Todays fitba

[RicoS321]

23 minutes ago, tup1 said:

There should be no poppies in football either, nor minutes silences for Remembrance Day. It really has nothing to do with football, if you want to pay your respects to these things, do so in your own time.

Football is not political. It's sport. People with agendas are making it political, using it as a vehicle for their sinister politics.

Football is completely political, what in the world makes you think it isn't? It's designed in capitalism's image with Scottish football illustrating that perfectly. The trickle down economics of Celtic's champions league cash, the blanket coverage of the scum on the national broadcaster and all mainstream media... I could go on. The inequality angle is just as much a feature of fitba as it is race/class/gender etc. If Scottish football isn't political for you then you're probably not doing it right (but given your opinions on Sevco's return to the top and the bought and paid for Tims, I'd say you are aware of that).

23 minutes ago, tup1 said:

The BLM movement by it's very nature is racist in itself. If it were WLM it would be a very different story. I'm sick of hearing about BLM, I really couldn't care less about it when I sit down to watch a simple game of football.

No it isn't "by its nature" racist in itself. Just as feminism isn't sexist. It might be the wrong way to present an argument - that's certainly my opinion - but that's not the same thing.

[tup1]

3 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

Football is completely political, what in the world makes you think it isn't? It's designed in capitalism's image with Scottish football illustrating that perfectly. The trickle down economics of Celtic's champions league cash, the blanket coverage of the scum on the national broadcaster and all mainstream media... I could go on. The inequality angle is just as much a feature of fitba as it is race/class/gender etc. If Scottish football isn't political for you then you're probably not doing it right (but given your opinions on Sevco's return to the top and the bought and paid for Tims, I'd say you are aware of that).

No it isn't "by its nature" racist in itself. Just as feminism isn't sexist. It might be the wrong way to present an argument - that's certainly my opinion - but that's not the same thing.

Celtic and Rangers are completely different, they are both weird clubs followed by religion obsessed weirdos. So of course to them everything is political. I don't even really consider them football clubs, they are more like terrorist organisations with a sporting branch.

Most or all of the rest of Scottish football is completely free of politics. So I don't agree at all that football is completely political. Quite the reverse, the very ethos of the game is apolitical. 

This taking the knee for BLM is up there with athletes giving the Nazi salute at the Olympics in the 1930's. Sinister crap.

[RicoS321]

4 minutes ago, tup1 said:

Celtic and Rangers are completely different, they are both weird clubs followed by religion obsessed weirdos. So of course to them everything is political. I don't even really consider them football clubs, they are more like terrorist organisations with a sporting branch.

Most or all of the rest of Scottish football is completely free of politics. So I don't agree at all that football is completely political. Quite the reverse, the very ethos of the game is apolitical. 

This taking the knee for BLM is up there with athletes giving the Nazi salute at the Olympics in the 1930's. Sinister crap.

Interesting you draw equivalence with the Nazi salute rather than the raised fist of Tommie Smith and John Carlos. Weird, I'd say. 

As for the rest of your post, I just gave you examples, which were pertinent to the whole of football and not the sideshow of religion. Scottish football as a whole is built entirely on politics. Was Stewarty retaining the 11-1 voting system political? What about Hearts' attempt at not being relegated? Scottish football needs a strong Rangers? But the biggest thing that is political is the duopoly and, as stated, the idea that the betterment of two teams will be beneficial for the entire game. It perfectly mirrors the "wealth creators will just leave!!" bullshit that we're fed in other walks of life. If you have any interest in the betterment of the Scottish game, which you seem to, then you're political. That you shouldn't bring a Palestinian flag to a match is just a specific form of politics that is frowned upon, the rest is the game itself, from the size of the league, whether Celtic can fuck off to a training camp, how the finances are split and so on. All politics.

[tup1]

You’ve shifted the argument and are referencing a completely different type of politics, internal football politics, which of course will always exist.

