(QF) Ukraine 0-4 England - Saturday 3rd July, 2021

[ToonArmy]

7 minutes ago, Stan said:

So the people who feel affected now and want positive change and equality for all shouldn't be listened to when they justify their reasons for their actions?

 

Then don't use the gesture of an organisation that wants to continue the decades long demonization of working class white men and boys - the very people who watch football - to the point they are now the least educated in society probably contributing to increasing far right tendencies among them, find a less loaded gesture. I suggested alternatives already, stand for a minute, kick some footballs off the pitch, shout kick out, sit down on the ground, do a black power salute - anything but kneeling. 

[Stan]

Huh? In your eyes a 'black power' salute is fine but kneeling isn't? 

[RandoEFC+]

Is anyone else just exhausted by the fact that some people genuinely believe that footballers taking the knee for 5 seconds before a game is some sort of expression of anarchistic sympathy and a Marxist attempt to defund the police? It's literally been over a year now where it's been clearly explained that it has no links to the BLM organisation in the USA that want to defund the police and that it's a simple gesture in solidarity and in favour of equality. It's perfectly reasonable for footballers who everyone knows get abused daily on social media, often racially, to take 5 seconds before a game to make the gesture if they choose.

At what point do you have this explained to you repeatedly and you admit that you either lack the intelligence to understand English, or that you're a conspiracy theorist because you disbelieve things you're told based on no evidence, or you just choose to try to undermine the gesture for other reasons which are open to speculation?

I've had this conversation in good faith so many times now.

[Dave]

3 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Is anyone else just exhausted by the fact that some people genuinely believe that footballers taking the knee for 5 seconds before a game is some sort of expression of anarchistic sympathy and a Marxist attempt to defund the police?

Yes. I've lost count how many times a footballer has had to say: "we are not doing this for political reasons".

Albert Einstein famously said: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result". Well, I'd use that basis to say the definition of stupidity is having the same thing explained to you over and over again and still expecting your original viewpoint to be proven right.

[ToonArmy]

2 hours ago, Stan said:

Huh? In your eyes a 'black power' salute is fine but kneeling isn't? 

 

Yes, exactly. The black power salute represents the fight against racial inequality, the kneeling represents things like defunding the police. It's not rocket science. 

[ToonArmy]

1 hour ago, The Palace Fan said:

Yes. I've lost count how many times a footballer has had to say: "we are not doing this for political reasons".

Albert Einstein famously said: "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result". Well, I'd use that basis to say the definition of stupidity is having the same thing explained to you over and over again and still expecting your original viewpoint to be proven right.

Surely even you can see the irony in raising this quote in defence of players kneeling. 

[Stan]

Just now, ToonArmy said:

 

Yes, exactly. The black power salute represents the fight against racial inequality, the kneeling represents things like defunding the police. It's not rocket science. 

Only if you personally choose to associate it with BLM, which is precisely what those who kneel on a football pitch have said countless times that that's not what they do it for. And what you choose to ignore...

 

[RandoEFC+]

17 minutes ago, ToonArmy said:

 

Yes, exactly. The black power salute represents the fight against racial inequality, the kneeling represents things like defunding the police. It's not rocket science. 

So footballers take the knee, explicitly say multiple times that they're doing it in support of equality, but Dave down the chippy says it's because they're Marxists who want to defund the police because he read it from some Farage-y type on Facebook or Twitter, and you decide that he's right, and the footballers are lying?

It's absolute whack job conspiracy theory stuff this. Why would the English national team, a group of literal multi-millionaires who get targeted for robberies semi-regularly and often rely on a fair amount of security because of their profile, secretly want to lead a Marxist revolution and defund the police? Utterly ridiculous.

[DeadLinesman]

3 hours ago, Devil-Dick Willie said:

I think you're absolutely right. BUT.

It takes a very special piece of shit to risk the health and even lives of his team mates, team assistants and family so he can go fuck a girl behind the back of his wife, the mother of his child. 
Foden could be hit by 18 busses tomorrow and I'd not shed a tear. 

He’s gets a pass because he’s white though, whereas Greenwood was massacred……

[ToonArmy]

12 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

So footballers take the knee, explicitly say multiple times that they're doing it in support of equality, but Dave down the chippy says it's because they're Marxists who want to defund the police because he read it from some Farage-y type on Facebook or Twitter, and you decide that he's right, and the footballers are lying?

 It's absolute whack job conspiracy theory stuff this. Why would the English national team, a group of literal multi-millionaires who get targeted for robberies semi-regularly and often rely on a fair amount of security because of their profile, secretly want to lead a Marxist revolution and defund the police? Utterly ridiculous.

