Dundee vs. Sevco - 9/12/18

[Big Chief Toffee Teeth]

I don't often side with Sevco fans but, in this instance, I think you're being hard done to by some of the usual trolls. Probably best to let it go, as you must surely see that your point will not be adressed. Those who resort to ad hominem attacks do not, by definition, address arguments.

Having read further in the thread now, I fully accept that I was mistakenly trying to defend the indefensible!

[KnightswoodBear]

Missed this yesterday as it was my son's birthday party.  Watched the highlights this morning.  Great goal from Miller after some horrible defending from Goldson.  The red seems a bit harsh to me but it's a great finish from Halliday from the free kick.

The Lafferty goal being disallowed is a joke, but I can only assume that the masonic conspiracy is playing the long game there, so it'll be all right in the end.

It's clear that we only have to lose a couple of players to injury (or in this case suspension) for the team to grind to a halt.

[HAMLISCH]

17 hours ago, Booker-T said:

happiest I've ever seen him.

I liked him, not blessed with great ability but always gave 100%, plenty of others that didn't.

[KnightswoodBear]

3 hours ago, HAMLISCH said:

I liked him, not blessed with great ability but always gave 100%, plenty of others that didn't.

I think that's the thing with Kenny.  Doesn't matter who he's playing for you always get the impression he's giving 100%. 

 

[Melanius Mullarkey]

On 09/12/2018 at 21:22, Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo said:

Only interested in the Tennent's.

 

23 hours ago, Bohemian said:

Subhuman Scum.. 

Confirmed.

[weegienative]

On 09/12/2018 at 21:05, Monkey Tennis said:

No, we cannot have such a charge.  I'll answer your question in good faith.

I would indeed be equally dead, regardless of your motive for killing me.

 

I do hope that helps you to claim some sort of victory in whatever the Hell quest you appear to have embarked upon.

Thank you.

So why is one song morally acceptable and one not? Using fact not hyperbole.

[weegienative]

10 hours ago, KnightswoodBear said:

Missed this yesterday as it was my son's birthday party.  Watched the highlights this morning.  Great goal from Miller after some horrible defending from Goldson.  The red seems a bit harsh to me but it's a great finish from Halliday from the free kick.

The Lafferty goal being disallowed is a joke, but I can only assume that the masonic conspiracy is playing the long game there, so it'll be all right in the end.

It's clear that we only have to lose a couple of players to injury (or in this case suspension) for the team to grind to a halt.

Apparently the red was given for denying a goal scoring opportunity. I actually did think it was serious foul play, not so sure there wasn't a covering defender thoygh.

[Monkey Tennis]

9 minutes ago, weegienative said:

Thank you.

So why is one song morally acceptable and one not? Using fact not hyperbole.

Due to the intent behind each.

It's not even about the apparent death threat.  It's about the nature of the prejudice evident in one and absent in the other.

[Bairnardo]

Apparently the red was given for denying a goal scoring opportunity. I actually did think it was serious foul play, not so sure there wasn't a covering defender thoygh.

Stupid ***

[YER SISTERS YER MAW]

Weegienative. The only *** who doesn't do walking away.

[weegienative]

14 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

Due to the intent behind each.

It's not even about the apparent death threat.  It's about the nature of the prejudice evident in one and absent in the other.

You are attaching a level of intent which is very subjective. 

I sing the song at matches then go out for drinks with Celtic supporting pals on a Saturday night. One of whom goes to parkhead and sings all the rebel songs including stuff about British soldiers despite being  serving member of the British army.

So your subjective opinion is wrong in my example. Presumably since there aren't 50,000 murders after an old firm game, it's also wrong about the entire match day support.

When you go down the road of subjectivity, do you see how quickly the waters get muddied.

On the subject if prejudice, as with the murder example previously, is prejudice or discrimination against a group any more morally justifiable if it's over support of a football team rather than religion? That's a very strange argument to be making.

[Bairnardo]

You are attaching a level of intent which is very subjective. 
I sing the song at matches then go out for drinks with Celtic supporting pals on a Saturday night. One of whom goes to parkhead and sings all the rebel songs including stuff about British soldiers despite being  serving member of the British army.
So your subjective opinion is wrong in my example. Presumably since there aren't 50,000 murders after an old firm game, it's also wrong about the entire match day support.
When you go down the road of subjectivity, do you see how quickly the waters get muddied.
On the subject if prejudice, as with the murder example previously, is prejudice or discrimination against a group any more morally justifiable if it's over support of a football team rather than religion? That's a very strange argument to be making.

[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

Stupid ***

[weegienative]

14 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

34 minutes ago, weegienative said:

Apparently the red was given for denying a goal scoring opportunity. I actually did think it was serious foul play, not so sure there wasn't a covering defender thoygh.

Stupid ***

Aye? Shouldn't you be in the league 1 forum? Or am I getting a bit ahead of myself there? I'll hold that comment till June.

[Bairnardo]

Aye? Shouldn't you be in the league 1 forum? Or am I getting a bit ahead of myself there? I'll hold that comment till June.

***

[weegienative]

1 minute ago, Bairnardo said:

Stupid ***

Which swear word has 3 letters? Curious now.

[weegienative]

2 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

***

 

[Girth]

Weegienative needs to stop.

[weegienative]

4 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

8 minutes ago, weegienative said:

admitting it so openly. Irony.

U ok hon?

Fine darling.

[Monkey Tennis]

22 minutes ago, weegienative said:

You are attaching a level of intent which is very subjective. 

I sing the song at matches then go out for drinks with Celtic supporting pals on a Saturday night. One of whom goes to parkhead and sings all the rebel songs including stuff about British soldiers despite being  serving member of the British army.

So your subjective opinion is wrong in my example. Presumably since there aren't 50,000 murders after an old firm game, it's also wrong about the entire match day support.

When you go down the road of subjectivity, do you see how quickly the waters get muddied.

On the subject if prejudice, as with the murder example previously, is prejudice or discrimination against a group any more morally justifiable if it's over support of a football team rather than religion? That's a very strange argument to be making.

I'm not talking about actual intent to kill people for goodness sake.

I'm referring to intent over who's being insulted.

I absolutely do see a moral difference as regards songs sung at the football, between those that denigrate a rival team, and those that denigrate a religious or ethnic group.

If you fail to see any such distinction, then fine.  We disagree.

[weegienative]

3 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I'm not talking about actual intent to kill people for goodness sake.

I'm referring to intent over who's being insulted.

I absolutely do see a moral difference as regards songs sung at the football, between those that denigrate a rival team, and those that denigrate a religious or ethnic group.

If you fail to see any such distinction, then fine.  We disagree.

We do disagree then.

Where can we find the oppressed league table so we know which level of morality to attach to each victim group?