Roverswall wrote:With the greatest of respect and I have given my views on this you are coming across as holiest that thou on this thread, That doesn't always sit will with folks.
Condeming a racist thug is not adopting a holier than thou attitude...
barham red wrote:I've stated my opinions on Ben numerous times and still haven't changed my opinion that the club did the wrong thing by not sacking him after the facebook affair. We didn't, he played on and the club decided to internally discipline him which in my view tainted both the club and the sport a bit. This now puts us, and my views, in a very tricky position. Not renewing his contract would not really do much in the way of making a statement. He'd go, get a decent contract elsewhere and it would be almost as if he was just let go. The impact to make a statement of us not tolerating this kind of behaviour was lost on the day of the KC derby. Because of this I think he'll get the new contract his playing deserves but his behaviour doesn't. I wont be chanting charlie, I don;t like to hear people chanting it, but they will because he's almost become a folk hero for reasons that are beyond me.
Just to say seventies red posted some valid points and actually made me think about some of the things I did in my past and how I'm a completely different character now to when I was 18 and to some extents 27 (BC's age). I find myself looking at antics of some turning my nose up in disgust without thinking that maybe I wasn't massively dissimilar at a younger age. I got given a chance, maybe this BC's very last one.
Put it this way, he's got an extremely long way to go before I'll do anymore than clap a try he scores and no doubt time will tell if he manages to keep his nose clean.
to save repeating things over and over i'll just state that barham red's opinion on the ben cockayne affair are exactly the same as mine. I understand why people want to keep him from a playing point of view but I personally feel that sometimes you have to look beyond that for the good of the club as a whole.
Dudley wrote:Maybe not, but the abuse seventies red got for referring to what Charlie did as "misdemeanors" was.
You consider me telling him his values & morals are in the gutter abuse ?
This is an emotive topic and if people are going to defend a racist thug they are going to get challenged by others. I actually think Seventies Red made some good valid points in his post and he/she has clearly got some life experience, however it fell down for me when he only considered Bens actions as misdemenours, Ben committed a very serious crime and clearly did not learn from it.
Joined: Jan 08 2006 Posts: 2192 Location: Somewhere in the Stratosphere.
berrigans bitch wrote:You consider me telling him his values & morals are in the gutter abuse ?
This is an emotive topic and if people are going to defend a racist thug they are going to get challenged by others. I actually think Seventies Red made some good valid points in his post and he/she has clearly got some life experience, however it fell down for me when he only considered Bens actions as misdemenours, Ben committed a very serious crime and clearly did not learn from it.
So you're saying telling someone their morals and values are in the gutter isn't abuse, seems quite abusive to me. And what did they do to merit this attack? Oh yes they used a word to describe an incident, that you didn't consider to be strong enough. Like I said before, in your own way your as Much a bigot as any racist, as you are totally intolerant to any views that don't match your own. As you say its an emotive subject maybe you best not get involved if you can't join in without attacking people who disagree with your opinions.
Dudley wrote:So you're saying telling someone their morals and values are in the gutter isn't abuse, seems quite abusive to me. And what did they do to merit this attack? Oh yes they used a word to describe an incident, that you didn't consider to be strong enough. Like I said before, in your own way your as Much a bigot as any racist, as you are totally intolerant to any views that don't match your own. As you say its an emotive subject maybe you best not get involved if you can't join in without attacking people who disagree with your opinions.
You consider my comment abusive, my word you must be more horrified than me regarding Ben. What does it matter what happened, are you implying certain behaviours warrant being nearly kicked to death! You consider me a bigot because I condemn a 27yr old racist thug
Joined: Jan 08 2006 Posts: 2192 Location: Somewhere in the Stratosphere.
berrigans bitch wrote:You consider my comment abusive, my word you must be more horrified than me regarding Ben. What does it matter what happened, are you implying certain behaviours warrant being nearly kicked to death! You consider me a bigot because I condemn a 27yr old racist thug
Don't you have to be able to read to be educated to degree standard? I think you'll find I called you a bigot for your lack of tolerance for anyone else's views. And just for the record, yes I found your comments aimed at seventies red offensive when taken in the context, that all he/she had done was to express an opinion on an open forum that didn't agree with yours and in doing so commited the dreadful crime of using a word, you considered not strong enough to describe Charlies actions. For this you accuse them of having morals and standards in the gutter. Like I said before maybe the issue is too emotive for you to get invovled in the debate if it has that effect on you.
Dudley wrote:Don't you have to be able to read to be educated to degree standard? I think you'll find I called you a bigot for your lack of tolerance for anyone else's views. And just for the record, yes I found your comments aimed at seventies red offensive when taken in the context, that all he/she had done was to express an opinion on an open forum that didn't agree with yours and in doing so commited the dreadful crime of using a word, you considered not strong enough to describe Charlies actions. For this you accuse them of having morals and standards in the gutter. Like I said before maybe the issue is too emotive for you to get invovled in the debate if it has that effect on you.
OK...your being very selective here to what you respond to..what about your replying regarding what the victim had done ? you clearly implied the attack was warranted. His name is Ben Caockayne, interesting that you still choose to use his pet name, bless!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 63 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
