I tend to find this argument always comes down to the lowest common denominator. You can explain economics, market forces, the fact that this money is all privately created and distributed, you can explain how few people are actually earning this amount, and you can sure as hell explain that it...
I really like that Stevenage kit. Quite like that ad too, it is a classic.
However, the newer sponsor on the old kit seems to fit amusingly with the design :D
Consent is consent, she could have been with him all night, chatting away telling him he's her soulmate, invited herself back but still say no. Equally, he can walk in on the centre half doing his thing, ask to join in and she says yes.
You'd seriously hope these cases are decided on more...
I remember hearing parts of that website had to be redacted for legal reasons, but didn't know his family were behind harassing her. I imagine that's more a bunch of red-pill swallowing football morons above anything else, or they'd have surely been liable to end up in court?
As for the second...
It's been mentioned a few times in this thread that ''but what about the victim being harassed?'' as if that is somehow relevant to his innocence or guilt.
Someone shouldn't have their freedom based on whether on not unrelated 3rd parties have attempted to harass the victim. Jesus wept...
Shame about Tait though, you'll do well to pick up someone better. We shouldn't have chucked him when we did. As for Arnold, poor bugger, twice promoted and still not a FL player.