Rods Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 At last Foulkes posistion with the media can be put to good use. Saying what we are all thinking but we dont have the platform to do it. http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heartofmidlothianfc/39Blue-Meanies39-on-pitch-hit.4676731.jp First paragraph is brilliant I reckon he reads kickback Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmiyaRomanova Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I'm already reminded of last season, when before Xmas we were victim of some truly appalling refereeing decisions that effectively damaged our prospects. There were precious few similar incidents following a small 'outcry' in the press around December/January. But the damage had been done. Seeing telltale signs of a similar agenda being followed this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 At last Foulkes posistion with the media can be put to good use. Saying what we are all thinking but we dont have the platform to do it. http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heartofmidlothianfc/39Blue-Meanies39-on-pitch-hit.4676731.jp First paragraph is brilliant I reckon he reads kickback I think Lord Dode of basra only got Ermine for his stance on the Iraq war,perhaps Blair had already sold all the knighthoods Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Kidd Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I'm surprised he is ever sober enough to write anything, let alone see it. His fault we are stuck with the Mad Lith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods Posted November 10, 2008 Author Share Posted November 10, 2008 I'm surprised he is ever sober enough to write anything, let alone see it. His fault we are stuck with the Mad Lith. I forgot that foulkes picked the mad lith out off all the people at the door desperate to buy us. What a really bad choice he made Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Lick your finger and hold it in the air. Which way is the wind blowing? If you answer correctly, you too can be a peer of the realm and Member of the Scottish Parliament! Fair play to Foulkes, he maybe has a point in this article: but it's embarrassing the way he sways from week to week. Populist doesn't even begin to cover it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Lick your finger and hold it in the air. Which way is the wind blowing? If you answer correctly, you too can be a peer of the realm and Member of the Scottish Parliament! Fair play to Foulkes, he maybe has a point in this article: but it's embarrassing the way he sways from week to week. Populist doesn't even begin to cover it. Can it really be considered populist though? It's better that he gives his personal opinion rather than making up a whole load of gratuitously controversial nonsense for no reason. He's a Jambo and his views generally tend to reflect those of many other Jambos...is that really so weird? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Officials have no chance with us. Act within the rules and people are still moaning.The real culprit is MS, I like the guy but it was his actions that could have cost us not 4th officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Though I agree that officials are often biased (I give you Andy Davis), the vast majority of problems Hearts have suffered in the last two and a half years have been self-inflicted. Questioning Romanov is the best use of his column inches. Buffalo Bill . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mouse Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I'm surprised he is ever sober enough to write anything, let alone see it. His fault we are stuck with the Mad Lith. His or Gary Mackays, both pushed for emperor Vlad but only GF gets a slagging for it. there was no other option at the time, nobody else wanted us Foulkes is a typical politician but agree with him this time, dont think Bazza would have been sent off in the same circumstances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbadbill Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 From now on then, can we look forward to the fourth official taking a much more active part in all fixtures? Or will this be another one-off? These decisions have been goiing against Hearts and most other clubs in the league for decades. Look out your Dad's old videos and you'll soon find a tranche of very dubious decisions against us. Think on this: we once had a referee at Celtic Park , around 1990ish, called Kevin O'Donnell. Did he give Celtic a very dodgy decision? Well, yes. Suspicious? Of course not, I'm just being paranoid. It's been going on for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Can it really be considered populist though? It's better that he gives his personal opinion rather than making up a whole load of gratuitously controversial nonsense for no reason. He's a Jambo and his views generally tend to reflect those of many other Jambos...is that really so weird? Foulkes could be so, so more effective than he is, red. He could be someone we all look up to, trust and respect: instead, I swear his views change every single week! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Foulkes could be so, so more effective than he is, red. He could be someone we all look up to, trust and respect: instead, I swear his views change every single week! He's not exactly Tony Benn granted but i don't think his views are much if any different from a lot of supporters and winning / losing can change the mood and outlook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighalders Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 So the officials make a correct decision but Foukes wants to moan about it.....eh? Stick to the I don't like Vlad columns that we're used to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Kurtz Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Foulkes could be so, so more effective than he is, red. He could be someone we all look up to, trust and respect: instead, I swear his views change every single week! Lord dode is currently spouting against private education,given his alma mater thus could be construed as a trifle hypocritical Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john brownlee Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 careful dode, havin' a rant at the GFA could make you as popular as Mr Romanov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Foulkes could be so, so more effective than he is, red. He could be someone we all look up to, trust and respect: instead, I swear his views change every single week! And run the risk of being accused of all sorts of things? I think he's best sticking to what he genuinely thinks and feels from week to week as a Hearts fan. I believe what he writes because he sounds like lots of other Jambos I know, his views do change and maybe that's the reason he seems so real. If he were specialising in being controversial in any way, he'd get utterly slated for that. I don't want to read a load of hysterical, fake nonsense...you get enough of that from the tabloid reporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 And run the risk of being accused of all sorts of things? I think he's best sticking to what he genuinely thinks and feels from week to week as a Hearts fan. I believe what he writes because he sounds like lots of other Jambos I know, his views do change and maybe that's the reason he seems so real. If he were specialising in being controversial in any way, he'd get utterly slated for that. I don't want to read a load of hysterical, fake nonsense...you get enough of that from the tabloid reporters. Who said anything about hysterical, fake nonsense Lee? My problem with the guy is this. He played a very significant role in bringing Vlad to the club, and was quite happy to bask in the acclaim this brought him - but has he taken responsibility for the many downsides since? I was in Edinburgh over the weekend. My taxi driver at Waverley happened to be a small shareholder in the club, and Jambo since the 1960s... who'd not been in over two years. Why? Because "the owner is off his head, and has ripped the heart and soul out of the club". His words Lee, not mine; and there's thousands like him too. People like the chap I met on my train journey back down today: a Jambo since 1962, who takes in games every time he's up in Scotland, and was at St Mirren on Saturday. But he too is in disbelief at what's happened and is continuing to happen - and feels powerless to do anything about it. What would be so wrong with Foulkes expressing similar views and concerns, if he shares any of them? These guys weren't hysterical or over emotional: so why would he have to be? And crucially, their fundamental viewpoint doesn't change purely because of an admittedly meritorious 1-0 win at Love Street: that's what's so laughable in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Bapswent Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Who said anything about hysterical, fake nonsense Lee? My problem with the guy is this. He played a very significant role in bringing Vlad to the club, and was quite happy to bask in the acclaim this brought him - but has he taken responsibility for the many downsides since? I was in Edinburgh over the weekend. My taxi driver at Waverley happened to be a small shareholder in the club, and Jambo since the 1960s... who'd not been in over two years. Why? Because "the owner is off his head, and has ripped the heart and soul out of the club". His words Lee, not mine; and there's thousands like him too. People like the chap I met on my train journey back down today: a Jambo since 1962, who takes in games every time he's up in Scotland, and was at St Mirren on Saturday. But he too is in disbelief at what's happened and is continuing to happen - and feels powerless to do anything about it. What would be so wrong with Foulkes expressing similar views and concerns, if he shares any of them? These guys weren't hysterical or over emotional: so why would he have to be? And crucially, their fundamental viewpoint doesn't change purely because of an admittedly meritorious 1-0 win at Love Street: that's what's so laughable in my book. You listen and put faith in the words of a taxi driver.....good luck to you. As for thousands of them....I can never find a taxi when i need one? Or do you mean small minded loudmouths with over inflated senses of importance....yes there are thousands of them alright....and loads of them drive taxis! I also got into a taxi with a guy supposedly who supported Hearts....he mouthed off about not having gone to a game in years...listens on the radio though....seemed very proud at being chucked out of away grounds as a kids for what he called 'silly things'....things most others would call sectarian nonsense. Should I listen to him as well as your taxi driver? Where is the difference? He saw himself as a fantastic supporter who would have bent my ear all day long about the club he doesnt go and see or send money on. Probably getting all his info from the tabloids. But he thought he knew it all. And was prepared to go on and on about it. All I saw was a big fat fool who thought too much of himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Spackler Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I'm reading that as a Hearts fan and I say well done George Foulkes who has written it as a Hearts fan