Zebroski Jailed

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

Damon was there, im sure what he said is true.

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Personally, I feel a bit for CZ.  A young teen at CCC PAFC with a future ahead of him.  Shit happened and he was potentially hounded out despite a bullying culture.  No wonder he ended up on the wrong path, despite his initial effort.

A "bullying culture" and "hounded out"..

Now you're just making shit up.

Were you there on the training ground etc?

Forget ambassador, it's president for you

Why wasn't I aware of what? That CZ was a dangerous and unhinged maniac? Unfortunately psychometric analyses are not required before signing someone. The first sign of him being what he is we dealt with the situation. We tried to help him as I guess all of his 8 clubs have in the past 8 years. The other clubs have all known what he is, probably thought he had learned from each of his 'mistakes' or that they could help him. 8 years later. 8 clubs later. No difference - still a dangerous maniac.

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

This incident killed off a promising career. He might just feel a little cheated?

alannotivvy wrote:

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

Damon was there, im sure what he said is true.  

so was my friend who was in the squad training there, only his side doesnt leave a huge gap like damon's does from karaoke to the pitcher going over the head..

everything else tallys though fwiw not that was ever in question.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

This incident killed off a promising career.  He might just feel a little cheated?

No, he had eight cubs after us, fecked up every chance he was given.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Why wasn't I aware of what? That CZ was a dangerous and unhinged maniac? Unfortunately psychometric analyses are not required before signing someone. The first sign of him being what he is we dealt with the situation. We tried to help him as I guess all of his 8 clubs have in the past 8 years. The other clubs have all known what he is, probably thought he had learned from each of his 'mistakes' or that they could help him. 8 years later. 8 clubs later. No difference - still a dangerous maniac.

A great defence with retroactive knowledge. It's why others put their opinions forward earlier in this thread and dismissed yours.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

This incident killed off a promising career.  He might just feel a little cheated?

I think the only people feeling cheated are the clubs that signed him.
He killed off his own career.

Iggy wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

This incident killed off a promising career.  He might just feel a little cheated?

No, he had eight cubs after us, fecked up every chance he was given.

Again, it 'killed off a promising career". Aside from a few lower/non league clubs his football career was effectively over unless he became the next Rooney, Owen etc. Not saying what he has since done is right but I'll always question if his treatment at PAFC led him to where he is now. At least he tried sommat before he became 'scum' as people who should know better like to describe him.

Rickler wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

Iggy wrote:

FFS Coxside if it was just this incident your argument may carry some weight, in light of the other three or four charges I think it's reasonable to assume the lad isn't quite right in the head.

This incident killed off a promising career.  He might just feel a little cheated?

I think the only people feeling cheated are the clubs that signed him.
He killed off his own career.

Nobody doubts he gone wayward. A potential CCC player with a career ahead of him down to being dismissed with no doubt a huge compensation pay out in front of him. Shit that could've been prevented with a bit of will.

If you don't get the guy is a total maniac when the players, clubs, the courts, his partner and anyone else who has had the misfortune to meet him agree then it's a pointless conversation.

Probably pointless after page 2 to be fair.

McCormick's career wasn't killed off by a single incident.

I know, how many did CZ kill?  We took one back after sacking him and kicked the other out.

Coxside_Green wrote:

Graiser wrote:

This thread is interesting reading, we have Damon who was actually there saying how it was and some refusing to believe him, so Damon has an axe grind has he ? Wouldn't think so.

If I read some opinions on here Wotton's a knob, well I suppose I could agree and pass on the same story, embellish it a bit and lo and behold Wotton becomes an even bigger knob.

But I don't know him and can only judge what I've seen on the pitch which was his leadership and his 100% acknowledgement of the fans after every game suggests perhaps not such of a knob.

Alledgely a bit of a pig to the youngsters ? Well who knows, but maybe a bit of tough love being misinterpreted to suit some agenda's ?

For me there's an eye witness who has clearly stated what was basically a violent assault and CZ who has  since proved to have violent criminal tendencies. So how should we judge the evidence ?

As for the alledged verbal abuse from Wotton, well most of ATD posters could be charged with that but I don't think anybody will be paying them a visit and wacking them across their lug holes

Funny we read the same thread differently.

I don't think anyone is "refusing to believe" what Damon saw but some are suggesting there was previous provocation that he hasn't seen and to this day remains in denial of which led to the events of the night in question.

