Looks like West Ham will get the Olympic stadium in preference to Tottenham Hotspur.
As a Spurs fan, I'm pleased, even though we have big problems in developing White Hart Lane.
I'm not bothered if he have to leave, but it has to be somewhere local, or neutral.
The Olympic stadium is in Stratford, east London, it's West Ham or Leyton Orient territory - nothing to do with us.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12412739
|
If anyone has been to Upton Park, they will know what it is, what it means. West Ham is Upton Park, Upton Park is West Ham.
If the move is made to the Olympic Stadium, the club is dead.
It was foolish for Spurs to even think about moving there. Spurs in the east end is unthinkable.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 10 Feb 11 at 13:57
|
Who cares? Neitrher club will win anything worthwhile...and they are London clubs anyway..
|
>> Spurs in the east end is unthinkable.
What could you mean Zero? Surely they have wheels on their houses. They can go anywhere.
|
Why do West Ham need a new stadium? Do they really expect to fill a 60,000 seater stadium? Their current stadium is 35,000 and they only manage to get 33,000.
No club ever gets 100% average attendance, but theirs is about 94% compared to around 99% for the likes of Man Utd.
I suppose it has to be use by somebody, but it seems a bit of a waste to me. Spurs, by comparison, also get almost 99% average attendances, so would seem far more likely to fill it (especially as West Ham are on the brink of relegation once again, and might rightly be considered more of a good Championship team, than a legitimate Premiership team).
|
>> a waste to me. Spurs, by comparison, also get almost 99% average attendances, so would
>> seem far more likely to fill it
They wouldn't fill it if they moved to Stratford.
West Ham don't need a 60k seat stadium, that's the whole point. The east end pornographers want to sell Upton Park. Its why they bought the club.
The current owners and that stupid woman Karen Brady have a record of under achievement, to put it mildly
|
>> >> a waste to me. Spurs, by comparison, also get almost 99% average attendances, so
>> would
>> >> seem far more likely to fill it
>>
>> They wouldn't fill it if they moved to Stratford.
Hard to say I suppose, but it is not a million miles away, and I'm not sure what transport links they are putting in for the stadium.
|
|
It has the best transport links in London. Its nothing to do with that. Its about club history, tradition, and fan base. You don't plonk one club in a rivals back yard.
|
Spurs's proposal to invest in the Crystal Palace site for athletics as compensation for removing the athletics track was an excellent one.
However, I do agree that Stratford would be too far for them to move. Although it would have given me a right good laugh to see their miserbale little faces trogging over there!
I also see no reason why West Ham need a new stadium. Similar situation to Fulham, it's seldom full, so a bigger one is simply not required.
A hugely scaled down stadium with athletics track remaining, used by Leyton Orient would have been the best solution, I think.
Or Maybe someone could have resurrected Thames FC to use it! They had (I think) the biggest stadium in the country at one time.
|
>> It has the best transport links in London. Its nothing to do with that. Its
>> about club history, tradition, and fan base. You don't plonk one club in a rivals
>> back yard.
The point being that if you spend every other weekend at White Hart Lane, and have done so for years, you are not going to stop going just because they move a bit further away, especially if there are good transport links.
Doesn't matter how close you are to your rivals, look at Liverpool/Everton.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Thu 10 Feb 11 at 15:19
|
>> Doesn't matter how close you are to your rivals, look at Liverpool/Everton.
They were born, created close together, born rivals.
I can tell you have no strong allegiance to any team.
|
>> >> Doesn't matter how close you are to your rivals, look at Liverpool/Everton.
>>
>> They were born, created close together, born rivals.
>>
>> I can tell you have no strong allegiance to any team.
Well Zero, you are very confident and yet very wrong in that belief, not for the first time and probably not for the last.
My point is that someone with a strong allegiance to a team would not stop supporting them simply because they move a couple of miles away.
I think you are confusing people being unhappy with moving near to a rival, with them being so unhappy as to stop supporting the team.
If you would stop supporting a team because they moved close to a rival, then perhaps it is you who has never had a strong allegiance.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Thu 10 Feb 11 at 17:28
|
>if you would stop supporting a team because they moved close to a rival, then perhaps it is you who has never had a strong allegiance.
We will have to disagree then. My feeling is you really dont understand - to such a degree I doubt your credentials.
Ask *any* spurs fan if they think its a good idea to move to Sratford. Tell you what, why not ask the Wimbledon fans about the various moves.
|
>> >if you would stop supporting a team because they moved close to a rival, then
>> perhaps it is you who has never had a strong allegiance.
>>
>> We will have to disagree then. My feeling is you really dont understand - to
>> such a degree I doubt your credentials.
>>
>> Ask *any* spurs fan if they think its a good idea to move to Sratford.
>> Tell you what, why not ask the Wimbledon fans about the various moves.
What you are getting confused about, I think, is that people will make all kinds of theoretical claims about what they would do if something they didn't like happened - "if Labour get in I am leaving the country" - "if Spurs move to the new stadium I'll burn my season ticket" - etc - etc
The truth is that, if it ever came down to it, a real supporter is not going to ditch the team, simply because they move a couple of miles. They might say they will, and they might complain if they do, but they won't ditch the team.
If you say that you would, then you are not a real supporter, you are just a fan who is fickle about what they will tolerate.
I thought you would bring up Wimbledon, because it seems to contradict the above, but the point that you are wilfully missing is that they moved over 50 miles away.
By doing so, they made it very difficult for primarily home supporters (i.e. ones that don't often attend away matches) to get there, and also they sent a strong message by moving so far away.
The same would happen if the likes of Man U moved to London, or Chelsea moved to Glasgow.
