Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Futtocks

Confirmed: Wolfpack buy stake in Skolars

Recommended Posts

That sounds very exciting. The bit about looking to take the place over could be a game changer for the sport in London never mind just the club.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say, he talks about Haringey Borough, and he's right. There is a buzz there considering they are 7th level (I think). But they charge 7 quid on the door, or a free season ticket, if you apply on the website. I think it was 15 sheets to go and watch the Skolars last season...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve long thought the hipster market is one we should go for as Clapton, Walthamstow, Harringey and others are showing. On price I do think given the quality of the stand and to be honest performance on the pitch it’s a bit steep. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skolars fans must be licking their lips at that. Money, player development, promotion, ground improvements.

I note the Saracens discussions. I’m inherently wary of that (and where it could lead) but if that’s what it takes for league to realise its potential in north London then good luck to them. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Skolars fans must be licking their lips at that. Money, player development, promotion, ground improvements.

It's certainly looking good. Key for me is building attendance. We lost a few people last season due to the performance on the field. We need to get people back and reach a new audience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, EssexRL said:

It's certainly looking good. Key for me is building attendance. We lost a few people last season due to the performance on the field. We need to get people back and reach a new audience. 

New River is a like a mini-Lamport in a way. There’s lots of potential but it may take a special effort to attract people in.

Would be interesting to see how turning the rugby effectively into a beer garden (with hotdog guns for those in the stands!) would go down in Wood Green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

Turns out Skolars are still waiting for David Argyle to cough up for the 20% stake he bought last year. Hmmm.

"You've got to let go of this obsession with Argyle...you are becoming (have become?) neurotic....let it go...breathe deep...deeper.

That will be $100...see you for another appointment tomorrow.  Close the door on the way out.

Bring in The Parksider now will you Betty."

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Kayakman said:

"You've got to let go of this obsession with Argyle...you are becoming (have become?) neurotic....let it go...breathe deep...deeper.

That will be $100...see you for another appointment tomorrow.  Close the door on the way out.

Bring in The Parksider now will you Betty."

It’s in the trade papers, chief. Quite a lot about Argyle & Toronto Wolfpack in them, as you would imagine.

The visa issue is going to bite them in the bum. ‘Do they allow Australian people in Swinton?’, so to speak...

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Man of Kent said:

It’s in the trade papers, chief. Quite a lot about Argyle & Toronto Wolfpack in them, as you would imagine.

The visa issue is going to bite them in the bum. ‘Do they allow Australian people in Swinton?’, so to speak...

Don't call me 'Chief' thats a racist comment and just as bad, if not worse, than what Argyle said (Do you not hold yourself to his same standard; one which you critique?).   Don't make me have to report you to Parky for racism....

Visa smizza...you gotta quit worrying about this type of stuff and just relax watching the Wolfpack games....I would imagine they would let Aussies in Swinton...the bars have got to make money somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Don't make me have to report you to Parky for racism....

....I would imagine they would let Aussies in Swinton...the bars have got to make money somehow.

 

Absolutely mate..... I see the racial stereotypes are flying today!!!!!

I assume they let "The Irish" in for the same reasons??

How much is entry at Swinton these days?  High enough to put off "The Jews"??

FFS

 

  • Like 1

Rugby League: Alive and Handling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Don't call me 'Chief' thats a racist comment and just as bad, if not worse, than what Argyle said (Do you not hold yourself to his same standard; one which you critique?).   Don't make me have to report you to Parky for racism....

Visa smizza...you gotta quit worrying about this type of stuff and just relax watching the Wolfpack games....I would imagine they would let Aussies in Swinton...the bars have got to make money somehow.

Nice try, boss. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey fellas, this conversation is going in the wrong direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fighting irish said:

Hey fellas, this conversation is going in the wrong direction. 

Well then he should hold himself to the same standards that he is so quick to critique in others....its about not being a hypocrite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I'm lost. What's racist about chief?

It's not in this context. It is another distraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

I'm lost. What's racist about chief?

Its clearly a racist term against North American First Nations people(s).  It is sometimes made as a racist statement/comment in Canada.

