Originally Posted by
judolphin
This was clearly a case of the FA abusing his power. The circumstantial evidence is simply too strong.
You mean all of the zero evidence of the actual encounter
Maybe the FA was in the right, maybe the FA was in the wrong
Lynch mobbing is not the appropriate procedure to determine it
Circumstantial evidence requires that the fact offered requires that is the only reasonable inferrence of what it is claiming
That some people booed, does not prove anything other than that some people booed and it cannot , I posit, be determined what the only possible event could be to lead to it