Spurs moving three or four miles away is a completely different kettle of fish...except for those fickle fans, who want their football hassle free...like you I expect...
|
>>
>> The same would happen if the likes of Man U moved to London,
>>
How would Man U make it difficult for their fans by moving to where most of them live?
|
>> >> The same would happen if the likes of Man U moved to London,
>> >>
>> How would Man U make it difficult for their fans by moving to where most
>> of them live?
Because the prawn sandwiches cost a fortune there...
|
>> How would Man U make it difficult for their fans by moving to where most of them live?
Ireland then? Oh what about Scandinavia.
|
>> Spurs moving three or four miles away is a completely different kettle of fish...except for
>> those fickle fans, who want their football hassle free...like you I expect...
You have failed to grasp the point, its not the distance, or even how hard to get there. Its the location. We are talking moving Spurs into West Ham home territory. Its like moving arsenal into the road next to White Hart lane.
This is why I doubted you have a grasp of Football support. You cant appreciate what was being asked of them.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 03:03
|
>> You have failed to grasp the point, its not the distance, or even how hard
>> to get there. Its the location. We are talking moving Spurs into West Ham home
>> territory. Its like moving arsenal into the road next to White Hart lane.
>>
>> This is why I doubted you have a grasp of Football support. You cant appreciate
>> what was being asked of them.
As I have said, there is no doubt it would bother a lot of supporters, and no doubt they would make all kinds of claims about not going to the new stadium, but the point is that, if they were true supporters, they would follow the team to the new stadium. If they were prepared to drop them, just because they moved, even if it was close to a rival, then they wouldn't be true supporters in the first place. That is what I am trying to get you to grasp.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 03:02
|
>> supporters in the first place. That is what I am trying to get you to
>> grasp.
People get divorced when the wife is unfaithful. Its much the same. Its Passion. Raises Passionate responses.
So what football team are you wedded to?
|
>> People get divorced when the wife is unfaithful. Its much the same. Its Passion. Raises
>> Passionate responses.
There you go, I knew you didn't get it and have shown it by using the wrong metaphor. It is not like getting divorced. A real supporter could never start following a different team. They might have any almighty fight, and not talk for a bit, but they could never go off with someone else.
Prawn sandwich?
|
>> >> People get divorced when the wife is unfaithful. Its much the same. Its Passion.
>> Raises
>> >> Passionate responses.
>>
>> There you go, I knew you didn't get it and have shown it by using
>> the wrong metaphor. It is not like getting divorced. A real supporter could never start
>> following a different team. They might have any almighty fight, and not talk for a
>> bit, but they could never go off with someone else.
Its the perfect metaphor. I never said you got married to another, Its an unthinkable thought.
You still haven't mentioned this team that you have such an passion for by the way. I still think I am right. Your an imposter.
|
>> Its the perfect metaphor. I never said you got married to another, Its an unthinkable
>> thought.
Exactly, unthinkable, so where are all of these Spurs fans going to go? Are they just going to stop going to football matches forever, because they have to travel a couple of miles?
You don't seem to realise how much going to matches is part of the fabric of a real supporter's life.
I reckon that you are strictly a MOTD man...
|
>> Exactly, unthinkable, so where are all of these Spurs fans going to go? Are they
>> just going to stop going to football matches forever, because they have to travel a
>> couple of miles?
Some will.
The real life example is when Fulham were forced into ground sharing at Loftus Road. Home attendances were about 25% down in that period, and it's barely 2 miles from Craven Cottage.
On our return, attendances were back to normal levels and have been increasing ever since.
I wouldn't dream of accusing those who stayed away from Loftus Raod as being armchair fans, or lacking passion for their club. I happen to know that some of them were far more passionate than most and were so broken hearted at having to play on a rival's patch that they simply couldn't take it.
If we'd stayed at the Bush, or moved in to a brand new shared stadium where Westfield now proudly sits (as was proposed), those stayaways would probably have been permanent stay aways. But to doubt their attachment and passion for the club would have been ludicrous.
So come on SS, we're all standing up and getting hte mickey taken for the club we follow - what's yours? I'm betting you live in Guildford and follow Man U. :-)
|
>> So come on SS, we're all standing up and getting hte mickey taken for the
>> club we follow - what's yours? I'm betting you live in Guildford and follow Man
>> U. :-)
Hes a Sky Sports Man U fan. Never seen a turnstile in his life. ;)
|
>> >> So come on SS, we're all standing up and getting hte mickey taken for
>> the
>> >> club we follow - what's yours? I'm betting you live in Guildford and follow
>> Man
>> >> U. :-)
>>
>> Hes a Sky Sports Man U fan. Never seen a turnstile in his life. ;)
Ha, it seems that you're the one who'd dump your club, if they moved away from your bus route.
|
>> Ha, it seems that you're the one who'd dump your club, if they moved away
>> from your bus route.
Get out of it, I am not listening to a man who thinks the SKY EPG is the turnstile.
|
>> >> Ha, it seems that you're the one who'd dump your club, if they moved
>> away
>> >> from your bus route.
>>
>> Get out of it, I am not listening to a man who thinks the SKY
>> EPG is the turnstile.
I've no doubt that you attend matches, plenty of football tourists do. Many also have season tickets, and yet still leave with 10 minutes left to miss the traffic.
Football for you guys really is just a type of entertainment, isn't it? You probably should just watch it on Sky.
|
>> The real life example is when Fulham were forced into ground sharing at Loftus Road.
>> Home attendances were about 25% down in that period, and it's barely 2 miles from
>> Craven Cottage.
>>
>> On our return, attendances were back to normal levels and have been increasing ever since.
>>
>> I wouldn't dream of accusing those who stayed away from Loftus Raod as being armchair
>> fans, or lacking passion for their club.