You can't honestly believe taking the piss out of physical disabilities is "tough love" can you?  There's laws against this sort of behaviour which the vast majority of society abide by, you're in a minority if so.  Myself when I was a young apprentice went through 'initiations' as did many others, which the suits would turn a blind eye but there was a line that was never crossed.

Clearly Damon and the rest of the suits acted on what they saw that night, CZ was clearly guilty of assault or worse.  It's still rather telling charges weren't pressed, Wotton got attacked not Hasney and Holloway's reactions to it all.  If people have heard different versions leading up to said assault or worse from people they trust and respect, why should they be any less credible than Damon who has his own little bit of less glamorous history?

The tough love I was referring to was a response to a couple of previous posters who were suggesting Wotton was a bit of a knob towards the apprentices.
Nothing to do with the glassing incident. I wouldn't condone that type of abuse if it happened in the context being suggested.
I prefer to believe an eyewitness account rather than conjecture

That's good to read Graiser. It appears taking the piss out of physical disabilities is fair game for some on this thread. Truly disappointing.

Albeit I accept it is mostly conjecture, it still stinks.

Coxside_Green wrote:

That's good to read Graiser.  It appears taking the piss out of physical disabilities is fair game for some on this thread.  Truly disappointing.

Albeit I accept it is mostly conjecture, it still stinks.

im pretty relaxed with theversion of events I have been given. It involves Wotton being a cnut, Because he is one.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

That's good to read Graiser.  It appears taking the piss out of physical disabilities is fair game for some on this thread.  Truly disappointing.

Albeit I accept it is mostly conjecture, it still stinks.

im pretty relaxed with theversion of events I have been given. It involves Wotton being a cnut, Because he is one.

I need to learn from you and stop filling up pages with shit replies (not meaning your reply of course..  strewth).

Coxside_Green wrote:

Funny we read the same thread differently.

I don't think anyone is "refusing to believe" what Damon saw but some are suggesting there was previous provocation that he hasn't seen and to this day remains in denial of which led to the events of the night in question.

You can't honestly believe taking the piss out of physical disabilities is "tough love" can you? There's laws against this sort of behaviour which the vast majority of society abide by, you're in a minority if so.  Myself when I was a young apprentice went through 'initiations' as did many others, which the suits would turn a blind eye but there was a line that was never crossed.

Clearly Damon and the rest of the suits acted on what they saw that night, CZ was clearly guilty of assault or worse.  It's still rather telling charges weren't pressed, Wotton got attacked not Hasney and Holloway's reactions to it all.  If people have heard different versions leading up to said assault or worse from people they trust and respect, why should they be any less credible than Damon who has his own little bit of less glamorous history?

This post is almost exactly my views a couple of pages back.
''jugging'' someone is wrong
Bullying is wrong
Abuse is wrong - particularly when aimed at a persons afflictions.

At the time of the incident CZ had been at Argyle about 12 months and I can't remember any events in the press during that time that indicated CZ was so volatile. It was after he was sacked and during the following years that his volatile and thuggish behaviour surfaced and so it would have been impossible to blame his alcoholic volatility for the incident. Comments like ''it was the first drink of the evening'' don't hold any water because unless CZ was being escorted throughout the day the amount of alcohol he, and the others, had consumed was pure guesswork. How many of you have had a few tipples before going out?

Were Argyle correct to sack CZ? Of course they were. His behaviour was appalling and not in any way acceptable with or without provocation. I wonder, however, whether any of the abusers were ''talked to'' about handing out abuse. As for PW, Hasney, IH etc - never met them so can't comment. Is his jail term correct? Yep - based on the events since then.

Exactly Tigger. Us so-called defenders aren't arguing the rights & wrongs of the night in question but the hours/days/weeks/even months leading up to it.

Why some can't see our point of view amazes me but also comes as no surprise. The world we live in.

Hugh Watt wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

That's good to read Graiser.  It appears taking the piss out of physical disabilities is fair game for some on this thread.  Truly disappointing.

Albeit I accept it is mostly conjecture, it still stinks.

im pretty relaxed with theversion of events I have been given. It involves Wotton being a cnut, Because he is one.

You need to see a Psychiatrist because your obvious hatred for a man you have never met is not healthy.
Why do you hate him so much?

I think this thread has done it time and should be locked up.

was kinda thinking that as well TGWU...