sydney
tinky ****in winky
Bong should have decked him at the time - it would have saved 88 pages
probably would of missed...
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] "You're black and you stink" Rodriquez comment to Bong? - FA say not proven
- Thread starter El Presidente
- Start date
probably would of missed...
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,296
Courts don't like to get involved in sporting matters. You can thank Steve Foster and the 1983 Cup Final for that.
severnside gull
Well-known member
There is always the Court for Arbitration in Sport.
The Andy Naylor Fan Club
Well-known member
According to Sky Sports, Rodriguez expected to find out the verdict today.
BensGrandad
New member
Are their findings mandatory and enforceable or just advice ie could the FA if they so chose totally ignore their findings if they didnt agree with them.
I think that we (Brighton and Hove Albion) provided the case law for this when we tried to go to court to overturn Steve Foster's FA Cup ban. Basically the court ruled that by entering the competition, we agreed to abide by the rules set by the FA.
Article from 11 years ago, when Sheffield United tried to take the FA to court
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Disagreeing with a ban over a red card is one thing, as thats just a grumble to do with the laws of the game within the sport which, as you rightly point out, all clubs agree ultimately to abide by.
Being accused of using racist language towards someone though, thats a criminal offence - its actually classified as a "hate crime" is it not ? I'd have thought that type of offence goes above and beyond the remit of the FA and their rules, should those involved want to take it further with a civil action.
BensGrandad
New member
That is correct the judge in the High Court ruled that by the players signing a contract that was inaugurated and sanctioned by the FA the player agreed to abide by their rules and the application and findings of any commission relating to those rules. That was in 1983 so like anything it is always possible for people to contest that High Court ruling but I do think that if it was possible John Terry's legal team would have considered it when he was found guilty of racism.
This is true - I don't know the answer, I just instantly thought of the Steve Foster case when I saw your post. I do agree, this is very different in its nature.
- Jun 27, 2012
- 13,865
The complete opposite. It thankfully shows the FA taking this accusation highly seriously, its already a high profile sports news story, and the degree to which Rodriguez was given time to prepare his defence case illustrates its importance to the player and the club .
Regardless of the verdict.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
If it is player v player, or heard by an official, then it is confined to the footballing authorities.
If a couple of fans heard it, they can report it to the police. Two separate men reported CKR for his homophobic gestures at the Amex, so it went to the magistrates court, and he was found guilty of a criminal hate crime.
severnside gull
Well-known member
Let's just say they would be unwise to ignore it as they may want to appeal issues of their own in the future.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
So taking it to an extreme...what if a player took a concealed knife onto the field of play, and during a melee at a corner, cuts off another players hand. The referee notices this, sends him off (for violent conduct), and includes it in his report. Would that incident also be confined to the footballing authorities to deal with ?
If not, then where is the line drawn ? Are we saying that if it happens on the pitch, the FA can adjudicate over a hate crime, but not a GBH / mutiliation ?
Asking for a friend.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I would think a few supporters/stewards/police would also notice, don't you?
Edit to add, Chris Casper sued Chippy for his injuries in a civil court.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/5913805.Footballer_sues_over_tackle/
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
I would think a few supporters/stewards/police would also notice, don't you?
Edit to add, Chris Casper sued Chippy for his injuries in a civil court.
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/5913805.Footballer_sues_over_tackle/
Right. So despite what BG said, not every offence that happens on a football field comes exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Football Association. In which case, if they find Rodriguez guilty of committing a hate crime on the pitch, and he still protests his innocence, I don't see whats stopping him from taking out a civil lawsuit to clear his name. He shouldn't have to rely on someone in the crowd screaming for a policeman to enable him to do that, should he ? Why would they have anyway, if (as he says) he's done nothing wrong.
Gazwag
5 millionth post poster
I would imagine he could take Bong to civil court for slander to claim damages
Lip service, let's see what actually happens. They had no choice but to investigate
He could but, if he was found guilty by the FA, he'd very foolish to - the burden of proof would be on him.
What would be interesting would be if he were found not guilty by the FA, would he then sue Bong for slander?
martin tyler
Well-known member
- Jan 25, 2013
- 5,844
No it doesn’t at all dispite what BG has said. I am aware of numerous criminal proceedings that have taken place against players from a wide range of levels of football. Punching a player off the ball being one example where the receiving player got a broken jaw. The other party was criminally prosecuted successfully. I’m also aware of numerous occasions where people have been questioned and it’s been left there with no prosecution.
A lot does depend on the circumstances. For example a bad tackle that may break a leg is part of the game.
In the case of Rodriguez he could go to a civil court to clear his name if he felt it was appropriate. It wouldn’t change the decision of the FA so personally I think he will whatever the decision is he or bong will just have to accept it as I don’t see a civil court coming to any different conclusion if presented with the same evidence