|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 5, 2014 10:57:38 GMT
Of course he was provoked but he earns more in a week than stretcher bearers probably do in three years, did he stop to think about them for a single second, whilst he was 'giving it back'- did he bollocks? And as I said, he wouldn't have been man enough to have given it back in the first place, if it wasn't for their presence. I don't know if I agree with that Paul. And had anything happened to the stretcher bearers the people to blame would have been the scum who threw something in the first place. If you throw something at players or anyone else at a football match you really are a waste of oxygen. What did Walcott think SOME OF the Spurs fans MIGHT do Rob? If he had stopped for a single moment and thought about what the potential consequences (and that's the important bit) of his actions, then do you think he would have still continued. I don't.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 11:02:51 GMT
I don't know if I agree with that Paul. And had anything happened to the stretcher bearers the people to blame would have been the scum who threw something in the first place. If you throw something at players or anyone else at a football match you really are a waste of oxygen. What did Walcott think SOME OF the Spurs fans MIGHT do Rob? If he had stopped for a single moment and thought about what the potential consequences (and that's the important bit) of his actions, then do you think he would have still continued. I don't. I don't know Paul. I have a problem with the dickheads in the crowd being absolved of all blame and responsibility to be honest. They dished it out, got it back and couldn't handle it. Like Walcott, it's not as if they had no choice but to go mental afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by cousindupree on Jan 5, 2014 11:03:34 GMT
Pretty harmless gesture from Walcott provokes an OTT from nutters..nothing new and Spurs should get fined. The incident however did underline the Governments comments that the UK is out of recession...pound coins were being thrown!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 5, 2014 11:07:28 GMT
What did Walcott think SOME OF the Spurs fans MIGHT do Rob? If he had stopped for a single moment and thought about what the potential consequences (and that's the important bit) of his actions, then do you think he would have still continued. I don't. I don't know Paul. I have a problem with the dickheads in the crowd being absolved of all blame and responsibility to be honest. They dished it out, got it back and couldn't handle it. Like Walcott, it's not as if they had no choice but to go mental afterwards. I didn't remotely suggest that the dickheads in the crowd should be absolved of all blame, they should be absolutely punished to the very last letter of the law. But precisely because there are dickheads in the crowd, means that I don't think footballers should engage opposition supporters (accept in very rare circumstances) and as I've already said, Walcott was only actually engaging them because he had other people to stand in the line of fire - which to me, is a liberty to take.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 11:10:56 GMT
I don't know Paul. I have a problem with the dickheads in the crowd being absolved of all blame and responsibility to be honest. They dished it out, got it back and couldn't handle it. Like Walcott, it's not as if they had no choice but to go mental afterwards. I didn't remotely suggest that the dickheads in the crowd should be absolved of all blame, they should be absolutely punished to the very last letter of the law. But precisely because there are dickheads in the crowd, means that I don't think footballers should engage opposition supporters (accept in very rare circumstances) and as I've already said, Walcott was only actually engaging them because he had other people to stand in the line of fire - which to me, is a liberty to take. We have no idea what he would have done if they weren't there Paul. There's no way of knowing. As gestures go it was a pretty innocent one - not like he was giving them the wanker sign or anything - and I really think the ones in the wrong are the idiots and crybabies in the crowd.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 5, 2014 11:17:00 GMT
