I do really mean what I say in respect to Kurt Zouma there has been an over reaction. He’s been given the 2nd biggest fine in the history of sports for doing anything and it still isn’t enough.
He’s been fined two weeks wages, the reason it’s the ‘2nd biggest fine’ is because his wage is so high, that doesn’t make him a victim.
Not only is this completely incorrect, it's such a stupid argument. He was fined 2 weeks wages, he's on a lot of money, that's how it works.
It's a really dumb thing to do to compare fines and punishments for offenses?
they can't yet as that would infer guilt and create an issue for the prosecution case
Across different clubs/sports/brands? Yes absolutely, it is ridiculously dumb. If I get sacked at my job, I can't go and look at another company and compare what I got sacked for to something that another person didn't get sacked for. However if I did the exact same thing as someone else within the same company and I got sacked but they didn't, then it's an issue. Otherwise why stop at sports? Why not expand to everything?
Took 2 minutes to find this is absolutely incorrect and more nonsense you're spouting, Tevez was fined 4 weeks wages which was £1m for disobeying Mancini at City. Back then were you screaming that City fined him more than John Terry got fined for racism? Tevez got fined 4 times more for ignoring a human than Zouma did for abusing a cat, disgrace! Where are West Ham's morals? We can all play these absolutely irrelevant games.
Nike have dropped their sponsorship deal with him, without compensation. He's been suspended by Manchester United and will not train or play for the club until further notice.. but no fine.
In real terms Terry's fine was more, it's the equiv of 270k, however football inflation wise it's probably even bigger. Zouma's fine had to be by his club and limited to 2 weeks wages.
you may feel it's an over reaction, but it's not your role to decide how others should feel.
Well.. thank goodness for that! (Pretty desperate)
Your personal view should not supersede what is right and just in the eyes of the law. The punishment should fit the crime, I don't think violence is the answer here, but I would fully expect folks to hold some thug in high regard and commend their actions should that happen to 'leave a bit on him in future' I hope it's not one of our players.. I would much rather see our energies be put into beating West Ham rather than risking a suspension or committing assault.
it's not desperate, it's accurate or if you want to be all defensive rather than debate honestly call it pedantic
This isn't about the law, the law will do as it sees fit, this is about footballing ethics and morals
Probably not, I'm just highlighting there are a lot of animal lovers, it's an emotive subject, his behaviour has left him open to a lifetime of on and off the pitch issues, and that's on him. He'll get no sympathy from me. Has the man even get up and apologised for his behaviour in front of the media? No
You have, it's a messageboard people can make their own minds up and have their own say if they feel it's valid. That's how it works.
Quite right. And yes, I am a vegan.
Agreed. But to widen and (occasionally) muddy the debate is one of the primary functions (and joys) of this board.
No, I'm not.
No, that isn't the case
