Crouchy's girlfriend

[Jezzman]

Just read that Crouch has sent her home to England, after pictures were published in Sunday Mirror showing Abigail with her nose in cocaine.... Tabloids are a sad business...

[Guest Red Mist]

Well done Crouchy. Professional athletes should not associate themselves with druggies.

[Guest RedIsMyColour]

I despise tabloids.

 

If England somehow manage to win the world cup they will glorify it immensely, even though they have done everything possible to disrupt it.

[Scally Bob]

Well done Crouchy. Professional athletes should not associate themselves with druggies.

 

Has Ferdinand gone home as well?

[Guest Red Mist]

I've just seen a picture of this bird. Crouch was stupid to send her home.

[Paul B]

Even though he'd be tainted by implication through her involvement with drugs? He'd be stupid? So, in your world, anyone fit enough is automatically above the law and can do no wrong? You do come out with some old pony, you.

[Guest YKI]

Aren't the photographs old? I heard they were from when she was a teenager.

 

Even though he'd be tainted by implication through her involvement with drugs? He'd be stupid? So, in your world, anyone fit enough is automatically above the law and can do no wrong? You do come out with some old pony, you.

 

 

Would he? I didn't know you could be convicted for another's sins.

[gkmacca]

Did you read Cruyff in the papers today, saying that Crouch is 'of no use at all outside the box' and is only useful at all when he's heading crosses? For such a great player, this guy really comes out with some stunningly silly comments.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I despise tabloids.

 

If England somehow manage to win the world cup they will glorify it immensely, even though they have done everything possible to disrupt it.

that seems to be their sole reason for being - to destroy people's lives

[Guest 3an86]

is this true?

[kop205]

 

Would he? I didn't know you could be convicted for another's sins.

 

'Convicted for another's sins'. What a bizarre turn of phrase.

 

Do you seriously think that there AREN'T journalists out there who would make a huge song and dance out of this and use it to put pressure on Crouch, question his judgement and his moral fibre, claim that he is a poor role-model?

 

I'm not saying that it would be right or fair necessarily, but of course it would happen - that is what Paul B is driving at. Without the Crouch angle, it is hardly a story really is it - 'Young girl does drugs'.

[Paul B]

 

Would he? I didn't know you could be convicted for another's sins.

 

 

Point out where I wrote the word "convicted" and I'll agree I'm wrong. In return, I'll raise you one "implicated" , which I did write and also cite Dr. Ferarri's association with Lance Armstrong which seriously damaged the Texan's reputation and forced him to answer some tough questions.

[Guest YKI]

Point out where I wrote the word "convicted" and I'll agree I'm wrong. In return, I'll raise you one "implicated" , which I did write and also cite Dr. Ferarri's association with Lance Armstrong which seriously damaged the Texan's reputation and forced him to answer some tough questions.

 

 

I suggest you look at the meaning of the word convict. I don't need to use your language verbatim. It has implications beyond a court room.

 

"To show or declare to be blameworthy; condemn: His remarks convicted him of a lack of sensitivity."

 

http://www.answers.com/convict&r=67

 

Again, why would he be implicated when the pictures were taken years ago? Dr Ferrari was a known drugs cheat, there's a bit of a difference. The equivalent argument would be if she was a drug dealer, not a user. We don't even know if she still is a user or not.

Edited June 18, 2006 by YKI

[Dule]

[Guest 3an86]

she's gorgeous. how has pete got with that?

[Paul B]

I suggest you look at the meaning of the word convict. I don't need to use your language verbatim. It has implications beyond a court room.

 

"To show or declare to be blameworthy; condemn: His remarks convicted him of a lack of sensitivity."

 

Again, why would he be implicated when the pictures were taken years ago? Dr Ferrari was a known drugs cheat, there's a bit of a difference. The equivalent argument would be if she was a drug dealer, not a user. We don't even know if she still is a user or not.

 

 

How sad.

[jon_hall]

she's gorgeous. how has pete got with that?

 

The rich and famous Peter Crouch

 

No idea at all.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

she's gorgeous. how has pete got with that?

you mean, "Abigail, what first attracted you to multi-millionaire, Peter Crouch?"