Well one of our star players thinks people shouldn't have to take responsibility for feeding their own sprogs, so they've already showed their colours on marxism. If you can't afford em don't have them. The problem is if you give people from council estates millions of pounds for doing essentially nothing of economic value, they start to think everybody deserves the same and don't think about how it should be paid. The reason footballer's are socialists is the same reason the lotto lout ended up back on benefits. If people don't do real work for their money, they lose track of the value of their money and everybody else's at the same time. 

[Devil-Dick Willie]

1 minute ago, DeadLinesman said:

He’s gets a pass because he’s white though, whereas Greenwood was massacred……

Not from me he doesn't mate, and mummy says I'm important 

[LFCMike]

2 minutes ago, ToonArmy said:

Well one of our star players thinks people shouldn't have to take responsibility for feeding their own sprogs, so they've already showed their colours on marxism. If you can't afford em don't have them. The problem is if you give people from council estates millions of pounds for doing essentially nothing of economic value, they start to think everybody deserves the same and don't think about how it should be paid. The reason footballer's are socialists is the same reason the lotto lout ended up back on benefits. If people don't do real work for their money, they lose track of the value of their money and everybody else's at the same time. 

Who let this cunt in?

[ToonArmy]

1 minute ago, LFCMike said:

Who let this cunt in?

Ah the good old anyone who disagrees with me is a cunt trope. Wouldn't expect much more from someone from Liebourpool though!!! 

[RandoEFC+]

2 minutes ago, ToonArmy said:

Well one of our star players thinks people shouldn't have to take responsibility for feeding their own sprogs, so they've already showed their colours on marxism. If you can't afford em don't have them. The problem is if you give people from council estates millions of pounds for doing essentially nothing of economic value, they start to think everybody deserves the same and don't think about how it should be paid. The reason footballer's are socialists is the same reason the lotto lout ended up back on benefits. If people don't do real work for their money, they lose track of the value of their money and everybody else's at the same time. 

Imagine coming out with this and thinking that you're contributing to an intellectual debate . If you're going to accuse people of Marxism at least try and find out what it is first. I suppose in your warped image of "Great" Britain we'd let the kids' bodies pile high in the street as they starve for the crime of being born to parents who can't afford to feed them.

So Rashford wants kids in this country not to starve. What a dangerous revolutionary. What else is Marxism? State education? The NHS? The Post Office? Roads? If people can't afford those things themselves then maybe they should just not be born in the first place.

[ToonArmy]

9 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Imagine coming out with this and thinking that you're contributing to an intellectual debate . If you're going to accuse people of Marxism at least try and find out what it is first. I suppose in your warped image of "Great" Britain we'd let the kids' bodies pile high in the street as they starve for the crime of being born to parents who can't afford to feed them.

So Rashford wants kids in this country not to starve. What a dangerous revolutionary. What else is Marxism? State education? The NHS? The Post Office? Roads? If people can't afford those things themselves then maybe they should just not be born in the first place.

The government gives people this very useful thing called money when their unemployed or earning below certain thresholds unless they're already loaded and then their expected to use their savings. Not unfair. That money should be first and foremost used to pay your rent, and secondly to feed the kids you chose to have, if you have to eat a tin of baked beans get on with it. In my not warped image we should go back to the system we had until the Trussell Trust figured they could line their executives pockets by pretending their was a food crisis in a first world country, where you use your benefits to feed your kids not pay for Sky subscriptions and lottery tickets and booze and then get free food off well meaning but deluded pensioners and namby pamby middle classes. If you want more, work

 

It's funny how these supposedly food impoverished people can still buy a bloody season ticket or book a table in the pub for match-day which most of us working folk are priced out of isn't it? 

[Stan]

'liebourpool' that's a new one

Certified wum. 

[RandoEFC+]

Just now, ToonArmy said:

The government gives people this very useful thing called money when their unemployed or earning below certain thresholds. That money should be first and foremost used to pay your rent, and secondly to feed the kids you chose to have, if you have to eat a tin of baked beans get on with it. In my not warped image we should go back to the system we had until the Trussell Trust figured they could line their executives pockets by pretending their was a food crisis in a first world country, where you use your benefits to feed your kids not pay for Sky subscriptions and lottery tickets and then get free money of well meaning but deluded pensioners and namby pamby middle classes.

Superb again. Trying to be condescending before managing to use the wrong spelling of "they're" before the end of the first sentence. To be fair, though, this reads as if it's been copied and pasted off a Facebook comments section of some sort so perhaps that one's not on you.