1. I didn't remotely suggest that the dickheads in the crowd should be absolved of all blame, they should be absolutely punished to the very last letter of the law. But precisely because there are dickheads in the crowd, means that I don't think footballers should engage opposition supporters (accept in very rare circumstances) and as I've already said, Walcott was only actually engaging them because he had other people to stand in the line of fire - which to me, is a liberty to take. We have no idea what he would have done if they weren't there Paul. There's no way of knowing. As gestures go it was a pretty innocent one - not like he was giving them the wanker sign or anything - and I really think the ones in the wrong are the idiots and crybabies in the crowd. 1. The idiots in the crowd are definitely in the wrong. 2. I think Walcott put other people at risk, regardless of what it was he did. 3. I don't think footballers should engage opposition supporters. That's really the top and bottom of it for me Rob.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 11:20:10 GMT
1. We have no idea what he would have done if they weren't there Paul. There's no way of knowing. As gestures go it was a pretty innocent one - not like he was giving them the wanker sign or anything - and I really think the ones in the wrong are the idiots and crybabies in the crowd. 1. The idiots in the crowd are definitely in the wrong. 2. I think Walcott put other people at risk, regardless of what it was he did. 3. I don't think footballers should engage opposition supporters. That's really the top and bottom of it for me Rob. Fair enough mate. I think if fans dish it out they should be able to take it back. If they can't and misbehave, they should be banned. Everyone is responsible for their own actions.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 11:21:38 GMT
I didn't remotely suggest that the dickheads in the crowd should be absolved of all blame, they should be absolutely punished to the very last letter of the law. But precisely because there are dickheads in the crowd, means that I don't think footballers should engage opposition supporters (accept in very rare circumstances) and as I've already said, Walcott was only actually engaging them because he had other people to stand in the line of fire - which to me, is a liberty to take. We have no idea what he would have done if they weren't there Paul. There's no way of knowing. As gestures go it was a pretty innocent one - not like he was giving them the wanker sign or anything - and I really think the ones in the wrong are the idiots and crybabies in the crowd. I totally agree with this Rob.I hate Arsenal as much as the next man but if Walcott gets any sort of punishment for this then the world has quite frankly gone mad. What he did was harmless, the fact that neanderthals chose to react is not his fault. I am bloody sick of knobheads being absolved of any blame. Normal fans would laugh it off us just give it him back in verbal terms. For anyone to say he provoked them with his gesture is pathetic, the only ones with the problem in this case are the knobs that call themselves Spurs supporter. Carrying on to suggest that he should have taken the stretcher bearers into account is taking the argument to ridiculous levels. The world has gone bonkers--there is absolutely no justification for throwing coins at someone.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 11:47:01 GMT
Isn't this just another case of Pennantitus - stupid is as stupid does?
I don't really think Walcott would have done any different if he'd been walking off the pitch on his own. I think he was pandering to an audience - the Arsenal fans, just as Ramsey was when he did the shussing gesture to the Stoke fans.
I kind of hope that if he'd had the intelligence to think, then he'd have realised there was the possibility of the Spurs fans reacting like they did, and would have refrained because of the stretcher bearers in the way - I honestly don't think he deliberately used them as a human shield. As for those chucking the coins, they should be banned, and hopefully prosecuted, but footballers have long known the dangers of this kind of interaction with opposition supporters, and know they shouldn't goad them.
And as for Carragher throwing the coin back at the fans, it's good that he knew exactly which fan had thrown it, and was confident that he wasn't going to hit someone else. Bravo.
|
|
|
Post by ianstokie on Jan 5, 2014 11:50:27 GMT
Arsenal fans are no better. They throw coins and shit all the time Didn't they throw coins at Carragher once so he picked it up and threw it back at them....cue moral outrage from the gunners. And Carragher said, "not the first time a copper has hit a scouser" Seriously, though, I wish we potters had money to throw away.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 5, 2014 11:55:15 GMT
If I was one of the stretcher carriers, I would have left the tosser to it, see how brave he is then! I can't be doing with Walcott and seeing him squirm would be excellent.
