Antonio Conte (52 Viewers)

[Suns]

Why vote on something we don't know anything about?



MOVE TO FRANCE!

Its sad.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[JuveJay]

This sets a terrible precedence now.

Any player can throw an accusation out, no matter how many come up and say that player is wrong or lying, and throw innocent players/coaches under a bus and get them in trouble.

The FIGC are fucking pussies.

An army of people could claim innocence and lies of that one person, yet the court sides with that one person?

The fuck kind of country is this?

I know it's a lot to ask, but can we actually wait until the outcome of the hearings.

 

[Hust]

Don't think that would be an option, unless he found there was something procedurally wrong with the sporting trial - such as the prosecution having withheld evidence or something.

This is just semi-educated guessing, though.

You and Pado need to explain this stuff to us, being the educated ones in this field.

How can a court, with no evidence other than 1 mans world, already disproved by Conte and his ex-players, still have a case?

Makes no sense.

That sort of shit would be thrown out of the court on Day1 here.

---------- Post added 30.07.2012 at 11:18 ----------

I know it's a lot to ask, but can we actually wait until the outcome of the hearings.

Point is...it shouldn't have gotten this far jay. The little bitch was proven wrong and has absolutely no evidence AT ALL that Conte is guilty. Does he have a note, a wire tap, a video, or a fucking glove that doesn't fit?

No, he doesn't. The case should have been thrown out long ago.

 

[Red]

You and Pado need to explain this stuff to us, being the educated ones in this field.

How can a court, with no evidence other than 1 mans world, already disproved by Conte and his ex-players, still have a case?

Makes no sense.

That sort of shit would be thrown out of the court on Day1 here.

Because it's just a sporting tribunal.

They make up their own rules regarding procedure and can pretty much do whatever they want.

 

[Hust]

Because it's just a sporting tribunal.

They make up their own rules regarding procedure and can pretty much do whatever they want.

That.Is.Bullshit.

FIGC is an epic fail.

 

[.zero]

So whats the deal now?

Is he taking the plea bargain?

How did it go from he's pretty much clear to this anyway?

 

[Emmet]

In my view Conte should prove his innocence, regardless if he's banned for 1,2,3 or 10 years from coaching, he's built up a legacy of being a winner with dignity for 20 + years, accepting the plea bargain will stain his reputation forever. I cannot see him lying down (even for our club) and wanting to accept this plea bullshit.

 

[Hust]

In my view Conte should prove his innocence, regardless if he's banned for 1,2,3 or 10 years from coaching, he's built up a legacy of being a winner with dignity for 20 + years, accepting the plea bargain will stain his reputation forever. I cannot see him lying down (even for our club) and wanting to accept this plea bullshit.

Exacly.

Fight for your right to be innocent. Don't accept being guilty if you can help it. It would be different if he risked jail time then it would be understandable.

---------- Post added 30.07.2012 at 11:42 ----------

So whats the deal now?

Is he taking the plea bargain?

How did it go from he's pretty much clear to this anyway?

 

[Fake Melo]

In my view Conte should prove his innocence, regardless if he's banned for 1,2,3 or 10 years from coaching, he's built up a legacy of being a winner with dignity for 20 + years, accepting the plea bargain will stain his reputation forever. I cannot see him lying down (even for our club) and wanting to accept this plea bullshit.

I think Juve are forcing Conte to agree to plea bargain and get this over with.

 

[Hust]

I think Juve are forcing Conte to agree to plea bargain and get this over with.

That is selfish then on the clubs part.


After all Conte has done, why convince him to have a guilty tag for the rest of his life rather than push for his innocence?

 

[JuveJay]

You and Pado need to explain this stuff to us, being the educated ones in this field.

How can a court, with no evidence other than 1 mans world, already disproved by Conte and his ex-players, still have a case?

Makes no sense.

That sort of shit would be thrown out of the court on Day1 here.

---------- Post added 30.07.2012 at 11:18 ----------



Point is...it shouldn't have gotten this far jay. The little bitch was proven wrong and has absolutely no evidence AT ALL that Conte is guilty. Does he have a note, a wire tap, a video, or a fucking glove that doesn't fit?

No, he doesn't. The case should have been thrown out long ago.

Firstly, Carobbio is/was considered a reliable witness, because he has given up evidence on the process of the deals. Naming names is standard, because you have no process without them, he has to know who is 'involved' and who is a bystander. Carobbio has certainly changed his story more than once, although that can be put down to either lying or misunderstanding from his perspective.

Secondly, he is most likely not the only witness to testify against Conte. It's extremely likely that Conte has been deferred because of testimonies from both Carobbio and Roberto Di Martino, who also used to play under Conte at Siena. My understanding is that the testimony of Carobbio would never have been enough to create his 'not informing' charge.