Well, I would. The other 75% are the real supporters, who support the club no matter what. That 25% are just fans, who go for the entertainment and want it their way. Especially if it was just a temporary move.
Fulham is not a heavily supported club, having very low sales of season tickets, and lots of casual supporters. Spurs is a very different matter.
|
>> That 25% are just fans, who go for the entertainment and want it
>> their way. Especially if it was just a temporary move.
Rubbish. I know some of them personally. You have no idea what you're talking about, evidently.
Look at it the other way, it could be argued that supporters who accept any and every change without question are simply not attached enough to the club, and what it stands for, to care.
To some Fulham fans, Craven Cottage = Fulham FC = Craven Cottage. It would be hard for someone who follows almost any other club to understand this, the relationship with the ground runs very deep for us.
|
>> Rubbish. I know some of them personally.
What difference does that make? Do they ramble onto you about how passionate they are, but then when it comes down to it, they can't be bothered going elsewhere? Or do they ramble on about being so passionate that they just can't go.
Not real supporters, full stop.
>> Look at it the other way, it could be argued that supporters who accept any
>> and every change without question are simply not attached enough to the club, and what
>> it stands for, to care.
If it comes down to accepting it or stopping suppporting, then the real supporters would accept it.
>> To some Fulham fans, Craven Cottage = Fulham FC = Craven Cottage. It would be
>> hard for someone who follows almost any other club to understand this, the relationship with
>> the ground runs very deep for us.
It's not different for Fulham at all. Most clubs have such a strong association. As I said Fulham do tend to have a higher proportion of casual fans than may other clubs.
|
>> Not real supporters, full stop.
Season ticket holders for upwards of 40 years, some ever present on away days for almost as long, and you think it was easy for them to protest about what they thought was happening to their club in the only way the could, by hurting the club in the pocket, and forming a Supporters' Trust to work on changing the club's mind? Fans who had been there to the bottom of Division 4 and back - something the fans of the so called glamour clubs will never understand.
Once they'd got us out of Craven Cottage with the promise of returning, they announced after 3 months at Loftus Road that we were never going back and the Cottage was to be redeveloped.
Many, many loyal supporters took matters into their own hands and argued the case for a return extremely professionally, and, in conjunction with the local council, secured our return to the club's ancestral home.
Some professional fans (eg lawyers, town planners, architects) gave their time and skills freely to the campaign for over two years.
And these aren't real supporters?
You really, really don't know what you're talking about.
>>It's not different for Fulham at all. Most clubs have such a strong association.
Some do, most don't. Many clubs' are fans are glad to be moved out of ramshackle dumps, Fulham is very different in that we're the only club to have defended it's ground to the hilt, several times over. Which other football grounds are Grade II listed buildings? A bit of Villa Park, that's it I think.
In the 1980s we campaigned against losing the Cottage for property development, and won the day. Again in the 2000s. We were even at it in 1910 for heavens' sake. No other clubs has history such as this. Even Liverpool fans (the greatest in the world, etc etc, ad nauseam) are mainly in favour of leaving Anfield - mainly for reasons of generating revenue to compete with the big boys again. Spurs fans would meekly accept a new stadium, as did arsenal's.
The real fans are the ones who understand all this.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 03:02
|
>> Many, many loyal supporters took matters into their own hands and argued the case for
>> a return extremely professionally, and, in conjunction with the local council, secured our return to
>> the club's ancestral home.
>>
>> Some professional fans (eg lawyers, town planners, architects) gave their time and skills freely to
>> the campaign for over two years.
>>
>> And these aren't real supporters?
They are if they kept going to games while they were at Loftus Road, they aren't if they took their ball home.
Your not a real supporter if you say "I'll fight tooth and nail to keep X playing at Y, but if they don't play at Y I won't support them"
|
|
Woteva, SS. You evidently don't have the foggiest about this.
|
>> Woteva, SS. You evidently don't have the foggiest about this.
Sorry Alanovic, but if you consider real supporters could ditch their club, simply because they moved near a rival, then it is you who doesn't have the foggiest about what a real supporter is.
That said, perhaps you have been swayed by those that will rant on for hours about being true supporters, yet can't be bothered when it comes down to it.
I can understand how those sorts could leave you with the impression that they are real supporters. They can be convincing, can't they?
|
>> real supporters. They can be convincing, can't they?
Yup, Alas unlike you however SS. Your credentials are in tatters.
Give it up and retreat, with what thin semblance of credibility you have left in this matter in tact.
|
>> Give it up and retreat, with what thin semblance of credibility you have left in
>> this matter in tact.
Can't justify your flawed argument eh, Zero? So try to distract attention by questioning my credentials.
I'd accuse you of an ad hominem attack, but you'd probably think I was accusing you of bashing gays...
|
..I'd accuse you of an ad hominem attack...
Makes a change from the ad feminam attack which we've had in the wheelie bin thread.
Last edited by: Iffy on Fri 11 Feb 11 at 15:29
|
>> Can't justify your flawed argument eh, Zero? So try to distract attention by questioning my
>> credentials.
The ones you refuse to show? Pee or get off the pot SS.
|
>> >> Can't justify your flawed argument eh, Zero? So try to distract attention by questioning
>> my
>> >> credentials.
>>
>> The ones you refuse to show? Pee or get off the pot SS.
So you agree that you can't justify your flawed argument, and need to distract attention, do you?
Poor debating skills Zero...
|
|
Nope merely questioning your right to be in the chamber SS. Perfectly valid as it turns out, you have no skin in the game. I suggest you move to the public gallery and throw fruit.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 11 Feb 11 at 15:39
|
>> Nope merely questioning your right to be in the chamber SS. Perfectly valid as it
>> turns out, you have no skin in the game. I suggest you move to the
>> public gallery.
