Jump to content

Barnard trial starts today


pressingon

Recommended Posts

What do his actions on the football pitch have to do with anything?

 

What's your point here SS? He doesn't pull out of a tackle, ergo he's a nasty piece of work off the pitch? How does that stack up then?

 

Not exactly CS, but you can't deny that a person's personality does affect their behaviour on the football pitch. For example; Joey Barton, Roy Keane, Duncan Ferguson (and many more) - all publicized for being dirty on the pitch, and well known nobs off of it (and no, I'm not putting Lee in the same bracket). I can't think of many dirty players who have a glowing nice guy reputation off of the pitch.

 

The best window we have to see Barnard's personality, unless you know him personally, is the 90 odd minutes that he pulls on the saints shirt. Whilst I wouldn't say he's particularly dirty neither would I definitely wouldn't say he's a clean player, and there are a lot out there who would put him in that dirty bracket - suggesting his personality could be spilling onto the pitch.

 

Of course, I'm not saying that if people see you as a dirty player it doesn't automatically mean you're a nasty piece of work, just that it is one indication of your personality. There are lots of other ways to show your true personality, but my original point was that it wasn't 'by all accounts out of character'.

 

A mate of mine grew up with him in Essex and says Barney is totally dedicated off the field. Only cares about his football and is the last person who would do anything to jeopardise his career.

 

That's fair enough. FWIW I agree that as this is an isolated incident that the club should (and will, I expect) support him as everyone makes mistakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not exactly CS, but you can't deny that a person's personality does affect their behaviour on the football pitch. For example; Joey Barton, Roy Keane, Duncan Ferguson (and many more) - all publicized for being dirty on the pitch, and well known nobs off of it (and no, I'm not putting Lee in the same bracket). I can't think of many dirty players who have a glowing nice guy reputation off of the pitch.

 

The best window we have to see Barnard's personality, unless you know him personally, is the 90 odd minutes that he pulls on the saints shirt. Whilst I wouldn't say he's particularly dirty neither would I definitely wouldn't say he's a clean player, and there are a lot out there who would put him in that dirty bracket - suggesting his personality could be spilling onto the pitch.

 

Of course, I'm not saying that if people see you as a dirty player it doesn't automatically mean you're a nasty piece of work, just that it is one indication of your personality. There are lots of other ways to show your true personality, but my original point was that it wasn't 'by all accounts out of character'.

 

But I don't think LB is a gobsh!te on the pitch particularly is he? Michael Svensson was certainly a take no prisoners character on the pitch, but is a quiet, unassuming guy off it. LB is, as you have pointed out, hardly a Keane, Barton, Ferguson etc, so I really don't get your point at all I'm afraid. LB strikes me purely and simply as a professional footballer who is no better or worse than any other when it comes to his onfield behaviour (probably average behaviour wise). He went out, had a drink and got into a ruck. I can't condone that, but the point you're trying to make, well, simply, has no point IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether Barnard is guilty or not, he is one of two players along with Seaborne to be close to the action in some form od nightclub or late bar brawl. It would be nice to hear that both were innocent bystanders but both are also well-paid sportsmen for whom fitness should be a top priority. What's the point of all the training and dietary advice if the players then go off to drink alcohol? Of course, they may have both been drinking soft drinks, but on the other hand...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether Barnard is guilty or not, he is one of two players along with Seaborne to be close to the action in some form od nightclub or late bar brawl. It would be nice to hear that both were innocent bystanders but both are also well-paid sportsmen for whom fitness should be a top priority. What's the point of all the training and dietary advice if the players then go off to drink alcohol? Of course, they may have both been drinking soft drinks, but on the other hand...........

 

Seaborne was out drinking supposedly with the full consent of the manager, on the Thursday before an international break. Massive difference between letting the players let their hair down for one night (with the next game 9 days away) than allowing a drinking culture to permeate the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the Saintsweb law experts.....***ts.

 

I'm doing a Law degree so I figure I know my stuff, and I know that it's impossible to say what's going to happen to him as none of us know the specifics of what happened. If it really was smashing someone in the face with broken glass then it doesn't take an expert to figure out that's serious stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, but was the glass broken prior to contact with the victim's [sic] face, or did it break on impact? Important detail I'd say.

 

With a courtroom full of so-called experts why is it that the final decision gets made by Joe Public, legal experts simply cannot know as much as they profess to know, it simply does not make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hypo yes I do have specifics about the cases they had the sentences halved due to a human rights technicality.

St Alex no I'm not a daily mail reader but I guess you are star reader given your small minded comment .

Really? I'd love to hear the details of the driver who got 5 years for driving without due care and attention then.

 

Because it's not actually possible. It's a summary-only offence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A mate of mine grew up with him in Essex and says Barney is totally dedicated off the field. Only cares about his football and is the last person who would do anything to jeopardise his career.

The good thing is that this is pretty much what Nicola Cortese said about him when I asked about it last December. I fully expect the club to stand behind Barnard should it comee to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frustrating that he wont be available for all of the run in but otherwise a great result.