Thirdly, try to understand the scandal as a whole, how many people and teams are involved. You are only focusing on a small detail because that is what you are interested in, but the entire picture shows a systematic process involving individuals and clubs at a certain level. So if the fixing of matches and guilt of individuals linked to them has been found, if those people name others then of course they become suspects until they can prove their innocence.

I think of something Buffon said this summer, about how at times it made sense for teams to settle for results that benefited both teams. This has been seen widely across football, and is not the same as calcio scommese (fixing for money), but still disagreeable from a sporting perspective. I'm wondering whether any hypothetical admission by Conte to the likes of Carobbio and De Martino hasn't been misconstrued in this way.

 

[Hust]

It would be one thing if Conte could give a fuck about have that sort of tag...if he doesn't care then thats different but if he wants a clean slate then support him in this endeavor.

---------- Post added 30.07.2012 at 11:51 ----------

Firstly, Carobbio is/was considered a reliable witness, because he has given up evidence on the process of the deals. Naming names is standard, because you have no process without them, he has to know who is 'involved' and who is a bystander. Carobbio has certainly changed his story more than once, although that can be put down to either lying or misunderstanding from his perspective.

Secondly, he is most likely not the only witness to testify against Conte. It's extremely likely that Conte has been deferred because of testimonies from both Carobbio and Roberto Di Martino, who also used to play under Conte at Siena. My understanding is that the testimony of Carobbio would never have been enough to create his 'not informing' charge.

Thirdly, try to understand the scandal as a whole, how many people and teams are involved. You are only focusing on a small detail because that is what you are interested in, but the entire picture shows a systematic process involving individuals and clubs at a certain level. So if the fixing of matches and guilt of individuals linked to them has been found, if those people name others then of course they become suspects until they can prove their innocence.

I think of something Buffon said this summer, about how at times it made sense for teams to settle for results that benefited both teams. This has been seen widely across football, and is not the same as calcio scommese (fixing for money), but still disagreeable from a sporting perspective. I'm wondering whether any hypothetical admission by Conte to the likes of Carobbio and De Martino hasn't been misconstrued in this way.

But why should anyone have to prove their innocence when no one had anything other than a verbal admission against you?

 

[swag]

That is selfish then on the clubs part.

Because Juve needs their current staff names dragged in the mud for 12 months for actions before they were on the club? Yeah, that's a good strategy.

After all Conte has done, why convince him to have a guilty tag for the rest of his life rather than push for his innocence?

A plea bargain isn't an admission of guilt. I wrote about this in the Bonucci thread.

 

[Hust]

Because Juve needs their current staff names dragged in the mud for 12 months for actions before they were on the club? Yeah, that's a good strategy.



A plea bargain isn't an admission of guilt. I wrote about this in the Bonucci thread.

Well can you link me because I don't read every single post in every single thread every day.

 

[JuveJay]

But why should anyone have to prove their innocence when no one had anything other than a verbal admission against you?

You don't need a smoking gun even by Italian law, never mind a sporting trial. Carobbio has been classed as a credible witness for what he has provided. As we don't have this information, we can't judge whether he is credible.

I also need to confirm this 'De Martino' testimony source, because I've seen him mentioned in English sources, but Roberto Di Martino is the Cremona prosecutor, so it needs checking they are not getting confused with poor translations.

 

[Völler]

Well can you link me because I don't read every single post in every single thread every day.

Yeah, I'm not buying that.

 

[Hust]

Yeah, I'm not buying that.

I do my best to be the forums most active member...but I'm not perfect.

---------- Post added 30.07.2012 at 12:12 ----------

You don't need a smoking gun even by Italian law, never mind a sporting trial. Carobbio has been classed as a credible witness for what he has provided. As we don't have this information, we can't judge whether he is credible.

I also need to confirm this 'De Martino' testimony source, because I've seen him mentioned in English sources, but Roberto Di Martino is the Cremona prosecutor, so it needs checking they are not getting confused with poor translations.

With the FIGCs track record, this whole thing seems shady. They rushed Calciopoli and knew what they were doing, now suddenly someone with shoddy evidence is suddenly considered credible.

Maybe I am taking crazy pills...

 

[JCK]

That is selfish then on the clubs part.


After all Conte has done, why convince him to have a guilty tag for the rest of his life rather than push for his innocence?

Then again you are sporting a Conte avatar...expect the worst gentlemen.

 

[Bezzy]

Exacly.

 

[swag]

Well can you link me because I don't read every single post in every single thread every day.

Just trying not to double post.

http://forum.juventuz.org/threads/30445-Leonardo-Bonucci?p=3783197#post3783197