The Official Chelsea Thread [Vol 2]
Discussion
SWoll said:
The evidence would suggest it does, but do please elaborate on your view.
What evidence?Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
ManFromDelmonte said:
OK.
Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
Precisely, even the greatest make mistakes from time to time. Jose has overreacted (and brilliantly diverted attention from our lacklustre performance on Saturday), but Eva didn't help herself by taking to social media about it. Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
ManFromDelmonte said:
SWoll said:
The evidence would suggest it does, but do please elaborate on your view.
What evidence?Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
He's always been one.
Great football manager though.
bodhi said:
(and brilliantly diverted attention from our lacklustre performance on Saturday),
Only for the hard of thinking, surely? It's a very obvious attempt by JM, which the media lap up as they love a story, as do presumably, their readers. I just don't know why he is so obsessed with playing cynical media games and micro-managing his (and his team's) image. The only person's opinion that matters is Roman, and I don't believe for one moment that he buys any of it. It all just seems a bit predictable and unnecessary. I guess his ego just can't accept that he ever does anything wrong or is ever responsible for a poor performance, so his automatic response is to blame others or look for a scapegoat. Eva was the only reason to watch a Chelsea match, after all.
Premier League Doctors' Group condemn Jose Mourinho over treatment of Chelsea doctor
I think this story is a long way from being over. I wonder even if Maureen will be forced into a humiliating climbdown?
PLDG Statement said:
Doctors working for Premier League teams and attending matches in a professional capacity are bound by the same professional and ethical boundaries as any other doctor practicing in the United Kingdom.
The General Medical Council issue clear guidelines on good medical practice that need to be met in order for a doctor to maintain a licence to practice and satisfy the criteria for professional revalidation every five years.
Maintenance of the duty of care from the doctor to the patient is fundamental to these guidelines, even when the patient is a footballer playing in a Premier League game.
The Premier League Doctor’s Group considers that removing Dr Eva Carneiro from the Chelsea team bench for their next match is unjust in the extreme. In the publicised incident in last Saturday’s game against Swansea, the Chelsea medical staff were clearly summoned on to the field of play by the match referee to attend to a player. A refusal to run onto the pitch would have breached the duty of care required of the medical team to their patient.
It is a huge concern that Dr Carneiro has been subjected to unprecedented media scrutiny and a change in her professional role, merely because she adhered to her code of professional conduct and did her job properly.
Dr Carneiro has universal and total support from her medical colleagues at the Premier League Doctors Group. It is also of great concern that at a time when the both the Premier League and the Premier League Doctors group are intensifying efforts to safeguard player welfare, the precedent set by this incident demonstrates that the medical care of players appears to be secondary to the result of the game.
Much progress has been made in the provision of pitch side medical care for Premier League players over the last 10 years. This incident highlights that there is more work to be done, with a pressing need to further establish and highlight the explicit role of a Premier League doctor with our colleagues at the LMA and PFA.
The General Medical Council issue clear guidelines on good medical practice that need to be met in order for a doctor to maintain a licence to practice and satisfy the criteria for professional revalidation every five years.
Maintenance of the duty of care from the doctor to the patient is fundamental to these guidelines, even when the patient is a footballer playing in a Premier League game.
The Premier League Doctor’s Group considers that removing Dr Eva Carneiro from the Chelsea team bench for their next match is unjust in the extreme. In the publicised incident in last Saturday’s game against Swansea, the Chelsea medical staff were clearly summoned on to the field of play by the match referee to attend to a player. A refusal to run onto the pitch would have breached the duty of care required of the medical team to their patient.
It is a huge concern that Dr Carneiro has been subjected to unprecedented media scrutiny and a change in her professional role, merely because she adhered to her code of professional conduct and did her job properly.
Dr Carneiro has universal and total support from her medical colleagues at the Premier League Doctors Group. It is also of great concern that at a time when the both the Premier League and the Premier League Doctors group are intensifying efforts to safeguard player welfare, the precedent set by this incident demonstrates that the medical care of players appears to be secondary to the result of the game.
Much progress has been made in the provision of pitch side medical care for Premier League players over the last 10 years. This incident highlights that there is more work to be done, with a pressing need to further establish and highlight the explicit role of a Premier League doctor with our colleagues at the LMA and PFA.
I think this story is a long way from being over. I wonder even if Maureen will be forced into a humiliating climbdown?
bodhi said:
Strange how in all the outcry and clamouring to be offended on Eva's behalf, poor Jon Fearn, who was also a target of José and will also be removed from the bench, barely seems to get a mention.
I do wonder why....
Yes, I do wonder as well....I do wonder why....
v
There are "nicer" pictures of Eva, but I want to keep this football related!
bodhi said:
Precisely, even the greatest make mistakes from time to time. Jose has overreacted (and brilliantly diverted attention from our lacklustre performance on Saturday), but Eva didn't help herself by taking to social media about it.
Agree on the classic Maureen diversion tactics, although this time he comes across as a bully as wellManFromDelmonte said:
What evidence?
Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
What on earth are you talking about? You analogy makes no sense whatsoever.Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
SWoll said:
ManFromDelmonte said:
What evidence?
Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
What on earth are you talking about? You analogy makes no sense whatsoever.Imagine if someone was a paragon of virtue and had never done a thing wrong in their life. One day they bumped their car against another leaving a small mark, they drove off without leaving a note.
Now, would anyone defend their behaviour? Probably not.
Does this "go to show what an absolute c**k they've become"? Probably not.
The point is, choosing not to defend someone who has done something wrong does not prove that they've become an absolute cock.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff