Torquay United Fans Forum

Gullscorer wrote:Sorry but that's nonsense. Implying a motive is not the same as establishing one, and establishing a motive is not alone sufficient to prove guilt. Corroborative evidence is required, and what evidence there is proves nothing one way nor the other.

And what do you say to the photo of Banks' photo of the bite? Is that nonsense? Considering your earlier posts, I would suggest you would say yes: that's nonsense too. So, on that thought I'd be interested why you think Banks would 'tweet' such 'nonsense'?

ferrarilover wrote: Ladders f*** his mum. Twice.

What motive would Lads have to bite him? I've already mentioned the 'no smoke without fire' argument. It doesn't hold water, I'm afraid.

Matt.

What motive would 'lads' have to bite him? Well like I've said, I was there, and have to say, before the 'alleged' biting took place, me and a number of others sat near me all seemed to be of the same opinion that Torquay had turned up with 10 players and 1 windup merchant. No prizes for guessing who the windup merchant was. Now I've read that your manager is defending him, would lead me to believe that this was part of your manager's game plan ie to get Labadie to wind up our players in an attempt to get one of ours booked or sent off, to even up the odds of getting a result. Just speculation on my part of course... But also implies a motive, now enhanced by your managers defence of him......

brucie wrote:Spireite - you say that you didn't see the incident but took the screen capture as Labadie bit Banks - how do you know he actually bit him? - Because your player chose to go on twitter and publicise the incident? Because some plank of a journalist (who is a Chesterfield fan) chose to write on the incident in the Daily mail.
On the subject of that article, it is outrageous. It is a total piece of garbage.
And also there is the insunation that Labadie bit another of your players. There doesn't seem to be a single shred of evidence to support that.

Hi Brucie. How do I know? I don't. That's for the FA to find out. All I would ask however, is what motive would Banks have for doing this, if it wasn't without foundation? I'd ignore media stuff, they just do what they are paid to do. Its the facts and evidence that need to be considered and we don't know the details. All I've tried to do is offer another angle to a lot of understandable scepticism that has been posted on here.

Now, I don't want to become a bore on your board. So I'll leave it at that and wish your team well and hope you avoid the drop.

gullintwoplaces wrote:Nobody is defending a proven case of biting. Proven biting has to be punished severely. You use the words "has done" at the end of your comment, which says it all to me. It should be "alleged to have done", and this is the problem that I have with how this has all been handled. The coverage of this case has taken this approach throughout.

Agreed, I didn't at the end. However, I did actually refer to the incident as alleged earlier in the post.

I'm not trying to be judge and jury here. I just wanted to put forward my own thoughts and views on this 'alleged' incident to contrast with your views ie 'cant convict him on that grainy photo'. Just to finish off, your point about 'how it has been handled', I imagine you are referring to the media, whose job it is to sensationalise to attract readership interest, just doing what they normally do. I'm confident the FA will 'handle it' based purely on the facts and the evidence presented.

gullintwoplaces wrote:I note what Spireite has said above, the tone of which is that Joss is guilty without having been to a hearing. As he says, he didn't see the incident, and nobody else did either, so how he can assume guilt like this I do not know.

Nobody would dispute the right of Chesterfield to complain if they feel that one of their players has been bitten. I am extremely unhappy, however, at the way that this has been played out. What idiot thought that it was a good idea to discuss the incident at the Chesterfield AGM? How on earth does Banks this it is OK to blast accusations over Twatter? The upshot of this is that the national, scandal rag/Twatter, publicity about this has prejudiced the case against Labadie. The FA tribunal will feel pressured into finding him guilty, even if the evidence is thin, and the Daily Fail articles will force the tribunal into throwing the book at him.

The matter should have been handled by a report to the FA, without alll the bollox on Twatter and without scandal rag articles. Labadie has undergone trial by media, and that stinks.

Hi, just picking the bones on the points you've raised above:
Correct, I don't believe anybody saw what happened at the time. The first we knew was when we saw Banks's tweet with a photo of the bite. Then when the video came out 24hours later, you saw at 3:27/28 minutes what happened. Regarding the AGM, it was during the general Q&A that a shareholder asked the manager about what had happened. Paul Cook's reply was that he had reported the incident to the ref and that it should be included in the ref's report and that it was now a matter for the FA. There seems to be some confusion on here, that it was our AGM that has instigated all this, when it wasn't as it was correctly reported to the ref at the end of the game. Regarding the journalist who was at the AGM, picked up on this and I guess saw it as a good media story aka Suarez.

I understand your frustrations. If it had been our player, of course the first course of action is to defend your own. But at the end of the day an alleged assault has been committed, it has been correctly reported to the ref and is now in the hands of the FA. Unfortunately, the media have got hold of it and blasted it all over the newspapers - but that's their job. And I have to ask if the journo hadn't reported it, would the FA have just ignored what is, a serious allegation?

As I've mentioned above, most Spireites have a soft spot for Torquay for some reason (must be the sea air), but your club would do well to distance itself from what Labadie has done, rather than try and defend him.

Cynical, potentially career ending 'attacks' (not tackles) need investigating, I agree. Co-Incidentally, this was the topic of this weeks BBC 'Silk' drama, recommended viewing if you've not seen it. Biting another player though is equally grotesque/offensive and requires severe punishment.

Just had a quick scan read thru this thread to check your thoughts on this incident and have to say, I'm not too surprised by most of your reactions, ie first thoughts are to defend our club and players etc. I must stress however, that neither Ollie Banks or Chesterfield FC are pushing this matter at all, far from it. All our manager said at our AGM meeting was that he had informed the referee and hoped it would be in the refs match report and therefore over to the authorities to investigate.

Just to let you know, I was at the game and it was also me who did the screen capture with the red circle around Labadie as he bit into Banks. Yes, the screen image is grainy, I captured of my laptop over a slow internet connection. I'm sure the club has better quality if it is asked to provide it. What the image and the video show is that as we play in a corner, as the ball goes high over the 6 yard box, a few yards away, away from where the (footy) action is the goal mouth, Labadie has grabbed Banks from behind and then bit him on his left side.

The referee hasn't seen it because he is watching the players in the goalmouth. I didn't see it; I'd bet nobody else in the stadium other than Banks and Labadie knew what was going on. Labadie's 'assault' (because that what it is) was over and done in a split second. Banks raised his arms, then looks down his left side and then chases after the referee. However, at the same time, you break away from our corner, your guy races down the right wing, the ref runs trying to keeping up with play (rightly so) and Banks's appeals to the ref are ignored, all understandable really. Banks was obviously upset and rightly so, had a photo took of the bite and tweeted it. That was it as far as he was concerned apart from informing our manager who then made his report to the ref. Note, Labadie had also bitten Armand (our no.21) late on in the 2nd half - seems he thought he could get away with it again? This is why at the end of the game there was friction between the both of them which nearly ended in blows being exchanged.

I just wanted to put our side of the story to you. I'm sure I will be shot down but hey-ho that's football.

I wish you well, I like Torquay - some good memories, but unfortunately Labadie is a disgrace for your club and deserves everything he gets. Just my opinion of course.