Thats not the point I’m making. BLM has absolutely nothing to do with football. They introduced it in this grid iron nonsense in America and now here it is in English and Scottish football.

The fans are correct to be contemptuous of it and the sinister motives behind it.

[RicoS321]

3 hours ago, tup1 said:

You’ve shifted the argument and are referencing a completely different type of politics, internal football politics, which of course will always exist.

Thats not the point I’m making. BLM has absolutely nothing to do with football. They introduced it in this grid iron nonsense in America and now here it is in English and Scottish football.

The fans are correct to be contemptuous of it and the sinister motives behind it.

I haven't shifted the argument, I'm making exactly the same point as I was from the beginning. Football is politics, and fitba politics is an exact mirror of society. BLM, regardless of how you feel about it, is about equality of opportunity at its very essence. That's why the grid iron shite is equally as applicable in this country as it is in America, where stop and search is more of an issue than police shootings, poverty equally so. The structural inequalities that prevent Hamilton ever being able to win a trophy and, without a miracle, even finish top six are exactly the same as though those that make it harder for a black child (statistically speaking, and I personally think it would be better to substitute class for skin colour, but it doesn't make it any less correct) from becoming prime minister or a lawyer. You get just enough breaking of the mould that people can say "well Livingston managed it last season", but you'd never see Livingston, St Mirren and Hamilton in the top six at the same time. That's structural inequality - by design. If players can see that in society, they're right to challenge it. You can disagree with their right to say it, but it has every place in society and football.

[tup1]

27 minutes ago, RicoS321 said:

I haven't shifted the argument, I'm making exactly the same point as I was from the beginning. Football is politics, and fitba politics is an exact mirror of society. BLM, regardless of how you feel about it, is about equality of opportunity at its very essence. That's why the grid iron shite is equally as applicable in this country as it is in America, where stop and search is more of an issue than police shootings, poverty equally so. The structural inequalities that prevent Hamilton ever being able to win a trophy and, without a miracle, even finish top six are exactly the same as though those that make it harder for a black child (statistically speaking, and I personally think it would be better to substitute class for skin colour, but it doesn't make it any less correct) from becoming prime minister or a lawyer. You get just enough breaking of the mould that people can say "well Livingston managed it last season", but you'd never see Livingston, St Mirren and Hamilton in the top six at the same time. That's structural inequality - by design. If players can see that in society, they're right to challenge it. You can disagree with their right to say it, but it has every place in society and football.

I'd imagine the athletes who gave the Nazi salute at the Olympics said exactly this, in their own defence. The Nazi salute has every place at the Olympics, to reassure themselves.

Meanwhile, those who refused were vilified. Exactly as the Millwall supporters are being vilified now for correctly booing a gesture for a global political movement with extremely dubious aims.

When the stadiums are full, the booing will of course increase massively, so the 2k fans at Millwall is only a small taster of public opinion.

Millwall have now ditched the gesture, correctly. It's the fans who pay their wages not the other way round.

 

[wee toon red]

8 minutes ago, tup1 said:

I'd imagine the athletes who gave the Nazi salute at the Olympics said exactly this, in their own defence. The Nazi salute has every place at the Olympics, to reassure themselves.

Meanwhile, those who refused were vilified. Exactly as the Millwall supporters are being vilified now for correctly booing a gesture for a global political movement with extremely dubious aims.

When the stadiums are full, the booing will of course increase massively, so the 2k fans at Millwall is only a small taster of public opinion.

Millwall have now ditched the gesture, correctly. It's the fans who pay their wages not the other way round.

 

So if the fans want the club to be perceived as racist, the owner's have to just shrug their shoulders and let them get on with it? That's almost as mental as your other line about Black Lives Matter being racist.

[RicoS321]

1 hour ago, tup1 said:

I'd imagine the athletes who gave the Nazi salute at the Olympics said exactly this, in their own defence. The Nazi salute has every place at the Olympics, to reassure themselves.

