As We're In the Position of One View Only (1 Viewer)

Deleted member 5849 said:

Those not giving the club any money because they disagree with the actions of the owners and want to make a principled stand...

Did you agree with the likes of Ann Lucas to do the same because of the club's actions previously?

Did you decide she would be back as soon as we won a couple of games?

I thought she was right to stand up for her beliefs and the signing of Marlon King din't sit quite right with myself, but to compare that scenario with the current one is bit bonkers mate.

A lot of teams have signed players of dubious character and will continue to do so in the future, what we are dealing with now is hedge fund which has the primary aim of making money for its investors. People are not going through a moral choice but using the logic that if we turn off the cash flow these bandits can be forced out of the club.
Did you decide she was just doing it for the publicity?

Did you decide she was out of order for choosing not to support the club and get behind the lads?

Were those who chose not to go then condemned by you for not being a proper fan?

Was it decided the club was better off without them anyway, and we didn't need fans like them?

Click to expand...

I think they are two different scenarios mate; one was an act of conscience which I applauded at the time and this current situation is people starving this hedge fund of cash to try and force them out.

Clubs will always sign players of dubious character if the do it on the pitch (just look at Liverpool fighting tooth and nail to hold on to that twat Suarez) we have an organisation that is trying to uproot a club from its community without any regard for the fans.

Did you agree with the likes of Ann Lucas to do the same because of the club's actions previously? I didn't feel the same way as her but sympathised with her reasons which were valid and I agreed with her choice to stand up for what she believed in

Did you decide she would be back as soon as we won a couple of games? I didn't but it is the case that the more attractive going to the games the harder it is to stick with your principles. Thats a fact and there is nothing wrong with that. Once you are doing harm to yourself while perhaps even not even being noticed by the people you are standing up against then it is a good idea to carry on? There are 2 reasons I won't be going the principle and they have killed my passion over the past few months. I'm no longer excited about seeing the skyblues like I was early this year. Now if my passion comes back it will probably override my principles and I have no issue with that. But since this season looks like a complete write off whatever happens I see no chance of my anger and sadness being replaced by excitement and so sticking to my principles is going to be easy.

Did you decide she was just doing it for the publicity? I didn't, it's possible she was though. Her motivations were irrelevant to me just as the MEP's and bob ainsworth's motivations are irrelevant to me, I'll judge them on their actions. It's certainly important in some cases to look at peoples motivations in politics but not in these cases imo.

Did you decide she was out of order for choosing not to support the club and get behind the lads? no

Were those who chose not to go then condemned by you for not being a proper fan? no

Was it decided the club was better off without them anyway, and we didn't need fans like them? no

Answers in red:

Deleted member 5849 said:

Those not giving the club any money because they disagree with the actions of the owners and want to make a principled stand...

Did you agree with the likes of Ann Lucas to do the same because of the club's actions previously?

Yes, I think it was a principle worth taking a stand for.

Did you decide she would be back as soon as we won a couple of games?

I didn't really form an opinion on this question one way or the other. I never once considered it, nor cared.

Did you decide she was just doing it for the publicity?

There's always a danger when someone in the public eye takes such a stance that it is for publicity. That said, I don't believe it was, as others took the same stance.

Did you decide she was out of order for choosing not to support the club and get behind the lads?

No; she, like any fan, is free to act and make decisions based on what they feel is right, and should not be abused for that.

Were those who chose not to go then condemned by you for not being a proper fan?

I prefer to condemn those who throw around terms like "proper fan" like they are the arbiter of football club fandom. But to answer the question, no, of course not.

Was it decided the club was better off without them anyway, and we didn't need fans like them?

Perhaps by others. Certainly not by me.

Click to expand...

Northern Wisdom:

Those not giving the club any money because they disagree with the actions of the owners and want to make a principled stand...

Did you agree with the likes of Ann Lucas to do the same because of the club's actions previously?

Thought she was wrong. My stance was that Marlon King had served his sentence and should be allowed to work again, being the free citizen he was.

Did you decide she would be back as soon as we won a couple of games?

Couldn't be arsed what she felt or had decided.

Did you decide she was just doing it for the publicity?

Nope. Think she genuinely believed in her stance.

Did you decide she was out of order for choosing not to support the club and get behind the lads?

Nope. Again, her choice.

Were those who chose not to go then condemned by you for not being a proper fan?

Nope. I reasoned with them as to why I thought King should be allowed to ply his trade now that he had served his sentence, but didn't chastise anyone for choosing not to go.

Was it decided the club was better off without them anyway, and we didn't need fans like them?

Nope. Just thought it a shame that we lost some fans.

