|
Post by gasify on Apr 26, 2024 10:49:46 GMT
That would make sense if he was offered a new contract. I'm not sure that he was offered one. If he wasn't offered one, does that make him sacked? The fact that Sam knows well before the end of the season that he will not be here next year suggests that conversations have taken place and there is more to it than just- not being offered a new contract Woooaaahhh. That's one helluva leap of assumption. Why can it not be a simple case of "Sorry Sam but you are just not up to League one standard anymore"?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 25, 2024 23:25:19 GMT
My apology for the confusion, the headline should have read Finley is quitting Rovers, by not accepting a new contract, in my eyes is quitting Rovers . Or should have said that he is walking away from Rovers ? That would make sense if he was offered a new contract. I'm not sure that he was offered one. If he wasn't offered one, does that make him sacked?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 25, 2024 11:03:26 GMT
I've just updated a Monty Python sketch. 'Is this the right thread for an argument' No it's not
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 25, 2024 10:51:56 GMT
Wrexham are going to run into some problems soon. The Players they currently have IMO arent good enough to get them out of L1 so they need to sign some, the strategy for them so far is just to sign established players on big money that have been in the mercenary bracket - I think they will have limited options in getting these players in in L1. Now I think they'll need to do what we all try to do and develop or scout some gems and mix that with targeted signings. Im not sure they know how to do this. As for the owners, they'll need to invest more, much more and although they are capable, the question is will they really want to? afteralll they wont be a big fish in L1. The appeal that they love giving out that Gladys the tea lady and Huw thats sold programmes for 20 years ect... will be upgraded/replaced. Fans that would have had access to players, this will be reduced. Tourists wont want to go to Wrexham if there is a possibility that they might not win, also the media will also wain I predict a few years of struggle for Wrexham I think they will go on to even more success. Apart from Peterborough, how has the top teams this season put their sides together? Have they thrown money at it or have they done it through scouting? I would be willing to guess that most have done it with money. There is no reason why Wrexham can't do the same. The revenue that Wrexham is generating is pretty impressive. Our owners should be trying to sell a series to the Kuwait TV companies. The told me to invest in gas, I misunderstood and now have this Bristol Rovers millstone hanging on my neck...
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 25, 2024 6:26:27 GMT
I've been concerned about Wrexham when they were in non league, the owner is buying them promotion, you know they will be in the prem probably in 2 seasons, that's 1 promotion spot already gone in my eyes Maybe this isn't what you meant but I do find this phrase quite funny. Other team "Owner is buying promotion" phrased as a negative comment, belittling that other team. Whilst at the same time, comments on Gaschat by some (maybe you Krugar, maybe not. It's more a generic observation) saying that the owners lack ambition, the budget is being lowered, the owners should put their hands in their pockets. The hypocrisy is not lost on me.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 24, 2024 19:57:48 GMT
Hopefully next season all the players will apply to gaschat to confirm what suitable clothing is for 17-29 year olds these days. 🤣 View AttachmentBrunel Ultras.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 23, 2024 21:22:57 GMT
Unless you get two screens, there will always be an area that cannot see it. If I was paying £m's to run a football club then I'd make sure it could be seen from the exec boxes!! True. Shame we can't put it back in the old location. That was perfect. Problem is, someone has gone and built a stand in front of it.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 23, 2024 21:09:29 GMT
I wonder if the screen is the reason why the South West Stand is so much lower than the South Stand. Could it go on top of the South West stand? The screen was planned to go directly above the goal on the front of the south stand. This is what Dave bright said That can't be right, the South stand wouldn't be able to see it... 🙄
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 23, 2024 21:08:33 GMT
I wonder if the screen is the reason why the South West Stand is so much lower than the South Stand. Could it go on top of the South West stand? Apparently it's lower to stop the residents behind the stand objecting to the plans, as the old SW stand was a similar height? Although if the TV was put there then nobody in the West Stand inc the exec boxes could see it? Not even sure if the North Terrace could see it? Unless you get two screens, there will always be an area that cannot see it.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 23, 2024 20:00:04 GMT
