The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
pendodave said:
I hate to break it to you, but the world is full of unsavory characters/ organisations making charitable donations and performing altruistic good turns.
The Sackler family in the US?
Closer to East Midlands footballing home, how about Robert Maxwell?
It's literally rich evil person 101.
Of course, your chap might be a clean as a whistle. Who knows, certainly not me. Just consider that it's more than a faint possibility that he isn't
Click to expand...

If we’re going to brand someone “dubious” in spite of being acquitted by a criminal court and in spite of consistent, substantial community contributions, then we’re not dealing in evidence — we’re dealing in vibes.

You don’t have to like Marinakis. I’m not here to canonise him. But it’s frustrating how quickly people bypass legal outcomes and concrete facts because they don’t fit the narrative.

If the standard is that any rich football owner might be shady, fine — apply that standard across the board. But if Marinakis is being singled out as uniquely sinister despite no conviction, despite visible good being done, and with the implication that seeing him in a positive light requires “jumping through hoops” or “performing mental gymnastics” — then yes, I’m going to push back on that.
 
Don Barzini said:
If we’re going to brand someone “dubious” in spite of being acquitted by a criminal court and in spite of consistent, substantial community contributions, then we’re not dealing in evidence — we’re dealing in vibes.

You don’t have to like Marinakis. I’m not here to canonise him. But it’s frustrating how quickly people bypass legal outcomes and concrete facts because they don’t fit the narrative.

If the standard is that any rich football owner might be shady, fine — apply that standard across the board. But if Marinakis is being singled out as uniquely sinister despite no conviction, despite visible good being done, and with the implication that seeing him in a positive light requires “jumping through hoops” or “performing mental gymnastics” — then yes, I’m going to push back on that.
Click to expand...

I kind of agree that if someone has been acquitted that should be the end of it. But if there’s a number of issues, some with legal ramifications, I’m of the opinion it comes down to weight of evidence. Is he a nasty pasty? I don’t care either way but the weight of evidence, across a number of issues/incidents, suggests he might well be.

As for all the good deeds he’s done. No, no way does doing good deeds balance bad deeds. It just doesn’t work like that. That’s just conflating totally separate issues. Pick any known villain you wish and then Google what good things they did. Jimmy Saville’s charity work raised over £40m in his lifetime. Does he get a free pass?
 
Hobbit said:
I kind of agree that if someone has been acquitted that should be the end of it. But if there’s a number of issues, some with legal ramifications, I’m of the opinion it comes down to weight of evidence. Is he a nasty pasty? I don’t care either way but the weight of evidence, across a number of issues/incidents, suggests he might well be.

As for all the good deeds he’s done. No, no way does doing good deeds balance bad deeds. It just doesn’t work like that. That’s just conflating totally separate issues. Pick any known villain you wish and then Google what good things they did. Jimmy Saville’s charity work raised over £40m in his lifetime. Does he get a free pass?
Click to expand...

Blimey, you’re bringing Jimmy Savile into a conversation about Evangelos Marinakis?! 😱🤷‍♂️

That comparison only makes sense when there’s actual wrongdoing being ignored, denied, or covered up.

In Marinakis’s case, yes — there have been allegations. But there was also a public trial, under heavy media scrutiny, and a unanimous acquittal in a high court. If we’re still treating him as “probably guilty” after that, we’re not dealing with evidence — we’re dealing with reputation. And that’s dangerous territory, especially when bias (conscious or not) plays a big part in how people perceive someone who’s blunt, foreign, and doesn’t play the PR game.

I’m not holding up his good deeds as proof of sainthood. I mention them because they’re real, measurable things that exist alongside the accusations — yet they’re overlooked by people who prefer the cartoon villain version of him. That narrative is what irks me.

No, he doesn’t get a “free pass.” But he also shouldn’t be treated like someone who got away with it — because he stood trial and was cleared. That matters. And if people choose to ignore that because he still feels dodgy to them, that’s not a moral stance. That’s just their preferred narrative.
 
Don Barzini said:
Blimey, you’re bringing Jimmy Savile into a conversation about Evangelos Marinakis?! 😱🤷‍♂️

That comparison only makes sense when there’s actual wrongdoing being ignored, denied, or covered up.

In Marinakis’s case, yes — there have been allegations. But there was also a public trial, under heavy media scrutiny, and a unanimous acquittal in a high court. If we’re still treating him as “probably guilty” after that, we’re not dealing with evidence — we’re dealing with reputation. And that’s dangerous territory, especially when bias (conscious or not) plays a big part in how people perceive someone who’s blunt, foreign, and doesn’t play the PR game.

I’m not holding up his good deeds as proof of sainthood. I mention them because they’re real, measurable things that exist alongside the accusations — yet they’re overlooked by people who prefer the cartoon villain version of him. That narrative is what irks me.

No, he doesn’t get a “free pass.” But he also shouldn’t be treated like someone who got away with it — because he stood trial and was cleared. That matters. And if people choose to ignore that because he still feels dodgy to them, that’s not a moral stance. That’s just their preferred narrative.
Click to expand...
I agree far to many careers ruined on the altar of accusation.

Not just football but in general now.

You don’t get to the top without upsetting someone but let’s be consistent!
 
clubchamp98 said:
I agree far to many careers ruined on the altar of accusation.

Not just football but in general now.

You don’t get to the top without upsetting someone but let’s be consistent!
Click to expand...

He currently has one on going court case

balkaninsight.com

Greece to Try Olympiacos FC Boss Over Policeman Killed by Hooligans

Vangelis Marinakis, president of the Greek football club Olympiacos and owner of English club Nottingham Forest, faces trial for inciting violence that led to the death of a police officer in 2023.
balkaninsight.com balkaninsight.com


He is also suing some other owners

And of course there was the spitting incident with the referee

It won’t be long until something else happens

Just glad he isn’t our owner
 
Arthur Wedge said:
He currently has one on going court case

balkaninsight.com

Greece to Try Olympiacos FC Boss Over Policeman Killed by Hooligans

Vangelis Marinakis, president of the Greek football club Olympiacos and owner of English club Nottingham Forest, faces trial for inciting violence that led to the death of a police officer in 2023.
balkaninsight.com balkaninsight.com


He is also suing some other owners

And of course there was the spitting incident with the referee

It won’t be long until something else happens

Just glad he isn’t our owner
Click to expand...
Innocent until proven though for me far to many cancel culture things going on.
Just my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hobbit
Another footie thread
2
Replies
36
Views
616
WorldHandicapSystem
W
road2ruin
Fantasy Footie 25/26
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
2K
Orikoru
Orikoru
SwingsitlikeHogan
Rental Rights Act
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
jim8flog
jim8flog
jim8flog
Golf or football
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
SaintHacker
The EFL Thread
33 34 35
Replies
682
Views
45K
Lucifer MorningStar
Lucifer MorningStar
Top