SlyNB Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 They dont stand in there thousands shouting n army. I'm guessing your jewish, which is cool, but if you stood shouting yid army I'd call you a yid also as it would seem you were happy with being called it. Lol, beat me too it mate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Well if they went about chanting "N***** army" and "We are the N******", then yes it would. Lawson trying to stir things up when I'm sure he knows fine well they call themselves YIDS and have no problem with other fans doing the same. Away and try to wind up some other forum please. No, no it would not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan_R Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Got to feel for burnley. Very unlucky there. I really thought burnley were going to pull it off. Jay Rodriguez for hearts though? A promising young striker who apparently has a nack for finding the net, now theres a thought. Not really seen enough of him to know how good he is though plus he'd be too pricey... ok I'm rambling, sure sign I need my kipp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 why ? a lot of teams would have let there heads go down , they played till the final whistle and deserved to score in extra-time. Because their attitude is what left them 3-0 down in the first place. Primadonnas who can't be arsed and are generally indulged by their manager. If they keep this attitude up, they could easily go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Shut up... some Spurs fans openly call themselves it. http://www.fanchants.com/football-songs/tottenham_hotspur-chants/yid-army/ Edit; beat me to it SlyNb You win. It's not a disgusting word because some Spurs fans call themselves it. Plus your obviously PC hard man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.T.F.Robertson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Exactly. Which is why Spurs fans referring to themselves by the Y word is fine; but when others do it, it's not. In that particular scenario, again, it depends in which context the "others" are using the term. If it's in relation to the football club, then the majority would not be directing it from a racial angle. If thrown at Jewish people in general, then obviously ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K1874M Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 You win.It's not a disgusting word because some Spurs fans call themselves it. Plus your obviously PC hard man. Sound. You've lost me? Politically Correct Hardman? Hmmmm suppose thats kinds cool too. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.N.T.H. Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Unlucky from Burnley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Merse Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Sickener for Burnley. Totally unmerited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyNB Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 No, no it would not. Yes it would. You could argue by not allowing others to say it is racist, discriminating what people can and cannot say on the grounds of their colour, affiliation, allegiance, etc. Is there any club you don't support? Bit pathetic having so many 'favourite' teams, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 In that particular scenario, again, it depends in which context the "others" are using the term. If it's in relation to the football club, then the majority would not be directing it from a racial angle. If thrown at Jewish people in general, then obviously ..... I'm not so sure. I think it's the same principle as with families, or indeed, football clubs. Members of a family or fans of the same club can call each other names and utter home truths with impunity; but when others do it from outside, it's generally offensive and frowned upon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Yes it would. You could argue by not allowing others to say it is racist, discriminating what people can and cannot say on the grounds of their colour, affiliation, allegiance, etc. Is there any club you don't support? Bit pathetic having so many 'favourite' teams, no? Possibly the most bizarre argument in favour of the N or Y word I've ever heard. I support two clubs, and have soft spots for a number of others. Making it a lot easier for me to get into any particular game - as if you're not pulling for one side or the other, it can get pretty boring. Bit pathetic you hating Spurs given you're a Hearts fan, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyNB Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Possibly the most bizarre argument in favour of the N or Y word I've ever heard. I support two clubs, and have soft spots for a number of others. Making it a lot easier for me to get into any particular game - as if you're not pulling for one side or the other, it can get pretty boring. Bit pathetic you hating Spurs given you're a Hearts fan, isn't it? Lets face it, your argument is mince. We all call the OF tims or huns. I've never heard a Rangers fan refer to themselves as huns. It's football, so there's nowt wrong with it. You just try and cause arguments for the sake of it. Would you not say it is racist that what you can and cannot say depends on your skin colour? Nothing pathetic with hating the Yids, I hate many football clubs. What is pathetic is having a favourite team in each league and making up league tables in order of your fondness for each team. Now that is pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.T.F.Robertson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 I'm not so sure. I think it's the same principle as with families, or indeed, football clubs. Members of a family or fans of the same club can call each other names and utter home truths with impunity; but when others do it from outside, it's generally offensive and frowned upon. I'm with your "us as opposed to them" differential, but in this particular instance, I doubt you would find many Spurs' fans taking umbrage at the term. (I wouldn't, although mine might be closer to JockYid) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunks Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 5 mins in, essu-akotto? plays a 30 yard back pass to his keeper its going over keepers head so he tips it wide of the post with his hand, ref gives a.............. corner????? WTF!!! Back to the OP - the ref has made the correct decision in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Lets face it, your argument is mince. We all call the OF tims or huns. I've never heard a Rangers fan refer to themselves as huns. It's football, so there's nowt wrong with it. You just try and cause arguments for the sake of it.Would you not say it is racist that what you can and cannot say depends on your skin colour? Nothing pathetic with hating the Yids, I hate many football clubs. What is pathetic is having a favourite team in each league and making up league tables in order of your fondness for each team. Now that is pathetic. Nope. That's what you do. It's all you do on this messageboard, as far as I can see. Go call a black person by the N word, then when you're carted off to court, trying using as your defence that they were the ones being racist. You'd stand as much chance of being acquitted as George had of winning the Flanders Pigeon Murderer case. We do use the terms huns and tims in football - we probably shouldn't though, especially in the first case. Oh, and it's fine that you hate many clubs - just as it's fine that I like a number of them too (as well as loving just two). It's a funny sort of world in which hatred is considered normal, and liking others considered weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyNB Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Nope. That's