orion

Y et again What happened with McDonald before means nothing .. as the crown and the woman story is that she could not remember anything . The fact remains it's all down to her consent in the bedroom and the case of the crown is that she was in no state to say no . thus making it impossible to find one Guilty and the other not . Mcdonald is not a convicted rapist thou he was found not Guilty .

When is she going to say sorry to McDonald and his family ? after all he was found not guilty ..No doubt her family have said plenty of bad things about him all the internet as well but I doubt we are to see her say saying sorry .

When you said you maintain you not Guilty you can't show any remorse ...Of all the things said on the subject I still can't understand how people get there heads round that

Just Like Ched Evans ..the bloke you said that should be allowed back in football on another topic .

I never said she was so out of it she could not say no ...the point was that they try to make out that was the case and as many have said in the media in the few days that makes it near enough impossible using that line to make one guilty and the other not . As someone on Sky news today the moment they found Mcdonald not guilty it meant they could not have believe she was out of her face hence meaning Evans must be not guilty as well .

I would say the word of a hard Drug user is unlikely to carry as much weight as say others in most peoples eyes . No one can say fore sure that she to drunk to say no in fact it's impossible to prove 100 %. so bearing that in mind and with one person found somehow not guilty of the same offence what is impossible if we take the line that the girl could not say no or defend herself in that hotel room I would say there is massive reasonable doubt .

Not really ..they showed cctv of the women of the falling over etc during the night at take aways etc that what used to show she was not in control of what she was doing that includes going to back to a hotel room .

The main point of the case is that and no time was the girl in any state to consent to sex ...so with that in mind how can one by guilty and the other not

And ? the old rule as has proved change more match results than double points ...it one thing saying that the old rule was better more fun etc ...but fairer it was never was . Of course that brings in the double standards of that everything was better in the old days gang who after saying they like the old tac rule also say the play offs are unfair .

I read plenty about the case ...I know that Evans friend was found not guilty and also said like Evans that she gave her consent to have sex with them both . So based on what the girl said how can they all agree what happened as you say ? as quite clearly they don't .. How did the jury find one guilty and the other not guilty ... Was she only out of head when she had sex with Evans and not with McDonald ? . Explain to me how if she was out of head and could not give consent how was Mcdonald found not guilty ? No one has or can prove 100 % she was to drunk not to consent and lets not forget that she was such a nice girl that they found traces of cocaine and other drugs that had been using the days before that night out ...it's a piss poor case based on the word a druggie .and you me or no one can prove it to be rape without reasonable doubt as the law asks .

So were the Brum 6 and Barry George etc and so have many others .. As I said it not a clear cut case so and a lot of public don't think he was guilty so Webster should have kept out it .

And does Charlie care if Evans is not Guilty ? or that he has spent time in Prison for no reason or the effect of her actions are having on Evans and his family and friends . I agree people should refrain from comments and actions that effect and that includes Webster getting involved in a case that a lot of the public think there has been a unfair verdict

This Footballer says he not guilty and a lot of people agree with him .. Let's hope you or Charlie never get convicted of something you never did or are not given a second chance by people . Evans has never said he was above the law he's has said he not guilty .

Whoosh

Good post . The new tac sub rule Play offs etc tend to be a stick that the old time fans use to hit people with and blame for the drop in crowd figures . As has been said many times the Old Tac rule gave many more false results as well as costing a lot more money

So where did you come up with 80 % ?

Got a link to this survey ?

So if the GP riders at Cardiff were replaced by NL riders you reckon the crowds would be the same ...Just like any other sport names bring in crowds and always will do .

Of course it matters as the crowds would get worse ....The question was what sport has got more fans by making the standard lower . Your example is just of one club, a better example would to divide the crowds in each game in each league . So the example of Man City in the champions league is a poor one as if you divided the champions league crowds on average it would smash the average Championship crowds . Maybe this year at the World Darts this year rather than having Phil Taylor ,MVG etc they should get some pubs players ,after all the crowds would stay the same as no one cares about the standard or what names they are watching

Your first point on the subject was about getting rid of top riders then you went on about getting new fans ... As I asked ask me what sport has got bigger crowds by getting rid of the best players /riders etc ? We get told time again what a great product the Pl league but as we have seen the crowds without the draw of decent names are still poor .

Have you read your posts on this subject ? pot ,kettle black . You tell me what sport has moved forward and got better crowds by having a worse standard ?

Pretty easy .. Less matches and stronger teams will more likely to give people a better match day experience, then they tell there friends it's good it snowballs from then better riders bigger crowds more sponsors better tv deal etc . You have regular race nights in the Pl and the crowds are still poor . I never known any sport get better and get crowds back by putting out a poorer standard as you suggest .

If the Pl was so good then why are the crowds so poor ? So much for your view of what fans want . Less meetings stronger sides is the way forward

Poole put good and strong sides out and those teams paid for themselves . so the answer to question is that they Can afford Ward, Wolves can afford Woffy and it makes good business sense . Plenty of point of keeping good riders as you need to keep the fans you have now . As I said we have had 20 years of doing the thing you want to do it's not worked

Yet again it's not just of a case of being to afford riders . If the standard drops and Woffy and Ward don't ride the crowds will drop again and you won't save any money in fact you might lose more . The same mistake keeps being made dropping the standard so the crowds drop. Been doing the same for the last 20 years and it's not worked .