EPTFootball (Soccer) Thread - Page 120
| Forum Index > Sports |
FlaShFTW
United States10530 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
On April 01 2026 04:54 sharkie wrote: oohh you know a few years ago I really thought I might have to live through England coming to take a trophy home but since Tuchel was appointed I have slept so much more soundly :D I’m still unsure how your calculus works so that Ange is a good coach because he won a Europa League while finishing 17th, but Tommy Tuchs is bad despite having won a Champions League | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
On April 01 2026 06:49 FlaShFTW wrote: LMAO ITALY HAHAAHAAAAAAAAAA Fucking hell, how do they keep doing this? It’s really something. Bastoni is a quality player but that was daft. The sad part is it’s not like Italy are lacking quality, they’re not worldbeaters but they’re much more than Bosnia, and if they could get their shit together should be better than at least half of the World Cup field. You’ve a midfield of Barella, Tonali and Locatelli, DiMarco at left back, Bastoni in defence, Donnarumma… Dear lord what a mess | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
On April 01 2026 02:31 MJG wrote: They're upset about De Zerbi's support of Mason Greenwood in his previous role, which I feel is a fairly reasonable position to take. is that what theyre actually upset about? if so, what a crock of shit | ||
|
hitthat
Poland2349 Posts
| ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1451 Posts
Now there's no place for him at the World Cup. Good. | ||
|
MJG
United Kingdom1451 Posts
On April 01 2026 11:54 evilfatsh1t wrote: is that what theyre actually upset about? if so, what a crock of shit I don't think that "don't show support for domestic abusers" is a particularly difficult stance to understand. | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18721 Posts
On April 01 2026 08:46 WombaT wrote: I’m still unsure how your calculus works so that Ange is a good coach because he won a Europa League while finishing 17th, but Tommy Tuchs is bad despite having won a Champions League Because Spurs are a bad club which should never win anything and (unfortunately) Chelsea used to be a winner's club who just win shit load of trophies. Ange winning Europa League with Spurs is an achievement no one will do for at least another decade and Tuchel at that time winning with Chelsea was just another "year we all expect Chelsea to somehow win things" | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
On April 01 2026 15:54 MJG wrote: I don't think that "don't show support for domestic abusers" is a particularly difficult stance to understand. theres so many points i have issues with when it comes to the whole anti mason greenwood movement. the first of which is, in the eyes of the law he is innocent. law enforcement had a proper go at him and they dropped the case. if you have any respect for the judicial system in your country then you would accept the results of that process. the moment we allow the public to become judge and jury again, you might as well overhaul your entire judicial system and proclaim it outright useless. cancel culture is fucking stupid, period. the second point is, why the fuck would i care about what a footballer does in his home life? i want footballers to play good football. that is all. as long as theyre not committing any crimes (which again, greenwood has not been ultimately found to have done), why is his private life relevant to his performance in his job as a footballer? the only argument people bring up against this point is "oh, but hes a bad role model and therefore we must cancel him". im sorry but if youre stupid enough to consider a footballer a role model simply because hes a footballer, then lifes gonna turn out to be very difficult. its not rocket science to form your own judgments on whether a certain individual is worth looking up to, or educating your children on what characteristics to look for in people they look up to. ronaldo is a role model not because hes a footballer, but because hes an extremely hard working and disciplined individual who happens to be one of the absolute best in his chosen field. you dont like what greenwood allegedly did? dont take inspiration from him when it comes to those negative characteristics. its literally as simple as that. the last point is, the person he allegedly abused has literally had multiple children with him since and continues to live an apparently happy life with him. no one knows what really went down between those 2. its entirely possible the whole thing was doctored by her, or maybe shes just completely forgiven him and theyve moved on. either way, why does the public get a say in whether he is allowed to live his life? benjamin mendy is also another player that the public deemed guilty, and so he was released because of the pressure of public perception. look where his career ended up despite him being acquitted of all charges in court. im glad greenwood at least has managed to keep his career going and hasnt gone down mendys route. good for him. and yes, if it were possible id still have greenwood back at united in a heartbeat. i dont agree with uniteds decision to sell him in the first place. i mean i understand the decision from a corporate standpoint, but in principle he should have been protected by the club. the difference is united at the time didnt have an immortal figure that could tank all the fire for him like saf could have (and i daresay would have). as for spurs fans not wanting de zerbi because of this, that is an even more ridiculous take. marseille are de zerbi and greenwoods employer. if marseille bought greenwood because they obviously agreed with me on how stupid cancel culture is, how is it reasonable at all for de zerbi to openly defy the club and neglect the shiny new recruit? even if he wanted to he couldnt. people who are opposing de zerbi for this have no grasp on reality, which i guess tracks because theyre spurs fans | ||