and made no bones about it. I agree with everything he says there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I don't see why anyone should be criticised for bringing Vlad to Hearts. There were no other options. I'm actually quite contented with the way this season is going. On the whole we are playing better football, Results are mixed but performances are generally better than last season. Csaba has made a difference even if he's also been stuck with this system that we aren't good enough to play. Looking forward to January - don't know why, perhaps it will be a big disappointment, but I think we'll see a bit more of what Csaba is all about then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 You listen and put faith in the words of a taxi driver.....good luck to you. As for thousands of them....I can never find a taxi when i need one? Or do you mean small minded loudmouths with over inflated senses of importance....yes there are thousands of them alright....and loads of them drive taxis! I also got into a taxi with a guy supposedly who supported Hearts....he mouthed off about not having gone to a game in years...listens on the radio though....seemed very proud at being chucked out of away grounds as a kids for what he called 'silly things'....things most others would call sectarian nonsense. Should I listen to him as well as your taxi driver? Where is the difference? He saw himself as a fantastic supporter who would have bent my ear all day long about the club he doesnt go and see or send money on. Probably getting all his info from the tabloids. But he thought he knew it all. And was prepared to go on and on about it. All I saw was a big fat fool who thought too much of himself. I take people as I find them, Doc - as I'm sure do you. Sure, there are plenty of loudmouthed taxi drivers out there: but the chap I talked with isn't one of them. He's just another deeply disaffected Jambo. No club can afford the disconnect felt by so many Hearts fans over the past couple of years: many of whom whose support goes back many decades. And to dismiss such fans as "small minded loudmouths with over inflated senses of importance" apparently just because they disagree with you about the club is quite phenomenally short sighted, and pretty stupid quite frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 At last Foulkes posistion with the media can be put to good use. Saying what we are all thinking but we dont have the platform to do it. http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/heartofmidlothianfc/39Blue-Meanies39-on-pitch-hit.4676731.jp First paragraph is brilliant I reckon he reads kickback But again when anyone within Hearts say it they get slated by their own fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Bapswent Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 I take people as I find them, Doc - as I'm sure do you. Sure, there are plenty of loudmouthed taxi drivers out there: but the chap I talked with isn't one of them. He's just another deeply disaffected Jambo. No club can afford the disconnect felt by so many Hearts fans over the past couple of years: many of whom whose support goes back many decades. And to dismiss such fans as "small minded loudmouths with over inflated senses of importance" apparently just because they disagree with you about the club is quite phenomenally short sighted, and pretty stupid quite frankly. Oh come now Shaun, no need for slinging mud, maybe it just my uneducated venacular, but my point is, I would be hesitant about taking some taxi drivers perspective as gospel, and I would think others would too. Foulkes on the other hand has, whether people like it or not, a more knowledgable perspective. one that happens to coincide with the views of a good number of fans. Your taxi driving mates view also matches some fans view. So you could argue his view is valid....which it is...but is it as knowledgable as Foulkes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Oh come now Shaun, no need for slinging mud, maybe it just my uneducated venacular, but my point is, I would be hesitant about taking some taxi drivers perspective as gospel, and I would think others would too. Foulkes on the other hand has, whether people like it or not, a more knowledgable perspective. one that happens to coincide with the views of a good number of fans. Your taxi driving mates view also matches some fans view. So you could argue his view is valid....which it is...but is it as knowledgable as Foulkes? But I didn't take it as 'gospel': I just think it's legitimate and shouldn't be ignored. I'd respect Foulkes far more if I detected real knowledge and authority in what he writes; but sadly, it's almost always absent. It's worth asking too whether you'd think he was knowledgeable if, next week, he goes back to slagging Vlad again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Oh come now Shaun, no need for slinging mud, maybe it just my uneducated venacular, but my point is, I would be hesitant about taking some taxi drivers perspective as gospel, and I would think others would too. Foulkes on the other hand has, whether people like it or not, a more knowledgable perspective. one that happens to coincide with the views of a good number of fans. Your taxi driving mates view also matches some fans view. So you could argue his view is valid....which it is...but is it as knowledgable as Foulkes? Are you two not just violently agreeing? Any disaffected and concerned Jambo is important in my view ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spellczech Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 But I didn't take it as 'gospel': I just think it's legitimate and shouldn't be ignored. I'd respect