Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

You are technically correct of course Phil (as usual I would say) but also obfuscating around the point. I can say that Dr Shipman was alleged to be a murderer and that Barry Owen has been alleged to be less than fantastic as a public face of our club. Both are true. However, a Club Director, and especially one with nothing to recommend himself but 30 years of alleged service in law enforcement should base his judgements on the current position under the law. Before convicted, "alleged," would be appropriate. "Convicted, " is the appropriate term now. You yourself will be well aware that, "convicted," doesn't rule out future challenge or miscarriage of justice, but it's true now.

Club Director or ex copper, I just don't know why he should be basing his judgements on the current position under the law. He's entitled to his opinion. If he has a choice of saying alleged or convicted (both equally correct), and he chooses the word that suits him best, then that's fine by me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What do you make of Barry's use (or coinage) of the phrase "rape crime"? Are there other forms of rape, such as rapes that are not crimes, or are not crimes just because a jury, a judge, the appeal court and Uncle Tom Cobleigh say so? Is there such a thing as a rape misunderstanding that is not a crime? What about a rape to-do? What about a rape incident that is not a crime?

I haven't heard the interview yet since I haven't found a link that works for me. I'll try again later. However, surely with a phrase like "rape crime" the emphasis would be on the type of crime it is. ie "rape crime" as opposed to "murder crime". Without listening to it i can't be sure, but that is my first impression.

 

He's not alone...does that mean you're with Ched and Barry? Just come out and say it. It's all about free speech. Just say: "I can easily forget a rape crime for the sake of a 20-goal-a-year striker."

 

Easy. No need to hide about it if that's your honest opinion. (If that is your opinion, I hope women give you a wide berth for eternity, and I wish for many other bad things to come your way.)

 

Strawman much? I don't think he's guilty of "rape crime". That's not to say I think he's innocent. I'm just not convinced he's guilty.

 

And thanks btw. I love you too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Club Director or ex copper, I just don't know why he should be basing his judgements on the current position under the law. He's entitled to his opinion. If he has a choice of saying alleged or convicted (both equally correct), and he chooses the word that suits him best, then that's fine by me.

He is entitled to his opinion. As are, for example political candidates who don't like negroes. The latter aren't usually thanked for sharing them. Barry has had 10 years and maybe much more of being advised to shut the :censored: up for everyone's benefit. If he wishes to continue to speak his mind in public I prefer him to do it without, "Oldham Athletic Director," before his name.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is entitled to his opinion. As are, for example political candidates who don't like negroes. The latter aren't usually thanked for sharing them. Barry has had 10 years and maybe much more of being advised to shut the :censored: up for everyone's benefit. If he wishes to continue to speak his mind in public I prefer him to do it without, "Oldham Athletic Director," before his name.

 

We'll agree to disagree then. I'm fine with him giving his opinion in this context, I wouldn't take it too badly even if I disagreed with it. The only thing he did recently that annoyed me a bit was the ham handed way he tried to get stay-away fans to come back a few months ago. He's certainly no tactician.

 

And are you really comparing a Football Director sharing his opinions on the guilt or otherwise of a footballer, with a politician stating his dislike for black people?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This board is beginning to look very silly in it's pathological aversion to all things Barry.

It appears to now be a case of 'not what was said, but who said it'.

 

For some it's been that way for a long long long time, and not just Barry by the way.

 

However, you are correct in this context also. Not all I may add, some actually quite disagree and dislike Barry.

Edited by Lags
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And are you really comparing a Football Director sharing his opinions on the guilt or otherwise of a footballer, with a politician stating his dislike for black people?

To a degree yes I am. Lots of politicians of all shades have personal opinions but if they publicly show that it impairs their judgement in the job then they are gone. I wouldn't support a politician who has contempt for large numbers of his voters.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Used to agree to an extent. He's providing the ammunition recently though."

 

 

Maybe the delivery is less than polished.

I don't think the content of what he says is far from the truth, though. Including 'that' ramshackle critique of our attendances.

Edited by piglinbland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Used to agree to an extent. He's providing the ammunition recently though."

 

 

Maybe the delivery is less than polished.

I don't think the content of what he says is far from the truth, though. Including 'that' ramshackle critique of our attendances.

Whilst the club must be aware of what he is going to say, IMO he is definitely pursuing his own agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst the club must be aware of what he is going to say, IMO he is definitely pursuing his own agenda.

He always was. More than one Trust Director over the years has told me he always thought TTA/Corney would cut and run and he was positioning himself to take over.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was the guy who ripped off the trust funds? When is baz starting the campaign for him to return to the job he was trained for?

 

Baz? Baz? Surely you feel strongly about rehabilitating that guy too?

Barry's difficult-to-read victim impact statement was a massive part in Mike getting the somewhat harsh sentence he got. God love Mike but he's not getting us 20 goals a season. Five or 10 tops. I'd call Barry a hypocrite but, after listening to that interview, I think he's just genuinely incapable of complex thought.

 

The trust accountant who failed to file the accounts for seven years (thus neutering the trust as a shareholding entity) was not that Mike. This other accountant has also done time for fraud, but not of the trust. Why has no one ever heard of this other accountant? No one ever heard of him because Barry would've had to resign if it ever came out that the accounts simply were not filed for seven years. (That level of catastrophe can be the fault only of the man at the top, no matter how badly other people have behaved.)

 

Barry's arrogance has already cost the fans too much. We'll find out what he really thinks about us over the coming weeks, months and years, now that he really does not have to give a :censored: what people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...