ted Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I always enjoy when Mr. Knight ignores facts in his pursuit of convenient historical fiction. In his latest Blog entry, "Canada III — Passport problems" he again picks at the scab that is the Whoregreaves fiasco. Ben, you leave out the one and only reason that a special kind of hatred is reserved for this little wanker: he committed himself to Canada in a television interview and then, in what meets the dictionary definition of betrayal, played for England. Facts on the record. No room for interpretation of the events themselves. Jonathan deG NEVER made any such explicit commitment, as you know very well. That is the reason many who despise The Whore are merely disappointed in Jonathan. I especially love the red herring you add to the whole mess when you suggest, "most of the fans who rip him for choosing England would be up in arms, pitchforks and torches if any government anywhere tried to slap the same working restrictions on them." What utter and total nonsense. Playing for a national team is not a career or even a regular job. I have never seen any suggestion that he should not have played for Bayern or ManUre. Those are real jobs and if one has the talent there is no need to play for a particular national team in order to play for them. You are entitled to your opinions on his actions but do you think you could stop the false and misleading attacks on those of us who dare to disagaree with you? It is hard to get behind your otherwise constructive ideas when you insist on alienating supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bates Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Wow again Ted. So the guy either lied or changed his mind and you think that should give you and others the right to refer to him and his Family with these gross names until the end of time? Give it a break, he has free will and has used it to do whatever he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaku_bert Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Righty-ho, Ted. Like Bates-ey said, it is perfectly fine to lie. And it is perfectly fine to bail on the country that gave you a quality of life that you probably wouldn't have had if your parents didn't immigrate here. It's all about his choice and free will. He needn't feel any duty to his country or to live up to his word. /sarc off Christ, I have no problems with people who say that they don't care about the whore because they have moved on but completely amoral posts like the one above piss me off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bates Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 I am not saying that it is OK that he did it. I am saying that referring someone with such disgusting names does not exactly make you a better person than them. Hate him and his decision but refer to him and his family as the humans that they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhat Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Sorry Ted's right, and is also entitled to his own opinion. Besides this is a Canadian MNT supporters section, so supporters can call him whatever they want to someone who turns down the Maple Leaf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bates Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 No actually referring to someone with such a slanderous name is not Ok and it is not alright to refer to someone that way. It reflects poorly on the supporters of the MNT in general. If you don't believe that try referring to someone in your everyday life as a whore and see how others around you think of your actions. Again I think it is Ok to hate the guy and his decisions but I believe you lower yourself and this group by using such childish and grotesque names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the biologist Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 From Wiktionary: A person who is unscrupulous</u>, especially one who compromises their principles for gain</u>. If you find this offensive Bates, go read another thread just like you skip the channels that shows offensive material according to you (whores ?). EDIT</u>: ^ How can you say it is OK to hate</u> him, yet we are bastards because we call him names ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 quote:Originally posted by redhat Sorry Ted's right, and is also entitled to his own opinion. Besides this is a Canadian MNT supporters section, so supporters can callhim whatever they want to someone who turns down the Maple Leaf. ^ Unless of course the supporter is referring to Sidney Leroux, who is even worse in that she played for us, then jumped ship to our biggest rivals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bates Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Because hate is generally a thought towards someone whereas the names are actually slanderous. I am actually surprised that the Mods allow such slanderous name calling as it could cause a wonderful site a lot of trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 MasterBates should go wank off to some England fan forum if he loves Whoregreaves so much. As for slander, considering that the dictionary definition of the word 'whore' fits Whoregreaves so well, I'd like to see him sue Canadian soccer fans for slander. I actually enjoy Ben Knight's writing style. But I don't really consider him a journalist or a columnist when it comes to soccer. I'm not expecting anything hard-hitting. What you do get is articles from a fans perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the biologist Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 ^ It is slanderous as long as it's unjustified. This ain't the case here. quote:Originally posted by Bates Because hate is generally a thought towards someone ...and names are a way to express a tought towards someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 quote:Originally posted by the biologist ^ It is slanderous as long as it's unjustified. This ain't the case here....and names are a way to express a tought towards someone. If we want to get really technical, I think the word masterBates was looking for was libelous. Slander is spoken word. Libel is something printed or with a permanent record. Either way, its not defamatory to call him Whoregreaves if its the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bates Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Imagine for a second that someone at CSA who actually shares the views for the MNT that the Voyageurs have. That person brings the ideas to the rest of the CSA where they are asked about the Voyegeurs. The CSA then takes a look at such posting and you expect them to give some creedence to your thoughts when you write such childish posts and name calling. Don't think so but continue on Children!