Foulkes far more if I detected real knowledge and authority in what he writes; but sadly, it's almost always absent. It's worth asking too whether you'd think he was knowledgeable if, next week, he goes back to slagging Vlad again... TBH if he spent every column inch slating Vlad I'd suspect his persona on here has initials JR or DH...Newspaper editors at least know that repetition is tedious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 But I didn't take it as 'gospel': I just think it's legitimate and shouldn't be ignored. I'd respect Foulkes far more if I detected real knowledge and authority in what he writes; but sadly, it's almost always absent. It's worth asking too whether you'd think he was knowledgeable if, next week, he goes back to slagging Vlad again... Why not? Would that be so weird? I don't know about other people, but I have days where I'm happy and others when, if I was given column inches, I might want to go off on one about Vladimir too. That's why I appreciate what seems to be authenticity in his writing - he sounds like a Jambo. What do you want him to do? What would you prefer that he wrote about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Why not? Would that be so weird? I don't know about other people, but I have days where I'm happy and others when, if I was given column inches, I might want to go off on one about Vladimir too. That's why I appreciate what seems to be authenticity in his writing - he sounds like a Jambo. What do you want him to do? What would you prefer that he wrote about? I'd prefer if he didn't pander to the lowest common denominator all the time; and if he didn't write like a tabloid journalist. That's the thing: many of his pieces are sensationalist in some way - exactly the kind of hysteria you yourself deprecate! For the avoidance of doubt, I've defended Foulkes on here many, many times - but he's definitely starting to annoy me. Like many politicians, he seems to be all fur coat and no knickers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Bapswent Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I'd prefer if he didn't pander to the lowest common denominator all the time; and if he didn't write like a tabloid journalist. That's the thing: many of his pieces are sensationalist in some way - exactly the kind of hysteria you yourself deprecate! For the avoidance of doubt, I've defended Foulkes on here many, many times - but he's definitely starting to annoy me. Like many politicians, he seems to be all fur coat and no knickers. Is he wroting as a politician, or a Hearts fan? Because I see a disgruntled Hearts fan moaning about the ref...not a politician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Is he wroting as a politician, or a Hearts fan? Because I see a disgruntled Hearts fan moaning about the ref...not a politician. Both, I'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I'd prefer if he didn't pander to the lowest common denominator all the time; and if he didn't write like a tabloid journalist. That's the thing: many of his pieces are sensationalist in some way - exactly the kind of hysteria you yourself deprecate! For the avoidance of doubt, I've defended Foulkes on here many, many times - but he's definitely starting to annoy me. Like many politicians, he seems to be all fur coat and no knickers. I don't think he does pander to the lowest common denominator or write like a tabloid journalist. And which of his articles do you consider sensationalist because I don't think I remember reading any of them either. I'm not just saying that for the sake of disagreement or debate, I genuinely don't know where you're coming from with this stuff.... I want to put this carefully but there's really only one way to ask...is he just annoying you because he's not highlighting the issues that you'd like to see being discussed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 So the officials make a correct decision but Foukes wants to moan about it.....eh? Stick to the I don't like Vlad columns that we're used to Slighty misunderstood my friend. Lord George simply asks why a 4th official decides to become involved when it comes to Hearts ? Do you really think a 4th official's actions would have stood up to scrutiny if he had done the same with any OF player for example? I don't. As far us us being our own worst enemies ? Well if we keep on saying we are, is that not the green light for those officials who may just be that we bit inclined anyway, to carry on giving dodgy decisions, safe in the knowledge that they have the protection of our own paranoia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I don't think he does pander to the lowest common denominator or write like a tabloid journalist. And which of his articles do you consider sensationalist because I don't think I remember reading any of them either. I'm not just saying that for the sake of disagreement or debate, I genuinely don't know where you're coming from with this stuff.... I want to put this carefully but there's really only one way to ask...is he just annoying you because he's not highlighting the issues that you'd like to see being discussed? That's probably true in some cases, yes. If he heard something, would he highlight it, or at least act on it? I increasingly doubt it. He wrote a piece in May which was almost cringeworthy in its level of denial about how bad we were - only weeks after writing the complete opposite! It's hard to keep up with him at times... But, as is naturally the case with everything on here, it does come down to where you, me or the Doc sit in the grand scheme of things. I'm a lot more sceptical than you guys, so am bound to sympathise with pieces in accordance with