Deleted member 5849 said:

Those not giving the club any money because they disagree with the actions of the owners and want to make a principled stand...

Did you agree with the likes of Ann Lucas to do the same because of the club's actions previously?

Did you decide she would be back as soon as we won a couple of games?

Did you decide she was just doing it for the publicity?

Did you decide she was out of order for choosing not to support the club and get behind the lads?

Were those who chose not to go then condemned by you for not being a proper fan?

Was it decided the club was better off without them anyway, and we didn't need fans like them?

Click to expand...

stop wumming you fool

blueflint said:

stop wumming you fool

Click to expand...

I can't stand the 'verb-ing' of nouns. Stop wankering.

A principled stand is being made because of the huge impact this will have on our club. The scenarios you mentioned above are insignificant and represent a minority although this would have been a bit of publicity.

This principled stand currently being made clearly represents a majority.

TheParsonsHose said:

A principled stand is being made because of the huge impact this will have on our club. The scenarios you mentioned above are insignificant and represent a minority although this would have been a bit of publicity.

This principled stand currently being made clearly represents a majority.

Click to expand...

So priinciples are based on majority numbers not personally held beliefs?

That's just mob rule isn't it, rather than a principled stand?

lordsummerisle said:

So priinciples are based on majority numbers not personally held beliefs?

That's just mob rule isn't it, rather than a principled stand?

Click to expand...

The majority of the population in this country would like to bring back hanging.

Right and proper though that no government in recent history has brought in such legislation.

There probably is an element of the herd mentality in the boycott but for it to work it needs to be a massive majority and I believe if it is over 90% we can win this battle.

Picture the herd of wildebeest on the Serengeti standing strong against the hungry pride of lions, together we are strong, divided we fall.

I would see the people who go to Sixfields as Meerkats.

Nothing better than some animal metaphors on a Monday afternoon!

The problem in all this for me is: #toomanycampaigns.

There is Keep Cov In Cov and Not One Penny more neither of which are ideal for many fans. We aren't and never have been united in what we'#re trying to achieve. There are some who aren't going at all if SISU remain. Then there are some who are only going to away matches if SISU remain, then there are those (like me) who will go if we return to the Ricoh. It's all too diluted to make any real impact.

For example last week on CWR they were saying that there was going to be a demo outside SISU headquarters. Fair enough. However, this wasn't organised by the Sky Blue Trust but by the Not One Penny More campaign, although members of the Sky Blues Trust were attending. What?!

torchomatic said:

The problem in all this for me is: #toomanycampaigns.

There is Keep Cov In Cov and Not One Penny more neither of which are ideal for many fans. We aren't and never have been united in what we'#re trying to achieve. There are some who aren't going at all if SISU remain. Then there are some who are only going to away matches if SISU remain, then there are those (like me) who will go if we return to the Ricoh. It's all too diluted to make any real impact.

For example last week on CWR they were saying that there was going to be a demo outside SISU headquarters. Fair enough. However, this wasn't organised by the Sky Blue Trust but by the Not One Penny More campaign, although members of the Sky Blues Trust were attending. What?!

Click to expand...

It can be a bit "Judean Peoples Front" and "Peoples Front of Judea" at times!

lordsummerisle said:

So priinciples are based on majority numbers not personally held beliefs?

That's just mob rule isn't it, rather than a principled stand?

Click to expand...

Thats not what I am saying. I am just stating that the majority are making the same principle stand unlike a minority in the case of MK9. Are we now saying that principles cannot be shared among a majority?

If people boycott "home" games then I think they should also boycott away games. Surely that would send out a tremendously powerful message to SISU and the League?

McLovin87 said:

There probably is an element of the herd mentality in the boycott but for it to work it needs to be a massive majority and I believe if it is over 90% we can win this battle.

Picture the herd of wildebeest on the Serengeti standing strong against the hungry pride of lions, together we are strong, divided we fall.

I would see the people who go to Sixfields as Meerkats.

Nothing better than some animal metaphors on a Monday afternoon!

Click to expand...

torchomatic said:

If people boycott "home" games then I think they should also boycott away games. Surely that would send out a tremendously powerful message to SISU and the League?

Click to expand...

I think it would wind SISU up to see packed away ends then tumbleweeds rolling around Sixfields for the home games. The team would see that we are definitely behind them even though SISU would not be able to reap the benefits from this support.

McLovin87 said:

It can be a bit "Judean Peoples Front" and "Peoples Front of Judea" at times!

Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE change the romans to SiSU

torchomatic said:

If people boycott "home" games then I think they should also boycott away games. Surely that would send out a tremendously powerful message to SISU and the League?

Click to expand...

Im trying to follow your reasoning on that one ,but cant . Do you go to away games?