Still, he has every right to give it back for me, I just think he did it in a quite cowardly way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 11:58:32 GMT
Isn't this just another case of Pennantitus - stupid is as stupid does? I don't really think Walcott would have done any different if he'd been walking off the pitch on his own. I think he was pandering to an audience - the Arsenal fans, just as Ramsey was when he did the shussing gesture to the Stoke fans. I kind of hope that if he'd had the intelligence to think, then he'd have realised there was the possibility of the Spurs fans reacting like they did, and would have refrained because of the stretcher bearers in the way - I honestly don't think he deliberately used them as a human shield. As for those chucking the coins, they should be banned, and hopefully prosecuted, but footballers have long known the dangers of this kind of interaction with opposition supporters, and know they shouldn't goad them. And as for Carragher throwing the coin back at the fans, it's good that he knew exactly which fan had thrown it, and was confident that he wasn't going to hit someone else. Bravo. It was THEM doing the goading in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jan 5, 2014 12:02:40 GMT
Arsenal fans are no better. They throw coins and shit all the time Didn't they throw coins at Carragher once so he picked it up and threw it back at them....cue moral outrage from the gunners. They pelted Adebayor with coins when he switched to man city. They also throw shit at Van Persie. They're the ultimate hypocrites. Classless scum.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 5, 2014 12:06:22 GMT
When Adebayor scored against Arsenal at the Etihad and he ran the full length of the pitch, the Arsenal fans then were hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by liamo on Jan 5, 2014 12:08:17 GMT
If he gets banned for that then football is on a slippery slope, fans give opposing team players shit all game and they're just people at the end of the day, fans need to lighten up a bit and that includes us
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 12:11:54 GMT
Isn't this just another case of Pennantitus - stupid is as stupid does? I don't really think Walcott would have done any different if he'd been walking off the pitch on his own. I think he was pandering to an audience - the Arsenal fans, just as Ramsey was when he did the shussing gesture to the Stoke fans. I kind of hope that if he'd had the intelligence to think, then he'd have realised there was the possibility of the Spurs fans reacting like they did, and would have refrained because of the stretcher bearers in the way - I honestly don't think he deliberately used them as a human shield. As for those chucking the coins, they should be banned, and hopefully prosecuted, but footballers have long known the dangers of this kind of interaction with opposition supporters, and know they shouldn't goad them. And as for Carragher throwing the coin back at the fans, it's good that he knew exactly which fan had thrown it, and was confident that he wasn't going to hit someone else. Bravo. It was THEM doing the goading in the first place. Course it was. It's what football supporters do. And in an ideal world, I'd agree that there's nothing wrong with giving a bit of verbals back. But as I've said, it's long been know that footie supporters can get a bit naughty - which I suppose is a throwback to the violence at matches in the 70s and 80s. It's not as bad as that now, but the coins being idiotically thrown in the direction of the stretcher bearers is the reason players are discouraged from goading the opposition. If someone's eye had been put out, the only person responsible would have been the person who threw the coin, but you can't blame the authorities for taking whatever action they can to prevent such a situation arising in the first place. As I've said, in an ideal world, I'd agree with you, but the Arse v Spurs isn't the ideal place for li'l Theo to be doing stuff like that. I'm not really fussed whether he gets a ban or not. I just think the reasons for him potentially getting one are justified, particularly as there were other people in the line of fire.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jan 5, 2014 12:20:49 GMT
Paul I think you will find it was Walcott who was provoked I know, that why I said 'give it back' in the opening sentence of my post chap. Well walcotts actions cannot be described as provocation then. He was provoked as you said and responded, his response cannot be counted as provocation nor does it excuse the spurs fans
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 12:24:20 GMT