Before you claim to be good at debating, I suggest you read up on ad hominem attacks (and no, don't worry, it won't take you to any boy only websites).
They are one of the basic debating mistakes, and would have you laughed out of the chamber (and the public gallery for that matter).
I expected better of you Zero.
|
From Wikipedia:
"An ad hominem (Latin: "to the man"), also known as argumentum ad hominem, is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise. The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.
Please note the last sentence SS, before believing your own press. I'd say this is a case in point.
Now, get ouf of that closet and 'fess up. Is it Man U? Are you from Guildford, like the rest of 'em? Is it MK Dons and you're trying to justify dumping on your old club?
Come on, join in properly!
|
>> Please note the last sentence SS, before believing your own press. I'd say this is
>> a case in point.
Oh dear, you've missed the point there again Alanovic. It is valid if it is relevant to proving the premise.
The issue at stake is whether you are a true supporter if you will give up your support because a club moves. That argument is not affected by whether any of the debaters are themselves true supporters or, in fact, whether they have even heard of football.
Good try though (at least you looked it up).
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Fri 11 Feb 11 at 15:54
|
(at least you looked it up).
>>
What makes you think I needed to?
I hadn't realised this was The Oxford Union. When's the vote on the motion then? Actually, where's your seconder?
|
>> I hadn't realised this was The Oxford Union.
Trust me, it's not.
|
|
So why are you behaving like it should be?
|
>> Before you claim to be good at debating, I suggest you read up on ad
>> hominem attacks (and no, don't worry, it won't take you to any boy only websites).
Ad hominem attacks are perfectly valid when discrediting a debaters false claim to be a subject matter expert. Every point made by the discredited debater is then just mere background noise.
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 11 Feb 11 at 15:55
|
Tell you what SS, I will try and redeem you. Step by step.
Now, assumption number one. Do you agree that the location of a club is a significant factor in garnering true support? Just stick to answering the question if you can.
|
>> Ad hominem attacks are perfectly valid when discrediting a debaters false claim to be a
>> subject matter expert. Every point made by the discredited debater is then just mere background
>> noise.
It is the second point where you are making the logical fallacy Zero. You could discredit me as an expert on solar activity, but it wouldn't help you one jot, in refuting my premise that the sun is hot. It wouldn't even help you refute my premise that the sun is cold.
The debating mistake you are making is trying to discredit the debater rather than discredit the point they are making...it is a classic example of poor debating.
As for credibility as subject matter experts, even if it did matter, this is the internet, you could be a retired female body builder in Mumbai, who has never set foot in the UK and just likes a bit of an argument on motoring forums, for all we know.
"I'm an expert" carries no weight on the internet, unless you could prove your identity, and your credentials.
|
SS, this is a bleeding internet forum, not the UN. We are not trying to justify the invasion of Iraq here.
I have presented my anecdotal evidence in favour of mine and Zero's position, from the real world (where I live) of real, full bloodied football fans who have made the sacrifice of boycotting games as part of a campaign to influence a football club's management over the question of the club's stadium location. You just sit there and shout "Yah Boo".
I've seen nothing of even an anecdotal nature from you, other than generalisations which you can not substantiate.
And you've the nerve to criticise someone's "debating skills" in this context?
Odd. Certainly gives the impression of an agenda hiding somewhere, which you refuse to reveal.
|
"you could be a retired female body builder in Mumbai, who has never set foot in the UK and just likes a bit of an argument on motoring forum"
I so want that to be true :-)
|
>> I so want that to be true :-)
No chance, I would spend all my time fighting off the advances of BBD.
|
>> >> Doesn't matter how close you are to your rivals, look at Liverpool/Everton.
>>
>> They were born, created close together, born rivals.
>>
>> I can tell you have no strong allegiance to any team.
>Well Zero, you are very confident and yet very wrong in that belief, not for the first time and >probably not for the last
SS. I assert that you do not have any allegiance to a football club. Would you care to refute that claim?
|
>> SS. I assert that you do not have any allegiance to a football club. Would
>> you care to refute that claim?
More good debating Zero.
I assert that you are a fickle fan of a club, rather than a proper supporter. Would you care to refute that?
|
I assume that as you refuse to answer you indeed have no allegiance to any club, therefore we will allow that point to stand as an undisputed matter of record.
Am I a supporter of a football club, one single club that I have supported all my life, through many failures and disappointment and little reward or success, one that I am prepared to name, Indeed I am, and thereby that gives me the right to be critical of those who are merely custodians of the club. It also gives me the right NOT to attend matches if I feel some heart, spirit or tradition of the club has been cast aside by the temporary custodians of the club.
Had I been fickle, my allegiance would have transferred to another during the many lean years past, or even those I am sure will come. It hasnt and it wont.
Therefore I confirm, and you cannot disprove or refute, that I am not a fickle football supporter
|
>> It also gives
>> me the right NOT to attend matches if I feel some heart, spirit or tradition
>> of the club has been cast aside by the temporary custodians of the club.
Of course you have the right not to attend, but you can't do that AND be a real supporter. A real supporter is not fickle.
|
>> >> It also gives
>> >> me the right NOT to attend matches if I feel some heart, spirit or
>> tradition
>> >> of the club has been cast aside by the temporary custodians of the club.
>>
>>
>> Of course you have the right not to attend, but you can't do that AND
>> be a real supporter. A real supporter is not fickle.
Indeed one can, as we have previously agreed you have no subject matter knowledge, you can not assert otherwise.
|
>> Indeed one can, as we have previously agreed you have no subject matter knowledge, you
>> can not assert otherwise.