Meanwhile, those who refused were vilified. Exactly as the Millwall supporters are being vilified now for correctly booing a gesture for a global political movement with extremely dubious aims.

When the stadiums are full, the booing will of course increase massively, so the 2k fans at Millwall is only a small taster of public opinion.

Millwall have now ditched the gesture, correctly. It's the fans who pay their wages not the other way round.

 

It's got fuck all to do with who pays who's wages. They're not the property of Millwall fans. You couldn't get a more naziesque mentality if you tried, that's how shallow your argument becomes. To exclude politics from anything is political. Millwall fans don't control players, the FA don't control players, they're human beings with their own opinions based on their own experiences. I'm more than happy for the Millwall fans to boo, and it would be terrible if they were censored or fined, but insisting that players conform is equally as bad. If the Millwall fans have the understanding and conviction to back up their position then that's great. They should be happy to take the flak like adults and articulate their position. I doubt that's the case, and I think using the "no politics in fitba" excuse to make up for their ignorance is fairly pathetic. It would be good if Millwall could organise some sort of forum with their supporters and players to state their position on the issue.

Edited December 8, 2020 by RicoS321

[tup1]

3 hours ago, wee toon red said:

So if the fans want the club to be perceived as racist, the owner's have to just shrug their shoulders and let them get on with it? That's almost as mental as your other line about Black Lives Matter being racist.

I doubt the fans in question care about the perception of their club. The important point is that they are well within their rights to boo it if they want to do that. Same as any player or club official should be within their rights to not take the knee if that's what they want to do.

But of course the players or officials are not going to do that, to do so would be to be labelled a racist.

So BLM being racist is maybe the wrong word. BLM is fascist in nature is the correct phraseology.

[tup1]

2 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

It's got fuck all to do with who pays who's wages. They're not the property of Millwall fans. You couldn't get a more naziesque mentality if you tried, that's how shallow your argument becomes. To exclude politics from anything is political. Millwall fans don't control players, the FA don't control players, they're human beings with their own opinions based on their own experiences. I'm more than happy for the Millwall fans to boo, and it would be terrible if they were censored or fined, but insisting that players conform is equally as bad. If the Millwall fans have the understanding and conviction to back up their position then that's great. They should be happy to take the flak like adults and articulate their position. I doubt that's the case, and I think using the "no politics in fitba" excuse to make up for their ignorance is fairly pathetic. It would be good if Millwall could organise some sort of forum with their supporters and players to state their position on the issue.

Fans are paying customers. If they want to boo something, they should be allowed to crack on. Since when was booing against the law?

But booing the fascist BLM movement results in you becoming the target. This mirrors exactly what happened in German society in the 1930's. Acquiescence to a fascist movement.

[RicoS321]

48 minutes ago, tup1 said:

Fans are paying customers. If they want to boo something, they should be allowed to crack on. Since when was booing against the law?

But booing the fascist BLM movement results in you becoming the target. This mirrors exactly what happened in German society in the 1930's. Acquiescence to a fascist movement.

Nobody's stopping them. I'm not suggesting otherwise in any of my points. What the fuck does becoming the target mean? These guys are perfectly able to get their points across if they can articulate them. The daily mail, the express, the telegraph will happily print them if they don't amount to basic racism. There's no shortage of platforms for them.

[tup1]

1 hour ago, RicoS321 said:

 What the fuck does becoming the target mean? 

I'd have thought that was obvious from my previous point. You become a target for the fascist BLM movement and it's shadowy backers.

If you don't take the knee, you would get labelled a racist in the media, whether you were racist or not. It's comply or die with this nonsense.

I reiterate, it has absolutely nothing to do with football. If we took a knee for all the folk persecuted in the world, we'd never stand up again. It has no place in a football stadium, people are there to see a simple 11 vs 11, not to have propaganda shoved down their throats by unknowns.

[RicoS321]

19 hours ago, tup1 said:

I'd have thought that was obvious from my previous point. You become a target for the fascist BLM movement and it's shadowy backers.

