Sky news players charged bury game - Page 13

Outback Ozzy · 09-04-2009, 03:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCR ADIM

Yeh than what will happen is what Wille Miller says! PFA get involed! Club end up paying alot of money out to them in unfair dismissal if found not guilty! Now i know which route i would rather take until the 23rd april! who else do we have though! Murphy, King, Leam all still out injured! Meaning Murdock would come in and Jay bell than who do we have on bench! Youth team?

We did at Bradford and came away with a respectable 1-1 draw, so why not pu the youth on the bench

Redraine · 09-04-2009, 06:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Matthew

I didn't mean immediately MCR.

The club really needs to grow a pair. This will agitate many and could go as far as totally underming all marketing methods used recently to increase crowds.

Many will be disgusted if the forementioned play.

I'd rather play with 9 men to be honest.

Pay them but don't let them play, simple, it's a matter of principle.

Well said that man. Why can't the club see this and do the decent thing by suspending the pair of them? I didn't really agree with the Ultra's protest over the Mullin affair, although I fully respect their right to make their feelings known. If these two are selected I would hope they will do something similar and would certainly join them in squatting for the whole game on Monday. I don't care if I don't see any of the match - I just dont want to see these two in a Stanley shirt until the case is heard, and I'm not so sure I could back them even if the case is not proven.

dabeast · 09-04-2009, 07:33

Posted via Mobile Device
To play them with the knowledge of the charges brought would be so stupid! Suspension is the only realistic option. Surely the club can see that. I will reserve my comments until the event has passed but whatever anyone thinks, they should not play. I can't imagine that the players would want to start either - whether innocent or guilty they should be of the lowest profile until the mess is sorted.
On another point i didn't agree with the last protest but this is different

mab · 09-04-2009, 07:57

Ok alturnatives!! who do we have well we could put Murdock and Bell back in the starting line up with Mullin,McConville,Grant,Hibbert,Hey,Smith on the bench Richarson if fit after his opp,so we do have cover for the game and in my book we've no need to play Cav n Rocky,what would JC do if the two were injured.

yonmon · 09-04-2009, 08:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod

Neither player will be able to give their all with the crowd against them, and I dont particularly want them to.

Easter Monday 13:45 hrs. Scenario 1.:-

The Left Wing-Back of Chester City makes a run in front of the Press Box..Cav goes in to tackle him but inadvertently slips on an unseen patch of mud. His opponent skips round him, runs into 'the Box', calmly rounds Kenny Arthur and slips the ball into the empty net!.

Scenario.2. :- (Three minutes left to play!)

On the other wing a Chester Forward craftily gives Robert Williams the slip, and as he goes into the box
Robbie quite innocently clips his heels...he immediately goes to ground (as they do!)..the referee awards a penalty, it is converted and Chester City go on to win the match 1-0 !.

Scenario 3. I and the ever-loyal andfaithful 999 are sitting in the Stand, or standing on the Clayton End...
The Chester City Fans are baying like hungry wolves..everyone, Media included, bearing witness to these unfortunate footballing 'accidents', and wondering how to respond to them !.

I for one will be there Cashy !, but as yet I find it diifficult to predict how I will feel as I enter the FES, let alone my reaction, and that of other Fans were the aforementioned Scenarios allowed to occur by the inclusion of the allegedly 'bent' members of the first team squad.
It is still my opinion that the two players in question should be protected from further suspicion, if not more charges, by removing them from any situation whatsoever which could cause them further villification and possible punishment.

This, in my humble opinion would be a FAIR method of dealing with this convoluted and complicated status quo at the FES..one which we on this forum can only speculate about !...yet speculate we must!!.

K-P · 09-04-2009, 08:41

OK I am guesing that your all so wound up that your not going to appreciate the following so I will add my dissclaimer first... If they did do what they are accused of then I agree with everything said.. I have very strong views on this for all the same reasons most of you have.

BUT some of you are putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5

The players have NOT and I repeat NOT been accused of match fixing.. Nowhere has anyone said they have tried to fix a match and nowhere is the FA the Club or anyone else other than Internet users (yes not just accyweb) suggesting they have done anything to change the outcome of a match

The players are accused of betting against the team they play for... something as I say I have equally strong views about and am still disgusted now at the thought... But to accuse them of match fixing could lead you and/or this messageboard open to ...well you know.

Betting against your team is a mortal sin for a footballer as far as i am concerned ... But it isn't match fixing as most seem to assume.

Sorry for saying it.. But I believe it had to be said

Revived Red · 09-04-2009, 08:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by K-P

OK I am guesing that your all so wound up that your not going to appreciate the following so I will add my dissclaimer first... If they did do what they are accused of then I agree with everything said.. I have very strong views on this for all the same reasons most of you have.

BUT some of you are putting 2 and 2 together and getting 5

The players have NOT and I repeat NOT been accused of match fixing.. Nowhere has anyone said they have tried to fix a match and nowhere is the FA the Club or anyone else other than Internet users (yes not just accyweb) suggesting they have done anything to change the outcome of a match

The players are accused of betting against the team they play for... something as I say I have equally strong views about and am still disgusted now at the thought... But to accuse them of match fixing could lead you and/or this messageboard open to ...well you know.

Betting against your team is a mortal sin for a footballer as far as i am concerned ... But it isn't match fixing as most seem to assume.

Sorry for saying it.. But I believe it had to be said

A timely reminder, K-P. They are accused of breaching the FA rules on betting as noted in one of the early posts in this thread.

We probably all realise that it is but a short step to making sure that the bet is successful, and that would then be match-fixing. But that is not the charge.

