Hazard and the ball boy

[A kick in the Jacobs]

You're really quite a disturbing character, you're the one twisting like a teething baby on a helter skelter and you can't admit it.

You are deluded.

I'll say it again, you had a go at me when you thought I was calling for a prosecution now your laughable angle of attack is based around the fact that I don't think a kick in the ribs is worthy of prosecution.

No, my first issue was your statement that it was a kick in the ribs and that you were so categoric about it.

On THIS occasion there's no reason for a prosecution IMO and if you believe there is then you're the sort of person who gets someone an unwarranted criminal record, if you don't then we agree so WTF is it then? You're either that sort of person or you've been arguing about something you agree with me on.

Are you so stupid that you really think every situation where someone is kicked in the ribs I'll have the same opinion? Talk about a generalisation

Christ on a bike.

How is there no reason for a prosecution if you think he intentionally kicked him in the ribs.

I don't believe Hazard should be prosecuted because he didn't (intentionally) kick him in the ribs, but if he had intentionally kicked him in the ribs then I would expect him to be prosecuted. Absolutely! It's beyond me how anyone would not expect/want someone to be prosecuted for intentionally forcefully kicking someone in the ribs, especially with the 'evidence' on tape.

Why would I change my stance on this? It looked that way to me, I don't think we'll ever know for sure so no opinion on it is a load of s***.

Oh, so now it's "I don't think we'll ever know for sure" after you were so sure previously.

The only thing that's a load of s*** is your attitude by dismissing my opinion on it out of hand. It's you that will always be the idiot and nothing short of a troll on these boards. I know others look upon you the same way.

Brilliant - a common sign that someone's been tucked up is when they accuse someone of being a troll. I don't troll. I much prefer to make dozy twonks like you make themselves look fools.

Your stance on this is very, very worrying. Especially being in the role that you are (and I'm not meaning your role of board spunkmat).

[DL5]

I'll say it again, you had a go at me when you thought I was calling for a prosecution now your laughable angle of attack is based around the fact that I don't think a kick in the ribs is worthy of prosecution.

No, my first issue was your statement that it was a kick in the ribs and that you were so categoric about it.

So categoric?, I was sure he has kicked the lad and not the ball, I think I said once it was intentional, hardly worthy of your silly over reaction

On THIS occasion there's no reason for a prosecution IMO and if you believe there is then you're the sort of person who gets someone an unwarranted criminal record, if you don't then we agree so WTF is it then? You're either that sort of person or you've been arguing about something you agree with me on.

Are you so stupid that you really think every situation where someone is kicked in the ribs I'll have the same opinion? Talk about a generalisation

Christ on a bike.

How is there no reason for a prosecution if you think he intentionally kicked him in the ribs.

I don't believe Hazard should be prosecuted because he didn't (intentionally) kick him in the ribs, but if he had intentionally kicked him in the ribs then I would expect him to be prosecuted. Absolutely! It's beyond me how anyone would not expect/want someone to be prosecuted for intentionally forcefully kicking someone in the ribs, especially with the 'evidence' on tape.

I've explained it to you several times now but you choose not to accept how the criminal justice system operates and how things are dealt with in the real world, pathetic really on your part.

Why would I change my stance on this? It looked that way to me, I don't think we'll ever know for sure so no opinion on it is a load of s***.

Oh, so now it's "I don't think we'll ever know for sure" after you were so sure previously.

I can only speak as I see it, you're making out as though I claimed to have knowledge of his mindset at the time

The only thing that's a load of s*** is your attitude by dismissing my opinion on it out of hand. It's you that will always be the idiot and nothing short of a troll on these boards. I know others look upon you the same way.

Brilliant - a common sign that someone's been tucked up is when they accuse someone of being a troll. I don't troll. I much prefer to make dozy twonks like you make themselves look fools.

Your stance on this is very, very worrying. Especially being in the role that you are (and I'm not meaning your role of board spunkmat).

Better luck next time because you've made yourself look like a right muppett this time (again) And as for the the faux fretting, very worried dear me you steaming badger's ballsack, don't have nightmares, do sleep well DJ

[A kick in the Jacobs]

Is that you meekly conceding defeat? Give a little concession, but say it wasn't material to make you look less of a loser?

As you're a man of no substance whatsoever, I suppose I shouldn't expect you to expressly state "I was wrong", but still . . .

I await your next dose of bollocks.

[DL5]

Is that you meekly conceding defeat? Give a little concession, but say it wasn't material to make you look less of a loser?

As you're a man of no substance whatsoever, I suppose I shouldn't expect you to expressly state "I was wrong", but still . . .

I await your next dose of bollocks.

I'm conceding fuck all Deej

You want me to admit that I was wrong about what? telling it like I saw it? that I was wrong about you and you're actually not a narcissistic moron and are perfectly justified in causing this tedious nonsense?

How about you admitting (for starters) you've over reacted to my comments, jumped at the chance to have a go due to past issues between us and pathetically switched the focus of your ramblings in hypocritical fashion?

As for substance, I think you've used too much.


