| A distraction from the football 11:17 - Oct 27 with 7114 views | GlasgowBlue |
What do we make of the Mike Amesbury Incident then?
|  |
| |  |
| A distraction from the football on 21:23 - Oct 28 with 946 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| A distraction from the football on 19:47 - Oct 28 by eireblue |
The ideal, is to walk away from someone giving you verbal abuse, and not punch them.
I was just running with your hypothetical about there being a reason for repeatedly punching him.
Your hypothetical was the MP could be justified in his action because of his belief that the attacker had a knife, therefore your hypothetical needs the MP to be acting with justified purpose and intent, and the ideal option of walking away was not appropriate, and he didn’t just simply hit a guy whilst he was…tired and emotional. |
I've no idea what you're waffling on about now. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| A distraction from the football on 22:23 - Oct 28 with 903 views | cressi |
His fighting Wardley in the spring at Portman Road that was a warm up fight. |  | | |
| A distraction from the football on 23:06 - Oct 28 with 863 views | Nutkins_Return |
| A distraction from the football on 18:20 - Oct 28 by The_Flashing_Smile |
I understand your position and it's probably right. But it's very easy to say how we'd react without actually being there and knowing what was said (or what happened before the clip we've seen).
Glassers asked for our thoughts in his OP and I just think it's fair and reasonable to wait and see what led to this. People are acting like an MP has just lamped an innocent member of the public - many of them I think rubbing their hands with glee because it's a current (Labour) MP. |
I'm sure most would recognise it almost certainly didn't happen for no reason. I'm sure the guy involved provoked him (most likely drunkenly). But you can't punch someone's face in and remain an MP. You'd lose most jobs if your boss saw that. | |
| |
| A distraction from the football on 11:47 - Oct 29 with 768 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| A distraction from the football on 23:06 - Oct 28 by Nutkins_Return |
I'm sure most would recognise it almost certainly didn't happen for no reason. I'm sure the guy involved provoked him (most likely drunkenly). But you can't punch someone's face in and remain an MP. You'd lose most jobs if your boss saw that. |
Not sure why you've aimed that at me, I haven't said anything about whether he should or shouldn't lose his job. I've merely said let's wait and see what led to this before we make any judgement. Some seem to think there's literally no justification for punching someone - which is fair enough - but I respectfully disagree (for reasons given earlier).
Having said that, if it turns out the bloke just gave him a bit of verbals that could easily be ignored, and the MP has punched him because he was drunk, then yes I'd say he should be sacked. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| A distraction from the football on 11:52 - Oct 29 with 760 views | GlasgowBlue |
| A distraction from the football on 11:47 - Oct 29 by The_Flashing_Smile |
Not sure why you've aimed that at me, I haven't said anything about whether he should or shouldn't lose his job. I've merely said let's wait and see what led to this before we make any judgement. Some seem to think there's literally no justification for punching someone - which is fair enough - but I respectfully disagree (for reasons given earlier).
Having said that, if it turns out the bloke just gave him a bit of verbals that could easily be ignored, and the MP has punched him because he was drunk, then yes I'd say he should be sacked. |
I’m not one of those people who think there is no justification for an initial punch. John Prescott had every right to chin the bloke who egged him.
It’s the five or six punches and a sly kick when the bloke was laying helplessly on the ground followed up by drunkenly given him some verbal as he was laying flat out. | |
| |
| Apparently the reason he knocked… on 12:09 - Oct 29 with 734 views | Bloots |
….seven shades out of him was because the constituent was arguing with him about the removal of the winter fuel allowance and the closure of a local bridge.
That’s OK then.
(this may have already been mentioned on this thread, dunno) |  |
| "The sooner he comes back the better, this place has been a disaster without him" - TWTD User (July 2025) |
| |
| A distraction from the football on 13:37 - Oct 29 with 693 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| A distraction from the football on 11:52 - Oct 29 by GlasgowBlue |
I’m not one of those people who think there is no justification for an initial punch. John Prescott had every right to chin the bloke who egged him.
It’s the five or six punches and a sly kick when the bloke was laying helplessly on the ground followed up by drunkenly given him some verbal as he was laying flat out. |
I didn't see a "sly kick" and at no point was he "flat out", think you've rather exaggerated to make your point. I don't know you well enough but I imagine you'd react similarly if the other guy threatened to harm your daughters, for example... and I'd fully support you in that.
I notice the person filming was more interested in getting all the action for his social media and shouting "It's the MP for Runcorn" just so people were sure, rather than trying to help diffuse the situation. I bet he was loving it being an MP involved.
But anyway, I think everyone's said all there is to say on the subject until we find out more. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| We’ve found out more…. on 13:45 - Oct 29 with 680 views | Bloots |
| A distraction from the football on 13:37 - Oct 29 by The_Flashing_Smile |
I didn't see a "sly kick" and at no point was he "flat out", think you've rather exaggerated to make your point. I don't know you well enough but I imagine you'd react similarly if the other guy threatened to harm your daughters, for example... and I'd fully support you in that.
I notice the person filming was more interested in getting all the action for his social media and shouting "It's the MP for Runcorn" just so people were sure, rather than trying to help diffuse the situation. I bet he was loving it being an MP involved.
But anyway, I think everyone's said all there is to say on the subject until we find out more. |
….he was arguing with the constituent about him voting to remove the winter fuel allowance and the closure of a local bridge.
Context. | |
| "The sooner he comes back the better, this place has been a disaster without him" - TWTD User (July 2025) |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