Nevertheless, the accusation of seriously transgressing FA rules should surely demand suspension of those involved until a verdict is reached. The fact that the accusation involves betting on one's own team to lose just compounds the offence.

shakermaker · 09-04-2009, 08:59

Personally I don't feel any animosity or disappointment in this situation; more confusion than anything.
Perhaps it's due to fictitious versions of the two players that I've presumed to be true; as with near ten years' service you expect the players to be straight forward, loyal and honest. If Peter Cavanagh and Robbie Williams were to take the field on Saturday then I'd probably support them just as I would any other player in a Stanley shirt.
I can completely understand why people are up in arms and wishing for the players to be suspended, but it hasn't quite sunk in here. All I know is that I don't feel like burning any effigies just yet. The reason for that probably being what K-P correctly writes; that no formal charges of match fixing have been made. Their charges are still very serious, but I would feel much more like I'd been kicked in the swingers if the actual charges were match fixing. I don't think the players (Cav/Rocky) are either guilty or capable of anything like that.

Revived Red · 09-04-2009, 09:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Personally I don't feel any animosity or disappointment in this situation; more confusion than anything.
Perhaps it's due to fictitious versions of the two players that I've presumed to be true; as with near ten years' service you expect the players to be straight forward, loyal and honest. If Peter Cavanagh and Robbie Williams were to take the field on Saturday then I'd probably support them just as I would any other player in a Stanley shirt.
I can completely understand why people are up in arms and wishing for the players to be suspended, but it hasn't quite sunk in here. All I know is that I don't feel like burning any effigies just yet. The reason for that probably being what K-P correctly writes; that no formal charges of match fixing have been made. Their charges are still very serious, but I would feel much more like I'd been kicked in the swingers if the actual charges were match fixing. I don't think the players (Cav/Rocky) are either guilty or capable of anything like that.

OK, well let's put it another way. You bet on your team to lose 0 - 2. It's near the end of the match and you find yourself in front of goal with the goal at your mercy. You are almost bound to score, but if you do, you and your fellow punters will lose the bet. What do you do?

K-P · 09-04-2009, 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

OK, well let's put it another way. You bet on your team to lose 0 - 2. It's near the end of the match and you find yourself in front of goal with the goal at your mercy. You are almost bound to score, but if you do, you and your fellow punters will lose the bet. What do you do?

Hmmm lets see.... 5 quid bet.... v goal scoring bonus.. if I was cav I would go for goal

shakermaker · 09-04-2009, 09:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

OK, well let's put it another way. You bet on your team to lose 0 - 2. It's near the end of the match and you find yourself in front of goal with the goal at your mercy. You are almost bound to score, but if you do, you and your fellow punters will lose the bet. What do you do?

I've no doubt that in that situation the goal and the club would mean more to Cav/Rocky than the bet. Sadly I have to admit that this only works on a presumed opinion of their nature. We've only been watching them play football for the best part of a decade, we don't know them.

Revived Red · 09-04-2009, 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

I've no doubt that in that situation the goal and the club would mean more to Cav/Rocky than the bet. Sadly I have to admit that this only works on a presumed opinion of their nature. We've only been watching them play football for the best part of a decade, we don't know them.

Oh, dear. Maybe my comment was too subtle. I think you will find that the match report describes what one of the accused did in that circumstance.

shakermaker · 09-04-2009, 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

Oh, dear. Maybe my comment was too subtle. I think you will find that the match report describes what one of the accused did in that circumstance.

Really? I was at the game and I don't remember that. Which report?

yonmon · 09-04-2009, 10:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by shakermaker

I've no doubt that in that situation the goal and the club would mean more to Cav/Rocky than the bet. Sadly I have to admit that this only works on a presumed opinion of their nature. We've only been watching them play football for the best part of a decade, we don't know them.

I agree with you when you submit that 'we don't know them', and it is a dangerous practice to work on a presumed opinion of anyone's nature.
But if we are placing some question on the alleged character and behaviour of our two 'Senior' players,
then I would refer you to an earlier posting of mine where I almost begged someone to explain to me just what on earth could possibly motivate two respected members of Accrington Stanley's First Team squad to place the credibility of The Club, their Employers, and 'The Faithful 1000' in the situation of emergency existing NOW, ..whilst at the same time placing their entire careers in the game at such risk by indulging in the alleged fraudulent behaviour.

If necessity or character flaws have precipitated these alleged actions and they are found to be accurate, then they must indeed face whatever consequences will surely follow.

If the Club have any regard for the two concerned, which, as they say, they must, being 'innocent until proved guilty', then I repeat, it is because of this sense of 'we don't know them' that some protection of their 'character' and their professional standing should be extended to them !, if they cannot be suspended, then by mutual exclusion from any Club activities whatsoever until the whole sorry mess is brought to a resolution.

I won't bang this particular Drum again...Promise!!!.

JEFF · 09-04-2009, 10:15

In today's Lancashire Telegraph Jimmy Bell appears to be defending Cav by saying he only had a £5 accumulator and shouldn't be crucified - I thought Cav had also been charged with betting on a Stanley game this season and betting on other league two games. Bell also appears to be blaming the FA for making this public. I don't agree with having a protest on Monday - we NEED to win the game, but I do agree that Cav and Rocky shouldn't play even if they haven't been found guilty. Any defensive slip by either of them will result in the fans saying that they must have had a bet on the game. Drop them until the FA hearing but please don't play Jay Bell. For once nearly everybody on this forum is in agreement, it just goes to prove that we all have the interests of Stanley at heart.