Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
And if the investigator does look at that person and doesn't find anything remotely illegal, that person is NOT implicated as having anything to do with those crimes. That's exactly what happened with Foster according to all of the articles I've read.
To post that Foster was still implicated after those facts have come out and he was cleared is what is really stupid imo.
Just so I'm perfectly clear.....I've never had a problem with anybody questioning the ability of any official. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion in that regard. When you start to question the integrity of an official however, you'd better have some damn good proof.
|
So now I guess you are saying I should have said he was implicated previously, but now he isn't since they've looked into it? OK, fair enough. Either way, the whole matter is bringing Foster (rightly or wrongly) into connection (part of the definition of implicate) with Donaghy's gambling problem.
At this point, you've made your opinion clear and it would be hard to back away from it even if you thought you should. That is human nature and I can understand that. However, that alone doesn't make you right so tell me how I improperly used implicated other than to say I should have used it in past tense.
We are in agreement with questioning an official's integrity. I hope you realize I was just commenting on the reports, not my own feelings.