No idea, not sure if it was mentioned in the South Stand planning application, if not, then I assume the club will need to apply for pp given the size of the TV and it can't go where it was previously situated. It was mentioned by Dave Bright to a friend of mine when the stand was initially planned that they wanted to put a big screen at the top of it, like they have at Pompey. I wonder if the screen is the reason why the South West Stand is so much lower than the South Stand. Could it go on top of the South West stand?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 23, 2024 19:58:16 GMT
It seems very likely indeed to me. What else is it for? Did they run out of corrugated sheeting? The gap in the seating is there to link the east stand seats into the south stand , when the east stand is constructed, that info came from TG. I call BS on this comment. At the fans forum, Abdullatif said that no one knew why that gap was there. We have a theory, but it doesn't bode well for those involoved.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 16:41:46 GMT
Does understanding a racist stop them from being a racist? Never known a racist to ever say, "you know what, you right. I'm being a racist here". You cant stop anyone nor should you want to - The point is undrstanding why - Until then, there is not argument to be made just two people experessing opposing views I want to stop people being racist and homophobic.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 15:14:11 GMT
I disagree It very much did work, but what people laughed at was very much generational. My grandfather was born in 1887 and laughed with the character not at him. My own father, a racist dickhead (born 1930) also with, not at. A lot of us laughed at. And argued with the National Front in the 1970s I think you are being a twat - People are entititled to their own views. You and I were not arounfdi in the 30's so have no idea of the feelings at that time. It is better to try and undersatand why people thing as they do rather than act supperior with your own comfertablke life feelings. And before you get all Woke on me - I'm 58, half Polish with grandparents that died in Camps in WW2 so obiviuley not racist - You should have had a chat with your Dad and understood why rather than acting so rightous Does understanding a racist stop them from being a racist? Never known a racist to ever say, "you know what, you right. I'm being a racist here".
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 15:04:14 GMT
No, not really. The point I was making is that is Akinfenwe thought it was funny, that is OK. If Akinfenwe thought it was out of order then that is not OK. It is about the person receiving the comment. If they voluntary believe is to be funny, then that's fine. If they are unhappy about the comment, then that is not fine. If a gay person used a gay slur to one of their friends, that is OK. If a heterosexual used that same word, it's not OK. Tim Minchin explains this very well: But it's not just about akinfenwa himself on his own is it?Many others in and around the stadium might have seen and heard it as a form of abuse, as well as, or opposed to comedy value: much like AG or LTN back in the day and taken huge offence. But where do you go if you take that form of abuse in public but it's not recognised as racist homophobic sexist misogynistic anti Semitic islamaphobic (curiously , not Christian phobic though?)? Like my original post alludes, some forms of abuse appear to be protected, others don't because it's funny or just not taken seriously. As mentioned in an earlier post. I think your sentiment is correct, your examples aren't examples that work. Drop the Akinfenwa and use "Who ate all the pies". Then, yes you can continue with your approach. That particular chant make people feel uncomfortable if they are of a certain body type. We shouldn't have any fans that feel uncomfortable. I think essentially, we are in agreement.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 14:50:35 GMT
Here we go. In jump those that hate those that are offended Nope - sorry to disappoint your personal prejudices and preconceptions of people but I welcome initiatives to support those affected and genuinely offended in all walks of life - can’t stand those who claim to be offended on behalf of other people because it makes them feel superior and trendy. You gonna have to give an example as I have no idea what you are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 14:12:29 GMT
Sadly many people laughed with Alf Garnett, not at him as the show intended. It appeared to be scripted to make him look the racist fool, however it did not work and many saw him as their racist hero. It failed and he is still lauded today by some as some sort of funny idol. 🤦🏾♀️ More of an Alan Partridge man myself. "AHA!"