|
sharkie
Austria18721 Posts
| ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
| ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9958 Posts
| ||
|
sharkie
Austria18721 Posts
On April 02 2026 00:31 evilfatsh1t wrote: you want to hate on someone, do it in your own time and in private. if you try and make a movement out of it with intentions to damage the persons livelihood, its cancel culture. oh so movement against hitler for example was just cancel culture? | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
On April 02 2026 01:07 sharkie wrote: oh so movement against hitler for example was just cancel culture? he committed actual provable crimes you dumbass. whats happening against greenwood isnt just cancel culture, its actually worse because technically greenwood could sue each and every one of you for libel and he would win every single case without a shadow of a doubt. obviously it would never happen because the logistics of it is impossible, but thats how stupid this whole thing is. everyone straight up slandering him according to the law, because not a single person could claim that what theyre saying is the truth when the whole world knows already that the prosecution itself failed to prove their case. all these people committing civil offenses at best and criminal offenses at worst and they dont see the hypocrisy of them sitting on their high horses. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
I’ve zero issues with him coming back to the game. The problem I have is that he’s hidden away, hasn’t owned up to his failings, and people around him have similarly danced around it (such as De Zerbi). Tony Adams could have killed someone drink-driving, but he owned it and set up Sporting Chance to help others in similar positions with addiction issues. To take one example. Greenwood could do some good after behaving atrociously, he’s studiously avoided doing anything of the sort. I think there’s some middle ground here. It can be an unfair imposition to expect footballers who at the end of the day are just regular folks with a particular skill to be perfect role models. Equally, ‘who cares if they abused women, they’re good at football’ swings way too far the other way for many. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9958 Posts
On April 02 2026 01:21 evilfatsh1t wrote: he committed actual provable crimes you dumbass. whats happening against greenwood isnt just cancel culture, its actually worse because technically greenwood could sue each and every one of you for libel and he would win every single case without a shadow of a doubt. obviously it would never happen because the logistics of it is impossible, but thats how stupid this whole thing is. everyone straight up slandering him according to the law, because not a single person could claim that what theyre saying is the truth when the whole world knows already that the prosecution itself failed to prove their case. all these people committing civil offenses at best and criminal offenses at worst and they dont see the hypocrisy of them sitting on their high horses. You seem to have gone completely off the deep end. No-one here is committing any civil or especially criminal offences. They heard a recording and saw pictures and made their minds up based on that recording and pictures. Perfectly reasonable in law when your opinion holds zero legal weight I'm afraid. He could definitely sue everyone on the forum, but he'd lose alot of money doing it. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
On April 02 2026 01:34 WombaT wrote: Greenwood behaved pretty egregiously, and albeit via a leak, in the public eye. I’ve zero issues with him coming back to the game. The problem I have is that he’s hidden away, hasn’t owned up to his failings, and people around him have similarly danced around it (such as De Zerbi). Tony Adams could have killed someone drink-driving, but he owned it and set up Sporting Chance to help others in similar positions with addiction issues. To take one example. Greenwood could do some good after behaving atrociously, he’s studiously avoided doing anything of the sort. I think there’s some middle ground here. It can be an unfair imposition to expect footballers who at the end of the day are just regular folks with a particular skill to be perfect role models. Equally, ‘who cares if they abused women, they’re good at football’ swings way too far the other way for many. i agree that it would be better if greenwood had addressed the situation himself. i actually hoped that greenwood and united would come out publicly with joint statements, whatever that may be. unfortunately united beat around the bush and sent greenwood away and once greenwood went to france, well, france isnt really the audience he needs to appease. i just wonder what may have happened if greenwood and/or united issued a statement when the prosecution announced that they had dropped all charges. greenwood still probably would have ended up in another country away from the heat, but years later, he might have been in consideration to be brought back to the national team. from a pure footballing perspective, i think englands chances at winning the world cup go up significantly if greenwood is available for call up. hes a no brainer for the RW position in the starting 11 over saka and would be an instant fix on what is arguably one of englands weakest positions at the moment. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
On April 02 2026 01:58 Jockmcplop wrote: You seem to have gone completely off the deep end. No-one here is committing any civil or especially criminal offences. They heard a recording and saw pictures and made their minds up based on that recording and pictures. Perfectly reasonable in law when your opinion holds zero legal weight I'm afraid. He could definitely sue everyone on the forum, but he'd lose alot of money doing it. your position would be right if the prosecution never tried to bring charges against him. but they did, and they had the benefit of having more information and evidence than the public ever did. they still failed to prove their case and the charges didnt stick. in those circumstances, continuing to label greenwood as a domestic abuser is indeed slanderous. no one on tl might be committing libel to the extent that it is a criminal offense, but there probably are people out there that are far more vocal and aggressive about their position. develop an appreciation for your own judicial process will ya, or go cry to your government about how you have a national emergency because your judicial system is completely unreliable dogshit | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9958 Posts
On April 02 2026 02:03 evilfatsh1t wrote: your position would be right if the prosecution never tried to bring charges against him. but they did, and they had the benefit of having more information and evidence than the public ever did. they still failed to prove their case and the charges didnt stick. in those circumstances, continuing to label greenwood as a domestic abuser is indeed slanderous. develop an appreciation for your own judicial process will ya, or go cry to your government about how you have a national emergency because your judicial system is completely unreliable dogshit OK you seem not to know how court verdicts work at all. The court did not find him innocent, they found him not guilty - notice the difference - and for someone to say that they believe he is guilty anyway is not a crime - civil or criminal. If someone here has said specifically that he was found guilty in court, then they have probably committed a civil offence, but that's as far as it could possibly go. Either way, fuck Mason Greenwood, the guy is clearly a fucking twat of the highest order. | ||
|
evilfatsh1t
Australia8916 Posts
On April 02 2026 02:11 Jockmcplop wrote: OK you seem not to know how court verdicts work at all. The court did not find him innocent, they found him not guilty - notice the difference - and for someone to say that they believe he is guilty anyway is not a crime - civil or criminal. If someone here has said specifically that he was found guilty in court, then they have probably committed a civil offence, but that's as far as it could possibly go. Either way, fuck Mason Greenwood, the guy is clearly a fucking twat of the highest order. what? there was no verdict at all because the case was never tried. do you even know what it means when prosecution drops charges? and thats not how defamation works at all. if i repeatedly call you a pedophile without concrete evidence to back my claim, and you eventually lose your job because of me, you can sue me for defamation. theres no requirement that my statement needs to refer to a court verdict or any other nonsense. the claim that greenwood is a domestic abuser is now slanderous because you cannot say that you have proof of what he did. the only "proof" the public had, prosecutors also had (and more) and yet the prosecutions final words on the matter was "In this case a combination of the withdrawal of key witnesses and new material that came to light meant there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.". they not only admit to not having enough proof, but they also cast doubt on the truth of the original claim by explicitly referring to the existence of new material (that the public doesnt have) which would damage their case. with all of this being in the public record, it is not a reasonable position for any member of the public to say now that greenwood is a domestic abuser in a court of law. but yeah ok. act like you know what youre talking about rofl. this is the problem with half the people who jump on the cancel culture agenda. literally clueless about their own legal system and the facts of the case. also, the audacity to say that a "not guilty" verdict in court doesnt mean anything about the innocence of a man. jesus fking christ | ||
| ||
