If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Very valid point but I think it is far more weighted in one direction and for a select few what some would consider a very unhealthy obsession
To be honest if he leaves he leaves if he stays he stays and in the position we are in the league and the style of football we are now enjoying I just cannot understand why some just keep on and on
I have seen some comments that he is far too quiet these days from the same people who moaned that he said too much once so the situation will never be resolved
A Director is only a tempory guardian of our club anyway and over the years I have seen countless numbers of them come and go so I wont be losing any sleep over his position regardless of what the FA decide
It goes without saying of course that if he is found guilty of any financial wrongdoing at QPR then of course he should leave
Very valid point but I think it is far more weighted in one direction and for a select few what some would consider a very unhealthy obsession
To be honest if he leaves he leaves if he stays he stays and in the position we are in the league and the style of football we are now enjoying I just cannot understand why some just keep on and on
I have seen some comments that he is far too quiet these days from the same people who moaned that he said too much once so the situation will never be resolved
A Director is only a tempory guardian of our club anyway and over the years I have seen countless numbers of them come and go so I wont be losing any sleep over his position regardless of what the FA decide
It goes without saying of course that if he is found guilty of any financial wrongdoing at QPR then of course he should leave
Agree 100%, but by including caveats, that causes problems. If QPR is fined a penny piece, for something he is guilty of doing, he should go.
Agree 100%, but by including caveats, that causes problems. If QPR is fined a penny piece, for something he is guilty of doing, he should go.
Does Pete still agree with this sentiment.. As he is saying 100% fine.
So if a fine is levied that shows that we have broken the rules, if we have broken the rules, Paladini should go...
Does Pete still think that , that is the question.
Does Pete still agree with this sentiment.. As he is saying 100% fine.
So if a fine is levied that shows that we have broken the rules, if we have broken the rules, Paladini should go...
Does Pete still think that , that is the question.
Not to fussed about what other people think, as its horses for courses and they are entitled to their opinion as I am to mine, but in the real world, if he is found guilty of anything, he would be thanked for doing what he has in the past, but then sacked on the spot for negligence.
Agree 100%, but by including caveats, that causes problems. If QPR is fined a penny piece, for something he is guilty of doing, he should go.
An interesting point though is if we are found guilty of playing Faulin when he should not have been allowed to and fined or get a small point deduction would we be happy to still take the promotion but still have a go at the board even though we would have cheated to get there or do we all have such high morals that we would prefer to stay in the Championship?
An interesting point though is if we are found guilty of playing Faulin when he should not have been allowed to and fined or get a small point deduction would we be happy to still take the promotion but still have a go at the board even though we would have cheated to get there or do we all have such high morals that we would prefer to stay in the Championship?
It all depends on when Faurlin was actually ineligible. If it was for a couple games a couple of seasons ago I would still be happy to be promoted Isleworth.
An interesting point though is if we are found guilty of playing Faulin when he should not have been allowed to and fined or get a small point deduction would we be happy to still take the promotion but still have a go at the board even though we would have cheated to get there or do we all have such high morals that we would prefer to stay in the Championship?
That's neither here or there but the question should be why did we play him and why was he not allowed to play.
Didn't I read somewhere that the FL had no rules regarding third-party ownership in 2009/10, and that is why Faurlin was ALWAYS eligible to play in 2010/11. This is supposedly why the FA have taken up the case?
It seems that now people are saying that Faurlin was illegible, when this is clearly not the case.
As I understand it, FL had no rule until Spt/Oct, but the FA did.
Just because we play in FL, we are also affiliated to the FA, thus we have to abide by their rules.
Otherwise, in theory we couldn't play in the FA Cup or get promoted !
would we be happy to still take the promotion but still have a go at the board even though we would have cheated to get there or do we all have such high morals that we would prefer to stay in the Championship?
NOOOO my morals are lower than a snakes belly I don't care if all our players have been on coke all season I want promotion
Comment