The Official Arsenal Thread - Part 2

here's the quote Philby:




'For what he's been through with the injuries...'

not sure why you're choosing to understand it in a different way....

It wasn't a choice. It was what he said Marco.

As Clayton is a very prominent member of Ignoreland these days here's a link below to the footage. Seems pretty definitive to me.

I can see though why Arsenal blogs chose to go with the less contraversial (yet inaccurate) wording.

 
From the club's perspective, if, after getting advice from the legal team, it believes the evidence fully supports the player, why would they drop him?

In this day and age, communication and posture are more important than ever, i can't, for one second, believe they'd be as reckless as to not give a shit about it and just keep on playing him just because he makes the team better...there has to be more to it than what we know.

Your take is to suspend him until he's cleared, which is fine, their take is probably as simple as 'innocent until proven guilty' (and being fairly confident this case won't be going any further).

This goes far beyond simply circle the wagons and back the player.

Speculation about legal advice is wholly irrelevant.


Given the seriousness of the charges, the club taking him out of circulation would have been the morally correct thing to do.


Arteta saying what he said yesterday is just beyond the pale.

He should be tackled on this. Nowhere near good enough.
 
It wasn't a choice. It was what he said Marco.

As Clayton is a very prominent member of Ignoreland these days here's a link below to the footage. Seems pretty definitive to me.

I can see though why Arsenal blogs chose to go with the less contraversial (yet inaccurate) wording.

So can we all.
sweep-sweep-under-rug.gif
 
It wasn't a choice. It was what he said Marco.

As Clayton is a very prominent member of Ignoreland these days here's a link below to the footage. Seems pretty definitive to me.

I can see though why Arsenal blogs chose to go with the less contraversial (yet inaccurate) wording.



While 1 case of sexual assault was dropped on a technicality the man is still under investigation for 2 incidents of rape.

It doesn't look any better watching it back.
While you might give him the benefit of the doubt , he should really have said as little as possible about Partey.
 
From the club's perspective, if, after getting advice from the legal team, it believes the evidence fully supports the player, why would they drop him?

In this day and age, communication and posture are more important than ever, i can't, for one second, believe they'd be as reckless as to not give a shit about it and just keep on playing him just because he makes the team better...there has to be more to it than what we know.

I agree with the above Marco and appricaite that all you are trying to do is to understand why the club have done what they've done.

One would think that it's quite likely that the club has been privy to some compelling evidence, and high-priced legal advice, for them to have taken this approach.

Not every rape allegation case is the same of course. Personally I don't necessarily believe in a blanket approach - i.e. standing down every employee who has had an allegation placed against them. But by taking this approach in this case the club have really backed themselves into a corner.

If, down the line, Partey is found guilty (...or further damaging information leaks into the public domain) it will backfire on them in a big way. It'll be a stain on the club's reputation & heads will roll at the very highest level of the club.
 
I agree with the above Marco and appricaite that all you are trying to do is to understand why the club have done what they've done.

One would think that it's quite likely that the club has been privy to some compelling evidence, and high-priced legal advice, for them to have taken this approach.

Not every rape allegation case is the same of course. Personally I don't necessarily believe in a blanket approach - i.e. standing down every employee who has had an allegation placed against them. But by taking this approach in this case the club have really backed themselves into a corner.

If, down the line, Partey is found guilty (...or further damaging information leaks into the public domain) it will backfire on them in a big way. It'll be a stain on the club's reputation & heads will roll at the very highest level of the club.

Agreed, call me naive, but I really don’t think they’re that stupid and would take such big PR risks (especially after the Super League debacle) if they weren’t that confident about Partey being innocent.

If/when they see new evidence suggesting he did do the other stuff he’s being accused of, I’ve no doubt they’ll drop him in a heartbeat. Losing a player, regardless of his abilities, is peanuts compared to the shitstorm and crazy bad PR that would come the club’s way.

As for not having a blanket approach, I’m with you on this, each case needs to be looked at.
 
Last edited:
EVENT GUIDE - HIGHLIGHT
The Old Moderns
Clancys, 15-16 Princes St.

5th May 2024 @ 10:00 pm
More info..
More events ▼
Top