Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Rui Jorge tests positive

  1. #1
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131

    Rui Jorge tests positive

    Portugal defender Rui Jorge has tested positive to anti allergy medicine.

    Now he faces 6 months for testing positive, Rio got 8 and yet he was negative, he got 8 forgetting, but Jorge faces 6 because he tested positive.

    Debate on
    Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

    RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

    Quote Originally Posted by Boobidy View Post
    Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

  2. #2
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,726
    First you get the facts about Rio wrong.

    He missed his test, which is the equivalent of a failed test, it is irrelevant that he took another test the next day.

    He was also extremely disruptive towards the FA and getting the hearing heard, and the evidence to the FA (think of the time to get the phone bill to them, and when it did, it had been tampered with)

    He pleaded guilty to the charge and then appealed when punished!
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  3. #3
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Simon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    25,599
    he appealed the length of the punishment, not the punishment itself...

  4. #4
    World Traveller Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Super Happy Fun Sugar Lollipop Land!
    Posts
    34,131
    [QUOTE=marc71178]First you get the facts about Rio wrong.

    He missed his test, which is the equivalent of a failed test, it is irrelevant that he took another test the next day.[/qoute]

    IIRC it was about 90 minutes later he did the test.

    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178
    He was also extremely disruptive towards the FA and getting the hearing heard, and the evidence to the FA (think of the time to get the phone bill to them, and when it did, it had been tampered with)

    He pleaded guilty to the charge and then appealed when punished!
    You honestly believe that was included in the banning?

    And anyway doesnt he have the right to appeal? If a player from Coventry tested positive, there is IMO a very good chance he would appeal.

    It was a forgone certainty that he would appeal.


  5. #5
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,726
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig
    You honestly believe that was included in the banning?
    My sources (which are very good by the way and know a lot of things that are going on before the public do) tell me it was 3 months for the offense, 3 months for being so disruptive when charged as regards getting the information requested and 2 months to cover the 2 months he carried on playing between the initial charge and the hearing.

    Had he just accepted it in the first place (why request a personal hearing if you admit the offense?), he would have been back playing just after Christmas, but Man United arrogantly thought that they were bigger than the FA and were proven wrong.

  6. #6
    International Coach
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    13,336
    Quote Originally Posted by marc71178
    My sources (which are very good by the way and know a lot of things that are going on before the public do) tell me it was 3 months for the offense, 3 months for being so disruptive when charged as regards getting the information requested and 2 months to cover the 2 months he carried on playing between the initial charge and the hearing.

    Had he just accepted it in the first place (why request a personal hearing if you admit the offense?), he would have been back playing just after Christmas, but Man United arrogantly thought that they were bigger than the FA and were proven wrong.
    You are so bloody biased.
    MSN - tomhalsey123@hotmail.com

    Manchester United FC: 20 Times

    R.I.P. Sledger's Signature, 2004-2008

  7. #7
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    57,726
    Why?

    Because I don't accept the pathetic excuses etc. that Ferdinand and Man United tried to use?



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •