Thread: Premiership Talk
View Single Post
Old 03-19-2004, 04:35 PM   #20
Rob
Part time poster
 
Rob's Avatar
 
Posts: 22,963
Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Rob has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by packt up
I think Man U should take responsibility for the length of the ban. The difference between the Negouai case and the Rio case is that Man U DIDN'T ACCEPT THEY WERE WRONG.

Hence when they decided the fight the FA and try to get Rio cleared the consequences was that when he was (obviously) going to be harsher. Many people have said that if Man U had pleaded guilty then the ban would have been 3 months max.

This is the problem with people saying its the FA's fault - its actually Man U. How the **** they can plead not guilty to failing the test - WHEN THE GUY DIDN't ****ing turn up is insane. If the guy doesn't turn up its a fail.

If Man U had accepted they had done something wrong in the first place and not fought an unwinnable battle they wouldn't be in this position.

Man United weren't wrong. How can they be when it's a player at fault and NOT the club?

Cactus Sid, keep saying I'm in denial or whatever dude. Glad you can read minds though. I hope to be able to do that someday too.
Rob is offline