dingdangdo

And now an Oldham defender has to be comforted by teammates because he was so upset at a nasty comment from some bloke in the Kop. Game nearly had to be stopped because the poor little victim was so offended. Do me a favour!

So the big sort shite has got some bloke arrested for offending him on twitter. Perfectly legitimate course of action? Or does he deserve a bit more love from Andy Todd? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-16455531

I now have a mental impression of a 30 something classy intellectual independent stunner - an unmarried Lauren Laverne perhaps?

Totally agree with you there...a winner. Great player too. Make a statement about footballers not being role models and get that lad to the bok.

Wank stain on a tuxedo...class!

Sorry athywhite - I wasn't being sanctimonious - how could I? I joined most of it! (apart from picking fights with innocent onlookers) I was merely pointing out the fact that I was there...as Jules_Darby had raised concerns about the legitimacy of my post. Sorry If I misled you there fella.

Aye - I had a season ticket for 2 years up there in the rafters - 'tis a bit codgery

Is she a MILF?

As the previous article clearly highlights - it was New Labour and their political set that redefined racism: "to include speech and action that is not even consciously bigoted ("unwitting racism") and to include "any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person" So there you are - it was feckin new labour wot fucked it all up....and it's still fecked - despite what the "yoof" might tell you.

Bang on! http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100127879/if-we-go-by-the-daft-definition-of-racism-proffered-by-diane-abbotts-own-social-set-then-she-is-a-racist/

Ok shit - I got carried away - how stupid of me - or course we're all the same aint we! In this wonderful "big society" "we're all in it together". There's no such thing as class, there are no advocacy groups lobbying government to ban anything, there is no elite - no-one is attempting to impose austerity on us, no-one is telling us to stop smoking. No-one is threatening us with imprisonment if we dare to sing sectarian songs at football matches, no-one is seeking to brand football supporters as low life chavvy scum...it's all in my fucked up imagination. I'm clearly too old to make a valid contribution to a debate because I'm just too fucking old. Only the under 40s have the brains to make sense of the world. Life experience counts for nought - ignorance is bliss - celebrate apathy, question nothing, take it up the arse and accept your lot - were are all equal. Ever read Orwell?

You sound just like my missus

That's a completely ageist comment - I'm offended - call the cops!

Actually her knockers were of the more petit variety - las tetas peque?as an espa?ol.

You are absolutely right - well done that man! That's the tune - now what about them there lyrics....we could develop a whole portfolio based on that tune..."he was the lion - the lion of vienna"...in fact that could be our signature melody.... And I love that commentary at the end..."Lofthouse is through......" goosbump city!

Welcome w/h w...what are we going to call you then? Westhoughton White? W/hatever - welcome anyway..know any good wanderers songs?

suggested title of new wanderers anthem 3 o'clock at the reebok Now will someone please formulate the lyrics and someone else come up with the tune

Not bad at all

Unfortunately I was sat opposite the stoke fans at the half way line and got an ear full of "delilah" all through the fucking game - not a good day that - but thanks for posting that - I listened to it the whole thing and felt the odd goosebump emerge more than once

In answer to that I would say yes - absolutely we do - and bloody good we do too. What we're talking about here is free speech - or to put it another way "the right to be offensive". Looked at one way you might conclude that it's simply not acceptable to go around abusing everyone you meet - sure that's not a desirable thing to do. But I'd defend your right to do it - why? Because I also have a right to hit back - it's my right to also say what I think - however confortable that might be to you. So not only is free speech is fundamental to a free society, it's also the most effective weapon against tyranny - and what we have here is a tyranny imposed by an ecotistical (geddit), green shirted, authoritarian elite. What puzzles me is this: Since when did the state change it's mind on the question of race? When did the ruling elite suddenly become all PC anti racist minded? When I grew up the ruling class were the pioneers of racism - it was the state that promoted the idea of nasty foreigners coming over here, causing trouble, nicking our jobs, infecting our culture bla bla bla....now they want to lecture us about the the language we use and punish us for using offensive words. Did I sleepwalk through that change in culture or what? What is evident is that those in authority are very keen indeed to supervise our speech - that can only be becuse they actually think we're unenlightened scum incapable of a progressive thought of our own and liable to launch racist pogroms at the drop of a hat. The illiberal leftists love to single out those that transgress - like Suarez - because it makes them feel good - because it gives them a sense of purpose. It re-confirms their belief that we're all - particularly the football community - a load of racist scum who can't be trusted. Follow that lot at your peril. I'll defend free speech and the right to be offensive till I shuffle off this mortal coil.

Do you think the author of that quote would be the inspiration behind social revolutions in America and France? Thought not. Worth reminding ourselves of the words of the great enlightment thinkers like Voltaire, Rousseau then JS Mill and Marx - all of whom would twitch vigorously to hear some of the nonsense spouted about Suarezgate.

I don't like the fact that we don't have the freedom to speak as we find - do you?

This raises a good point which was raised in that ridiculous waste of time report. They went on and on and on about subjectivity and objectivity - did Suarez subjectively mean to racially abuse Evra? Or can you convict based on the objectivity of his words when taken out of context. The twats got their knickers in a twist over that one for sure. I guess we've all got mates from all kinds of different ethnic backgrounds. What's ok to say to one might be something you don't say to another because for a whole variety of reasons. Subjectively I wouldn't intentionally racially offend anyone - but I might call my best asian mate a fucking paki and he calls me something similar and we get another beer in and think nothing of it. There again I have other mates I probably don't know as well where I would be a bit more careful...maybe I cross the line in an attempt to test the water and end up offending a pal. Am I a racist? Of course not. Should I be punished for a failed attempt at humour - under current legislation I could be charged for the use of racist language. Did Suarez mean to racially abuse Suarez - well the so call independent paneil deemed he had because objectively speaking the word spanish word negro (or negrito) was deemed (objectively) racist. The panel of bureaucrats didn't find Suarez guilty of an subjective racism - how could they? They would have to prove his racist intent which was impossible. So this was not a fair trail at all - and his punishment was unjust, unfair and morally inept. The focus on words not deeds is a minefield - and, apart from satifsying the bloodlust of the punishing class, achieves zero in terms of tacking what's left of racism in this country. Ask yourself this - we're all anti racists now aren't we? We all buy into this PC language and pride ourselves on our anti racist credentials? We feel good when attacking anyone who falls foul of the anti racist langaue code? But let me ask you a question? Where do you stand on immigration?

Independent! Are you serious? Who are those bureaucratic boffins? Who elected them into their esteemed positions as high priest of morality? Do me a favour...

Interesting you say "when racial predjudice is in all the headlines". I note you didn't say "when racial prejudice is at an all time low". The latter statement is true - so it's worth asking yourself - why is there so much official anti racism these days - when racism is actually pretty much a thing of the past? And does he really need lessons in humility? So anyone who kicks against the authoritarian dogma of political correctness needs lessons in humility? Maybe we should support those that fight back? It's not easy these days when the illiberati get hold of you and launch a twitterstorm. And maybe you're guilty of not seeing the bigger picture?