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 13:46:37 GMT
The thrust of what I was saying is how it makes that person feel. If that person finds it funny, it's Bants. If the person doesn't then it's bullying. What if many found Love Thy Neighbour as 'funny'? It ran for many series. Or, Alf Garnett character....? Is that Bantz!? Nope... because racial abuse is a protected abuse. Fat abuse amongst others isn't, but both can be funny and abusive. Can you see the point I'm making?No, not really. The point I was making is that is Akinfenwe thought it was funny, that is OK. If Akinfenwe thought it was out of order then that is not OK. It is about the person receiving the comment. If they voluntary believe is to be funny, then that's fine. If they are unhappy about the comment, then that is not fine. If a gay person used a gay slur to one of their friends, that is OK. If a heterosexual used that same word, it's not OK. Tim Minchin explains this very well:
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 10:25:38 GMT
Your sentiment is a good one. Your example is poor. I have always been challenged by my weight. If someone sang "Your t*ts are offside" to me, I would find that funny. If however, they sang "Who ate all the pies..." then that would water me off. In fact when fans sing that around me, I feel uncomfortably. When Steve Evans was called a weeble, I felt uncomfortable. When we sang "I want to be ginger haired too" I thought that was hilarious. However there is an argument for inherent misogyny in that song which makes it a bit 'awkward'. The treatment of Snakey Taylor at Cheltenham was out of order when lets have a party was sung. However hilarious when "Taylor is a wan...." was sung for 5 to 10 mins continuously. Especially the "oooohhh" between the repeats. Thanks, g but respectfully disagree... because the thrust of what I'm inferring from your post is: It's ok as it's under a comedic banner. Unfortunately cancel culture negates this. This world generally views abuse abuse, no matter what sentiment behind it. The thrust of what I was saying is how it makes that person feel. If that person finds it funny, it's Bants. If the person doesn't then it's bullying.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 7:33:47 GMT
Nobody is disputing that, I think. So why raise other examples in this particular incident? Lets be honest, O2 appears to be claiming that some claim greater protection than others It's true. Who was there and laughed and joined in with akinfenwa his t*ts are offside...? Sounds like a resounding abuse to me. No one batted an eyelid. No protection in form of fat shaming then. Or now. Your sentiment is a good one. Your example is poor. I have always been challenged by my weight. If someone sang "Your t*ts are offside" to me, I would find that funny. If however, they sang "Who ate all the pies..." then that would water me off. In fact when fans sing that around me, I feel uncomfortably. When Steve Evans was called a weeble, I felt uncomfortable. When we sang "I want to be ginger haired too" I thought that was hilarious. However there is an argument for inherent misogyny in that song which makes it a bit 'awkward'. The treatment of Snakey Taylor at Cheltenham was out of order when lets have a party was sung. However hilarious when "Taylor is a wan...." was sung for 5 to 10 mins continuously. Especially the "oooohhh" between the repeats.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Apr 22, 2024 5:51:08 GMT
Is it any more or less bigoted to abuse someone for being larger than average, taller than average, or shorter, perhaps having an extremely short haircut or extremely long hairstyle? Or, for being ginger haired? Or even living in a caravan!? Any form of abuse is wrong, but with some factions of society it feels like they have more protection than others. But, it's still abuse. I think your comments have come from the right place, however the wording might be a bit confusing. There is definitely a difference between racial and homophobic rhetoric when compared to say questioning if the referees parents were married. There is no place for this in society and some football fans still think it is OK in football. Its just not. I don't really believe that it is up to an individual to fight the cause, I think the stewards and the club need to take the responsibility. If someone around me on the Thatchers starts homophobic and rascist chanting, I couldn't say that I would stand up to it. I do have a sense of personal survival too. The IRA chant is pretty silly, especially the age of the kiddies singing that. Thankfully, most of those 'children' have lived in a world with a peace agreement. As for the referees, I'm sure they 'knock one out' every now and then, so that is very likely to be factually correct.
|
|