Something to do with 'The court is in their pocket' - Hence Kangeroo. 🙂
Two bans on the way ....
- Thread starter Rosco
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
-
- Tags
- dirty cunts
- Status
Um....no it's not.
Enlighten me then fella - I have a lot of respect for you so hit me with your knowledge man. 🙂
Hahahahahaha
I thought it was one of those unexplained phrases, where nobody is actually quite sure
But jumping makes sense. They do jump. It's their defining feature really
Ahhhhhh Ok - I'll go with that. Cheers 🙂
Did you just say "yous"?
Wiki says....
Etymology[edit]
Although the term kangaroo court has been erroneously explained to have its origin from Australia's courts while it was a penal colony,[3] the first published instance is from an American source in the year 1853.[4] Some sources suggest that it may have been popularized during the California Gold Rush of 1849, along with mustang court,[5] as a description of the hastily carried-out proceedings used to deal with the issue of claim jumping miners.[3] Ostensibly the term comes from the notion of justice proceeding "by leaps", like a kangaroo[6] – in other words, "jumping over" (intentionally ignoring) evidence that would be in favour of the defendant. Another possibility is that the phrase could refer to the pouch of a kangaroo, meaning the court is in someone's pocket. The phrase is popular in the UK, US, Australia and New Zealand and is still in common use.[7]
Etymology[edit]
Although the term kangaroo court has been erroneously explained to have its origin from Australia's courts while it was a penal colony,[3] the first published instance is from an American source in the year 1853.[4] Some sources suggest that it may have been popularized during the California Gold Rush of 1849, along with mustang court,[5] as a description of the hastily carried-out proceedings used to deal with the issue of claim jumping miners.[3] Ostensibly the term comes from the notion of justice proceeding "by leaps", like a kangaroo[6] – in other words, "jumping over" (intentionally ignoring) evidence that would be in favour of the defendant. Another possibility is that the phrase could refer to the pouch of a kangaroo, meaning the court is in someone's pocket. The phrase is popular in the UK, US, Australia and New Zealand and is still in common use.[7]
Ah you see - My claim wasn't as laughable as some on here would claim. Silly @manwithnoname
Yes.
Mine was better though.
B
bkwitche2
Guest
It's also a point by point recounting of what actually happened. But by all means ignore what happened and stick by the argument that a player half way falling down and trying to prevent a goal could accidentally step on another player.
Do you have some alternative facts to interject?
Zlat accepts
Mings appeals
Mings appeals
I am amazed that Zlatan has been banned for three games and has accepted the punishment
I thought that David Gill and the pro-United FA conspiracy would almost certainly ensure he got away with it
I thought that David Gill and the pro-United FA conspiracy would almost certainly ensure he got away with it
I'd be called a troll if i pointed that out.
But I'm sure there's a larger conspiracy into which the ban fits.
Zlatan misses the Chelsea cup game.
He had no defence. With Mings you can argue intent or not and really only he knows. But he will be found guilty and banned. Plus with him appealing, I suspect he will have book thrown at him. It was already mentioned at the charge stage that a 3 game ban wasn't considered long enough.
I seem to remember that the rate of guilty in these situations is high 90% - @Rosco i seem to remember you saying this ages ago when this debate came up. Could be wrong of course, age is messing with my memory nowadays.
He had no defence. With Mings you can argue intent or not and really only he knows. But he will be found guilty and banned. Plus with him appealing, I suspect he will have book thrown at him. It was already mentioned at the charge stage that a 3 game ban wasn't considered long enough.
I seem to remember that the rate of guilty in these situations is high 90% - @Rosco i seem to remember you saying this ages ago when this debate came up. Could be wrong of course, age is messing with my memory nowadays.
Yeah i know... when i saw it i just thought he had trouble getting his teeth out of the way.
It is.
But the suggestion that its a kangaroo court because of same is probably an unsafe one because plenty of magistrate courts have similar success rates - and they do it without the benefit of 12 Sky Sports cameras.
5 matches for Mings
[article]
Bournemouth said they are "extremely disappointed" with the FA's decision.
The Premier League club added they "find it extraordinary that the charges can be described as 'proven' when there is absolutely no evidence to prove the incident was intentional."
[/article]
Hahahaha fools. Next time they should instruct someone who knows how administrative law works.
Bournemouth said they are "extremely disappointed" with the FA's decision.
The Premier League club added they "find it extraordinary that the charges can be described as 'proven' when there is absolutely no evidence to prove the incident was intentional."
[/article]
Hahahaha fools. Next time they should instruct someone who knows how administrative law works.
The FA were a bit merciless on Mings
Zlatan actually looks like Ming The Merciless. Life is funny.
Surely they will appeal
Appealing against FA punishments is futile.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