No, no, Zero, you misunderstood again. We didn't agree that, in fact the opposite.
I explained to you that being a subject matter expert would be irrelevant to proving any argument. I also explained to you that you couldn't acquire the status of a subject matter expert anyway, given that it is impossible validate any claims you make about your expertise.
I personally find it highly unlikely that you have any real involvement with football support but, of course, I can't prove it, any more than I can prove you are a female weightlifter.
It really is pointless trying to claim to be a expert on the internet, especially if you hope that by doing so you can somehow win a debate.
|
>> >> Indeed one can, as we have previously agreed you have no subject matter knowledge,
>> you
>> >> can not assert otherwise.
>>
>> No, no, Zero, you misunderstood again. We didn't agree that, in fact the opposite.
We have agreed, it is now a matter of record.
Therefore any assertions you make, are as a matter of record and by mutual agreement, based on lack of knowledge.
|
Oh and BTW
the definition of fickle.
1/
likely to change, especially due to caprice, irresolution, or instability; casually changeable
2.
not constant or loyal in affections:
I have not, nor intend, to change my support for my club. My feelings are constant, and as I support no other - loyal.
|
>> We have agreed, it is now a matter of record.
Sigh. What on Earth are you talking about now Zero? Have you been drinking, or have I fried you brain today by insisting that you debate properly?
|
>> >> We have agreed, it is now a matter of record.
>>
>> Sigh. What on Earth are you talking about now Zero? Have you been drinking, or
>> have I fried you brain today by insisting that you debate properly?
>>
>I assume that as you refuse to answer you indeed have no allegiance to any club, therefore >we will allow that point to stand as an undisputed matter of record.
As you did not answer or refute this ultimatum, you allowed it to stand as a matter of record.
|
>> As you did not answer or refute this ultimatum, you allowed it to stand as
>> a matter of record.
Sorry, was I being too subtle for you? I was trying to point out again that making claims of our expertise on the internet is pointless.
Arguments need to stand on their own merits, I'm afraid.
Back over to you.
|
Sorry my old fruit. Your time has been and gone. You are washed up, washed out, lacking in credibility substance or experience. Your peers and audience have voted you down and laughed you out of court.
This debate has ended.
|
>> Sorry my old fruit. Your time has been and gone. You are washed up, washed
>> out, lacking in credibility substance or experience. Your peers and audience have voted you down
>> and laughed you out of court.
>>
>> This debate has ended.
Ah the final humiliation...Zero, unable to cut it in the cauldron of logical argument, sticks his fingers in his ears and makes a run for the exit shrieking "I won, I won, I can't hear you, I won, I won" as he goes...a sad, but predictable end...
|
I expect you're right Z, but here's a theory.
He's an MK Dons fan who went with them from Wimbledon.
That's the only sort of person I can think of who would be so dogmatic about this and so evidently bearing such guilt.
|
No interest whatever in football but isn't this mostly an argument 'in theory'?
Other than Wimbledon/MK Dons I'm struggling to think of a club that's changed it's location in recent times and therefore posed its fans with a real as as opposed to 'if they did' conundrum?
Moves to new stadia in different parts of one team towns (Bolton. Coventry, Sunderland etc) and of course the arsenal moving a mile down the road.
But a club moving cities or from the East End to the West?
Charlton or QPR might have come near??
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 03:01
|
Is there room for a y** in this debate?
Were I a Spurs season ticket holder, and were the Spurs board planning something I didn't like, I would stop going if I thought it would influence the board.
I would do anything legal to bring the board around to my way of thinking.
It would be particularly easy to stop going if home games were being played away from the Lane.
|
3-1, SS.
What's the winning line in this official debate of yours?
|
>> 3-1, SS.
>>
>> What's the winning line in this official debate of yours?
Yes, that's correct Alanovic, if you can get two people to agree with you then you are right.
How many people would I need to agree with me to prove that the sun is made of ice?
EDIT: For someone who said that you had finished commenting some time back, you sure are making a lot of comments.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Fri 11 Feb 11 at 17:00
|
>> Yes, that's correct Alanovic, if you can get two people to agree with you then
>> you are right.
You're the one setting this up as an Oxford Union debate. Don't they always have a vote at the end and declare the motion passed or defeated?
For someone who claims to understand debating (as well as the culture of football fans), you're sure making a hash of this one.
|
>> You're the one setting this up as an Oxford Union debate. Don't they always have
>> a vote at the end and declare the motion passed or defeated?
>>
>> For someone who claims to understand debating (as well as the culture of football fans),
>> you're sure making a hash of this one.
Oh dear, back to attacking the debater rather than the argument.
What I claim you don't know what to do is put together a logical argument. Trying the old "my two mates agree with me" angle and then claiming that you have convinced a large, educated audience, is yet another failure of logic.
My point being that, if you were in front of an educated audience (especially one keen on debating), your attempts at debating would likely meet with ridicule.
In other words, the Oxford Union wouldn't let you get away with relying on ad hominem attacks.
|
You completely miss the point I'm trying to make. Again. Perhaps I'm being too subtle.
I'll say it again. This is not the Oxford Union. I couldn't give a tuppenny walls what they would think of this conversation. I'm not trying to debate with you, it's an informal conversation. One which would have been greatly enhanced if you could have brought yourself to confess to which team you support, evidently you have some reason or other why you refuse to do so. Hiding behind arcane debating language is not going to distract me or anyone from that. I wasn't trying to "Debate" you, you were the one trying to impose those standards on a mere conversation.
So your engagement in the conversation was somewhat undermined by this, and you turned to quoting debating regulations and concepts in order to support your unwillingness to join the conversation fully.
And now, this:
>> What I claim you don't know what to do is put together a logical argument.
And you're not attacking the debater also? Utter hypocrisy.
Sorry it's taken a few days to pick this up, I've been demonstrating my loyalty to my favourite national rugby team by trogging up to Edinburgh from Reading for the weekend. How did your boys look on Football First?
|
>> You completely miss the point I'm trying to make. Again. Perhaps I'm being too subtle.
No, no, I get it.
I make a comment suggesting that supporters will not abandon a club if it moves location. I then get told that I don't understand, that somehow you know better, and that I have to prove my credentials to you.
I undermine your silly tactic of trying to discredit me (using your own criteria, of course) by pointing out the absurdity of it (it doesn't make any difference in a logical argument, and nobody can prove their credentials either). You don't like it so you start getting all huffy.
You're the one that started talking about the Oxford Union...
If you don't want your silly tactics showing up, then don't use them on a public forum. Next time, just provide your own opinion without trying to tell other people that their opinion isn't valid - if you can't do that, then expect your silly tactics to be exposed.
|
|
I think Zero must be right. I must be a ****head for trying to have a conversation with you.
Last edited by: Alanović on Mon 14 Feb 11 at 14:15
|
Did you try to have a conversation, or did you just tell me the way it is, and then tell me that my opinion didn't count?
Funny kind of conversation, sounds more like a guy spouting off in a pub and then belittling anybody who might have a different point of view.
|
|
I officially concede the last word to you, your magnificence. Well done.
|
>> I officially concede the last word to you, your magnificence. Well done.
Ta
|
>> That said, perhaps you have been swayed by those that will rant on for hours
>> about being true supporters, yet can't be bothered when it comes down to it.
Can't be bothered? Have you read a single word I've said? The efforts and money some people put in to doing what they thought was right for their club was phenomenal. Some went to Loftus Road, others didn't, thinking it wrong to financially support the club's management who they believed were doing the wrong thing by their club. These are not people who couldn't be bothered, quite the contrary. They put more in to the club through their actions than any season ticket purchaser at the time.
Nobody had to rant on at me for hours about anything, I have seen their true colours through their actions, not just their words. I'm not talking about bar room bores here, although that's all you seem to want to see. Personally, I went to Loftus Road but contributed finacially to the campaign to return us to the Cottage. Had that campaign failed, I'm not sure I'd have carried on. There was talk of an AFC Fulham should that situation have happened, which I would may have turned to. Others had their own views and approaches, and I respect them all. You don't, but seriously, you don't understand and I'm getting a bit fed up with your accusations of disloyalty towards people who invested serious time, money and effort in to what they thought was right.
I can only surmise you're on a wind up, or are simply skimming my posts for what you want to find.
I'm sorry but you are simply clueless to the situation we were in and what was done by supporters for their club. The Back To The Cottage campaign was a huge success, and FFC wouldn't be the club it is today had it not been so enthusiastically run by some people who refused to go to Loftus Road - and I stress - AFTER it was known that the club's true intentions were not to return us to the Cottage at all, despite assurances on leaving. Do you see where the true loyals and supporters are in this now?
You've had enough of a rise out of me now, and I won't comment further. I'd ask you to do the same, please. Of course, I would like to know where your club loyalties lie as you seem to have a bit of a chip on your shoulder about mine. Do I detect jealousy somewhere in all this? Or just the smugness of a follower (most likely plastic, as most are) of one of the so-called "glamour" clubs?
|
>> Can't be bothered? Have you read a single word I've said?
Yes, I have, the point you are avoiding is that no matter what people say, if they will walk away from supporting the club, then they were never real supporters in the first place.
As for supporting glamour clubs, there is only one thing worse that a glamour club supporter...and that is a somebody who claims to support a lower level club and think by doing so they are somehow more of a supporter, that they somehow suffer for their football and makes their support more worthwhile (even though they'd drop the club if they had to travel another couple of stops on the train).
|
I have said I will not comment further. I've made my point.
Unless you have been where our supporters were in those days, you can not understand what you're talking about.
So, unless you are prepared to tell me who you support and why, then I'm not prepared to engage in this further with you.
|
>> I have said I will not comment further.
Er...so what are you doing back here?
>> Unless you have been where our supporters were in those days, you can not understand
>> what you're talking about.
Supporters are no different at Fulham. The true ones are the ones who will stand by the club, not go off in a huff.
|
>> Er...so what are you doing back here?
I wasn't commenting further, I was restating my position which you have failed to address.
Now, who's your club?
|
>>
>> >> Er...so what are you doing back here?
>>
>> I wasn't commenting further
How about this time?
|
|
isnt that what we did at Highbury :-)
|
|
why post then? the fact you did means you had an opinion or interest.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 10 Feb 11 at 14:56
|
>> Or lack of it.
Were that the case you would have ignored it.
|
|
Go play on a football forum.
|
|
For someone who doesn't care, you have a lot to say about it.
|
The three stooges want the Olympic Stadium because it will increase the value of the club. My bet is they are hoping it will be an attractive proposition for an oil sheik or Russian mafia gangster who wants to create another Chelsea, making them quite a killing on their investment. Otherwise their purchase of West ham made no sense whatsoever, in footballing terms they already had the same with Birmingham.
West ham's traditional fanbase has moved from the east end out along the A13 corridor, Newham now being over 90% black and Asian with no interest in football. From that point of view a move to Dagenham or Rainham would have made much more sense. I feel sorry for Leyton Orient who will suffer massively with a bigg club on their doorstep.
|
>> West ham's traditional fanbase has moved from the east end out along the A13 corridor,
The medway towns north kent coast corridor, the A12 corridor. Stratford makes perfect transport and traditional sense for a West Ham base. If it was a tight, compact 40k seat seat stadium.
