Ally Love

[shawfield shed boy]

I don't know, in this day and age people are encouraged to speak up about it, I don't know why you would wait until after the game when telling the ref would surely make it easier to convict someone of it.
I don't know what incident he's referring to but from what I'm told the one in which Love is supposed to have said it the referee is as close to the incident as Moxon, who backs up Omar's story. How does he or any other player not hear it if it's as blatant as made out. Stories seemed to change too, Love was told the incident was supposedly in the 25th minute, they checked footage and the two players are nowhere near each other, the minute of the incident then changed to well into the second half. If someone calls you that I'm sure you remember what half it happened in at the very least. 
As I've said every post, Love may well have said something but I don't think it adds up. 

Careful Moonster. There are a lot of over sensitive people on here that only want to believe one side of the story. Racism is wrong in every way. Lying about it is just as bad to allow the shoe to fit

[1320Lichtie]

I don't know, in this day and age people are encouraged to speak up about it, I don't know why you would wait until after the game when telling the ref would surely make it easier to convict someone of it.

I don't know what incident he's referring to but from what I'm told the one in which Love is supposed to have said it the referee is as close to the incident as Moxon, who backs up Omar's story. How does he or any other player not hear it if it's as blatant as made out. Stories seemed to change too, Love was told the incident was supposedly in the 25th minute, they checked footage and the two players are nowhere near each other, the minute of the incident then changed to well into the second half. If someone calls you that I'm sure you remember what half it happened in at the very least. 

As I've said every post, Love may well have said something but I don't think it adds up. 

 

Out of interest where are you hearing about all of these specific details?

 

And people are encouraged to speak up but that doesn’t mean they always do? Nobody likes doing it, there’s a stigma around it and in this case he knows that as soon as he does this is national news and a lot of people are speaking about it. Think it makes perfect sense to not go running to the ref straight away, probably something he spoke about to mates or family about afterwards and they encouraged him to go forward with it.

 

And if you don’t know what incident he’s referring to I’m presuming that’s when it happened, Love was told the 25th minute by who? If it was a player how is a player playing the game going to know the exact minute it happened? How are people seeing an incident kick off between the 2 of them and presuming something bad was said???

 

Do you know Love personally? If you do do you not think he’s maybe feeding you this information to make himself look better? Did he play for Dumbarton?

 

I agree with most things you say elsewhere on here so I’m very surprised that you’d think there’s even a chance someone has possibly made up a story as horrible as this.

 

Would be pure evil to do this as you wreck someone’s reputation (also another hard reason for saying it happened) and have an absolute shit storm to deal with (another hard reason for saying it happened) and as SSB has said if he was caught to be lying it would absolutely f**k his own reputation too.

 

Don’t see any reason why anyone would make it up and don’t believe he has for a second either.

 

From what I’ve seen from Ally Love even before this incident he doesn’t seem the brightest.

[The Moonster]

18 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

Out of interest where are you hearing about all of these specific details?

 

And people are encouraged to speak up but that doesn’t mean they always do? Nobody likes doing it, there’s a stigma around it and in this case he knows that as soon as he does this is national news and a lot of people are speaking about it. Think it makes perfect sense to not go running to the ref straight away, probably something he spoke about to mates or family about afterwards and they encouraged him to go forward with it.

 

And if you don’t know what incident he’s referring to I’m presuming that’s when it happened, Love was told the 25th minute by who? If it was a player how is a player playing the game going to know the exact minute it happened? How are people seeing an incident kick off between the 2 of them and presuming something bad was said???

 

Do you know Love personally? If you do do you not think he’s maybe feeding you this information to make himself look better? Did he play for Dumbarton?

 

I agree with most things you say elsewhere on here so I’m very surprised that you’d think there’s even a chance someone has possibly made up a story as horrible as this.

 

Would be pure evil to do this as you wreck someone’s reputation (also another hard reason for saying it happened) and have an absolute shit storm to deal with (another hard reason for saying it happened) and as SSB has said if he was caught to be lying it would absolutely f**k his own reputation too.

 

Don’t see any reason why anyone would make it up and don’t believe he has for a second either.

 

From what I’ve seen from Ally Love even before this incident he doesn’t seem the brightest.

I've never spoken to Ally Love and I don't know him personally. We'll disagree on reporting it to the ref, the whole "nobody likes a grass" thing doesn't wash for me when it comes to racial abuse.  The compliance officer issued the notice so I'm assuming that's where he was told the 25th minute.  At the end of the day everyone will draw their own conclusions, all I'm saying is things aren't always as clear cut as they seem.  

 

[1320Lichtie]

I've never spoken to Ally Love and I don't know him personally. We'll disagree on reporting it to the ref, the whole "nobody likes a grass" thing doesn't wash for me when it comes to racial abuse.  The compliance officer issued the notice so I'm assuming that's where he was told the 25th minute.  At the end of the day everyone will draw their own conclusions, all I'm saying is things aren't always as clear cut as they seem.  
 

