OT: Association Football

[phantom eel]

Meanwhile, Glory run out 2-0 winners in what I would call a plodding match.

 

[Suitman]

Lol. Pot kettle black.

You're still avoiding the question Suity... what are your constant tirades really about for you.

Still can't reply to your claim that it was a good article?
Ok then.

 

[phantom eel]

I think it was a good article.

I didin't read your essay. We have different points of view.

Why are you so bothered about that...? Why do you instigate questions of me, when you have already given your own answers...?

 

[Suitman]

I think it was a good article.

I didin't read your essay. We have different points of view.

Why are you so bothered about that...? Why do you instigate questions of me, when you have already given your own answers...?

Then Why do you make comments on something you didn't read?

 

[phantom eel]

Because you asked... and keep asking... me for my reasoning as to why I thought it was a good article? I just do, and I'm happy if you don't (and if we disagree).

Remember the good old days when you used to PM me with all of these types of questions about my opinions? And when I had to stop answering your PMs, because I was just getting more and more PM essays back - kind of like your overlong post above, in response to my three word opinion?

You are the master of your destiny Suity. As I said earlier, if you stop asking me direct questions then there will be nothing (other than my opinions on association football) to see here. The future of this thread is in your hands...

 

[Suitman]

And you still haven't answered. As you always don't if it doesn't suit you.
You have NOT questioned but ONE argument I made on your claim it was a good article, besides saying lets agree to disagree.
Again, proving you were just trolling.
You've had your chance. Again.
And blown it. Again.

 

[phantom eel]

Lol, you take this internet thing way too seriously. Refusing to engage in your essay-arguments over an article that I gave a three word opinion on is not trolling.

It's just refusing to play your games. There are no such things as "having a chance" in an internet forum... and hence why it doesn't matter whether that chance is "blown" (in your opinion). I am not trying to seek your acceptance online, nor anyone else's.

I have an opinion and am happy that you have yours, but to be honest I'm not overly interested in discussing your opinions at any length - though you seem to have a borderline obsession with requesting I provide more and more details of my opinion?

Only you know why that seems to matter so much to you... and whatever it is you're trying to prove? I'm sure it bores the heck out of everyone else. But when you keep asking me questions, or keep commenting about me (rather than commenting the issue), then you're only perpetuating the very thing that seems to uspet you on the forums.

You can stop. I believe in you.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Far from having a cry... I'm having a laugh, at the person who was getting upset at a three word opinion, and watching them try their best to avoid the subsequent questions.

Why would he answer your questions when you're not responding in good faith? You're obviously a troll. And you're not answering the questions put to you either.

 

[phantom eel]

Faith has nothing to do with it. I would suggest an essay posing multiple questions of someone in response to their three word comment is not good faith either.

And the only thing more boring imo than an imaginary unrequited, one-sided internet "feud", is other people commenting on an imaginary unrequited, one-sided internet "feud".

 

[Suitman]

Why would he answer your questions when you're not responding in good faith? You're obviously a troll. And you're not answering the questions put to you either.

I'm not sure that question even needs to be asked?
The answer has already been provided by Phantom Bart himself - the man (lol) who tried to get away with an alternative persona on this forum and used the excuse that he had an alternative log in device.
We all fell for that old chestnut.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

And the only thing more boring imo than an imaginary unrequited, one-sided internet "feud", is other people commenting on an imaginary unrequited, one-sided internet "feud".

Would you say it's any more boring than you trolling the same f**king poster over the same f**king topic over and over again?

As an Eels fan you should know better than to kick a man while his club is down. And don't pretend he shouldn't care. You care about your f**king team or you wouldn't post here. f**kwit.

 

[Gronk]

You guys have issues. Not hyped sorry.

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, its homophobia.

(Toolshed is a gay sex shop on Oxford St if you didn't know)

I am. Didn't offend me at all. I laughed.

Then you my friend need to reconsider your comments and perhaps reflect that if caricature of Graham Arnold was your son, father, brother, grand father or friend, I am sure you would have not LOL'd at it. Perhaps also add to your moment of reflection, if any of your close kin or friends were in fact gay, how you would feel about the graphic slur upon them.

Yes. you are right.
We ALL have those issues.
ha.

Ha ? What was the funny bit ? I must have missed it.