 

If convicted sentence will probably be delayed until the seasons end. He will have the mitigation that he has suffered with the delay beyond his control, and a chunk of any custodial will be served in the close season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frustrating that he wont be available for all of the run in but otherwise a great result.

 

If convicted sentence will probably be delayed until the seasons end. He will have the mitigation that he has suffered with the delay beyond his control, and a chunk of any custodial will be served in the close season.

 

So you're convicting him now, are you? If he's acquitted he'll be available from here on in. Lets not play judge and jury just yet, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're convicting him now, are you? If he's acquitted he'll be available from here on in. Lets not play judge and jury just yet, eh?

 

 

Wtf are you on about? Where did I convict him?

 

I said "if convicted".

 

My point is that the delay for barney, and us , is a positive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so a bunch of heard them all before opinions, but no confirmation on what is happening or on the post about the trial being adjourned due to a mix up.

 

Very helpful, thanks gang

 

This place isn't referred to as the mong forum for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trial postponed until March due to courtroom cock-up.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/9298367.Saints_player_could_wait_months_for_trial/

 

It has already been more than 12 months since Barnard, of ****** Way, ***** ******, Southampton, is alleged to have attacked a man in a Southampton nightspot.

 

This really f/cks me off. Innocent until proven guilty, but the press publish his address.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has already been more than 12 months since Barnard, of ****** Way, ***** ******, Southampton, is alleged to have attacked a man in a Southampton nightspot.

 

This really f/cks me off. Innocent until proven guilty, but the press publish his address.

 

Yep, true, and utterly needless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may not have intended to imply that, but it read like you were.

 

 

Aplogies, not the intention. The trial is in March, hence the reference to the run in. He'll be available at least until then and hopefully beyond.

 

We cannot overlook that IF convicted that this delay, and the timing of the trial, are a massive bonus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has already been more than 12 months since Barnard, of ****** Way, ***** ******, Southampton, is alleged to have attacked a man in a Southampton nightspot.

 

This really f/cks me off. Innocent until proven guilty, but the press publish his address.

 

Is that not a requirement? Same reason they often needlessly publish someone's age. It's so they can be seen to have done as much as possible to prevent any other confusion with any other person of the same name, who could then possibly sue for libel. (In this case though I'm sure Saints footballer would have sufficed)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, but was the glass broken prior to contact with the victim's [sic] face, or did it break on impact? Important detail I'd say.

 

With a courtroom full of so-called experts why is it that the final decision gets made by Joe Public, legal experts simply cannot know as much as they profess to know, it simply does not make sense to me.

 

Because being trialed by peers is the foundation and cornerstone of a fair and just society blah blah blah. End of the day, the judge and lawyers spoonfeed the jury everything they need to know so a lot of the time, the verdict is a formality. And if they get it wrong, they just appeal to higher courts and that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aplogies, not the intention. The trial is in March, hence the reference to the run in. He'll be available at least until then and hopefully beyond.

 

We cannot overlook that IF convicted that this delay, and the timing of the trial, are a massive bonus.

 

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to be fair on this......if the blokes who bashed Dan Seaborne go to court,most of us think a custodial sentence is in order

So why should Barney not expect a few months of porridge if found guilty.

 

Morally I agree with you.

 

However Barnard will be able to afford a very good lawyer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that not a requirement? Same reason they often needlessly publish someone's age. It's so they can be seen to have done as much as possible to prevent any other confusion with any other person of the same name, who could then possibly sue for libel. (In this case though I'm sure Saints footballer would have sufficed)

 

Not sure if it's a requirement. Never thought about it before. I guess you could get several people with the same name and it stops mix ups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This place isn't referred to as the mong forum for nothing.

 

says the man who has 12,913 posts on said forum which make up approximately 1.8% of all posts on Saints Web ever.

 

Some of the above may be made up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that not a requirement? Same reason they often needlessly publish someone's age. It's so they can be seen to have done as much as possible to prevent any other confusion with any other person of the same name, who could then possibly sue for libel. (In this case though I'm sure Saints footballer would have sufficed)

 

Newspapers have some very strict guidelines on what they can publish in an ongoing trial - remebering from my journo days (no longer before i'm taken to the cleaners!) there is a list of only ten points that can be covered, of which age and address are two of them, which is why these nearly always get published. There's not that much else to say, and if you do overstep the mark, the paper can be held in contempt of court - although some of the larger nationals do push the boundaries at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has already been more than 12 months since Barnard, of ****** Way, ***** ******, Southampton, is alleged to have attacked a man in a Southampton nightspot.

 

This really f/cks me off. Innocent until proven guilty, but the press publish his address.

 

Any Saints fan who lives near him, such as me could have told you where his address. That part of his address they have given, doesn't actually tell you what flat building he lives in, the only sacred info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the bus now on Saturday ?

 

I flippin hope so, about time we had some striker cover and would be so good to see him back in the shirt; I belive Adkins said ' after the international break' so here we are.

 

So far in my Fifa12 iPad he is top scorer in the league - his last game against Brighton where he scored 9 of the 12 helped ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...