ECB moves on quick....
Moderator: Moderators
Re: ECB moves on quick....
I listened to radio 4 this morning to gauge how they are reacting to the fallout of this trial. They were discussing what the ECB might conclude from their own review and what action they might take. The questions asked went down the line of: although not guilty and didn't break the law did Stokes bring the game into disrepute from excessive drinking, get into a fight, knocking someone out, etc....
The response was exactly the same as we had towards PJ and SO.
They said that they couldn't possibly impose any sanction as he had been acquitted. They should instead have a chat with him and try to help him. He had already been punished enough because he missed the ashes. Next season is a big year for cricket and they would definitely need him. Even the suggestion of a suspension was ruled out as he could and should challenge that through the courts himself.
They also said there was a document available which clearly sets out the decision tree the jury had to follow to reach their verdict. It seems like they are bending over backwards to ensure he gets fair treatment and continues his career.
The response was exactly the same as we had towards PJ and SO.
They said that they couldn't possibly impose any sanction as he had been acquitted. They should instead have a chat with him and try to help him. He had already been punished enough because he missed the ashes. Next season is a big year for cricket and they would definitely need him. Even the suggestion of a suspension was ruled out as he could and should challenge that through the courts himself.
They also said there was a document available which clearly sets out the decision tree the jury had to follow to reach their verdict. It seems like they are bending over backwards to ensure he gets fair treatment and continues his career.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
- big mervyn
- Rí na Cúige Uladh
- Posts: 14360
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
- Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)
Re: ECB moves on quick....
The difference in this case is that they were out on the lash in the middle of an international series. Stokes was vice captain. That would certainly warrant some sort of sanction from the EBC. You could argue that Stokes has been punished enough. Hales on the other hand ...
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall
Big Neville Southall
Re: ECB moves on quick....
Let's not beat around the bush.big mervyn wrote:The difference in this case is that they were out on the lash in the middle of an international series. Stokes was vice captain. That would certainly warrant some sort of sanction from the EBC. You could argue that Stokes has been punished enough. Hales on the other hand ...
The main difference between the cases is one is an affray charge and the other is a rape charge.
We're comparing apples and PCs.
Re: ECB moves on quick....
What if the person involved in the Stokes incident was a woman?BR wrote:Let's not beat around the bush.big mervyn wrote:The difference in this case is that they were out on the lash in the middle of an international series. Stokes was vice captain. That would certainly warrant some sort of sanction from the EBC. You could argue that Stokes has been punished enough. Hales on the other hand ...
The main difference between the cases is one is an affray charge and the other is a rape charge.
We're comparing apples and PCs.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
Re: ECB moves on quick....
Which person involved?Dave wrote:What if the person involved in the Stokes incident was a woman?BR wrote:Let's not beat around the bush.big mervyn wrote:The difference in this case is that they were out on the lash in the middle of an international series. Stokes was vice captain. That would certainly warrant some sort of sanction from the EBC. You could argue that Stokes has been punished enough. Hales on the other hand ...
The main difference between the cases is one is an affray charge and the other is a rape charge.
We're comparing apples and PCs.
Re: ECB moves on quick....
The guy knocked out.BR wrote:Which person involved?Dave wrote:What if the person involved in the Stokes incident was a woman?BR wrote:Let's not beat around the bush.big mervyn wrote:The difference in this case is that they were out on the lash in the middle of an international series. Stokes was vice captain. That would certainly warrant some sort of sanction from the EBC. You could argue that Stokes has been punished enough. Hales on the other hand ...
The main difference between the cases is one is an affray charge and the other is a rape charge.
We're comparing apples and PCs.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
Re: ECB moves on quick....
If she didn't make a complaint, then nothing changes.Dave wrote:The guy knocked out.BR wrote:Which person involved?Dave wrote:What if the person involved in the Stokes incident was a woman?BR wrote:Let's not beat around the bush.big mervyn wrote:The difference in this case is that they were out on the lash in the middle of an international series. Stokes was vice captain. That would certainly warrant some sort of sanction from the EBC. You could argue that Stokes has been punished enough. Hales on the other hand ...
The main difference between the cases is one is an affray charge and the other is a rape charge.
We're comparing apples and PCs.
- big mervyn
- Rí na Cúige Uladh
- Posts: 14360
- Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
- Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)
Re: ECB moves on quick....
Stokes DIDN'T rape anybody. Exactly like PJ and SO.
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall
Big Neville Southall
Re: ECB moves on quick....
Correct.big mervyn wrote:Stokes DIDN'T rape anybody. Exactly like PJ and SO.
Neither did I.
Re: ECB moves on quick....
Correct.BR wrote:If she didn't make a complaint, then nothing changes.Dave wrote:The guy knocked out.BR wrote:Which person involved?Dave wrote:What if the person involved in the Stokes incident was a woman?BR wrote: Let's not beat around the bush.
The main difference between the cases is one is an affray charge and the other is a rape charge.
We're comparing apples and PCs.
However there is no feminist outcry.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
Re: ECB moves on quick....
I thought it was more common for feminist activists to support those accused of public order offences.Dave wrote:Correct.BR wrote:If she didn't make a complaint, then nothing changes.Dave wrote:The guy knocked out.BR wrote:Which person involved?Dave wrote:What if the person involved in the Stokes incident was a woman?
However there is no feminist outcry.
Re: ECB moves on quick....
They will back the female.BR wrote:
I thought it was more common for feminist activists to support those accused of public order offences.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
Re: ECB moves on quick....
So the co-accused in this (hypothetically altered) case?Dave wrote:They will back the female.BR wrote:
I thought it was more common for feminist activists to support those accused of public order offences.
No affray. All those charged walk free.
Re: ECB moves on quick....
I'm not referring to the case or verdict but the so called public outcry that follows.BR wrote:So the co-accused in this (hypothetically altered) case?Dave wrote:They will back the female.BR wrote:
I thought it was more common for feminist activists to support those accused of public order offences.
No affray. All those charged walk free.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?
Re: ECB moves on quick....
We all know if Stokes had been videoed in a punch-up with a woman, there would have been a greater outcry and the result of the trial would have been the least if his worries. His image would have been irreplaceably damaged and he'd probably have to go and play cricket in India.Dave wrote:I'm not referring to the case or verdict but the so called public outcry that follows.BR wrote:So the co-accused in this (hypothetically altered) case?Dave wrote:They will back the female.BR wrote:
I thought it was more common for feminist activists to support those accused of public order offences.
No affray. All those charged walk free.