mmmbop
Simon Hunt
Posts: 1,062
|
Post by mmmbop on Feb 5, 2009 18:42:52 GMT
good god, you are so naive mmmbop. im also very surpised you got away with calling me a so and so and scum. i thought those sort of remarks were outlawed on here. seems the goalposts have shifted again. *edit* nice word filter mods, atleast you've done something today. Trust me im far from naive! Just speaking how I find. You see nothing wrong in that kinda carry on i do, different courses for different horses
|
|
Rich
Paul Adey
Go hard or go home
Posts: 6,691
|
Post by Rich on Feb 5, 2009 19:08:14 GMT
Sadly I was on a train coming from Birmingham when these Derby fans got on. Now I admit I hate football, but is there any need to punch hell out of a train and swear at anything they see? Dont think football fans no a chant that hasnt got a 'C' word in it or a 'F' They was busy chanting how much they 'F'ing hate Nottingham, I was gagging to ask, 'If you hate it so much, why ya going'? But thought maybe not. And then to to top their lil journey they was met with police at the station and frog marched to the ground! People wonder why i hate sport watched and played by classess idiots! And yet you like a sport where people are complaining that there aren't enough fights in the games. There are dumb fans of every sport. Football has more because it has more fans. Bit of a difference between doing it for a reason on the ice and smashing up a train/terrorising innoncent bystanders!!
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Feb 5, 2009 19:45:33 GMT
And yet you like a sport where people are complaining that there aren't enough fights in the games. There are dumb fans of every sport. Football has more because it has more fans. Bit of a difference between doing it for a reason on the ice and smashing up a train/terrorising innoncent bystanders!! I'm not justifying the idiot fans. Nor can I justify the fighting in ice hockey no matter how much I've enjoyed it. Selling tickets is not a justification. Hooligans would say the same thing. They can't justify the fighting but they find it fun. Let's be honest - both are pretty dumb and classless. Obviously the hooligans are worse than hockey fighting. Football does not draw from th same demographics as ice hockey. 50% of the Panthers crowd are female for a start. It's also more middle class I'd suspect.
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Feb 5, 2009 19:50:42 GMT
Nonsense, is that why you're below us in the league? Is that why you haven't been the better side in three games between the side so far? Rubbish. If Forest win the league game, we've won the season. the other two games have been draws one of which derby won fair but were very harshly done when the ref disallowed a goal that was just laughable. so debry have clearly had the upper hand in the three encounters so far. if derby win their game in hand then they would be two points ahead of you. they get more fans and have a better stadium. they dont have to resort to playing the kids. they have been in the premier league more recently than forest and have not been in the third tier of english football. they have also recently got to a cup semi final and pushed man utd quite hard. how many of forests players would actually get in the derby team? one or two. I dont claim derby are a good team. they are just better than forest in recent times. You make some fair points. What you didn't mention is that - 1 - You have to win your game in hand. The chances are you won't. You do not average 2 points per game. So in effect your league position is worse. 2 - You're allegedly tens of millions in debt. You're also not going up this season. That means you'll be seling players in the summer. If both teams stay up my guess is that Forest will be better placed to do well next season than Derby. In fact, Derby could be on their way to the Charlton, Leicester, Southampton, Forest, Norwich, Leeds etc scenario.
|
|
|
Post by grumpyminer on Feb 5, 2009 19:54:44 GMT
It's a shame Forest missed out on a nice pay day v Man U. It's not great to lose to Derby too of course. However that is all yesterday was about. QPR is a more important game. All that matters is staying up. The FA Cup is not important. Not signing any players has killed momentum so soon after the Cardiff game. Good old Mark Arthur. This is the post I agree with. the league is far more important than the cup. We may have missed a big payday by not winning to play United. but if we don't stay in the Championship the lost revenue over the entire season would be far greater. We were never gonna win the cup anyhow. Also agree that Mark Arthur, Nigel Doughty or whoever, have not helped by keeping their wallets firmly closed......there is still time however to bring in loan signings. A big concern is the ever-growing injury list and loan signings would help with that. Just a word of agreement to pg1982, derby! Better than Forest!? Well they should be!! They were, as you say, a Premier League team last season, all be it the worst ever whilst Forest just sneaked out of League 1 on the last day. For that, derby won millions of pounds for finishing a long way last whilst Forest got a comparitively small prize for gaining automatic promotion. We have to play the kids because we didn't get the millions that derby did. Just remember who got the winner, where he came from and how you hijacked him by telling him we can offer you £10k a week, thats twice what you'll get at Forest. All in all, it has nothing to do with being a better CLUB; it has all to do with having more money. Our current manager is the one you need to thank for that, it was his team that got you to the Prem (although you were nowhere near ready for it - which is what cost him his job there), Jewell was never gonna save you, the directors knew that, but he did no better this season. Our Nigel may be the one to steady the ship, but the war still rages, the better team will be the one who is highest come May.
