Muttley
Well-known member
That's history for youFour games would be sufficient
That's history for youFour games would be sufficient
Four games would have beenThat's history for you
Glad to see I am once again on the right side of history with this .
I think you've gone full Trump with this one newy.10 games would have been ridiculous let alone all the talk of 18 months, 2 years, lifetime ban. Glad to see I am once again on the right side of history with this .
Rest of the season would have been way too harsh.
No it just shows that 10 games was ott.. I said I thought a four game ban would be sufficient but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was higher.Behave. You were calling for a 4 game ban. He was banned for 8 and might be longer if the FA appeal as it seems they might.
Him being banned for twice as long as you suggested doesn’t make you a modern day Nostradamus.
Top trollingNo it just shows that 10 games was ott.. I said I thought a four game ban would be sufficient but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was higher.
People were getting carried away again weren’t they.. and then when I piped up as the voice of reason I was shot down
minimum 10 games and then all the nodding dogs with their ever increasing punishments..Unbelievable that you are trying to spin this as a win for you. Those who called for 10 games were far closer to the actual punishment than you. And the FA clearly feel it’s too lenient so let’s see where we end up.
minimum 10 games and then all the nodding dogs with their ever increasing punishments..
View attachment 55711