>> I feel sorry for Leyton Orient
Who?
|
Spurs' ground is full each time they play and there is no doubt they could sell more seats, although no one knows how many more.
It seems our grand plan to redevelop White Hart Lane is being blocked by the owners of a couple of plots of land the club need to move it forward.
In effect, Spurs are being held to ransom, which is fair enough, that's business.
I would like to see them move out to a brownfield site near a motorway, perhaps somewhere off the M25 in Hertfordshire.
That wouldn't be treading on anyone's toes, and nor would the fans feel they were on somebody else's patch.
|
Yup, and that always used to be the fall back plan if they couldnt redevelop White Heart Lane. Cheshunt was always favourite.
London can support 4 premier clubs. One in the North, one South, one East and one West.
It means Fulham, will have to move. We can float it down the Thames and then transport it down the old kent road.
|
...Cheshunt was always favourite...
Lovely not so little training ground, now a Tesco and a housing estate.
|
>> It means Fulham, will have to move.
Many have tried, none have succeeded. Starting with the spiv who built Walham Green Dog Track. Al Fayed nearly did, mind, so we do have to be careful. The enemy can even come from within and be bearing illusionary gifts of gold.
We were certainly lucky that Bulstrode didn't manage to create Fulham Park Rangers.
Which of the north London clubs is going to be sent down the Lee (or Lea) in your cull?
|
>>
>> >> It means Fulham, will have to move.
>>
>> Many have tried, none have succeeded. Starting with the spiv who built Walham Green Dog
>> Track. Al Fayed nearly did, mind, so we do have to be careful. The enemy
>> can even come from within and be bearing illusionary gifts of gold.
>>
>> We were certainly lucky that Bulstrode didn't manage to create Fulham Park Rangers.
>>
>> Which of the north London clubs is going to be sent down the Lee (or
>> Lea) in your cull?
Yeah, forgot about the Gooners. The East Midlands needs a club, who is closest to the A1? we can send them up.
|
>>Who cares?
I don't care whether it's Leyton Orient or Manchester United who use it.
I do care that it isn't demolished.
I do care that it is being 50% demolished anyway.
I do care that by the time it's finished it will have cost somewhere between 0.5 and 1bn, and it's being sold for a fraction of that sum.
I do care that an enormous media centre is being built in Stratford and nobody wants to use it after a fortnight in 2012.
I do care about the 10bn (bet it's closer to 20bn or more) cost of the Olympics; a complete waste of money. Surely Britain had sufficient venues for the Olympics without building any more.
Sheffield for a swimming pool
Badminton for the eventing
Manchester for the velodrome
Crystal Palace for athletics
etc. etc. etc.
|
>> Go play on a football forum.
>>
Navy, this is a "Non Motoring" section. Why object to football topics and not any other?
|
Dare I say it's a bit like you objecting to Daily Mail links...neither of you have to read it:)
Pat
|
.....neither of you have to read it:)...
Quite so.
Football in general and Tottenham Hotspur in particular has been an important, and a constant, part of my life for 40 years.
I dare say Alanovic and Zero could say the same about their teams, as could many others.
I'm no fanatic, but it's always there and I suspect always will be.
It shows a complete lack of understanding of others for someone to say 'don't talk about it'.
|
>> I dare say Alanovic and Zero could say the same about their teams, as could
>> many others.
Indeed. My realtionship with my football club is very personal, it means a lot to me as it's inextricably linked with loved ones no longer with us, amongst other reasons.
|
Oh, Pat. Please don't imagine for a single minute that I READ the Daily Wail articles! Just seeing the publication's name on a link is enough to set me off. ;-)
I think I proved that when I made a fool of myself trying to comment on one recently.
|
I get the feeling ON feels the same about Footie:)
So, now play nicely and stop falling out!
Take a leaf out of my book.
Pat
|
Mapmaker summed it all up for me... I wish the French had won the Olympics... But I bet they are glad they didn't!
As for teams moving grounds , mines Man City and their gates haven't changed on moving, nor has their unpredictability despite all the money... but thats for another thread!
Last edited by: hobby on Thu 10 Feb 11 at 16:24
|
>> As for teams moving grounds , mines Man City and their gates haven't changed on
>> moving, nor has their unpredictability despite all the money... but thats for another thread!
#
Thats because they have no history or heart.
|
Ah come on, Zero. At least they relegated their neighbours once. Thanks to one of the neighbour's legendary ex-players.
Surely we can all appreciate them a little for that moment of high comedy.
|
I thought they were getting a few in the new ground, but I'm sure hobby knows what he's talking about.
They might be unpredictable, but I predict they could easily deny the mighty Spurs a place in the Champions League next season.
|
>> I thought they were getting a few in the new ground, but I'm sure hobby
>> knows what he's talking about.
Gates are pretty much the same, Iffy, and the grounds capacity is as well, I think... After you lot denying us last season revenge will be sweet!
|
|
Has that awful woman with the bell died yet?
|
|
Aren't you thinking about Portsmouth, Z? The, erm, person more commonly known as TCWTB?
|
...Aren't you thinking about Portsmouth, Z?...
I wondered that, isn't he an antiques dealer from Waterlooville?
Might be the wrong place, but I'm sure he runs a shop.
|
>> Aren't you thinking about Portsmouth, Z? The, erm, person more commonly known as TCWTB?
No there was some dreadful woman who followed Man S Hitty around, ringing a bleedin school bell. Someone at Upton Park grabbed it and threw it on the pitch with the immortal words "Now STFU"
|
|
He's quite right, back in the 70s when I was a regular at Maine Road she was there, they tried to shut her up once but the fans wanted here to stay... I think she's long since gone though...
|
>> Thats because they have no history or heart.
