 | Forum
Reply | Odemwingie, the truth
at 19:37 9 May 2020
I was very happy with Hoilett's signing, but it was Caulker that I was really excited about... |
| Forum
Reply | With Hindsight
at 19:32 9 May 2020
It doesn't really matter if you agree with him or not.
In age of regurgitated clickbait journalism, we have someone who actually covers our club properly. His website does original interviews, breaks original stories and gives actual insights into the club behind the scenes. Feel free to disagree with his opinions, but be thankful for the coverage. |
| Forum
Reply | New £20 note
at 01:23 29 Feb 2020
It'll be worth the same, soon enough... |
| Forum
Reply | No-fault car accident advice please
at 13:54 10 Oct 2019
Conditional Fee Agreement. A no-win no fee agreement with a firm of solicitors, but they often take a chunk of your damages if the claim is successful. |
| Forum
Reply | It could be worse....
at 07:52 28 Feb 2018
Yeah, that's where I first saw it too. A bit of perspective. |
| Forum
Reply | Grenfell game.
at 12:44 2 Sep 2017
Less than 1,000 tickets left according to official Twitter. |
| Forum
Reply | Rio
at 23:20 29 Mar 2017
Just one question - did you actually watch the documentary before posting? |
| Forum
Reply | Marcus Bignot
at 20:21 3 Nov 2016
Absolutely loved him. It might be nostalgia, but I can't remember him having a bad game. |
| Forum
Reply | Hasselbaink in the Telegraph
at 00:54 1 Oct 2016
Not sure I agree about the knowledgeable bit, but let's face it - we've all heard worse about Redknapp (as did a jury).
I agree with Northern, the real problem is perception here if Jimmy's telling the truth (see comments on Redknapp!). However, there's something really uncomfortable with what the Telegraph are doing; the evidence is getting thinner and thinner, and they seem to be prepared to release less and less of it. Jimmy might be guilty, but the club are right to insist on seeing all of the evidence first, and I cannot think of a journalisticly (I know that's not a word) honest reason of why the Telegraph wouldn't give the club the full evidence. |
| Forum
Reply | Hasselbaink in the Telegraph
at 00:35 1 Oct 2016
Look, I'll admit I have mixed views on Hasselbaink and I'm waiting to see the outcome of the investigation, but isn't this all starting to sound a bit desperate from the Telegraph?
They won't release the transcripts or full videos for no given reason other than that apparently the police want to see them. As a criminal lawyer, there's no legal reason why the police need to see them first - they could release them to everyone at the same time. So why not?
On top of that, I don't really see what Eric Black has done wrong, I don't see what Redknapp has done wrong (this time) given that he wasn't managing a club at the time and therefore not under FA rules, and if Jimmy's right, I don't see what he's done wrong.
If Jimmy asked for money in return for looking favourably on players sent for him to recommend to us, that's corrupt and he should never work in football again. But I don't think that's what the limited evidence the Telegraph have put forward shows. It splices two meetings together. He does seem to be talking about going to the far east when the money is mentioned. Admittedly it looks bad, but if the Telegraph were confident in their investigations, why not disclose all of the footage/transcripts? I repeat, there is no reason in law not to provide the full evidence to QPR. If the Telegraph are being genuine in their investigations, their subsequent behaviour is difficult to understand. |
| | MrGrieves
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 35 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 35 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