If you don't take the knee, you would get labelled a racist in the media, whether you were racist or not. It's comply or die with this nonsense.

I reiterate, it has absolutely nothing to do with football. If we took a knee for all the folk persecuted in the world, we'd never stand up again. It has no place in a football stadium, people are there to see a simple 11 vs 11, not to have propaganda shoved down their throats by unknowns.

Who are its shadowy backers? Who owns the movement? More importantly, who doesn't? As I said before, any player wishing to not comply would easily get to make their point in any of the national tabloids in this country, there would likely only be the Guardian and twitter/social media that would hold the opposing view.

You entirely miss the point. You're not simply there to see a simple 11 vs 11 and you are having propaganda shoved down your throat every time you attend a football match. Whether it be the lining up of the players in front of the dugouts, the billboards at the side of the pitch, the players on one team earning six times that of the opposition, the chairmen colluding on media deals, the segregating of a club and the company that owns a club, the community work that a club does, the holding up of red cards for kick racism out etc etc. You can't opt out. You're objecting to a single form of propaganda because it falls outwith the propaganda you've already bought into.

[tup1]

1 hour ago, RicoS321 said:

Who are its shadowy backers? Who owns the movement? More importantly, who doesn't? As I said before, any player wishing to not comply would easily get to make their point in any of the national tabloids in this country, there would likely only be the Guardian and twitter/social media that would hold the opposing view.

You entirely miss the point. You're not simply there to see a simple 11 vs 11 and you are having propaganda shoved down your throat every time you attend a football match. Whether it be the lining up of the players in front of the dugouts, the billboards at the side of the pitch, the players on one team earning six times that of the opposition, the chairmen colluding on media deals, the segregating of a club and the company that owns a club, the community work that a club does, the holding up of red cards for kick racism out etc etc. You can't opt out. You're objecting to a single form of propaganda because it falls outwith the propaganda you've already bought into.

I'm sorry, but that's just wrong. I'm there to watch football. That's it. I'd imagine most people feel the same way. I'm not buying into any propaganda by watching a football match despite your waffle above.

Nor am I there to take knees, give minutes applauses, or make nazi salutes. I find the sight of Derek McInnes taking the knee absolutely laughable. 

It's only in recent years that this has become a 'thing'. Probably started with the Princess Diana stuff, forced grief for someone murdered by her own family members. That was the start of this slippery slope of manipulating sports crowds with geopolitical bullshit.

I get it though, you either can't see it or refuse to see it for what it is. 

[RicoS321]

9 minutes ago, tup1 said:

I'm sorry, but that's just wrong. I'm there to watch football. That's it. I'd imagine most people feel the same way. I'm not buying into any propaganda by watching a football match despite your waffle above.

Nor am I there to take knees, give minutes applauses, or make nazi salutes. I find the sight of Derek McInnes taking the knee absolutely laughable. 

It's only in recent years that this has become a 'thing'. Probably started with the Princess Diana stuff, forced grief for someone murdered by her own family members. That was the start of this slippery slope of manipulating sports crowds with geopolitical bullshit.

I get it though, you either can't see it or refuse to see it for what it is. 

I do see that, that's what I'm saying. I agree with your last part, I don't need you or others to tell me that's why I brought up the NHS clap originally. What I'm saying is that the whole experience is political whether you like it or not. By supporting Aberdeen in Scottish football, you're taking a political position. I don't care if most people feel the same way or not, it's a simple fact. Your agreeing to everything about Scottish football by paying your money to watch AFC, and every decision made by the SPFL and its setup is political, unless you can point to any of the examples I gave and say they're not political (or propaganda)? The football match you attend doesn't exist in a vacuum, whether you pretend it does or not, it's just a subset of capitalism. You're buying into the "AFC family" narrative. What you're actually saying, then, is that you don't want a particular type of political action to be practiced at a football match. I'm saying that you're choosing an arbitrary cutoff point. I make a choice to ignore the fact that AFC play in a fixed league designed around two teams (that's political, just in case you thought otherwise) when I turn up at Pittodrie - to suspend the belief for 90 minutes. Whether I extend that for another 30 seconds prior to kick off or not is arbitrary, and would miss the point entirely.

