frank ryan Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 No I haven't, but that sort of proves my point Frank ! well obviously , it it hadn't been live on tv, discussed on radio and telly and in the papers it would have had less attention , but that's the case with anything - if the new orleans flood hadn't been in the media no one would've known about it - it doesn't mean the 'hype' caused the flood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 well obviously , it it hadn't been live on tv, discussed on radio and telly and in the papers it would have had less attention , but that's the case with anything - if the new orleans flood hadn't been in the media no one would've known about it - it doesn't mean the 'hype' caused the flood There is no hype surrounding a devestating flood frank, but someone calling someone names on a football pitch ....... was it really worthy of so much airtime ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT70 Posted February 12, 2012 Author Share Posted February 12, 2012 its not exactly just "name calling" though is it? its racist, unsporting, derogatory and snide, particularly when "nipping" the other players arm to wind them up even more. then denying its offensive, and claiming its something his team mates call him all the time. and then lying about shaking his hand to your own team, before doing the opposite and making one of the countrys most famous clubs look like racist chumps for supporting him. he's a snidey nasty piece of work, his reputation preceded him and hes dragged a great club down into his crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank ryan Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 There is no hype surrounding a devestating flood frank, but someone calling someone names on a football pitch ....... was it really worthy of so much airtime ? it depends on the names surely - 'bumface' or 'matchstick legs', for instance wouldn't be worthy of much attention, whereas direct racist abuse at a time when this country has started to clean football up is another matter - did you ever go a match back in the day when 'calling someone names' ran to thousands in unified monkey chants - we've come a long way and its worth protecting - if suarez doesn't like it then we can call him names - like arrogant, racist and bigot - he doesn't like it apparently Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joiner andy Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 it depends on the names surely - 'bumface' or 'matchstick legs', for instance wouldn't be worthy of much attention, whereas direct racist abuse at a time when this country has started to clean football up is another matter - did you ever go a match back in the day when 'calling someone names' ran to thousands in unified monkey chants - we've come a long way and its worth protecting - if suarez doesn't like it then we can call him names - like arrogant, racist and bigot - he doesn't like it apparently i was called match stick legs as a kid, i have only just got over the trauma, until now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisT70 Posted February 12, 2012 Author Share Posted February 12, 2012 Just seen it again, the GK shook suarez hand, the next Man U player (not sure who it was) refused. Where is the outcry over the Man U player refusing? there is no outcry, people just reacted to seeing suarez blank evra and withdrew their handshake. rio ferdinand was probably the guy, as the PFA rep pointed out its Evra who was the wronged party in all of this and not suarez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank ryan Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 i was called match stick legs as a kid, i have only just got over the trauma, until now I actually have a bum face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antics^^ Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Just seen it again, the GK shook suarez hand, the next Man U player (not sure who it was) refused. Where is the outcry over the Man U player refusing? The next Man Utd player (Rio Ferdinand) was showing solidarity for his team mate. A team mate who lets not forget is the victim in all this, a victim of cowardly abuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted February 12, 2012 Share Posted February 12, 2012 Just seen it again, the GK shook suarez hand, the next Man U player (not sure who it was) refused. Where is the outcry over the Man U player refusing? Was the next Man United player (Ferdinand) just back from an eight match ban for being an unpleasant racist git? How would you have reacted in Ferdinand's boots, if you'd seen Suarez blank your team mate like that? Especially given the history. The big difference between the two is that Suarez's actions were premeditated, Ferdinand's were not. Suarez is a disgrace, Auto. Dalgleish is equally a disgrace, upon a fine club. Thankfully the owners have recognised that today and started to put things right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pottedplant Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Just seen it again, the GK shook suarez hand, the next Man U player (not sure who it was) refused. Where is the outcry over the Man U player refusing? There is a world of difference between the two actions. Suarez was being (at best) petulant , actions were intentional and deliberate - all preplanned (despite, if Dalgliesh is to be understood, promises that he would shake Evras hand). Actions were preplanned and mean't to provoke. Ferndinand was begin supportive of his team mate and actions were reactionary. Well done Rio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.