Jump to content

Generic small time football blather thread FOREVER


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Today just a year ago I was making the dream of my life come true and I was able to meet you   (Yes... I was the first to enter the stadium)  

Posted Images

Just now, PaddockLad said:


You’ve never spoken to anybody from the City of Liverpool in your life have you Dave? :lol:

 

I try to avoid it, but yes, I have. 

 

They're... very proud of themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Fish said:

I try to avoid it, but yes, I have. 

 

They're... very proud of themselves.


Yes, great sense of humour apparently :lol: 

 

Its how old is pronounced by scousers, which is where the confusion came from yesterday. It is as you’ve pointed out an official word in the Scots language 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Alex said:

What Fish is saying is that when Geordies say ‘yes’, it should be spelt ‘eye’ 

 

We could save ourselves a lot of bother if we just assume whatever I've written is both funny and accurate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

We could save ourselves a lot of bother if we just assume whatever I've written is both funny and accurate.

That’s sort of how I save time re: your posts 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

manslaughter? 

unfucking believable.

still, you'd expect a judge to hand out at least a similar sentence to that of the traveller kids in the harper case?

13-16 years with an extended early release date, I hope the biggest pussy to ever attend a routine domestic incident, or so he would've had you believe, enjoys every second of his time in long lartin. I'm sure they're absolutely dying to greet him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, thebrokendoll said:

manslaughter? 

unfucking believable.

still, you'd expect a judge to hand out at least a similar sentence to that of the traveller kids in the harper case?

13-16 years with an extended early release date, I hope the biggest pussy to ever attend a routine domestic incident, or so he would've had you believe, enjoys every second of his time in long lartin. I'm sure they're absolutely dying to greet him.

You've mentioned the traveller case a couple of times now? Have I missed something? The scruffy cunts dragged a young lad to his death because they were out on the rob. I hope they get locked away for as long as possible 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it could be argued that booting him twice in the head when he was on the ground was a bit malicious but I agree with you, he was never going down for murder. Manslaughter is a decent result IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

You've mentioned the traveller case a couple of times now? Have I missed something? The scruffy cunts dragged a young lad to his death because they were out on the rob. I hope they get locked away for as long as possible 

is the traveller case a banned subject then?

I think the traveller kids convictions were correct and their sentences appropriate. I accept they were thieves and as result of their thieving a young bloke tragically died.

have you got an issue with any of that?

the only issue I have with regard to the traveller kids is the the inbalanced way their trial was reported and because of that the ludicrous notion that they should've been jailed for life for what amounted to a freak accident, you'd be lucky to replicate if you tried a thousand times.

you reckon there was no malice in monk's actions? I'd argue that tasering somebody for 6 times longer than recommend and then booting them repeatedly in the head before standing on it, was a pretty nasty thing to do.

murder doesn't need to be premeditated  it is also conduct so reckless that it is punishable as murder.

monk's intent was far more murderous than that of 3 profoundly stupid kids who were trying to flee a theft.

disregarding your obvious bias, how long do you reckon he deserves then? or do you think a fines appropriate?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thebrokendoll said:

is the traveller case a banned subject then?

I think the traveller kids convictions were correct and their sentences appropriate. I accept they were thieves and as result of their thieving a young bloke tragically died.

have you got an issue with any of that?

the only issue I have with regard to the traveller kids is the the inbalanced way their trial was reported and because of that the ludicrous notion that they should've been jailed for life for what amounted to a freak accident, you'd be lucky to replicate if you tried a thousand times.

you reckon there was no malice in monk's actions? I'd argue that tasering somebody for 6 times longer than recommend and then booting them repeatedly in the head before standing on it, was a pretty nasty thing to do.

murder doesn't need to be premeditated  it is also conduct so reckless that it is punishable as murder.

monk's intent was far more murderous than that of 3 profoundly stupid kids who were trying to flee a theft.

disregarding your obvious bias, how long do you reckon he deserves then? or do you think a fines appropriate?

 

 

They knew he was attached to the car. They swerved all over the road to try and dislodge him. He was practically skinned alive by the tarmac. 

I know where my sympathy lies, and it's not with the lads involved in a "freak accident" 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...