what you do. It's all you do on this messageboard, as far as I can see. Go call a black person by the N word, then when you're carted off to court, trying using as your defence that they were the ones being racist. You'd stand as much chance of being acquitted as George had of winning the Flanders Pigeon Murderer case. We do use the terms huns and tims in football - we probably shouldn't though, especially in the first case. Oh, and it's fine that you hate many clubs - just as it's fine that I like a number of them too (as well as loving just two). It's a funny sort of world in which hatred is considered normal, and liking others considered weird. Eh, I think you'll find that in this thread I merely posted in support of Burnley then you try and get a rise out of me for using a term used by many fans in the UK, including Spurs. So think you'll find it's yourself who started this argument, as you seem to do on many threads that you post on. Think you'll also find in the FOOTBALL world, hating other teams is perfectly normal, and professing your love for all clubs (including your arch rivals) is just downright weird, don't you agree? Face it, you're ****ing into the wind here, just give it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john brownlee Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Well done spurs you concured what every big teams nightmare is, thats why I always want Hearts to have SPL teams in the cup Or when in euro have bigger teams, as if! It works both ways and as a winner its just fantastic and if johnjenkins has logged on tonight get me a ticket for the final Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Harris Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 kick ass game. most enjoyable. shame burnley couldn't hold out for teh pens, would have been interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Eh, I think you'll find that in this thread I merely posted in support of Burnley then you try and get a rise out of me for using a term used by many fans in the UK, including Spurs. So think you'll find it's yourself who started this argument, as you seem to do on many threads that you post on. Think you'll also find in the FOOTBALL world, hating other teams is perfectly normal, and professing your love for all clubs (including your arch rivals) is just downright weird, don't you agree? Face it, you're ****ing into the wind here, just give it up. Except I've never done that. I support two clubs, and have a soft spot for a number of others. You think journalists involved in the game all their lives, for example, don't develop soft spots for certain clubs they report on? There's nothing wrong with you hating as many clubs as you like; and there's nothing wrong with me having a soft spot for (though neither loving nor supporting) as many clubs as I do. Tribalism depresses me; if it's your thing, then go for it. Live and let live - unless that's just too difficult for you to accomplish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudi must stay Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 shame for Burnley. Man Utd-Tottenham is probably a more interesting final though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 kick ass game. most enjoyable. shame burnley couldn't hold out for teh pens, would have been interesting. Spurs were heading out on away goals until the last five minutes, CH. Ridiculous rule: it gives the visitors in the second leg half an hour extra to score one more away goal! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbump Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 S.L you've got more soft spots than a new born babies napper:tongue: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Harris Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Spurs were heading out on away goals until the last five minutes, CH. Ridiculous rule: it gives the visitors in the second leg half an hour extra to score one more away goal! ah, of course. I wasn't thinking about that. it does seem silly that away goals count in ET. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlyNB Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Except I've never done that. I support two clubs, and have a soft spot for a number of others. You think journalists involved in the game all their lives, for example, don't develop soft spots for certain clubs they report on? There's nothing wrong with you hating as many clubs as you like; and there's nothing wrong with me having a soft spot for (though neither loving nor supporting) as many clubs as I do. Tribalism depresses me; if it's your thing, then go for it. Live and let live - unless that's just too difficult for you to accomplish. As I said before, your argument is mince, why are trying to keep this going? You should listen to your own advice and stop trying to be a contoversial, argument maker. I'm happy to live and let live, seems you're the one with the problem, with your ludicrous reply to my first post down to the snidey wee dig in the last line above, just what exactly is your problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cade Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The fact that away goals only counts after extra time is dodgy as feck. It means that the fitter teams with the multi million quid training centres will usually score in extra time. Well unfair! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander Harris Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Sound. You've lost me? Politically Correct Hardman? Hmmmm suppose thats kinds cool too. Cheers. K, I've always though you were very P.C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 S.L you've got more soft spots than a new born babies napper:tongue: I'm just a big ole softie, me. Fortunately, there's no chance of anything I write on hibs.net ever being held against me again - because I've been emptied! As you can imagine, I am inconsolable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 The fact that away goals only counts after extra time is dodgy as feck. It means that the fitter teams with the multi million quid training centres will usually score in extra time. Well unfair! Until a few years ago, the play-off semi-finals unbelievably operated the same format. On the bright side, it sent Ipswich out a couple of times - but it meant that the side that had finished lower in the league was given a clear advantage! Ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted January 21, 2009 Share Posted January 21, 2009 Dirty cockney b*stards. They don't deserve that. It should have been over on away goals after 90 minutes. What a nonsense. Feel terrible for Burnley. Tha was a tremendous effort. Cockneys? Nice grasp of London geography there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
$ilvery_Moon Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Cockneys? Nice grasp of London geography there. Nice try at being smart. Cockney doesn't mean East End. The St Mary-le-Bow church is in fact central therefore theoretically making it possible for people from west, north, south and East London within distance cockneys. My geography of London is fine thank you. I had the mis-pleasure of living in Tower Hamlets for just over a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tazio Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Nice try at being smart. Cockney doesn't mean East End. The St Mary-le-Bow church is in fact central therefore theoretically making it possible for people from west, north, south and East London within distance cockneys. My geography of London is fine thank you. I had the mis-pleasure of living in Tower Hamlets for just over a year. If you can hear Bow Bells from the Seven Sisters you're a better man than me. Or possibly a bat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.