So the club were informed

I started this thread so take this as a dig at myself. Now I have been brought up a Sunderland supporter from the day I was born. I want nothing more than to see the club do well. My dream is for us to win something. Have I been critical. Yes I have and if there is something to critise I feel I'm allowed to do that. this is different though. If this football club that I love has swept under the carpet the seriousness of this allegation. Not worried about a young fan first rather than it's millionaire player or own reputation then I struggle to see how I can put up with those in charge of our club behaving in that way. I don't want Sunderland football club to be like that. It's because I care that I criticise.

 

In what? I personally think safc have done everything most other clubs would have. If not all.

The club were made aware of his police statement. To which he has now admitted lying about! Where have the club gone wrong exactly?

@concrete tony it was an allegation that he denied. The club were under no obligation to suspend him and, as mentioned, he lied to the police in his initial statement so the club being made aware of it makes no difference.

 

The club sacked him as soon as he made his plea of guilty. I honestly can't see what more they could have done without leaving themselves wide open. The only thing bringing the club down is the fans who are trying to turn Johnson's exploits into a dig at the club in general.

 

Stop being so self righteous man. God knows what you would have done in 1956/7 when we got caught out with under the table payments to players. As it was we were the ones that got caught as it was rife throughout football. AJ has been stupid rather than evil, saying the wrong thing in a test = grooming in law.

Nowt to do with the club when all the ingredients are put together.

 

He certainly isn't. The press seem to be purposefully quoting him word for word too, so he is coming across as a complete thicko. I'd not be surprised if they started using the Viz spelling guide when quoting him next.

 

I have got to be honest and say that I'm not sure what the relevance to the trial is over the club knowing or not. Is the inference that as the club "knew" they in some way condoned it therefore lessening the offence?

I genuinely don't understand why it was brought up.

As a result I do think that as soon as they are able to the club needs to issue a statement to the fans clarifying (note - I didn't say justifying) what happened from their perspective. It would also be really useful if they could highlight what they were obligated to do.

This is not a witch hunt but I do think there will be a lot of people genuinely confused by this and the best way to stop all the speculation would be for the club to issue a statement as soon as they can.

 

Simply not true you bellend

 

- we are both agreeing here about a seriously wrong emotive action -- he deserves all the outfall coming his way just hope Sunderland don't catch any blame - We need to remove our CE & any others board members who are named as knowing - imo. We don't want to derail our BSA led recovery l

 

In my opinion your are a negative poster.
In your opinion I'm a bellend all that matters really.

 

He admitted his guilt to police in his initial interview and those transcripts were given to Sunderland AFC (Margaret Byrne) a short while after his arrest.

 

Do you honestly believe that the police go around handing out transcripts from interviews to people's employers? And a short while after his arrest? It takes quite a while for the transcripts to come through...

 

Look, you can try to defend your club as much as you like but the fact of the matter is, the club knew a long time ago that he was guilty. they continued to let him play in the belief he would help save them from relegation. If I were you I'd be devastated that my club could act in this manner.

 

http://www.thepfa.com/news/2015/3/18/sunderland-lift-johnson-suspension
"The club has discussed the current position in detail with both the PFA (Professional Footballers' Association) and Adam's representatives.

"In line with those discussions we recognise that the player is entitled to re-commence his duties with the club while the legal process continues. He will therefore return to training.

"The club's own investigation cannot continue until the conclusion of the legal process. Sunderland AFC will make no further comment on the matter due to the ongoing police investigation."

We had to lift the suspension. We've acted completely ethically, in line with the law and guidelines set by the player's works union. You're pointing the finger based on very little information and making yourself look a right clip. Don't worry though, you type have been ten a penny.

 

Yep. Like I said, dress it up however you want. You are making out they had no option. Thats bollocks and you know it! If he admitted his guilt to the club (which he did) , they could have sacked him there and then. They didn't need to do any investigations. If they wanted to protect the legal process, they could have kept him suspended on full pay.

Listen. At the end of the day, the club knew. End of. The whole country is now looking at SAFC with disgust.

 

So you're the whole country's spokesperson then?

 

You got your **** deflectors on there Billy?

 

Only the idiots.

You do know while you're skipping around in that delusional moralistic eutopia which only exists in your mind, the rest of the planet are governed by laws. Our CEO is a Lawyer, AJ has Lawyers and the PFA is a Union with Lawyers. They are all wrong with their professional opinion because Bishbashbosh who tends not to floss said 'end of'. Righto

 

I'm not sure which laws you are referring to. Are you? As I'm sure you are well aware, lawyers are the best people to use to try to manipulate a situation to your own advantage in a legal setting. In that respect SAFC are very well equipped it would seem.

If you read the link I was so kindly referred to, it is a minefield of info if you care to look.

A club statement said: "The club has discussed the current position in detail with both the PFA (Professional Footballers' Association) and Adam's representatives. - Translates as, can we still legally get away with playing him?

Durham Police...... statement "Sunderland AFC informed us this morning of their decision, which of course is a matter entirely for the club. The police investigation remains very much live and ongoing and a man remains on bail while enquiries continue. - Which means there is nothing legally preventing the club from playing the player.

It then goes on to discuss how imperative it is for SAFC to remain in the PL. Coincidence?

 

please log in to view this image

 

Yeah it's all just been a great big ****storm where AJ's lawyers, Sunderland football club and the PFA all conspired together in order to play a nonce. It's Noncegate and you uncovered it Bosh.

P.S, I suggest you go and read uo the difference between criminal law and the likes of civil and employment law as you clearly don't have a clue. If you did you wouldn't have made yourself look divvy in the bit you quoted in regards to Durham Police

You seem to forget that's a PFA article too. They've chosen how it's worded not the club.