It was THEM doing the goading in the first place. Course it was. It's what football supporters do. And in an ideal world, I'd agree that there's nothing wrong with giving a bit of verbals back. But as I've said, it's long been know that footie supporters can get a bit naughty - which I suppose is a throwback to the violence at matches in the 70s and 80s. It's not as bad as that now, but the coins being idiotically thrown in the direction of the stretcher bearers is the reason players are discouraged from goading the opposition. If someone's eye had been put out, the only person responsible would have been the person who threw the coin, but you can't blame the authorities for taking whatever action they can to prevent such a situation arising in the first place. As I've said, in an ideal world, I'd agree with you, but the Arse v Spurs isn't the ideal place for li'l Theo to be doing stuff like that. I'm not really fussed whether he gets a ban or not. I just think the reasons for him potentially getting one are justified, particularly as there were other people in the line of fire. Fair enough, I just didn't agree with Walcott being characterised as the goader when he was the one provoked. I don't have a problem with them giving Walcott stick. I have a problem with them being outraged at the idea they might get some back. Arseholes to a man.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysoul60 on Jan 5, 2014 12:27:10 GMT
i dont mind stuff like that it was a decent response to the Spurs fans having a go , no action required , we need a bit of enjoyment in the game and banter
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 12:31:50 GMT
Course it was. It's what football supporters do. And in an ideal world, I'd agree that there's nothing wrong with giving a bit of verbals back. But as I've said, it's long been know that footie supporters can get a bit naughty - which I suppose is a throwback to the violence at matches in the 70s and 80s. It's not as bad as that now, but the coins being idiotically thrown in the direction of the stretcher bearers is the reason players are discouraged from goading the opposition. If someone's eye had been put out, the only person responsible would have been the person who threw the coin, but you can't blame the authorities for taking whatever action they can to prevent such a situation arising in the first place. As I've said, in an ideal world, I'd agree with you, but the Arse v Spurs isn't the ideal place for li'l Theo to be doing stuff like that. I'm not really fussed whether he gets a ban or not. I just think the reasons for him potentially getting one are justified, particularly as there were other people in the line of fire. Fair enough, I just didn't agree with Walcott being characterised as the goader when he was the one provoked. I don't have a problem with them giving Walcott stick. I have a problem with them being outraged at the idea they might get some back. Arseholes to a man. Nowt wrong with Spurs fans goading Theo. Nowt wrong with him giving it back. As ever, it's the idiots who can't control themselves and take it too far who ruin it for those who just want a bit of banter.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 5, 2014 12:37:08 GMT
All of this said, until my dying day I will never stop laughing at the moment Fabian Wilnes (sp) had a pie chucked at him in the Boothen/Seddon corner. Clive Clarke had just tried to amputate him at the knee, so of course Fabian was a cheating, diving tosser. He was down in absolute agony being given dog's abuse and then splat. Brilliant*. *But highly illegal and it shouldn't happen in a football ground etc
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 5, 2014 12:49:57 GMT
I know, that why I said 'give it back' in the opening sentence of my post chap. Well walcotts actions cannot be described as provocation then. He was provoked as you said and responded, his response cannot be counted as provocation nor does it excuse the spurs fans Of course they can, you can still be 'provocative' even if you didn't go first. And I haven't tried to excuse the Spurs fans - completely the opposite in fact.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Jan 5, 2014 12:52:40 GMT
What Walcott did was incitement pure and simple. For that he should be shot or be made to appear on Tom Daley's show!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 5, 2014 12:54:54 GMT
If I was one of the stretcher carriers, I would have left the tosser to it, see how brave he is then! I can't be doing with Walcott and seeing him squirm would be excellent. Still, he has every right to give it back for me, I just think he did it in a quite cowardly way.
|
|
|
Post by MrMagic on Jan 5, 2014 12:56:07 GMT
From what I saw, the spurs fans were chucking coins BEFORE Walcott made the gesture.
Even so, this is one of the things that really pisses me off about the cowardly nature of the moderm premiership supporter. We hear week after week on radio and tv shows how it's the nature of the game to have a bit of abuse, how it's not the theatre and different rules apply, then as soon as a footballer reminds a load of baying idiots of the score (no swearing, spitting, coin throwing) they are all bleating about his behaviour.