There’s nothing clear cut about this and nobody is saying there is. None of us have heard anything and we weren’t on the park.

But imo the balance of probability is massively in favour of Omar.

Also who is Moxam? A player? Again do you really think that he would want to get involved in this whole incident if he wasn’t sure? Surely 99 percent of people would just say that they didn’t hear anything or want to get involved if they had an element of doubt over what they’d heard?

And fair enough but I’ve gave a load of reasons why it wouldn’t have been easy for him to go running to the ref as soon as it happened. Think it’s a perfectly normal reaction, it’s pretty sad but Omars probably went through these situations in his life before and not said anything to anybody too, another reason..

I don’t believe for one second he’s making it up and I think it’s a sinister way of looking at this situation .

[Brian Carrigan]

14 hours ago, Brazilianlex said:

How do you know there is no evidence. ? If that’s true then Love has a very good case to sue the SFA for libel, loss of earnings etc. Do you think he will ? 

im afraid you are proving my point, fans back their players no matter what they do and it’s a sad reflection on Scotland in my opinion.

Right lad, I'm not backing him. I fully support the ban, and something clearly happened and the SFA have been convinced beyond the boundaries of probability due to the simple fact that they've issued a ban. My point was merely that the reason he hasn't faced the full 16 games as was an option is likely because there is no video evidence to prove the fact and little other than verbal accounts. I'm not backing him, he's said the thing, I don't want him wearing my clubs jersey and I don't think he should be picked once the ban is over, but there is a big difference between proving beyond reasonable doubt (as would have been the case if it was caught on camera and would justify the 16 game ban) and verbal accounts.

[The Moonster]

8 minutes ago, 1320Lichtie said:

 

There’s nothing clear cut about this and nobody is saying there is. None of us have heard anything and we weren’t on the park.

I don’t believe for one second he’s making it up and I think it’s a sinister way of looking at this situation .

 

Looks like you do think it's clear cut. 

 

[Dunning1874]

1 hour ago, shawfield shed boy said:

2 hours ago, The Moonster said:

 

Careful Moonster. There are a lot of over sensitive people on here that only want to believe one side of the story. Racism is wrong in every way. Lying about it is just as bad to allow the shoe to fit

People are engaging with Moonster on this because he's looking at the evidence and testimony of the players to express his doubts about anything actually being said.

You, on the other hand:

11 hours ago, shawfield shed boy said:

Have any of us said something in the heat of the moment we regret, Of course. By saying something racist is wrong like any wrong...

Annan lad knew by reporting it he was always going to get the full support,Media,Online and their dug cause the victim of the racial comments is always the innocent one,Its the way its always worked cause of walters,Barnes and so on...

Point im making is, Was love a victim of some abuse(No doubt likely) or does that not count...

Moving on

Basically saying that even if Love did say something racist it's alright because it was the heat of the moment, and that Omar is a grass who's only 'playing the racist card' to get sympathy while being equally in the wrong because he must have said something as well.

Moonster's perspective is entirely reasonable, so no one is jumping down his throat for defending Love on those grounds and a respectful discussion is taking place with him.

Your position is fucking ridiculous, so everyone is having a go at you for defending Love on those grounds and quite rightly calling you a moron.

HTH

[haufdaft]

My recollection and the reason I believe Omar was an incident over at the far side (I believe in the first half) in which the ball went out for a throw in. Both players gave each other a wee push in the way that you see so often in games.

After the initial coming together and some verbals, Omar seemed to become very angry and animated.

At that time my first instinct was that Love had said something upsetting to Omar.

I've no idea what was said but Omar's reaction to it was unusually furious.

That's why I believe Omar.

[BrigtonClyde]

So we've two players who were ex teammates and therefore have history,  whether good, bad or indifferent.  That wouldn't excuse the alleged incident, but worth taking it on board.

When the drums were first beating about this, word was that several Annan players and some Clyde players witnessed this.  My position was that if that were the case, the SFA would have strong evidence which would only take one session to consider, they should then hand out a lengthy ban and Clyde should terminate his contract. 

Turns out it's not quite as simple as that.  Only one other player apparently heard this which means whatever was said must have been done when the two were in close proximity of each other. The entire game was filmed, so while it's not possible to pick up audio, it could have been time marked when the two of them were in a position for this to have taken place.

I dont think anyone on this thread has a different opinion about the nature of the allegation itself.  The problem here is how these inquiries are handled, along similar lines to a Civil hearing in which case anything is possible with any amount of evidence.

A 5 game ban after a 3 day investigation smacks of the SFA deciding that probably maybe it kind of looks like sort of aye, that'll be it, he maybe kind of sort of did do it, because his team mate said so.  It's a halfway house verdict based on a hunch, that's not the same as balance of probability. They have now been "seen" to tackle an important and sensitive wider issue.

