The all-new Premier League thread Page 4093

  • Page

    of 5610 First / Last

  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 14:22:45 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Meh, at least we got the benefit of them playing for us, and then the money from selling them. Let's not forget Wenger passed on the chance to buy both of them.
  • The-Bodybuilder 12 Sep 2013 16:26:46 14,387 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Love the special relationship.
    We give you inflated offers for your best players.
  • Blotto 12 Sep 2013 16:29:55 2,777 posts
    Seen 4 days ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    The special relationship seems pretty good to me.

    Madrid get dibs on the player, Spurs get more/the maximum amount they're worth and get to sell them to a club that doesn't effect them in anyway rather than to United.

    It's not perfect but you know, they're Real Madrid with infinite money. You're spurs. It's not going to be equal.
  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 16:32:16 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Just heard David Baddiel on the radio going on about why clubs should adopt a zero policy to people chanting about Yids.

    He, quite rightly, pointed out that the vast majority of the people claiming to be taking it back were not jewish, with it being like the same average white fans, since tottenham has a large black population chanting 'nigger army' and taking back the N word.

    Woz quite interesting.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • LeoliansBro 12 Sep 2013 16:34:02 44,724 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    If people are genuinely offended by it, or it is intended to demean or belittle them, then it should not be used. Otherwise I don't see the problem.

    /adjusts ignorance

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 16:36:31 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    As he put it 'its the last racial slur thats OK to say but its just as offensive to me as the n word or the p word'

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 16:37:23 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Most Spurs fans whinge about the whole thing, but I feel like Real fans probably feel just as hard done by, if not more so.

    It would be nice to get some quality youth players on loan or something, but I think the whole thing is just PR more than anything else tbh. It's about marketing and friendlies and such.
  • Dougs 12 Sep 2013 16:42:21 69,026 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    Just heard David Baddiel on the radio going on about why clubs should adopt a zero policy to people chanting about Yids.

    He, quite rightly, pointed out that the vast majority of the people claiming to be taking it back were not jewish, with it being like the same average white fans, since tottenham has a large black population chanting 'nigger army' and taking back the N word.

    Woz quite interesting.
    This is on the back of the FA statement on the issues, and Spurs' subsequent statement. Which basically said (although I did read it a few days ago) "here are the reasons some fans do it, we know it's bad, we'll work with them to try and stop it".
  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 16:45:13 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    As for the Yid thing, here's an interesting counter-perspective from the Jewish Chronicle.

    http://www.thejc.com/comment-and-debate/comment/111318/chronicler-jump-idiotic-bandwagon

    FWIW I think the word should stop being used by Spurs fans, but it needs to be stopped for the right reason. They (or we) should stop using the word because it muddies the issue, and creates a grey area where there should be none. It once was sung for good reason - to counteract the word being used racistly - but that has not become counter-productive and ironically it is now prolonging the issue. If Spurs fans stopped using it now, then everyone else would have to too. however, I don't agree that Spurs fans singing it is offensive.

    Also Baddiel needs to realise if he really wants Spurs fans to stop singing it then he needs to shut the fuck up about it, as Spurs fans do not take kindly to a high profile Chelsea fan telling them how to support their team. He has genuinely just made it sung even louder.
  • LeoliansBro 12 Sep 2013 16:46:33 44,724 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    But 'Yid Army' is used as a term of solidarity, not an insult.

    LB, you really are a massive geek.

  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 16:48:44 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    LeoliansBro wrote:
    But 'Yid Army' is used as a term of solidarity, not an insult.
    IMHO, thats not really the point. Either racist terms are ok or they arent.

    And, as kalel said, by prolonging the association, it encourages idiots like the west ham fans who sit there and go 'ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss'.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 16:52:48 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    nickthegun wrote:
    IMHO, thats not really the point. Either racist terms are ok or they arent.
    But for the sake of argument, no term is inherently racist. "Yid" is just an abbreviation of the word "yiddish" and was used affectionally by Jews long before it got thrown back in their faces by racists. So why shouldn't it be reclaimed or repurposed?

    And frankly there's no confusion when it comes to West Ham fans hissing, or Chelsea fans singing "Spurs are on their way to Auschwitz". That's racist, regardless of whether Spurs fans sing Yid Army or not.

    The grey area is when other fans call us Yids. That's it really. They do it with malice and racist intent, but because it's what we call ourselves, they claim it's ok. That's an issue that can't be solved imho without us stopping calling ourselves Yids, but frankly I don't think we should have to. It's obvious what the difference is. But I think it's a necessary concession Spurs fans should make in the name of solving this issue.

    Edited by kalel at 16:53:11 12-09-2013
  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 16:57:21 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yeah and if you take it back to the start 'stan' means country of. Afghanistan is country of the afghans, kazakhstan is country of the kazakhs and pakistan is country of the pakis, which is not inherently racist but you cant imagine anyone shouting 'Paki Army'.

    I dunno, seems like its offending enough people for it to be dropped now because it doesnt really do anyone any favours.

    Edited by nickthegun at 16:58:21 12-09-2013

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 17:01:32 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    I don't think anyone should be offended by Spurs fans specifically using it. And while I think it should be stopped, again, people being offended by that specifically shouldn't be the reason why it's stopped.