TBH I don't get why you are attempting to pick the article to pieces . It was an opinion piece that was written by (a highly respected Sports Lawyer) offering the premise that the RBB got off light. IMHO They did. TBH they were lucky that they did not get charged by the police. It certainly has happened elsewhere that fans have been charged (This Celtic fan was in fact charged - Martin Gallagher faces a charge under the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications Act.). Certainly many protesters have been charged in the past when they have overstepped the mark with banners which were beyond the realms of free speech. I certainly don't think that the RBB Tifo was raised under the guise of free speech. Lets be frank here, it was designed to degrade and insult Arnold. At the same time it vilified a marginalized section of our society.

I suggest to you that if that banner was raised elsewhere in a public gathering and depicted the PM, the Queen, Dick Smith, Albert Namatjira, or the Wiggles, the outrage would have been a million times more and that unenforceable bans from soccer matches would be the least of the RBBs problems.

IMHO the WSW fans need to own the gravity of what they did and make sure it never happens again. Maybe they should track down these WSW supporters and try and understand why a large percentage of the fan base don't get what vilification means.

 

[Gronk]

Good on us by the way @ 2011

Parramatta Eels Tackle Homophobia http://www.samesame.com.au/news/local/6799/Parramatta-Eels-tackle-homophobia.htm

Not you merkin

Useless waste of our time.

 

[Suitman]

@Gronk.

I picked the article to bits because it was a shit article.
End of.

 

[Gronk]

@Gronk.

I picked the article to bits because it was a shit article.
End of.

Let's be honest, you picked it to pieces because of your unconditional love for the RBB. That's OK BTW, you just need to own it.

I bet that if SFC did that to Poppa you would not be as relaxed.

 

[Suitman]

Let's be honest, you picked it to pieces because of your unconditional love for the RBB. That's OK BTW, you just need to own it.

I bet that if SFC did that to Poppa you would not be as relaxed.

lol.

Not sure how many times you have to ignore my opinion on the banner.
Rather than attack me, why don't refute any of what I claimed was wrong about the article?
You're becoming as bad as Phantom Bart.

 

[Avenger]

The Gay and Lesbian community during their Mardi Gras have far worse caricatures and depictions of prominent Christian people that offend more than what happened last week. They and their apologists like Gronk cannot have it both ways.

Like I said I'm not offended with either. What shits me is when lefties try and tell me how I should feel. Just get back in your echo chambers and get f**ked. That's what I reckon.

 

[Gronk]

lol.

Not sure how many times you have to ignore my opinion on the banner.
Rather than attack me, why don't refute any of what I claimed was wrong about the article?

Ok I didn't attack you.

On your post about refuting the article ...

1. That you thought that the punishment was enough.
2. You said that he got the suspended 3 point penalty issue wrong.
3. He was looking for an apology from the FBB and all you offered was - oh yeah what about the chairs that SFC broke ? So where is the apology from the RBB ?
4. You refuted the historical timeline of the National Banning Regulations.
5. You claimed that you can't identify perpetrators cos they don't sit in the seats they bought.
6. You felt that he used hyperbola when he counted the number of perpetrators.
7. When he said that the punishment was light, you again raised the issue of the broken seats.

Facts are that you disagree that they got off light. Fact checking his few points does not diminish his claim that they got off light. Deflecting the focus onto broken seats by SFC fans does nothing other than avoid the truth. As @I bleed blue & gold said last night, the RBB break seats with monotonous regularity.

You're becoming as bad as Phantom Bart.

That's a bit of an ivory tower thinned skinned comment and unfair to claim that i am a troll (I say that because you call Bart a troll, not because I agree with you) simply because you and I don't agree on something.

 

[strider]

Let's be honest, you picked it to pieces because of your unconditional love for the RBB. That's OK BTW, you just need to own it.

I bet that if SFC did that to Poppa you would not be as relaxed.

Biased opinion pieces like that are written to have people react to em - good or bad. Suitys doing exactly what they wanted.

I agree suity may have felt a bit different had the roles been reversed ..... but i also agree with him that its pretty appauling there has been practically nothing about the sfc behaviour

Avenger has a point about mardi gra floats too

I'm just agreeing with every merkin this morning

 

[Suitman]

Biased opinion pieces like that are written to have people react to em - good or bad. Suitys doing exactly what they wanted.

I agree suity may have felt a bit different had the roles been reversed ..... but i also agree with him that its pretty appauling there has been practically nothing about the sfc behaviour

Avenger has a point about mardi gra floats too

I'm just agreeing with every merkin this morning

Is today "Happy Sunday" in the Strider household?