Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Wendies at war (Madine sent down)

2456

Comments

  • What's Sheffield actually like as a city?
  • I wouldn't suggest Madine as the guy to make the peace in Syria anyway. Seems to go to DEFCOM 5 a bit too sharpish.
  • dizzee said:

    What's Sheffield actually like as a city?

    Same as most cities. Some nice areas, some nawty areas and some shithole areas. Night life is good as there's 2 big unis in the city. The Peak District is just a short drive as well. Great place to be a student basically
  • dizzee said:

    What's Sheffield actually like as a city?

    Lovely, trust me.
  • dizzee said:

    What's Sheffield actually like as a city?


    Not a patch on York ;o)
  • dizzee said:

    What's Sheffield actually like as a city?


    Not a patch on York ;o)
    the team or the town?

  • dizzee said:

    What's Sheffield actually like as a city?


    Not a patch on York ;o)
    Yorks nice too, but too many twats from Leeds seem to blight it at weekends.
  • In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.
  • se9addick said:

    In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.

    I think it maybe because they didn't have a safety cert for the ground at the time of the disaster.
  • se9addick said:

    In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.

    I think it maybe because they didn't have a safety cert for the ground at the time of the disaster.
    Ah right, would that have been normal at the time ?

    Here's the story from the BBC - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-24064118
  • Sponsored links:


  • se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.

    I think it maybe because they didn't have a safety cert for the ground at the time of the disaster.
    Ah right, would that have been normal at the time ?

    Here's the story from the BBC - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-24064118

    Not sure when they started to be required, however, 3 yrs prior to Hillsborough, we had the Bradford fire, Heysel and B'ham. It showed that something was required to check / improve the state of football grounds.
  • se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.

    I think it maybe because they didn't have a safety cert for the ground at the time of the disaster.
    Ah right, would that have been normal at the time ?

    Here's the story from the BBC - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-24064118

    Not sure when they started to be required, however, 3 yrs prior to Hillsborough, we had the Bradford fire, Heysel and B'ham. It showed that something was required to check / improve the state of football grounds.
    Indeed, a terrible time for football. I hope that Hillsborough/SWFC aren't judged by 2013 standards but what was the reality at the time. If they fell below that standard and that duty of care to their customers then of course they should be punished.
  • Love that the prosecutor used a football cliche: "You may think Mr Madine is a large centre forward in the old-fashioned English style..."
  • Valley11 said:

    Love that the prosecutor used a football cliche: "You may think Mr Madine is a large centre forward in the old-fashioned English style..."

    "...but he is actually a big violent drunk in the old-fashioned style." Finish sentence to taste.
  • se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.

    I think it maybe because they didn't have a safety cert for the ground at the time of the disaster.
    Ah right, would that have been normal at the time ?

    Here's the story from the BBC - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-24064118

    Not sure when they started to be required, however, 3 yrs prior to Hillsborough, we had the Bradford fire, Heysel and B'ham. It showed that something was required to check / improve the state of football grounds.
    Indeed, a terrible time for football. I hope that Hillsborough/SWFC aren't judged by 2013 standards but what was the reality at the time. If they fell below that standard and that duty of care to their customers then of course they should be punished.
    If we follow this train of thought, shouldn't the FA be charged as well? It was their competition, they chose Hillsborough as a venue.

    Should we expect the organiser & governing body to have a duty of care to the fans and to have ensured, especially after the recent tragedies at that time, that grounds were of the highest standard for their premier cup competition?
  • TelMc32 said:

    se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    se9addick said:

    In other Sheffield Wednesday news I noticed that the guy in charge of the current Hillsborough enquiry has stated that Sheffield Wednesday may face "criminal charges" as an outcome of the enquiry. What would those charges relate to ? And has this been speculated on before ? I know it's long been thought South Yorks Bill could/should be prosecuted but it's the first time I've heard SWFC in the frame.