>>
Ha Ha, good joke Z, even if totally inaccurate... Founder member of Division 2... Not quite as good as being a founder member of Div 1 but close!
As for a heart... We have them as well, but they don't half put a strain on them with their unpredictability!
:-)
|
|
football hooligans the lot of you. :-)
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 03:03
|
...football hooligans the lot of you. :-)...
Yes, Zero's a founder member of the ICF.
I'd liked to go on, but I don't know the names of any Tottenham, Fulham or Man City gangs.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sun 13 Feb 11 at 03:03
|
>> I'd liked to go on, but I don't know the names of any Tottenham, Fulham
>> or Man City gangs.
>>
>>
>>
Fulham fans are too busy with their knitting to bother with gangs.
|
|
We left the gangs behind in Moss Side... as Ted and Rattle will tell you! Can't speak for Spurs, though... Zero may well be a member of theirs though! :-)
|
>> The East Midlands needs a club
Do we?? I have no idea who my nearest important football club are, or what division they play in. Football stadia certainly look impressive when I drive past them though, I guess it must be a popular sport, just not with anyone I know...
EDIT: Birmingham are probably the closest, I can think of three big football grounds there from when I used to drive round the place every day. M5 J1, Aston Villa and the blue one off the ring road.
|
my total interest
non pwoint
:-)
|
>> >> The East Midlands needs a club
>>
>> Do we?? I have no idea who my nearest important football club are, or what
>> division they play in.
EXACTLY Thats why you need one. Birmingham is not the East Midlands BTW.
|
...Birmingham is not the East Midlands BTW...
Nottingham Forest, Notts County, Leicester City and most would say Derby County.
|
I don't know the first thing about any of those. I grew up halfway between Luton and Stevenage and have never been into either of their grounds. Or any other, for that matter. Football and its appreciation seem to have completely passed me by. I probably don't know what I'm missing!
I'm surprised it's taken a whole year for a football thread to appear on here, actually.
|
...I'm surprised it's taken a whole year for a football thread to appear on here, actually...
I've managed to drift on or two others in a footie direction - with the help of Zero and Alanovic.
|
>> ...Birmingham is not the East Midlands BTW...
>>
>> Nottingham Forest, Notts County, Leicester City and most would say Derby County.
>>
>>
>>
Not in polite company, you wouldn't! ;-)
|
I knew that it was one of the premier forums on the internet, full of wit, incisive comment and clinical analysis. Now I know why - it has lots of Spurs fans.
In reply to comments above, Spurs could fill the Olympic Stadium. They have a waiting list for season tickets of over 40,000 people.
But Spurs must stay in Tottenham. Only sc*mbag teams move from one distinct part of London to another. (E.g. from Woolwich to Highbury)
|
>> E.g. from Woolwich to Highbury
Or Wimbledon to Milton Keynes....?
|
>> >> E.g. from Woolwich to Highbury
>>
>> Or Wimbledon to Milton Keynes....?
>>
Or Tottenham to Wormwood Scrubs, depending on the outcome of his spat with HMRC...
|
>> Fulham fans are too busy with their knitting to bother with gangs.
Quite so, and most of us are very proud of the fact we don't have a "firm". We are a pretty unique and special club, we fly in the face of convention.
A small minority wish it weren't so, but those in the area who long to belong to a simian tribe usually end up at Walham Green Dog Track, where they have always been able to find plenty of knuckle ruts in the ground.
|
It's finally official.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12424549
Spurs have won....by losing the bid.
Spurs stay in N17 where they belong. I'm very relieved.
|
...Spurs stay in N17 where they belong. I'm very relieved...
Me too, but we still have the problem of squeezing our quart of supporters into our pint pot of a ground.
|
>> It's finally official.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12424549
>>
>> Spurs have won....by losing the bid.
>>
>> Spurs stay in N17 where they belong. I'm very relieved.
Oh dear, you will go in SS's little book as a non-fan now.
|
>> >> Spurs stay in N17 where they belong. I'm very relieved.
>>
>> Oh dear, you will go in SS's little book as a non-fan now.
Sorry Zero, I must have really worn your brain out today. Being relieved about staying in a stadium doesn't make somebody a non-supporter, it is refusing to attend if they move that is the problem.
Sorry, you do seem to be a bit bamboozled, and I blame myself for being too hard on you. I know that logical reasoning doesn't come easy to you, and I should have eased you in a bit more.
|
Talk in this thread of fans protesting reminds me of a time the directors at Sunderland AFC were getting a bit of stick.
It was after a typically poor game at the old Roker Park during which the team were beaten by Oxford.
Afterwards, a hundred or so fans gathered outside the ground.
They knew the place in the main stand where the directors had their post-match nibbles, so gathered as near as they could to the windows to get the maximum impact.
Every chant could be heard by those inside, including by one of the directors of Oxford, who was sitting at a table with the leader of Sunderland Council.
The man from Oxford was getting more and more nervous, and he hunched down over his plate, clearly fearing incoming missiles from the baying mob below.
"What's up?" asked the Sunderland councillor. "Don't you get any fan protests at Oxford?"
"Well," replied the Oxford director. "We get the odd letter."
Southern softie.
Last edited by: Iffy on Fri 11 Feb 11 at 21:59
|
They thought they had scored, they were wrong.
AC Milan 0 Tottenham Hotspur 1
I might even buy a Guardian tomorrow, see what they make of it.
|
|
Harry probably stole that as well.
|
Well done, Spuds. Pleased for them.
Good start, but an early goal from AC (Gattuso, 2nd minute ;-)) at Right Tart Lane..........
|
A game I'm pleased we lost - Zero