|
|
|
Post by buster on Feb 5, 2009 20:15:11 GMT
good god, you are so naive mmmbop. im also very surpised you got away with calling me a so and so and scum. i thought those sort of remarks were outlawed on here. seems the goalposts have shifted again. *edit* nice word filter mods, atleast you've done something today. Trust me im far from naive! Just speaking how I find. You see nothing wrong in that kinda carry on i do, different courses for different horses i never said i didnt see anything wrong with the fans behaviour. you just assumed that was the case and then proceeded to use offensive language toward me and insult me. you can check my posts if you disagree with me. you'll certainly find that i never said that antisocial behaviour, like you described, was acceptable. by the way, the first two of the board rules are: 1) No bad language. 2) Posts should be none abusive or offensive to others. Proper respect to be shown for other posters.
|
|
Adam
Chick Zamick
Posts: 7,519
|
Post by Adam on Feb 6, 2009 0:14:34 GMT
|
|
Rich
Paul Adey
Go hard or go home
Posts: 6,691
|
Post by Rich on Feb 6, 2009 16:07:08 GMT
Bit of a difference between doing it for a reason on the ice and smashing up a train/terrorising innoncent bystanders!! I'm not justifying the idiot fans. Nor can I justify the fighting in ice hockey no matter how much I've enjoyed it. Selling tickets is not a justification. Hooligans would say the same thing. They can't justify the fighting but they find it fun. Let's be honest - both are pretty dumb and classless. Obviously the hooligans are worse than hockey fighting. Football does not draw from th same demographics as ice hockey. 50% of the Panthers crowd are female for a start. It's also more middle class I'd suspect. Sorry, I just do not follow the thought process where you can begin to compare 2 guys fighting out an honest toe to toe at hockey with hooligans smashing up a train. Im not accusing you of justifying these peoples behaviour. Sometimes fighting in hockey (90% of the time) is entirely justified, just like im sure there might be a time when a football fight has been justified (1% max) but fighting in hockey isnt just for the entertainment, its not a guilty pleasure, its a part of the sport. On a totally unrelated note, Iv found something on ebay which you forest fans wont want to miss: Who wants one??!
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Feb 6, 2009 18:36:06 GMT
I'm not justifying the idiot fans. Nor can I justify the fighting in ice hockey no matter how much I've enjoyed it. Selling tickets is not a justification. Hooligans would say the same thing. They can't justify the fighting but they find it fun. Let's be honest - both are pretty dumb and classless. Obviously the hooligans are worse than hockey fighting. Football does not draw from th same demographics as ice hockey. 50% of the Panthers crowd are female for a start. It's also more middle class I'd suspect. Sorry, I just do not follow the thought process where you can begin to compare 2 guys fighting out an honest toe to toe at hockey with hooligans smashing up a train. Im not accusing you of justifying these peoples behaviour. Sometimes fighting in hockey (90% of the time) is entirely justified, just like im sure there might be a time when a football fight has been justified (1% max) but fighting in hockey isnt just for the entertainment, its not a guilty pleasure, its a part of the sport. On a totally unrelated note, Iv found something on ebay which you forest fans wont want to miss: Who wants one??!It's not needed though, is it? It demeans ice hockey and invites mockery from critics. What I was comparing (admittedly in a clumsy way) was people bemoaning a lack of fighting in games at the NIC. It reminds me of hearing people bemoaning the lack of 'atmosphere' at present day football matches. I appreciate hockey fighting is allowed in the rules (though I'm not sure if it is legally permissable). It doesn't stop it from being a bit naff though. A bit like those naff 'aren't we hard?' firms [sic].
|
|
|
Post by sparta on Feb 6, 2009 19:19:20 GMT
Although I have to say that I was watching a programme on espn america last week, and the American writers were being critical of the NFL for the brutality of the game at this moment in time, I think one of the writers was Bob Ryan...
But yes, I'm in agreement with you Sunbeam regarding the comments by many hockey fans on this very site regarding violence and the generalisation of football V hockey.
I often have to laugh at the folks who always come out with "hockey is a family sport we don't want football-esque themes in our sports" and yet these are the same people that will take their children to watch a sport where by violence is an accepted part of the game.
Now I accept that a fight in hockey is within the confines of the sport, and yet certain folks can't grasp that football hooliganism/violence is nothing to do with football as a sport, but down to identity as an individual within a (small) group.