my views, and get annoyed by things that aren't - with the same being true in your cases too, I'd imagine. Posters on here often accuse others of having an 'agenda', and they're right: we all have an agenda to a greater or lesser degree, and that goes for journalists and prominent figures as well as mere Kickbackers. It's nigh on impossible for anyone to view things without the prism we all hold on Vlad and his running of the club, I'd say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Slighty misunderstood my friend. Lord George simply asks why a 4th official decides to become involved when it comes to Hearts ? Do you really think a 4th official's actions would have stood up to scrutiny if he had done the same with any OF player for example? I don't. As far us us being our own worst enemies ? Well if we keep on saying we are, is that not the green light for those officials who may just be that we bit inclined anyway, to carry on giving dodgy decisions, safe in the knowledge that they have the protection of our own paranoia. I do agree with you here. But just for the record, the fourth official intervened similarly at another senior game in Britain over the weekend too: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/wdp/sport/Swindon-Town-latest/article-460246-detail/article.html The opening period had ended in controversial fashion when Histon appeared to have taken the lead when a long Gareth Gwillim throw was bundled into the net by striker Wright. Referee Steven Rushton ran back to the centre circle having awarded the goal before complaints from the Swindon bench that the ball had not touched anyone on the way in prompted an intervention by the fourth official. Rushton eventually ruled out the ?goal?, much to the ire of the Histon coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I do agree with you here. But just for the record, the fourth official intervened similarly at another senior game in Britain over the weekend too: http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/wdp/sport/Swindon-Town-latest/article-460246-detail/article.html The opening period had ended in controversial fashion when Histon appeared to have taken the lead when a long Gareth Gwillim throw was bundled into the net by striker Wright. Referee Steven Rushton ran back to the centre circle having awarded the goal before complaints from the Swindon bench that the ball had not touched anyone on the way in prompted an intervention by the fourth official. Rushton eventually ruled out the ?goal?, much to the ire of the Histon coaching staff. Very Good. But not quite the OF is it, or for that matter, if you wish to draw parallels, any of the top Engilsh sides. If we continue to make ourselves a target from within our very own support, then we will be only easier to hit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Very Good. But not quite the OF is it, or for that matter, if you wish to draw parallels, any of the top Engilsh sides. If we continue to make ourselves a target from within our very own support, then we will be only easier to hit. No - I have to agree with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 That's probably true in some cases, yes. If he heard something, would he highlight it, or at least act on it? I increasingly doubt it. He wrote a piece in May which was almost cringeworthy in its level of denial about how bad we were - only weeks after writing the complete opposite! It's hard to keep up with him at times... But, as is naturally the case with everything on here, it does come down to where you, me or the Doc sit in the grand scheme of things. I'm a lot more sceptical than you guys, so am bound to sympathise with pieces in accordance with my views, and get annoyed by things that aren't - with the same being true in your cases too, I'd imagine. Posters on here often accuse others of having an 'agenda', and they're right: we all have an agenda to a greater or lesser degree, and that goes for journalists and prominent figures as well as mere Kickbackers. It's nigh on impossible for anyone to view things without the prism we all hold on Vlad and his running of the club, I'd say. Thanks for not taking my comment the wrong way and giving an honest answer. I suppose if he was to take an extreme view on things from any sort of perspective, I'd probably get annoyed with him too...but as he seems to swing back and forth between thinking things are okay and then thinking they're not so okay...I suppose I find that more authentic and truthful than if he were to develop one line of argument and stick with it regardless of what else was going on with the club. Plus, he'd only then be accused of being boring and repetitive. As for George's column yesterday...I really don't know what there could be to criticise. He discussed the most important events of the past week and what more can you ask for? What else could he possibly have brought up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 No - I have to agree with that. I don't follow the sayings of Saint George as much as some KBRs quite plainly do. But let's give the guy credit on this particular occassion. He raises a valid point, which we as Hearts fans should really be rallying around rather than trying to disect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I don't follow the sayings of Saint George as much as some KBRs quite plainly do. But let's give the guy credit on this particular occassion. He raises a valid point, which we as Hearts fans should really be rallying around rather than trying to disect. I don't think anyone considers him to be saintly in the slightest, and as with everything connected to Hearts and the Romanovs...there have been times when he might have