I'm bored of you now so hush Crispian

[darren]

little b****** ball boy/man got wot he fuckn deserved .was even bragging what he was gunna do.wouldnt like it if he was doing it for spenny against us wud we.?

[A kick in the Jacobs]

You want me to admit that I was wrong about what? telling it like I saw it? that I was wrong about you and you're actually not a narcissistic moron and are perfectly justified in causing this tedious nonsense?

How about you admitting (for starters) you've over reacted to my comments, jumped at the chance to have a go due to past issues between us and pathetically switched the focus of your ramblings in hypocritical fashion?

As for substance, I think you've used too much.

I'm bored of you now so hush Crispian

DL5 - always the victim.

Picking you up when you're talking bollocks has nothing to do with anything to do with previous exchanges. If that was the case, I'd always be on your case. In addition, as I always best you, it's not as if I'm looking for revenge. As I've already said, it's simply because you're stupid. Just accept it.

I didn't switch my focus at all. I was postulating as you were fannying about with non-committal nuanced responses. As soon as I knew what you stood for, I was able to focus on your hypocrisy and/or stupidity.

You're stupid. Always have been. Always will be.

[DL5]

You want me to admit that I was wrong about what? telling it like I saw it? that I was wrong about you and you're actually not a narcissistic moron and are perfectly justified in causing this tedious nonsense?

How about you admitting (for starters) you've over reacted to my comments, jumped at the chance to have a go due to past issues between us and pathetically switched the focus of your ramblings in hypocritical fashion?

As for substance, I think you've used too much.

I'm bored of you now so hush Crispian

DL5 - always the victim.

Picking you up when you're talking bollocks has nothing to do with anything to do with previous exchanges. If that was the case, I'd always be on your case. In addition, as I always best you, it's not as if I'm looking for revenge. As I've already said, it's simply because you're stupid. Just accept it.

I didn't switch my focus at all. I was postulating as you were fannying about with non-committal nuanced responses. As soon as I knew what you stood for, I was able to focus on your hypocrisy and/or stupidity.

You're stupid. Always have been. Always will be.

postulating = fannying about. More horseshit as usual from you DJ, it's been dealt with entirely correctly which mirrors my thoughts on the subject. You're the one with the stupid idea that it should have been prosecuted IF it was intentional despite the "victim's" wishes, this incident was not serious enough to prosecute without the victim's support, as I've already said, why can't you grasp that?

Cue you ironically calling me stupid again and dodging the question.

[A kick in the Jacobs]

You want me to admit that I was wrong about what? telling it like I saw it? that I was wrong about you and you're actually not a narcissistic moron and are perfectly justified in causing this tedious nonsense?

How about you admitting (for starters) you've over reacted to my comments, jumped at the chance to have a go due to past issues between us and pathetically switched the focus of your ramblings in hypocritical fashion?

As for substance, I think you've used too much.

I'm bored of you now so hush Crispian

DL5 - always the victim.

Picking you up when you're talking bollocks has nothing to do with anything to do with previous exchanges. If that was the case, I'd always be on your case. In addition, as I always best you, it's not as if I'm looking for revenge. As I've already said, it's simply because you're stupid. Just accept it.

I didn't switch my focus at all. I was postulating as you were fannying about with non-committal nuanced responses. As soon as I knew what you stood for, I was able to focus on your hypocrisy and/or stupidity.

You're stupid. Always have been. Always will be.

postulating = fannying about. More horseshit as usual from you DJ, it's been dealt with entirely correctly which mirrors my thoughts on the subject. You're the one with the stupid idea that it should have been prosecuted IF it was intentional despite the "victim's" wishes, this incident was not serious enough to prosecute without the victim's support, as I've already said, why can't you grasp that?

Cue you ironically calling me stupid again and dodging the question.

Hazard is not being charged because he didn't intentionally kick him in the ribs, which is the whole point of this exchange, you nob!

Members of the public complained. The police looked at it and said there was no case to answer.

If he had intentionally kicked him in the ribs, he'd surely have been prosecuted.

I await your next wave of waffle.

[DL5]

You want me to admit that I was wrong about what? telling it like I saw it? that I was wrong about you and you're actually not a narcissistic moron and are perfectly justified in causing this tedious nonsense?

How about you admitting (for starters) you've over reacted to my comments, jumped at the chance to have a go due to past issues between us and pathetically switched the focus of your ramblings in hypocritical fashion?

As for substance, I think you've used too much.

I'm bored of you now so hush Crispian

DL5 - always the victim.

Picking you up when you're talking bollocks has nothing to do with anything to do with previous exchanges. If that was the case, I'd always be on your case. In addition, as I always best you, it's not as if I'm looking for revenge. As I've already said, it's simply because you're stupid. Just accept it.

I didn't switch my focus at all. I was postulating as you were fannying about with non-committal nuanced responses. As soon as I knew what you stood for, I was able to focus on your hypocrisy and/or stupidity.

