Jump to content
Richard

Sunderland

Recommended Posts

They fairly held off for as long as they possibly could didn't they? 

Either what he did was worthy of the club's derision, or it wasn't. 'He told us all along he was not guilty. We are shocked by his guilty plea'. Bollocks. 

Sunderland don't care what he did. They just wanted to play him for as long as possible until the heat from sponsors outweighed the benefits to the team, with relegation looming. The plea yesterday tipped the scales, possibly after some pressure was put on by the Premier League who were concerned about their brand.

It's all just a bit transparent really. Sunderland come out of it looking weak and not at all consistent in their supposed outrage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the word scumbag would be too nice for him. Absolute disgrace and Sunderland should be ashamed of themselves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty crazy that he scored against Liverpool in a PL match less than a week ago and is now probably done in professional football for good. I was surprised that Sunderland even let him back in the first place while the whole thing was ongoing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, YLN said:

They fairly held off for as long as they possibly could didn't they? 

Either what he did was worthy of the club's derision, or it wasn't. 'He told us all along he was not guilty. We are shocked by his guilty plea'. Bollocks. 

Sunderland don't care what he did. They just wanted to play him for as long as possible until the heat from sponsors outweighed the benefits to the team, with relegation looming. The plea yesterday tipped the scales, possibly after some pressure was put on by the Premier League who were concerned about their brand.

It's all just a bit transparent really. Sunderland come out of it looking weak and not at all consistent in their supposed outrage.

Why would you assume Sunderland knew he was guilty? I recon he would not be admitting it to anyone except his lawyer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, YLN said:

They fairly held off for as long as they possibly could didn't they? 

Either what he did was worthy of the club's derision, or it wasn't. 'He told us all along he was not guilty. We are shocked by his guilty plea'. Bollocks. 

Sunderland don't care what he did. They just wanted to play him for as long as possible until the heat from sponsors outweighed the benefits to the team, with relegation looming. The plea yesterday tipped the scales, possibly after some pressure was put on by the Premier League who were concerned about their brand.

It's all just a bit transparent really. Sunderland come out of it looking weak and not at all consistent in their supposed outrage.

Alternatively perhaps they thought "let's see if he's guilty - if he's guilty, we'll sack him".

I suspect if they'd sacked him and he was subsequently found innocent, they may have opened themselves up for an unfair dismissal claim.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but they initially suspended him when the story first broke only to backtrack when they realised he was probably their best player

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zatman said:

but they initially suspended him when the story first broke only to backtrack when they realised he was probably their best player

...or the company lawyers said that if he was planning to plead innocent then they could be in trouble if he is found innocent and they've not been playing him for 6 months (damage to reputation / career etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't blame Sunderland for playing him.  Innocent til prioven guilty and all that.  Just a shame it took so long for the trial really... 

Edited by PieFacE
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

Can't blame Sunderland for playing him.  Innocent til prioven guilty and all that.  Just a shame it took so long for the trial really... 

This. You can't just suspend a player because he has a court case looming. Sunderland would have had to keep paying him his wages so you might as well make him work for his money. If he worked in a bank he couldn't have been sacked until he plead guilty so why would a football club be any different.

Hopefully he'll be given a proper sentence ... but he won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PieFacE said:

Can't blame Sunderland for playing him.  Innocent til prioven guilty and all that.  Just a shame it took so long for the trial really... 

Also helps when he's one of their best players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. Their squad is so devoid of quality, he's one of the few they had (even though he's still shit). Without him, nobody's bending that free kick on target like that and helping win a point at Anfield. From a purely footballing perspective, this is good news for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Yep. Their squad is so devoid of quality, he's one of the few they had (even though he's still shit). Without him, nobody's bending that free kick on target like that and helping win a point at Anfield. From a purely footballing perspective, this is good news for us.

*Searches for a GIF of that M'Villa free kick v us.* ;)

Thinking about it, Sunderland really need to come down with us. Who on earth can they sell for decent money to rebuild in the championship? Have many players over 30 aswell looking at their squad who I doubt will fancy a 46 game season.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot about that, but yeah he's one of the few :lol: . 

They are well and truly ***** either way. People talk about our transfer policy being bad, there's has been horrible for years now. They're still stuck with old overpaid players from the Bruce "buy 13 unwanted PL players per window" era as well as Di Canio's poor man's 2013 Paul Lambert (does it get any poorer?) impression. At least we had/have players that we sold or can sell for large sums of money and have some real gems among some of the shit as well as the added bonus that they're all relatively young.

We have the luxury of being able to pick and choose which players we keep sell (for the most part) if we go down, unfortunately for them they don't :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looking at their squad now people like O'Shea and Wes Brown will retire I imagine. Someone in the prem will want Defoe but he'll be 34 next season so no one's paying decent money for him.

Their most saleable assests look like people like Younes Kaboul, M'Vila and Jermaine Lens. Borini also cost what 10m and he's hardly played for them. They'll do well to get even 10m for those four.

Must say the thing I was most amazed about looking at their squad list is Cattermole is only 27!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...
Â