    It isn't going to stop unless Spurs fans come to the conclusion themselves, and that needs to be carefully approached. Baddiel going on the radio and saying it's Spurs fans' fault that Chelsea fans are racist is really not helpful.
  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 17:03:36 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Spurs fans are offended by Spurs fans using it is the impression im getting.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 17:05:22 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Where are you getting that impression from?
  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 17:24:50 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Anyway, a few Spurs fans probably do get offended by it. As it happens my old man hates it. But I think most get it to some extent as well. The Spurs fans don't mean harm by it and I think everyone needs to realise that before they start trying to solve the issue.
  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 17:26:16 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Over the years ive heard rumblings, radio phone ins, tweets, this, that, the other.

    As I type this theres a jewish spurs fan on the radio saying that all the people around him dont like it being sung.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • nickthegun 12 Sep 2013 17:29:20 60,988 posts
    Seen 3 minutes ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    To clarify, I dont have a massive problem with it myself, but I can see why people want it banned and it seems to do more harm than good.

    ---------------------------------------------------------
    My man gives real loving that's why I call him Killer
    He's not a wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am, he's a thriller

  • kalel 12 Sep 2013 17:29:41 89,176 posts
    Seen 40 minutes ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    As I say, that's a small part of the issue really.

    The whole problem with this one is on one side people are saying "it's offensive so you shouldn't be signing it", and the other side saying "but the intent isn't to cause offence, in fact it's the opposite, so it's fine".

    Both sides are missing the point.
  • Dougs 12 Sep 2013 17:42:36 69,026 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I thought the timing of the FA statement was odd too. Why now, and not before the NLD? That it's massively prevalent with Arsenal fans anymore, but there is still a nasty minority that do it. It's definitely dying out though, thankfully
  • Subquest 12 Sep 2013 19:31:59 317 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    News today praising Man City as having the cheapest season ticket, cheapest match day ticket etc. Considering their match day revenue matters less to them than any other club, and they at make way more than the difference from their bullshit etihad naming rights, colour me distinctly unimpressed. They could let people in for free and not even flinch.
  • morriss 12 Sep 2013 19:41:21 71,283 posts
    Seen 22 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    kalel wrote:
    Meh, at least we got the benefit of them playing for us, and then the money from selling them. Let's not forget Wenger passed on the chance to buy both of them.
    So we're lucky to have signed and improved these players to an extent where the richest club in the world wants to buy them off us for what we want to sell them for?

    Ok then.
  • Shikasama 12 Sep 2013 20:32:13 7,077 posts
    Seen 16 minutes ago
    Registered 6 years ago
    Subquest wrote:
    News today praising Man City as having the cheapest season ticket, cheapest match day ticket etc. Considering their match day revenue matters less to them than any other club, and they at make way more than the difference from their bullshit etihad naming rights, colour me distinctly unimpressed. They could let people in for free and not even flinch.
    Match day revenue is becoming an increasingly smaller % of a clubs revenue anyway with the majority coming from TV and sponsorship.

    Also, you can say the money doesn't matter to them, but Utd, Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool are all owned by multi billionaires and they don't offer 300 season tickets so yeah, they deserve the praise they get.
  • FWB 12 Sep 2013 20:40:17 45,137 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    I'd say it is something that they have reduced the prices. Hard to criticise someone for lowering costs. So fair play to them.
  • snowbored 12 Sep 2013 20:48:04 474 posts
    Seen 30 minutes ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    morriss wrote:
    kalel wrote:
    Meh, at least we got the benefit of them playing for us, and then the money from selling them. Let's not forget Wenger passed on the chance to buy both of them.
    So we're lucky to have signed and improved these players to an extent where the richest club in the world wants to buy them off us for what we want to sell them for?

    Ok then.
    If your club has an eye to spot young talent and the ability to develop that talent into the most expensive player in the world then surely that it is a good thing.

    If someone offered me the choice between sunny Spain, playing for a club that has the expectation of winning of every tournament it enters, or England where it's freezing and wet, and there is only an outside chance of winning anything, I know where I would go!
  • Dougs 12 Sep 2013 21:28:48 69,026 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Shikasama wrote:
    Subquest wrote:
    News today praising Man City as having the cheapest season ticket, cheapest match day ticket etc. Considering their match day revenue matters less to them than any other club, and they at make way more than the difference from their bullshit etihad naming rights, colour me distinctly unimpressed. They could let people in for free and not even flinch.
    Match day revenue is becoming an increasingly smaller % of a clubs revenue anyway with the majority coming from TV and sponsorship.

    Also, you can say the money doesn't matter to them, but Utd, Spurs, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool are all owned by multi billionaires and they don't offer 300 season tickets so yeah, they deserve the praise they get.
    Haaaaang on. Whilst match day revenue is decreasing (currently), we (and Liverpool) still need to operate as a business so have to maintain prices. We might be owned by billionaires, but they don't act in the same way as City's owners.
  • Dougs 12 Sep 2013 21:29:36 69,026 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    FWB wrote:
    I'd say it is something that they have reduced the prices. Hard to criticise someone for lowering costs. So fair play to them.
    But they can only do so because they're owner ploughs cash into them! Gah!
  • FWB 12 Sep 2013 21:40:19 45,137 posts
    Seen 1 hour ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    So what? They did it. This isn't a comment on their billionaires. It's about them reducing prices. They don't have to.
  • Dougs 12 Sep 2013 21:42:34 69,026 posts
    Seen 2 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    If you can't see how one affects the other, then I'll just stop there.
  • Page

    of 5610 First / Last

Log in or register to reply