An inquiry should feel confident they have sufficient and adequate evidence to find someone guilty, and therefore hand out an appropriate penalty, or it should be thrown out.  Clear cut, and precise.    They've done neither, left grey area, and he's been branded a racist in the national press which he may or may not be.  But we've to assume he is cos a guy said so, and an inquiry team said, aye, OK then.  Dangerous territory.  

 

[1320Lichtie]

Looks like you do think it's clear cut. 
 

I do think it is, but it isn’t. Nobody is stating that this HAS happened or is as clear as day.

[AgentDaleCooper]

2 hours ago, BrigtonClyde said:

So we've two players who were ex teammates and therefore have history,  whether good, bad or indifferent.  That wouldn't excuse the alleged incident, but worth taking it on board.

When the drums were first beating about this, word was that several Annan players and some Clyde players witnessed this.  My position was that if that were the case, the SFA would have strong evidence which would only take one session to consider, they should then hand out a lengthy ban and Clyde should terminate his contract. 

Turns out it's not quite as simple as that.  Only one other player apparently heard this which means whatever was said must have been done when the two were in close proximity of each other. The entire game was filmed, so while it's not possible to pick up audio, it could have been time marked when the two of them were in a position for this to have taken place.

I dont think anyone on this thread has a different opinion about the nature of the allegation itself.  The problem here is how these inquiries are handled, along similar lines to a Civil hearing in which case anything is possible with any amount of evidence.

A 5 game ban after a 3 day investigation smacks of the SFA deciding that probably maybe it kind of looks like sort of aye, that'll be it, he maybe kind of sort of did do it, because his team mate said so.  It's a halfway house verdict based on a hunch, that's not the same as balance of probability. They have now been "seen" to tackle an important and sensitive wider issue.

An inquiry should feel confident they have sufficient and adequate evidence to find someone guilty, and therefore hand out an appropriate penalty, or it should be thrown out.  Clear cut, and precise.    They've done neither, left grey area, and he's been branded a racist in the national press which he may or may not be.  But we've to assume he is cos a guy said so, and an inquiry team said, aye, OK then.  Dangerous territory.  

 

Spot on.

Love has not been found guilty of anything racial at all. No opinion or slanted media report will alter this.

Speaking with someone who was outside after the match, Love was furious after been punched by Omar, and had to be held back by several players and officials. Omar meanwhile - the alleged victim of abuse - was hiding behind his girlfriend, snidely telling Love to "get up the road wee man".

This is not a defence of Love - someting did happen - but it's appears to me, not to be a one way street, and it also appears to me, thats what the judicial panel thought as well.

 

 

 

 

 

[Sergeant Wilson]

16 hours ago, clyde4ever said:

Some ridiculous comments on here.

The fact that he was only banned for 5 games obviously means there were other factors of which we are not aware.

I've heard that the whole incident, allegedly, was related to Love, his ex-girlfriend, Omar, his current girlfriend, comments made on the park and in the tunnel, and an altercation in the car park after the match. (There was only one female involved, just to make it clear).

If Love made racist comments - he shouldn't have, and has correctly been punished. 

Omar, however, may not be the innocent that some would have us believe - and may well have  played a significant part in the whole sorry incident.

 

 

16 hours ago, shawfield shed boy said:

Years ago this would have been sorted out man to man.

Omar playing the racist card was always going to work in his favour if true

Even by Clyde supporter's standards, these are exceptional.

[Aidan]

Glad to see that shawfield shed boy is still a complete fucking moron.

[clyde4ever]

Even by Clyde supporter's standards, these are exceptional.

What's "exceptional" about my post?
I've said Love has correctly been banned if he made a racist comment.
I've also said that the 5-match ban is surprisingly lenient, therefore there must have been more to the incident than you or I know about.
He could have been banned for 16 games, or longer in exceptional circumstances. He hasn't, therfore the panel must have been aware of something more than us.

[Sergeant Wilson]

2 hours ago, clyde4ever said:

What's "exceptional" about my post?
I've said Love has correctly been banned if he made a racist comment.
I've also said that the 5-match ban is surprisingly lenient, therefore there must have been more to the incident than you or I know about.
He could have been banned for 16 games, or longer in exceptional circumstances. He hasn't, therfore the panel must have been aware of something more than us.

You tried to mitigate his remarks by insinuating the other player had provoked him.

[Clyde soccer trendy]

Glad to see that shawfield shed boy is still a complete fucking moron.

 

And glad to see that you are a wee fanny who is obsessed with Clyde.

[Brazilianlex]

Club statement says he has until next week to appeal so is he able to play tomorrow. ? Could be a bit of a media scrum if he does.

[Aidan]

 
And glad to see that you are a wee fanny who is obsessed with Clyde.

"Obsessed"[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

[Clyde soccer trendy]

"Obsessed"[emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]

I noticed you never argued about being a wee fanny though. [emoji1360]

[Aidan]

I noticed you never argued about being a wee fanny though. [emoji1360]

It's not far off being accurate tbf.