It's like the playground bully who runs to teacher to grass on the first kid to stand up to him.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jan 5, 2014 12:57:12 GMT
Well walcotts actions cannot be described as provocation then. He was provoked as you said and responded, his response cannot be counted as provocation nor does it excuse the spurs fans Of course they can, you can still be 'provocative' even if you didn't go first. And I haven't tried to excuse the Spurs fans - completely the opposite in fact. If you want to split hairs it was retaliative He was goaded Rightly or wrongly he responded End of story If the spurs fans then decide to throw coins you can hardly say he provoked them. If Matty had given the V's to the wolves fans it would have been justified If the inbreds then start throwing coins you can hardly say he provoked them to do so
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Jan 5, 2014 13:05:28 GMT
Judging by this new storm in a teacup, and also the Southampton attempt to suppress ref Clattenberg's free speech, folk are losing all sight of what actually is and isn't an offence nowadays. It is NOT an offence/crime to point out the score in a football match. It IS an offence/crime to throw projectiles with the intention of injuring someone. The idea that violent & yobbish actions are in some way provoked by other people's completely legal & harmless actions is just scapegoating, pure and simple. It is in effect saying you can do something totally legal, and then not only be on the receiving end of unwarranted intimidation, threats and violence, but also unwarranted retrospective punishment by authority figures too! So much for our supposed fundamental human right to have freedom of expression without fear of persecution! Unfortunately for Walcott, there is an FA precedent, in that his ex team-mate Adebayor once received a yellow card, a suspended two match ban and a £25000 fine for having the temerity to celebrate in front of some opposition fans, and clearly giving them no option but to start a riot(!) ... so yes Walcott can perhaps expect a similar semi-draconian punishment. It's like the country's become a fascist police state, and it's rather unpleasant. Inciting the fans is also against the rules and this is what he and Adebayor did, its in the rules so rightly or wrongly they'll get in trouble for it, its not about offence as you put it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2014 13:06:59 GMT
Must be a slow news day if this gets 50 odd posts on here and SSN are talking bout it
I can only surmise, the ENTIRE set of FA cup ties must have been shit yesterday
now then - what were we talking about ?? (I just forgot)
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 5, 2014 13:07:33 GMT
Of course they can, you can still be 'provocative' even if you didn't go first. And I haven't tried to excuse the Spurs fans - completely the opposite in fact. If you want to split hairs it was retaliative He was goaded Rightly or wrongly he responded End of story If the spurs fans then decide to throw coins you can hardly say he provoked them. If Matty had given the V's to the wolves fans it would have been justified If the inbreds then start throwing coins you can hardly say he provoked them to do so To be fair Salop I think it was you who started splitting hairs - it was a provocative gesture and it was meant to be one, regardless of who 'started it'. Virtually every opposition player who takes a corner in front of the Boothen gets dogs abuse EVERY TIME they take it but they all somehow manage to get on with it, without feeling the need to 'give it back'. Maybe we should set up a cordon of stewards in each corner, so that any player who feels he can't get on with the corner without giving a bit back to the crowd, has got a bit of protection eh? We don't live in a perfect world and as Friend Called Five has said further up the thread, there's a very good reason why footballers are encouraged not to engage opposition fans.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 5, 2014 13:18:49 GMT
If you want to split hairs it was retaliative He was goaded Rightly or wrongly he responded End of story If the spurs fans then decide to throw coins you can hardly say he provoked them. If Matty had given the V's to the wolves fans it would have been justified If the inbreds then start throwing coins you can hardly say he provoked them to do so To be fair Salop I think it was you who started splitting hairs - it was a provocative gesture and it was meant to be one, regardless of who 'started it'. Virtually every opposition player who takes a corner in front of the Boothen gets dogs abuse EVERY TIME they take it but they all somehow manage to get on with it, without feeling the need to 'give it back'. Maybe we should set up a cordon of stewards in each corner, so that any player who feels he can't get on with the corner without giving a bit back to the crowd, has got a bit of protection eh? We don't live in a perfect world and as Friend Called Five has said further up the thread, there's a very good reason why footballers are encouraged not to engage opposition fans. Bollocks. If you give it out you should be big enough to take it back, if not tough shit and fucking grow up. I don't see why a football player regardless of how much he gets paid should turn a blind eye to someone calling his mum a whore, or whatever shit gets thrown at them. It's not law nor is it written into their contract that they can't get upset at some things shouted at them by the crowd, and it certainly shouldn't be 'part of the job'. Those Spurs fans made themselves look a bunch of idiots yesterday and if a smile and a 2-0 gesture is all it takes for them to storm the pitch I suggest they go to anger management the clowns. H
|
|