mozy

Pointless cowardly statement and decision IMO.

Steady is exactly what you want from a centre half though? If you're referring to him at left back then fair enough. If, since Enrique left, we'd had a LB who defends consistently well, attacks the ball well from set pieces but isn't great on the ball we'd have finished higher than 5th, 16th and 10th. My point was more along the lines of, you could say someone like Godin or Chiellini is steady rather than fantastic. Clearly those are ridiculous comparisons but when is a centre half ever 'fantastic'? For arguments sake I think you need much better fullbacks than Dummett to finish in the higher placings of the PL. At centre half he has a chance.

Steady is exactly what you want from a centre half though? If you're referring to him at left back then fair enough.

That's complete rubbish. Using that methodology you'd like to adopt a guilty until proven innocent system? I think there should be more emphasis on defendants looking to provide evidence of consent (including if no verbal consent is given then things like, prior knowledge of the person, actions leading up to the event, how pissed the victim was, whether or not the person was high). Basically I think that if you're going home with a girl who has been described as 'extremely drunk', or sitting mortal on the ground, you need to put your dick back in your trousers. Rather than the 'opportunistic sex' described on here. In terms of what you've described there, I would guess most of that would be covered in a standard police interview anyway. I don't know what evidence anyone could provide really.

Well there's 2 witnesses that say she did consent, and 0 that say she did not. The girl herself does not know if she did or not. They're not witnesses (if you're referring to Evans and McDonald) although the night porter reported something about him hearing it as consensual through the door. Does McDonald not qualify as a witness in Evans' trial? My legal knowledge isn't brilliant, if not then one witness which was the night porter.

That's complete rubbish. Using that methodology you'd like to adopt a guilty until proven innocent system?

Did she consent with Evans or the friend? Both. I assume the reason McDonald (the friend) got off is because the girl initiated it, went back with him and gave a strong impression of being consensual. Whereas with Evans it is basically only his and McDonald's word that the girl consented.

Well there's 2 witnesses that say she did consent, and 0 that say she did not. The girl herself does not know if she did or not.

This girl initiated wanting to go back to the hotel room with McDonald though. To compare it to Bluestar's analogy it's like someone quite pissed giving you their phone and saying have this. As soon as the girl expressed a desire to go back to the hotel room of course she was going back there for sex man. 'I'm coming back to your hotel with you' was what she said, no prompting. It's hard to be too sympathetic with Evans as what he did was the act of a sexual opportunist who took what he could get. I have serious doubts as to whether this should be labelled as rape, especially as the girl said yes, and was fully conscious and engaged throughout.

The whole question of this trail boils down to the word 'rape' and the sentence attached to it. 'Rape' in my eyes refers to a despicable, predatory, violent crime that is explicitly against the wishes of the victim. No consent given at all. In her inebriated condition, over quite a considerable period of time, the girl was happy to get in the taxi with McDonald, go back to the hotel, have sex with him and then give consent to have sex with Evans too. From the perspective of Evans and McDonald they have not sexually assaulted a girl against her wishes and from their statements she was more than keen at the time. Personally I don't think you can put this on the same level as a violent street rape, which is what Evans will see in his mind every time he reads the headline 'Convicted Rapist Ched Evans'. Interesting case really. Like others have said, fairly eye opening.

Hypothetically speaking, if his impending appeal is successful, I wonder what the reaction of all the Sheffield United patrons and associates will be. Would they apologise to Evans, the club and whoever? I doubt it, because in their eyes he would still be guilty, regardless of the outcome of the appeal. It's silly to blindly trust the justice system and then label people based on the outcome of a 12 man jury, especially where the convicted continues to profess and fight against it.

Gouffran, Santon, Williamson, Tiote, Cisse - 5 players who have no right to get back into the first X11, but probably will. Prove us wrong eh Alan? I doubt it..

At the risk of becoming a broken record, he has always looked very competent as a central defender and has a future there at a good level.

A genuinely good team performance. I have no reservations about supporting this group of players and long may the streak continue.

He's always done well at CB...

The difference is that Fat Sam is still playing aids hoofball but he's signed players who fit it (Cresswell and Jenkinson excellent crossers, Song to provide enough quality and control from the holding role, the criminally underrated Amalfitano and a couple of pacey, athletic strikers who love to run, chase, jump and shoot). He's also stumbled upon Stewart Downing's golden summer as a CAM and a formation that binds it together. Sooner or later he will try and change it to bring Carroll and Nolan back in and they will finish bottom half again.

Made my evening.

How long before Keane replaces Lambert then?

f*** off, what he did is almost as bad, puts his head then when retaliation comes he goes crying to the ref. Only cause Benteke was a silly c***. No-one but himself to blame. Don't disagree with that, but Mason put his head to him. Shoudl've at least gotten a yellow. Yeah Mason should have been booked, but for Benteke to raise his hand there is beyond senseless. Is that one of the areas where a referees discretion can't be applied, i.e. he's bound by "the letter of the law" to do exactly as he did? My understanding was: Raise your hands to the face is an automatic red, hands to the chest is a yellow. Discretion can be applied when players are head to head without either one actually making an aggressive move.

f*** off, what he did is almost as bad, puts his head then when retaliation comes he goes crying to the ref. Only cause Benteke was a silly c***. No-one but himself to blame. Don't disagree with that, but Mason put his head to him. Shoudl've at least gotten a yellow. Yeah Mason should have been booked, but for Benteke to raise his hand there is beyond senseless.

Fuck off, what he did is almost as bad, puts his head then when retaliation comes he goes crying to the ref. Only cause Benteke was a silly cunt. No-one but himself to blame.

At least Mason didn't hit the deck.

I reckon he'll do alright, have a decent prem career.

Lets not act like defending isn't an important aspect of football either Saying that I think everyone is in agreement on what Dummett is good at, and what his limitations as a player will always be.