[Guest YKI]

How sad.

 

 

No, what's sad is somebody making judgements of one of our players before they know the full facts.

[kop205]

 

Again, why would he be implicated when the pictures were taken years ago? Dr Ferrari was a known drugs cheat, there's a bit of a difference. The equivalent argument would be if she was a drug dealer, not a user. We don't even know if she still is a user or not.

 

All well and good, but the only reason this is a 'story' in the first place is because she is Crouch's bird and so, in the eyes of the tabloids, he would be 'tainted by implication'. Not saying that is right, but it is the reality of the situation and Crouch has probably done what he needed to do in order to protect himself given the power wielded by the tabloids. It is unrealistic in the extreme to pretend otherwise.

[Guest 3an86]

link? maybe?

[kop205]

No, what's sad is somebody making judgements of one of our players before they know the full facts.

 

He wasn't doing that. The tabloids will. The mere fact of the story appearing in the first place is proof of that.

[Guest YKI]

All well and good, but the only reason this is a 'story' in the first place is because she is Crouch's bird and so, in the eyes of the tabloids, he would be 'tainted by implication'. Not saying that is right, but it is the reality of the situation and Crouch has probably done what he needed to do in order to protect himself given the power wielded by the tabloids. It is unrealistic in the extreme to pretend otherwise.

 

 

Since when have the tabloids be in charge of what's right or wrong? I couldn't give two ***ks about what the tabloids think. Remember what the tabloids had to say about us? Protecting himself from the media interest is not the same as being tainted by implication. He would have finished with her otherwise he hasn't.

 

He wasn't doing that. The tabloids will. The mere fact of the story appearing in the first place is proof of that.

 

 

Yes he was. Read this.

 

Even though he'd be tainted by implication through her involvement with drugs? He'd be stupid? So, in your world, anyone fit enough is automatically above the law and can do no wrong? You do come out with some old pony, you.

[kop205]

Since when have the tabloids be in charge of what's right or wrong? I couldn't give two ***ks about what the tabloids think. Remember what the tabloids had to say about us? Protecting himself from the media interest is not the same as being tainted by implication. He would have finished with her otherwise he hasn't.

 

He is protecting himself from the media interest lest he does become tainted by implication, in the minds of those who read the tabloids (a big proprotion of the population I'd say).

 

Of course the tabloids don't decide what is right and what is wrong, I've said that repeatedly. The issue here is about the power and influence they wield. You refer to what the tabloids said about us in the past and in doing so prove my point. Even though they printed lies, people believed them and in the minds of the S*n buying f***wits of this country, the reputation of Liverpool fans was tainted. That wasn't right, or fair, but it happened.

 

Likewise here, it wouldn't be right or fair for Crouch to have his reputation tainted but it could so easily happen, given the nature of the tabloids and the people they write for. He is trying to prevent that from happening and whilst it is a shame that he has to that, it is also reality. The only reason the story appeared was because of the link to Crouch - that IS the story in fact, so fair enough that he has chosen to distance himself.

 

And I still think that Paul B was referring to the fact that the tabloids etc would be the ones to judge him, rather than judging him himself.

[Guest YKI]

 

 

Likewise here, it wouldn't be right or fair for Crouch to have his reputation tainted but it could so easily happen, given the nature of the tabloids and the people they write for. He is trying to prevent that from happening and whilst it is a shame that he has to that, it is also reality. The only reason the story appeared was because of the link to Crouch - that IS the story in fact, so fair enough that he has chosen to distance himself.

 

 

 

 

He hasn't split with her, though. However, my point is that though the tabloids might try to implicate him it doesn't mean he has actually been implicated. In essence, I don't care what they have to say about it because, invariably, they always sensationalise and embellish the story. What matters is the actual truth not some halfwit's interpretation of it. As I said earlier, protecting himself from the media glare is not the same as him accepting that he could be implicated. If he was frightened he'd be implicated and that the implications had substance you'd suspect he'd split with her. He hasn't.

Edited June 18, 2006 by YKI