Man of Kent should be more careful with the words he is using; as David Argyle has so aptly learned.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Kayakman said:

Its clearly a racist term against North American First Nations people(s).  It is sometimes made as a racist statement/comment in Canada.

Man of Kent should be more careful with the words he is using; as David Argyle has so aptly learned.

That's a desperate line to take. Think you should scale back before you start to lose people's respect here.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

That's a desperate line to take. Think you should scale back before you start to lose people's respect here.

Its a term that is not used in the North American language lexicon anymore, it is slowly disappearing due to its racist overtones (as are sports teams with Aboriginal names e.g. Washington Redskins).   

Are you not aware of this?...is your indifference part of the problem?  Do you, or will you, still use the term even though you know people take offence to it?   That is how ridiculous this whole thing with Argyle has gotten.   .I guess people think different when the shoe is on the other foot.  The times they are a changin.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Its a term that is not used in the North American language lexicon anymore, it is slowly disappearing due to its racist overtones (as are sports teams with Aboriginal names e.g. Washington Redskins).   

Are you not aware of this?...is your indifference part of the problem?  Do you, or will you, still use the term even though you know people take offence to it?   That is how ridiculous this whole thing with Argyle has gotten.   .I guess people think different when the shoe is on the other foot.  The times they are a changin.

The two are completely incomparable.

One was a comment based on race. There was no other way it could be taken, it was a racial comment.

The comment you're complaining of is not. You have chosen to pick a word and change its context to one of race in order to pick a fight. That is not racism.

I did not know the word chief was considered offensive to some. Will I still use it? Well, yes; it has contexts that's are not racist and are completely innocent as well as not actually being designed as an offensive term (like the n word). The word chief is not a racist term in isolation unless you put it into a racist context, and you know full well it wasn't. It's just like the word black or coloured isn't racist unless put into a different context.

It has nothing to do with the shoe being on the other foot and everything to do with your lack of comprehension (or just being disingenuous).

  • Like 2

Wells%20Motors%20(Signature)_zps67e534e4.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Kayakman said:

Its a term that is not used in the North American language lexicon anymore, it is slowly disappearing due to its racist overtones (as are sports teams with Aboriginal names e.g. Washington Redskins).   

Are you not aware of this?...is your indifference part of the problem?  Do you, or will you, still use the term even though you know people take offence to it?   That is how ridiculous this whole thing with Argyle has gotten.   .I guess people think different when the shoe is on the other foot.  The times they are a changin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_of_police

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Saunders_(police_officer)

How can this racism be tolerated?


"I'm a traditionalist and I don"t think you'd ever see me coaching an Australian national side!"  Lee Radford, RLW March 2016

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wellsy4HullFC said:

The two are completely incomparable.

One was a comment based on race. There was no other way it could be taken, it was a racial comment.

The comment you're complaining of is not. You have chosen to pick a word and change its context to one of race in order to pick a fight. That is not racism.

I did not know the word chief was considered offensive to some. Will I still use it? Well, yes; it has contexts that's are not racist and are completely innocent as well as not actually being designed as an offensive term (like the n word). The word chief is not a racist term in isolation unless you put it into a racist context, and you know full well it wasn't. It's just like the word black or coloured isn't racist unless put into a different context.

It has nothing to do with the shoe being on the other foot and everything to do with your lack of comprehension (or just being disingenuous).

Does the setting where any such comment took place not play a role?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, latchford albion said:

Very convoluted...don't get the attempted point.

Edited by Kayakman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, latchford albion said:

Chief...

NOUN
chiefs (plural noun)
  1. a leader or ruler of a people or clan.
    "the chief of the village" · "Chief Banawi"
    synonyms:
    leader · chieftain · head · headman · ruler · overlord · master · commander · suzerain · seigneur · liege · liege lord · potentate · sachem · head · leading · principal · premier · highest · foremost · supreme · grand · superior · arch- · directing · governing · number-one
    antonyms:
    • the head of an organization.
      "a union chief" · "the chief of police"
Origin
Middle English: from Old French chief, chef, based on Latin caput ‘head’.
Edited by TBone
missed a bit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...