quite rightly come under the spotlight and received deserved criticism. But I just don't think he deserves any for what he writes in the EEN, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I don't think anyone considers him to be saintly in the slightest, and as with everything connected to Hearts and the Romanovs...there have been times when he might have quite rightly come under the spotlight and received deserved criticism. But I just don't think he deserves any for what he writes in the EEN, that's all. Explaining irony would diminish it's intended impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Good Night everyone. Off to bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redm Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Explaining irony would diminish it's intended impact. It didn't really come across as being all that ironic, so I thought I'd respond anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby8 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 It didn't really come across as being all that ironic, so I thought I'd respond anyway. Cheers:) I'm really going now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iainmac Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Foulkes could be so, so more effective than he is, red. He could be someone we all look up to, trust and respect: instead, I swear his views change every single week! Shaun, once again I find you having a go - for no apparent reason relating to what he wrote - at someone who could be a real asset and an instrument for change. I spoke to a couple of journalists at the weekend - you seem to have alienated them too! As for GF changing his views - people in glass houses etc. Wasn't it your good self that proclaimed that he would never post on this forum again? Please drop the "bull in a china shop" approach. GF follows Hearts home and away and has more credibility with the majority of the Hearts family than most of us. Those that can see past the party political stuff at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Shaun, once again I find you having a go - for no apparent reason relating to what he wrote - at someone who could be a real asset and an instrument for change. Completely agree and for what its worth I believe GF is one of the few people actively trying to bring about that change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jam Tarts 1874 Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Completely agree and for what its worth I believe GF is one of the few people actively trying to bring about that change. Is George Foulkes actively looking for a buyer for Hearts? If he is not then I don't know what his weekly opinions in the hootsman are going to achieve in terms of bringing about change. It seems to me the the dis-affected will always just latch onto anyone who appears to have similar opinions, that is human nature, doesn't make Foulkes some kind of anti-Romanov totem though. The bottom line is that Hearts are 4th in the table despite once again being hit with injury after injury. Rome wasn't built in a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Shaun, once again I find you having a go - for no apparent reason relating to what he wrote - at someone who could be a real asset and an instrument for change. I spoke to a couple of journalists at the weekend - you seem to have alienated them too! As for GF changing his views - people in glass houses etc. Wasn't it your good self that proclaimed that he would never post on this forum again? Please drop the "bull in a china shop" approach. GF follows Hearts home and away and has more credibility with the majority of the Hearts family than most of us. Those that can see past the party political stuff at least. Well said Iain Regarding Shaun's taxi driving pal, if he'd told me he stopped going two years ago, I'd have asked him when he started - four years ago would be my guess I then would've told him what I tell most taxi drivers who like the sound of their own voice - shut your mouth and just drive me where I want to go Makes you wonder how such experts in everything, endup driving other people about for a living Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 Shaun, once again I find you having a go - for no apparent reason relating to what he wrote - at someone who could be a real asset and an instrument for change. I spoke to a couple of journalists at the weekend - you seem to have alienated them too! As for GF changing his views - people in glass houses etc. Wasn't it your good self that proclaimed that he would never post on this forum again? Please drop the "bull in a china shop" approach. GF follows Hearts home and away and has more credibility with the majority of the Hearts family than most of us. Those that can see past the party political stuff at least. Iainmac - that's not how it often comes over on here, when almost weekly his EEN article gets picked over and criticised ? (I have no issue with GF and what he says - the fuss and bluster washes over me - but, as I said last night, any concerned and disgruntled Hearts fan is important at the moment, because we (Hearts fans) are very likely going to all need each other sometime soon, if the particular basket in which all our eggs lie is dropped soon.) What's the point of your dig to Shaun about journalists you've spoken to, by the way ? Just asking. Sounds a bit like the old playground thing "none of your friends actually like you, you know ... " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted November 11, 2008 Share Posted November 11, 2008 I heard GF was the leader of the band of fans singing "Hello Hello" Big G was in great voice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.