Bizarre.
|
|
Rich
Paul Adey
Go hard or go home
Posts: 6,691
|
Post by Rich on Feb 6, 2009 21:13:05 GMT
Sorry, I just do not follow the thought process where you can begin to compare 2 guys fighting out an honest toe to toe at hockey with hooligans smashing up a train. Im not accusing you of justifying these peoples behaviour. Sometimes fighting in hockey (90% of the time) is entirely justified, just like im sure there might be a time when a football fight has been justified (1% max) but fighting in hockey isnt just for the entertainment, its not a guilty pleasure, its a part of the sport. On a totally unrelated note, Iv found something on ebay which you forest fans wont want to miss: Who wants one??!It's not needed though, is it? It demeans ice hockey and invites mockery from critics. It depends. In some situations, yes. "Critics"? I dont care what these "critics" claim to know about the game but several top level NHL players have come out recently saying fighting is part of the game, the NHL commisioner (who has said he is anti fighting in the past) has acknowledged you cannot take it out of the sport. So the players like it, the people at the top acknowledge it, the fans (generalisation) love it (the noise levels and team intensity/momentum of games can be swayed), the general media cover it (if there is a big fight it often makes it onto TV) but "critics" dont? Critics dont sell arenas out. I can understand people who dont want it to be a large part of the sport, and dont want fighting for the sake of it but to say it "demeans the sport" because some TV critics think its thuggery is unbeleivable. I wouldnt describe myself as a fight fan, I have an intrest in it because its part of the game I love but I dont go for the fights. Does that mean I have an intrest in something which is pointless and "not needed"? Sorry to go off topic btw!
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Feb 7, 2009 2:52:28 GMT
Believe me, Rich, it's used as a big stick to mock the sport with. It's like fat people and darts. It kills credibility because no team sport needs fighting. There are plenty of tough sports out there but they don't have fighting. Aren't there Euro hockey leagues too that don't? It doesn't need fighting. At least not to enforce the rules it doesn't. BTW there was a fan poll connected to the All Star game that showed over 50% of Canadians opposed fighting. That surprised me. ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090127/national/hky_fighting_pollIs fighting even legal? Could a policeman arrest fighters in theory? They've done so in football.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Feb 7, 2009 8:03:57 GMT
I often have to laugh at the folks who always come out with " hockey is a family sport we don't want football-esque themes in our sports" and yet these are the same people that will take their children to watch a sport where by violence is an accepted part of the game. But is there a contradiction there? It's often said that in ice hockey the violence stays on the playing surface whereas in football it's found amongst the crowd. A stereotyping I know but there is an element of truth in it. Like it or not, we live in a violent world and for society to function violence, has to be channeled and controlled. If parents can take their children to hockey games and they learn that the violence is only permissible within prescribed circumstances, then surely that would be a good thing for society as a whole. A great deal better than letting them grow up into people who wreck trains in the name of sport.....
|
|
|
Post by Rob #12 on Feb 7, 2009 8:24:44 GMT
Is fighting even legal? Could a policeman arrest fighters in theory? They've done so in football. They will be after Carl Froch then! If the rules of a sport allow the sportsmen to fight then I can't see how the law applies. Unless its going above and beyond what is allowed in the rules (i.e. biting someones ear off, deliberately taking a swing at someone with your stick).
|
|
Rich
Paul Adey
Go hard or go home
Posts: 6,691
|
Post by Rich on Feb 7, 2009 10:10:27 GMT
Believe me, Rich, it's used as a big stick to mock the sport with. It's like fat people and darts. It kills credibility because no team sport needs fighting. There are plenty of tough sports out there but they don't have fighting. Aren't there Euro hockey leagues too that don't? It doesn't need fighting. At least not to enforce the rules it doesn't. BTW there was a fan poll connected to the All Star game that showed over 50% of Canadians opposed fighting. That surprised me. ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090127/national/hky_fighting_pollIs fighting even legal? Could a policeman arrest fighters in theory? They've done so in football. I wont let the thread go anymore off topic, youve got your opinion which is absoltely fine, but a few critics having a laugh at the fact weve got fighting in our sport isnt a valid reason to stop it, when its countered by players who say its necessary. Its part of the game and always will be. Meanwhile this discussion has come about from something which is a genuine problem which needs to be stopped and even if he is naive, mmmbop has every right to be concerned and upset about
|
|
|
Post by sparta on Feb 9, 2009 16:24:40 GMT
A great deal better than letting them grow up into people who wreck trains in the name of sport..... Damage to trains happens alot during the football calender, it just doesn't get reported. A section of Coventry fans are notoruious for causing trouble on the way down to London when their team plays there. Those spates of mindless moronic behaiviour have occured as the fans were travelling down to London and have nothing to do with football. It's just morons causing damage.
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Feb 11, 2009 17:41:39 GMT
Is fighting even legal? Could a policeman arrest fighters in theory? They've done so in football. They will be after Carl Froch then! If the rules of a sport allow the sportsmen to fight then I can't see how the law applies. Unless its going above and beyond what is allowed in the rules (i.e. biting someones ear off, deliberately taking a swing at someone with your stick). Boxing is licensed. My gues is - and maybe Sparta knows the answer - is that a cop could arrest them if he so wished. Just like they did the Newcastle Utd players (Kieron Dyer was it??).
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Feb 11, 2009 17:43:29 GMT
I often have to laugh at the folks who always come out with " hockey is a family sport we don't want football-esque themes in our sports" and yet these are the same people that will take their children to watch a sport where by violence is an accepted part of the game. If parents can take their children to hockey games and they learn that the violence is only permissible within prescribed circumstances, then surely that would be a good thing for society as a whole. Or they are taught to 'take the law in to their own hands'.
|
|