Mattock's Big Day (Thursday)

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
No Leeh. That just isn't glamourous enough for us. I bet the **** walked out doing the goosestep say "**** lestoh!" and some old dear is serving time in prison instead.

Scandalous.
 
Mattock got......‎10mths suspended for 2yrs, 150hrs unpaid work requirement and £1,500 cost

Proof that there is no genuine justice in this country - provided that you have enough money to afford a very good lawyer

Scandalous decision


I think that's probably a bit more than I expected him to get, considering the down-grading of the charges.
 
To be fair if some chav was in my face giving me shit i'd be inclined to smack them.
 
The judge's comments that he's fair game for abuse because he earns a good wage (effectively) is complete and utter bollocks.
I doesn't matter what job somebody does or how much they are paid to do it, nobody has the right to abuse you. If that arsehole had've been up in my face, I'd have done the same thing, especially if I had a few drinks in me. I'd stamp on his neck.
 
The judge's comments that he's fair game for abuse because he earns a good wage (effectively) is complete and utter bollocks.
I doesn't matter what job somebody does or how much they are paid to do it, nobody has the right to abuse you. If that arsehole had've been up in my face, I'd have done the same thing, especially if I had a few drinks in me. I'd stamp on his neck.

I thought the same.

As a footballer he will have to expect it (although in an ideal world it shouldn't matter) but even that shouldn't be taken into consideration in court. All men should be equal in the eyes of the law.
 
The judge's comments that he's fair game for abuse because he earns a good wage (effectively) is complete and utter bollocks.
I doesn't matter what job somebody does or how much they are paid to do it, nobody has the right to abuse you. If that arsehole had've been up in my face, I'd have done the same thing, especially if I had a few drinks in me. I'd stamp on his neck.

The judge didn't say he was fair game. The implication was that JM was recompensed enough to rise above jealous twats without having to resort to violence.
 
The judge didn't say he was fair game. The implication was that JM was recompensed enough to rise above jealous twats without having to resort to violence.

That's still bollocks though, the two aren't related at all. Mattock's earnings have nothing to do with the case.
 
That's still bollocks though, the two aren't related at all. Mattock's earnings have nothing to do with the case.

Yes they do. The judge was making the point that a sensible lad in Mattocks financial position would not put himself in the position that Joe did. Using a bit of common sense and staying away from clubs full of idiots who've had a beer in Leicester City centre for a while would have stopped any of this, it's not as if there aren't plenty of pubs and clubs around the midlands.
 
Yes they do. The judge was making the point that a sensible lad in Mattocks financial position would not put himself in the position that Joe did. Using a bit of common sense and staying away from clubs full of idiots who've had a beer in Leicester City centre for a while would have stopped any of this, it's not as if there aren't plenty of pubs and clubs around the midlands.

And of all the clubs available, even in Leicester, he chooses to go to beered-up chav central. Common sense would tell you that JM was more or less guaranteed trouble.
 
Last edited:
Course they are; if he wasn't a footballer earning a "king's ransom", he wouldn't have been targeted in the first place.

Exactly. So he deserves the protection of the law, not condemnation from it.
 
Exactly. So he deserves the protection of the law, not condemnation from it.

In what way?

Are you suggesting that his status should have meant he had the perfect excuse to use his fists to resolve a situation? Surely when he made that decision, and it was pointed out by his own brief, as a sober individual and not a pissed up lout like the people he dealt with, he crossed a line.
 
Yes they do. The judge was making the point that a sensible lad in Mattocks financial position would not put himself in the position that Joe did. Using a bit of common sense and staying away from clubs full of idiots who've had a beer in Leicester City centre for a while would have stopped any of this, it's not as if there aren't plenty of pubs and clubs around the midlands.

The quote from the judge indicates that the people winding him up aren't idiots, but some sort of martyr, abused by an evil footballer. If you take the piss out of any pissed up stranger, at some point you are going to get a smack.
 
The quote from the judge indicates that the people winding him up aren't idiots, but some sort of martyr, abused by an evil footballer. If you take the piss out of any pissed up stranger, at some point you are going to get a smack.

No it wasn't. First of all, it was said that Mattock was sober. Secondly, I think people are missing the point entirely. The complainants were not painted in any favourable light at all. The judge has criticised Mattock's reaction to the situation. If it was perfectly legal to smack gobby, pissed up twunts, then there'd be a lot more violence in town at weekends.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

Championship

P Pld Pts
1Leicester4697
2Ipswich4696
3Leeds Utd4690
4Southampton4687
5West Brom4675
6Norwich City4673
7Hull City4670
8Middlesbro4669
9Coventry City4664
10Preston 4663
11Bristol City4662
12Cardiff City4662
13Millwall4659
14Swansea City4657
15Watford4656
16Sunderland4656
17Stoke City4656
18QPR4656
19Blackburn 4653
20Sheffield W4653
21Plymouth 4651
22Birmingham4650
23Huddersfield4645
24Rotherham Utd4627

Latest posts

Top