and Cambridge Vity thought that we were 'Just a village team' and easy to beat, pushovers. I notice that we are the only ones in the Blue Square Premier.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2008 22:34:05 GMT
With that all said, why did the FA find him guilty if all the evidence apparently suggests he isn't?
Before anyone asks "why did the FA uphold Farrell's ban when the video evidence suggests he shouldn't have got a red?", in this case the FA have a clear incentive to do that as doing so "backs their man" (i.e. the ref). Rob Wolleaston wasn't the FA's man, so no such comparable explanatory incentive exists..
Does anyone know if it's possible to get a detailed report from the FA? Minutes of the hearing?
|
|