[tup1]

2 hours ago, RicoS321 said:

I do see that, that's what I'm saying. I agree with your last part, I don't need you or others to tell me that's why I brought up the NHS clap originally. What I'm saying is that the whole experience is political whether you like it or not. By supporting Aberdeen in Scottish football, you're taking a political position. I don't care if most people feel the same way or not, it's a simple fact. Your agreeing to everything about Scottish football by paying your money to watch AFC, and every decision made by the SPFL and its setup is political, unless you can point to any of the examples I gave and say they're not political (or propaganda)? The football match you attend doesn't exist in a vacuum, whether you pretend it does or not, it's just a subset of capitalism. You're buying into the "AFC family" narrative. What you're actually saying, then, is that you don't want a particular type of political action to be practiced at a football match. I'm saying that you're choosing an arbitrary cutoff point. I make a choice to ignore the fact that AFC play in a fixed league designed around two teams (that's political, just in case you thought otherwise) when I turn up at Pittodrie - to suspend the belief for 90 minutes. Whether I extend that for another 30 seconds prior to kick off or not is arbitrary, and would miss the point entirely.

Fair enough.

The fixed league thing only happened since football on TV became a thing. In the 80's, the league was not fixed, and was an actual proper competitive sporting competition, which several teams were capable of winning.

The introduction of saturation TV coverage has also, lo and behold, brought all this political nonsense into football. But BLM is by far the most sinister, and the taking of a knee by everyone, for fear of being labelled racist, is akin to having to Sieg Heil to Hitler back in the day. It's heinous. Booing it seems the only logical response.

[manc_don]

Disgusting to see both cheeks doing well in Europe. I can only be grateful that I'm not in the UK having to listen to the puke fest on TV.

[tom_widdows]

4 minutes ago, manc_don said:

Disgusting to see both cheeks doing well in Europe. I can only be grateful that I'm not in the UK having to listen to the puke fest on TV.

Both?

[manc_don]

11 minutes ago, tom_widdows said:

Both?

Granted, only the huns mk2 have done well and qualified, I was merely coming from the angle I want them both to lose all fixtures, at all times. So a win for the dhims still qualifies.

[tom_widdows]

7 minutes ago, manc_don said:

Granted, only the huns mk2 have done well and qualified, I was merely coming from the angle I want them both to lose all fixtures, at all times. So a win for the dhims still qualifies.

A win keeps 'the winner' in his job thereby continuing the suffering of the so called 'greatest fans in the world' The same fans that unveiled a banner stating the celtic board should be shot.

[tup1]

The huns are winning but I won’t get too down about it.

I lost all faith in Scottish football the day Gazza was blazing on the pitch and carried out a number of assaults on Dons players which he never even got booked for.

That was the day the corruption in our game dawned on me. It’s got much worse since.

The huns are still financially doping so you have to question what Scottish football even is. Make a massive unsustainable loss and win. Any team could do it.

[tup1]

History repeating itself at Tannadice as an elbow to the head from a hun is only deemed worthy of a yellow card.

No wonder they’re winning such a corrupt league.

[Jute]

How this wasn’t a red card defies explanation.

 

[tup1]

33 minutes ago, Jute said:

How this wasn’t a red card defies explanation.

 

The referee's brother, Brian McLean, used to play for the huns. He shouldn't be allowed to referee hun games, a more blatant supporter with a whistle you'd struggle to find.

He reminds me of Mike McCurry with his cheating, totally shameless.

[dons8321]

3 hours ago, Jute said:

How this wasn’t a red card defies explanation.

 

Any chance that this will be looked at by the beaks tomorrow and he'll be suspended...I mean the DU player for diving, obviously..