Jump to content

Mighty Montrose FC Thread


Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, VillaKnollBoy said:

Fair point, I never saw the "read on" there and yet found not proven?

Nobody likes a bookie.. :rolleyes: Or maybe they just thought he'd been manipulated by the others and it seemed over the top to likely end his career over it. Just guessing, it does seem as cut and dried a prosecution case as you could get.

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VillaKnollBoy said:

Fair point, I never saw the "read on" there and yet found not proven?

 

53 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Nobody likes a bookie.. :rolleyes: Or maybe they just thought he'd been manipulated by the others and it seemed over the top to likely end his career over it. Just guessing, it does seem as cut and dried a prosecution case as you could get.

Not proven is an odd verdict which I think they are phasing out imminently. It's a peculiarly Scottish middle ground which amounts to "we think you did it but don't think on balance they've quite proved it beyond reasonable doubt". Suspect the point here was they couldn't prove he'd got the booking deliberately as he denied that. He admitted taking cash but said he'd "forgotten about it" and got booked exactly when he'd been paid to do so coincidentally!

The SFA charged him with unrelated offences. It's surprising he's gotten off so lightly with those given he was found guilty but I know there are all sorts of arguments they take into account in determining penalty. It will be interesting to see of the SFA subsequently charge him with anything relating to the booking incident but you'd assume if they were going to they'd have done it at the same time. Looks like Montrose have 'won a watch' here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

 

Not proven is an odd verdict which I think they are phasing out imminently. It's a peculiarly Scottish middle ground which amounts to "we think you did it but don't think on balance they've quite proved it beyond reasonable doubt". Suspect the point here was they couldn't prove he'd got the booking deliberately as he denied that. He admitted taking cash but said he'd "forgotten about it" and got booked exactly when he'd been paid to do so coincidentally!

The SFA charged him with unrelated offences. It's surprising he's gotten off so lightly with those given he was found guilty but I know there are all sorts of arguments they take into account in determining penalty. It will be interesting to see of the SFA subsequently charge him with anything relating to the booking incident but you'd assume if they were going to they'd have done it at the same time. Looks like Montrose have 'won a watch' here.

It's all very odd, 2 of the accused wanted to plead guilty but the court wanted them to be tried together, so they all got off. I wonder if Bet365 even got their money back... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, welshbairn said:

It's all very odd, 2 of the accused wanted to plead guilty but the court wanted them to be tried together, so they all got off. I wonder if Bet365 even got their money back... 

I believe they stumped up the cash on the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, broomiesniper said:

I believe it is royal blue with slightly darker blue sleeve

I was told royal blue with a similar sleeve design, the away one appears to be a bespoke colour scheme so I would assume we’ll go with an off the shelf job for the home, leading me towards this.

IMG_4341.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, broomiesniper said:

be racking up the travel expenses going up and down from York to training, games etc

Davie Larter is not in it for the money,but yeah fair old trek from York back and fourth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, broomiesniper said:

be racking up the travel expenses going up and down from York to training, games etc

I did wonder how that was gonna work. If he is travelling up and down for training and matches that’s gonna be about 1500 miles a week, fair play if he’s willing to put the mileage in but surely we’re gonna be coming to some sort of agreement where he only takes one session a week or something or I can’t see it being sustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...