Ronaldo

he's achieved far less in his career than mcclaren. no thanks. He's only been at 2 clubs. And? Point stands, he's done sweet fuck all, why would we possibly want him here? Good job we never took a punt on that Kevin Keegan fella due to his lack of achievements as a manager. The pair of you need some fucking water poured over your heads, like.

What on earth is Klopp thinking shouting like a deranged lunatic at his players like that before a penalty shootout, like? Surely you want to keep everyone as calm as possible in a situation like that.

They'll soon have Ian W amongst them to increase their likability somewhat.

My girlfriend's first language is Spanish, gonna let her decide. Funny as fuck what's happened to Real, like. Sacking Ancelotti for Rafa fucking Benitez and expecting anything but colossal failure is madness.

I've got to admit, seeing him and Sunderland relegated together would be pretty fucking arousing. Sadly I can't fully see it, yet.

I'm sure the ref mouthed 'fuck no' as he waved that penalty shout away.

Funny what happens to the perception of Cabaye when he doesn't have penalties to take, like.

England job, ffs. He's one of the shittest managers in the league.

All of the BBC historical sex abuse cases enough for you? Not as if they've been low profile or anything. Seems your knowledge of the criminal justice system is as comprehensive as your knowledge of football. Or you're just quite thick (whoever you are) and don't understand the discussion. One person's word against another securing a conviction independent of witnesses and other evidence. No? Exactly. Pipe down.

Nobody said it was merely her word. If you'd followed the discussion you'd see where the issue arose.

Tyson's case involved DNA if memory serves. With the Hairy Cornflake there was a plethora of allegations/witness testimony. Taylor was two words against one, too.

If either of you can cite a case where a sexual assault conviction has been secured purely by the victim's testimony only, which has been contested by the defendant, let's hear it. Been waiting since last night. Racist incidents, ffs. Wake up, man.

I'll be very pleasantly surprised if he's found guilty of the 2 offences.

I'm not trying to be a dick here it's genuinely interesting to talk about. So we're talking generally about sex cases, typically people (including rapists) will run consent. So how can DNA take the case any further in such a scenario? Court of appeal says medical evidence is corroborative but not diagnostic of rape so what sort of supporting evidence are you envisaging? Like I say genuinely curious. Unfortunately, within a relationship the consent defence can succeed, it's a major flaw in the system but I don't see a way around it. But if a woman fights back, sustains injuries etc, as does the accused there's obviously effective support for the allegation. Admmissable use of previous bad character pertaining to sexual assaults etc.

So essentially, in any sex case unless there are what third party witnesses/evidence the person can never be convicted? That cannot be right. No evidence with the exception of the alleged victim's word resulting in a conviction if contested by the defendant(s)? I'd be genuinely interested to read one case in the UK where it has, but I doubt it exists. Sex cases will generally always have a fair degree of supporting evidence anyway, thankfully. One quick scratch will get DNA under the fingernails etc.

Of course, but there has to be more evidentiary support than one person's word to justify a conviction anyway.

Unfortunately that's the way a democracy should work. I think the dirty bastard's guilty as sin but if reasonable double exists you can't support a conviction. The burden has to be on the prosecution.

I feel sorry for her and the baby, they're both innocent victims. Is the correct answer. She's going to be tarnished for life through no fault of her own. She's accompanied him to court almost every day hasn't she? Father of her child or not she's got no obligation to show such solidarity for the filthy little worm.

It'd be a lot funnier if the bloke saying it wasn't one of the lowest pieces of garbage ever to grace English football.

Nobody will be watching the boxing at the time the game's going on, mind.

You've got to remember their job isn't to prove he's not guilty of the offences. They just need to cast reasonable doubt.

What a preposterous statement, even by your standards.

She is, and she's Irish, obvs. Quick Google search tells you complaints were made against her for lying to magistrates and making false allegations of threatening behaviour. Sounds like a horrible little bint.

Yeah that doesn't work given that they're all Dutch.