Jump to content

davebuckley06

OWTB Member
  • Posts

    882
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About davebuckley06

  • Birthday 02/12/1988

Profile Fields

  • Supported Team
    Oldham Athletic

Profile Information

  • Location
    Chadderton

Recent Profile Visitors

345 profile views

davebuckley06's Achievements

Gunnar Halle

Gunnar Halle (7/15)

20

Reputation

  1. May I be the first to say that he used to be really good on football manager a few years ago
  2. Nice touch for them all to turn up and pay their respects. Puts things into perspective
  3. Adam Virgo looks like he's been kidnapped and forced to be there. Never seen anyone look so awkward on tv
  4. Probably missed it somewhere but can you not buy season tickets for the new stand online? Only giving me the option of main stand or RRE
  5. After looking further discrimination in the work place can is only against the law if you are discriminated against for any of the protected characteristics. Convictions isn't (as yet) a protected characteristic. Doesn't mean discrimination of any sort for any reason is morally acceptable though Nb not many people come on here and shoot down there own arguement
  6. A very quick search shows me this: https://www.gov.uk/discrimination-your-rights/discrimination-at-work
  7. It does look like the councils threat was key but is that morally right from the council? Of course I agree that if the only two options we had were to take evans and go out of business or don't take evans and stay afloat then we have made the right choice. However that should never have been the only options People who have put us in this situation using whatever means necessary really need to have a real long look at themselves before they start to question anyone else's morals. Pot kettle black springs to mind
  8. You can discriminate against a rapist who applies for a teaching job or certain healthcare jobs because these jobs are protected by law. Other than the jobs that are protected by law any other discrimination regardless of who or what they are against is quite simply discrimination In your scenarios if they were real life cases your colleagues would be open to tribunal for discrimination I'm not sure you can say they ignored the moral aspect of it. Afterall they have discussed the matter for at least a week that we know of this will have come up and is most likely one of the main talking points that came up. I think we can say they were naive in under estimating the reaction but you can't account for absolute morons sending death threats and threats of rape. I'm sure most on here wouldn't have expected that. There was always going to be up roar but day by day that decreased, this I think they would have expected
  9. Reasonable and smart people suddenly deciding they can't think for themselves and deciding that you don't think evans should play for us is two completely different things. You could open your eyes and actually think for yourself and still be of the opinion he shouldn't play for us. It would wholly hypocritical for me to say people should think for themselves and decide he should play for us. You may not have been influenced by the mob that doesn't mean to say your not on the same level as the mob also doesn't mean to say you are. Many on here I would say are though. If your truly offended with my post then I would suggest either you misread the post and jumped the gun or that infancy it's quite accurate and touched a nerve. Your (and the rest of the anti evans brigades) stance that the majority were against him signing for us is bewildering also. What evidence do you have to suggest that your with the majority? A vote on owtb's? The same vote that 200 or so people voted in out of well over 2000 members? That's not a majority. The anti evans brigade were louder, more forceful and used majorly under hand tactics . . . This does not make them a majority. You agree you have discriminated against him and then try to justify it??? Like there is any reason that breaking the law and lacking morals is acceptable because you feel strongly about something. You back the criminal justice system blindly in your stance that he is guilty yet in the next breath totally disagree with the criminal justice system who say he can go back to work just because it doesn't suit yours and many others views (sound like mob justice yet ....probably still won't see that though) All this the board have embarrassed us and lost face is also a load of rubbish. Has it been handled perfectly? No . Outside of the latics fan base though how much criticism have we had for it? If you take your emotion out of it and look at the facts. We were thrown into a situation by the pfa ( Sundays announcement) despite a lot of media attention and pressure for updates we refused to rush into anything (positive) we took time to negotiate and come to a decision using the resources available ( Pfa , sponsors, the gaffer and presumably the squad he would be integrated into) ... I do agree sponsors should have been spoken to before it became public but if the PFA shafted us on Sunday how was that possible? Changing our mind after the origanal statement in no way makes us look stupid. It simply makes us look like we changed our mind. That happens everyday in football and in the wider world. I'm sure if you think about it at some stage this week/ month you personally have changed your mind about something ... Does that make you an embarrassment and mean you have lost face??? I would say not You do make a very good point about his integration into the squad and that is something that surprisingly hasn't been talked about massively other than a few comments about if he starts scoring all will be fine. If I'm honest it's not something I have given much thought to until you have pointed it out. I would imagine your right and some players may have been against it. That could have a massive affect on the squad wether it be consciously or sub consciously. I also agree with your point about cheer sing him to some extent. I've given this a lot of thought. I could happily have clapped him onto the pitch , when he did something good/skilful even scoring goals but I don't think I could sing his name although in the heat of the moment you never know. As others have said with time these apprehensions tend to leave us. I had no issue singing Hughes' name so maybe I would have been able to had we signed him or maybe back with Hughes I was young and immature and didn't appreciate the matter fully. To your last point that every victory would have been undeserved. That quite frankly is aload of rubbish to put it nicely( which is a shame as we were starting to see eye to eye on a few things) How would 11 beating 11 be undeserved in anyway. Playing him wouldn't have been cheating
  10. It may have been a bit too much of a sweeping statement not all but the majority yes
  11. I understand why u don't want him at our club. And I understand his conviction is fact. I havnt denied it is just putting 'the other' view across. The majority of anti evans brigade do see it as condoning it. It's just frustrating that grown men and women can't see the bigger picture and regardless of the courts decision can't see that things arnt always black or white or that it's been known on occasion that there have been miscarriages of justice just as Gordon Taylor has lauded to this evening I'm not trying to persuade anyone anything. I'm just trying to put a balanced view across. Some people just refuse to accept/ see it
  12. But realistically he has jus stated facts hasn't he. He hasn't said anything offensive or disrespectful. Once again the baying mob will have there way though
×
×
  • Create New...