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Massive Attack Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Bates Imagine for a second that someone at CSA who actually shares the views for the MNT that the Voyageurs have. That person brings the ideas to the rest of the CSA where they are asked about the Voyegeurs. The CSA then takes a look at such posting and you expect them to give some creedence to your thoughts when you write such childish posts and name calling. Don't think so but continue on Children!!! The only person here acting like a child is you, being a little sucky baby because people don't agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Having spoken to members of the CSA in 2000/2001 when the drama was being played out, let me assure you that the terms they used at the time were as bad if not worse when describing Monsieur OH. Not officially of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 If the CSA was able to recognize real talent when it's staring them in straight in the face, and capable of protecting the few valuable assets that this country manages to produce, then we wouldn't be having discussions like this one. People should put the blame squarely where it belongs, with the Canadian Soccer Assholiation and not with Mr. Hargreaves, the most successful Canadian born soccer player of all time. All this childish energy wasted on name calling just confirms how truly admired Mr. Hargreaves' talent truly is. Save it Massive! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrennanFan Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 this piece is misleading to the point that its not even worth discussing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Ted, if historical accuracy is so important to you, I could have a lot of fun with the following: "A Century of Being United Today's Victoria United traces it lineage back to the team with the same name that was formed in 1904 when the Victoria Association Football Club (who had also gone by the name Wanderers) and the Victoria Capitals, merged into one team. This practice resulted in other teams of this name in England and the British Empire. Rather than being an attempt to create a false connection like so many North American teams have done this is in fact a legitimate continuation from the earliest beginnings of soccer on Vancouver Island. We honour our shared heritage with the name and at the same time celebrate the modern team that brings together players from local clubs, college and University sides into a single team representing our community." quote:Originally posted by ted I always enjoy when Mr. Knight ignores facts in his pursuit of convenient historical fiction. In his latest Blog entry, "Canada III — Passport problems" he again picks at the scab that is the Whoregreaves fiasco. Ben, you leave out the one and only reason that a special kind of hatred is reserved for this little wanker: he committed himself to Canada in a television interview and then, in what meets the dictionary definition of betrayal, played for England. Facts on the record. No room for interpretation of the events themselves. Jonathan deG NEVER made any such explicit commitment, as you know very well. That is the reason many who despise The Whore are merely disappointed in Jonathan. I especially love the red herring you add to the whole mess when you suggest, "most of the fans who rip him for choosing England would be up in arms, pitchforks and torches if any government anywhere tried to slap the same working restrictions on them." What utter and total nonsense. Playing for a national team is not a career or even a regular job. I have never seen any suggestion that he should not have played for Bayern or ManUre. Those are real jobs and if one has the talent there is no need to play for a particular national team in order to play for them. You are entitled to your opinions on his actions but do you think you could stop the false and misleading attacks on those of us who dare to disagaree with you? It is hard to get behind your otherwise constructive ideas when you insist on alienating supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ed Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 Well I suspect the Hargreaves posts and inevitable onslaught of visceral reactions will be coming to an end. Rumours here in Cowtown that Hargreaves career is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vic Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 OH is nothing but a lightning rod for revealing members personalities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Knight Posted August 24, 2009 Share Posted August 24, 2009 LOL! Very well put, Vic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Rollins1555362254 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Robert If the CSA was able to recognize real talent when it's staring them in straight in the face, and capable of protecting the few valuable assets that this country manages to produce, then we wouldn't be having discussions like this one. People should put the blame squarely where it belongs, with the Canadian Soccer Assholiation and not with Mr. Hargreaves, the most successful Canadian born soccer player of all time. All this childish energy wasted on name calling just confirms how truly admired Mr. Hargreaves' talent truly is. Save it Massive! I am not the CSA's biggest fan. But the idea that we lost OH because we cut him when he was an undersized, underage and timid sub-17 player is misguided. OH didn't make that team because he wasn't good enough. It was a convenient excuse later. We lost OH because he took the easy way out and then made things worse on himself by never manning up and admitting it. If he had said "Look, I appreciate Canada, but the CSA is a mess and this is an amazing opportunity that could advance my career. How could I say no," then we still wouldn't have liked it, but we might have respected it a bit more. And he still would have done some good for the sport here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trillium Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Bates Because hate is generally a thought towards someone whereas the names are actually slanderous. I am actually surprised that the Mods allow such slanderous name calling as it could cause a wonderful site a lot of trouble. Funny you know Bates.. Hate Crimes get you in Jail in Canada... slander you pay a few bucks no jail time. So I guess you are opting for jail ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squizz1402635577 Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 quote:Originally posted by Massive Attack I actually enjoy Ben Knight's writing style. But I don't really consider him a journalist or a columnist when it comes to soccer. I'm not expecting anything hard-hitting. What you do get is articles from a fans perspective. Forgive the nitpicking, but I'm curious as to how you differentiate between a column, and a written article containing the author's perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free kick Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I would have had a much easier time accepting Hargreaves's decision had he decided to play for Germany. As I said many times. And thats why I have had an easier time accepting Jonathan Deguzman's decision. It was in Germany that he developed as a soccer player and it was where he lived for several years before became a professional. He owes more to Germany for his career as than he does to England. His only link to England is through his parents but so what if you have never lived there. Tons of Canadians have parents or grandparents who come from elsewhere but if you have never actually lived there then how can you call identify yourself as person from that country. He identified himself as Welsh for while as well, but why didn't he play fr Wales then? Home is where you live. Or where you live or have lived more often. And in perfect world, you should represent your homeland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.