    I think it maybe because they didn't have a safety cert for the ground at the time of the disaster.
    Ah right, would that have been normal at the time ?

    Here's the story from the BBC - http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-24064118

    Not sure when they started to be required, however, 3 yrs prior to Hillsborough, we had the Bradford fire, Heysel and B'ham. It showed that something was required to check / improve the state of football grounds.
    Indeed, a terrible time for football. I hope that Hillsborough/SWFC aren't judged by 2013 standards but what was the reality at the time. If they fell below that standard and that duty of care to their customers then of course they should be punished.
    If we follow this train of thought, shouldn't the FA be charged as well? It was their competition, they chose Hillsborough as a venue.

    Should we expect the organiser & governing body to have a duty of care to the fans and to have ensured, especially after the recent tragedies at that time, that grounds were of the highest standard for their premier cup competition?
    It depends where the duty of care is I guess. SWFC own and operate a football stadium for the attendance of the general public and I would imagine it's their responsibility to ensure the place isn't a death trap. The FA probably have a reasonable duty to investigate the venues of their competitions but I don't know what that extends to in real terms.

    If, God forbid, the there was an incident at the Valley and it was found to be caused by a violation of stadium safety you could see a scenario where Charlton are in trouble, it's difficult to imagine a scenario where that culpability might extend to the Football League provided they could prove they'd done some due diligence prior to giving us authorisation
    to host their competition at our ground.
  • I would imagine that clubs hosting matches on behalf of the FA bid for them in some way and I expect that safety requirements are clearly their responsibility. The FA would ensure that they ciuld not be charged.
  • The Owls have a history of criminality. Remember the infamous betting scandal of 1962? Three of their players - Peter Swan, Tony Kay and David Layne - placed bets on Sheffield Wednesday to lose at Ipswich; they did, 2-0, with both goals from Ray Crawford, who later played for us. The scandal was revealed by a tabloid, and Swan received a four-month jail sentence and a life ban from football that was later rescinded.
  • Not so much Wendies at War than, as one going awol.
  • Gary Madine jailed for 18 months WAWAW?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Prison team will have a better strikeforce than us if he's put in the same one as Ched Evans
  • 9 months in real terms.
  • just in time for the pre season friendlies
  • I'm sure they'll do it later today now he's been sentenced but i'm amazed Wednesday haven't already sacked him.

    Convicted on 2 counts, already had previous and didn't even plead guilty.
  • It's a MASSIVE organisation. They have 1,000's of employees. HR may take months getting around to kicking the scum bag out!
  • should sack him. no resale value and they will save about 250k in wages if he serves the whole term and still 125k if he serves half of it (assuming he's on 3k pw). sounds a real scumbag anyway. better off without him.
  • I think he got done for arson when he was at Carlisle.

    Pleased, he got what he deserved.
  • nice to see the wendie fan not having his better judgment clouded by things madine has done on the pitch. top top attitude, nice one OP.

    "an arrogant, violent thug" when drunk.

    can see that on the pitch as well. proper moron.

    i am glad we are a club that, whatever the currenty day behavioral standards are, consistently strive for better. thing with this case and with Evans--- sort it out lads, how can you support these oiks just because they do alright on the pitch. why wait until he has been convicted? he hit two fans, sack him as soon as you have made your own internal assessment. any other workplace would do the same.

    if chris solly gave it the biggun and beat up a wee fan for no other reason than for the sheets and giggles of it (morons such as Madine seem to enjoy the whole plastic gangsta wah wah), we wouldnt have it. am sure 90% would want him bombed out the club REGARDLESS of how he was playing. however, it wouldnt tend to happen (our players behaving like this) because, on the whole, we do not allow such behavior.
  • I dont know if it was his twitter account or some fake one but remember when we won League One and posted on under his name was: "Well done Charlton winning the league but shame your not the best team in the division"

    Was something like that anyway
  • How long before we read ' punched another prisoner and broke his jaw ' ?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!