I literally don't know what you're complaining about. Free school meals are done directly through schools so have nothing much to do with parents and their benefits anyway. This only became an issue because during lockdowns, families were asked to budget for feeding their kids lunch when they weren't previously because it was sorted through school. This issue prompted a debate about kids getting that support for a few extra weeks during the school holidays in the pandemic. A drop in the ocean compared to the amount of public money that got given, often illegally, to various already-loaded Tory donors for dodgy PPE contracts et al, but nah, let's get more angry for made up reasons about the government throwing a few coppers at starving kids and footballers kneeling on the pitch for 5 seconds before the game because those are the real issues here.

[Stan]

ToonArmy hates poor people and would rather see them starve than actually help them out. 

[ToonArmy]

Just now, RandoEFC said:

Superb again. Trying to be condescending before managing to use the wrong spelling of "they're" before the end of the first sentence. To be fair, though, this reads as if it's been copied and pasted off a Facebook comments section of some sort so perhaps that one's not on you.

I literally don't know what you're complaining about. Free school meals are done directly through schools so have nothing much to do with parents and their benefits anyway. This only became an issue because during lockdowns, families were asked to budget for feeding their kids lunch when they weren't previously because it was sorted through school. This issue prompted a debate about kids getting that support for a few extra weeks during the school holidays in the pandemic. A drop in the ocean compared to the amount of public money that got given, often illegally, to various already-loaded Tory donors for dodgy PPE contracts et al, but nah, let's get more angry for made up reasons about the government throwing a few coppers at starving kids and footballers kneeling on the pitch for 5 seconds before the game because those are the real issues here.

At least the money the government gives away is being taxed, and at least a large proportion of those contracts are creating jobs that funnily enough put food on kids tables. Fancy that an economy working how it should.

 

Free school meals are an addition to the food bank, there's now millions of families in Britain who don't have to pay a penny towards their kids upkeep - all sorted by the state - get a free school meal and go down the food bank and get showered in free food to feed them in the evenings. Don't you worry about working like the rest of us, as your universal credit, child benefit and housing benefit will give you anything you bloody want whereas those actually working full time get jack shit. No wonder hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of families have given up on contributing to society, why bother when the nanny state will coddle them and their kids. 

[ToonArmy]

2 minutes ago, Stan said:

ToonArmy hates poor people and would rather see them starve than actually help them out. 

I don't have an issue with poor people who work. Unfortunately society doesn't deem them as needing help, it's all about the lifetime scroungers getting a load of free help off the government these days. If you're on benefits and haven't found work in 12 months you should be deported to some Scottish island and given a daily diet of wheat and chaff, when you come back I bet the workshy cunts can find something fast.

 

Have the common sense to save up some money while you are working and you get fuck all help til you spent it when you end up unemployed. 

[RandoEFC+]

1 minute ago, ToonArmy said:

At least the money the government gives away is being taxed, and at least a large proportion of those contracts are creating jobs that funnily enough put food on kids tables. Fancy that an economy working how it should.

 

Free school meals are an addition to the food bank, there's now millions of families in Britain who don't have to pay a penny towards their kids upkeep - all sorted by the state - get a free school meal and go down the food bank and get showered in free food to feed them in the evenings. Don't you worry about working like the rest of us, as your universal credit, child benefit and housing benefit will give you anything you bloody want whereas those actually working full time get jack shit. No wonder hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of families have given up on contributing to society, why bother when the nanny state will coddle them and their kids. 

Ah, fancy that. I knew somehow giving millions or billions of pounds to Tory donors would be fine but giving £20 a week to children is the worst thing ever. You're either totally deluded or, as others have suggested, simply a troll account.

If it's that easy being unemployed then why don't you just jack in your job and put your feet up like everyone else apparently has?

It's amazing when people like you are so utterly convinced that your positions are fully justified yet they always fall to absolute pieces when challenged with a few simple questions.

[ToonArmy]

12 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Ah, fancy that. I knew somehow giving millions or billions of pounds to Tory donors would be fine but giving £20 a week to children is the worst thing ever. You're either totally deluded or, as others have suggested, simply a troll account.

If it's that easy being unemployed then why don't you just jack in your job and put your feet up like everyone else apparently has?

It's amazing when people like you are so utterly convinced that your positions are fully justified yet they always fall to absolute pieces when challenged with a few simple questions.

See my above comment about common sense and being punished for it. Because I'd be living off my own money for having the audacity not to splurge it on sky subscriptions and nights out rather than the state's money. 

 

Someone works 30 years and saves a grand a year - no help from the state.

Someone works 30 years and spends a grand a year on porn magazines - they get benefits. 

You can't seriously not see the issue with that? 

 

Read my About Me... 

[ToonArmy]

Just here to tell the young'uns a few home truths. 

 

Practising my character acting skills.

Looking for a rise out of the masses. 

Living in a cave. 

[RandoEFC+]

Banned? What did he do?

[Cicero]

What a strange man