You're stupid. Always have been. Always will be.

postulating = fannying about. More horseshit as usual from you DJ, it's been dealt with entirely correctly which mirrors my thoughts on the subject. You're the one with the stupid idea that it should have been prosecuted IF it was intentional despite the "victim's" wishes, this incident was not serious enough to prosecute without the victim's support, as I've already said, why can't you grasp that?

Cue you ironically calling me stupid again and dodging the question.

Hazard is not being charged because he didn't intentionally kick him in the ribs, which is the whole point of this exchange, you nob!

Members of the public complained. The police looked at it and said there was no case to answer.

If he had intentionally kicked him in the ribs, he'd surely have been prosecuted.

I await your next wave of waffle.

Wrong as usual, they didn't investigate because it was minor as there were no injuries and there was no complaint How many times do you need telling? That hole's getting bigger DJ.

"South Wales Police received a number of calls from members of the public following an incident involving a ball boy at the Capital One Cup semi-final between Swansea City and Chelsea at The Liberty Stadium in Swansea on Wednesday 23rd January.

From the outset our primary concern was for the victim who was spoken to by a police officer in the presence of his father and he does not wish to make any formal complaint.

We can confirm there is no longer any police involvement in this matter"

– SOUTH WALES POLICE STATEMENT

[A kick in the Jacobs]

You want me to admit that I was wrong about what? telling it like I saw it? that I was wrong about you and you're actually not a narcissistic moron and are perfectly justified in causing this tedious nonsense?

How about you admitting (for starters) you've over reacted to my comments, jumped at the chance to have a go due to past issues between us and pathetically switched the focus of your ramblings in hypocritical fashion?

As for substance, I think you've used too much.

I'm bored of you now so hush Crispian

DL5 - always the victim.

Picking you up when you're talking bollocks has nothing to do with anything to do with previous exchanges. If that was the case, I'd always be on your case. In addition, as I always best you, it's not as if I'm looking for revenge. As I've already said, it's simply because you're stupid. Just accept it.

I didn't switch my focus at all. I was postulating as you were fannying about with non-committal nuanced responses. As soon as I knew what you stood for, I was able to focus on your hypocrisy and/or stupidity.

You're stupid. Always have been. Always will be.

postulating = fannying about. More horseshit as usual from you DJ, it's been dealt with entirely correctly which mirrors my thoughts on the subject. You're the one with the stupid idea that it should have been prosecuted IF it was intentional despite the "victim's" wishes, this incident was not serious enough to prosecute without the victim's support, as I've already said, why can't you grasp that?

Cue you ironically calling me stupid again and dodging the question.

Hazard is not being charged because he didn't intentionally kick him in the ribs, which is the whole point of this exchange, you nob!

Members of the public complained. The police looked at it and said there was no case to answer.

If he had intentionally kicked him in the ribs, he'd surely have been prosecuted.

I await your next wave of waffle.

Wrong as usual, they didn't investigate because it was minor as there were no injuries and there was no complaint How many times do you need telling? That hole's getting bigger DJ.

"South Wales Police received a number of calls from members of the public following an incident involving a ball boy at the Capital One Cup semi-final between Swansea City and Chelsea at The Liberty Stadium in Swansea on Wednesday 23rd January.

From the outset our primary concern was for the victim who was spoken to by a police officer in the presence of his father and he does not wish to make any formal complaint.

We can confirm there is no longer any police involvement in this matter"

– SOUTH WALES POLICE STATEMENT

Christ - you're an idiot. You continue to hang yourself over and over again.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... -32674578/

"Three calls have been received from members of the public living in Sussex, Kent and West Wales which are being followed up."

"Officers have interviewed the ball boy concerned in the presence of his father and he does not wish to make any formal complaint."

They wouldn't be 'followed up' if, as you're suggesting, the ballboy's decision not to make a formal complaint put an end to the matter.

[mikkyx]

FFS, this topic had been dead for two weeks. Let it go!

[DL5]

Christ - you're an idiot. You continue to hang yourself over and over again.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... -32674578/

"Three calls have been received from members of the public living in Sussex, Kent and West Wales which are being followed up."

"Officers have interviewed the ball boy concerned in the presence of his father and he does not wish to make any formal complaint."

They wouldn't be 'followed up' if, as you're suggesting, the ballboy's decision not to make a formal complaint put an end to the matter.

The correct quote is what I posted you twonk, no complaint = end of investigation. I'll keep typing it until it sinks in if you like

[DL5]

FFS, this topic had been dead for two weeks. Let it go!

Lock it Mikky, I'm sick of this tool, I won't be wasting another moment on him.

[thomo27]

Christ - you're an idiot. You continue to hang yourself over and over again.

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales ... -32674578/

"Three calls have been received from members of the public living in Sussex, Kent and West Wales which are being followed up."

"Officers have interviewed the ball boy concerned in the presence of his father and he does not wish to make any formal complaint."

They wouldn't be 'followed up' if, as you're suggesting, the ballboy's decision not to make a formal complaint put an end to the matter.

The correct quote is what I posted you twonk, no complaint = end of investigation. I'll keep typing it until it sinks in if you like

You mean you will keep typing until you get the last word