Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, iangidds said:

And he should be allowed to speak

I wasn't aware he wasn't allowed to speak. It is a fake battle.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I wasn't aware he wasn't allowed to speak. It is a fake battle.

Well on Facebook he’s not

Share this post


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

For many people this isn't thee bottom line. It has upset and angered them.

I'm not sure why you keep bringing criminality into this. It's weird.

I find it deeply puzzling you don't get so offended by people who have bashed their partners or terrorirised an innocent family but someone quotes a.few words from the bible and you think the world has ended 

Your and others priorities are severely mixed up 

  • Thanks 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Johnoco said:

I think you’re going slightly OTT here, practically  nobody has said what he said was ok. People have had different views on what the reaction should have been to him but I don’t recall anyone actually agreeing with him. Surely an important distinction?

Like you, I think they should have kept well clear.

I accept that people haven't come out and said 'I agree Gays are going to hell' - it's why I posted the examples of defence and justification of his behaviour and their condemnation of any sanction or criticism of his words.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Well on Facebook he’s not

Facebook can decide what they have on their platform. Nowt to do with FoS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Poower Lad said:

Unfortunately it is this is what I keep saying , you cannot pick and choose , read your history .

You can pick and choose who you employ though*.

 

 

* That's the entire point of this thread in 9 words.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aj1908 said:

I find it deeply puzzling you don't get so offended by people who have bashed their partners or terrorirised an innocent family but someone quotes a.few words from the bible and you think the world has ended 

Your and others priorities are severely mixed up 

Have you been up all night posting the same antithetical posts?

Go to bed man. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can not believe that after 43 pages of discussion on this subject there are still 2 or 3 posters who deliberately keep missing the point. He is a very good R.L. player, over and over again, he may be, that is not the point. He has beliefs that he should have kept to himself, he did not, he decided to spout his rubbish to all and sundry. In my eyes that tells me the idiot needs counselling and in my opinion Catalan should have steered well clear of him until he denounced what he had said. If not, fine,that is his choice,but until he does leave him in the wilderness.

       

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ckn said:

On reflection, if you look back at the thread, there's a small handful of people who've made the overwhelming number of posts in this thread. Those few people are getting extraordinarily wound up with defending a hateful, but talented, player who really should be treated as unacceptable baggage regardless of that talent.  The overwhelming number of single and maybe 2-3 posts posters in this thread have been a bit mystified as to why he's being brought in.

So, usual story, those with the most extreme views making the loudest noise but making it seem like there's a lot of them.

 

On 28/01/2020 at 02:08, iangidds said:

He quoted the bible which he holds in very high esteem, traditional Cristian beliefs are also part of an inclusive society; some may consider them outdated of course but that’s just different opinions.

 

On 28/01/2020 at 02:30, Number 16 said:

What a narrow-minded, holier-than-thou and mean-spirited individual you are. 

 

On 28/01/2020 at 02:32, frank said:

Lots of do gooders on this board.

The above quotes are from the very first page. Ian's comments are absolutely a defence of him spouting those views and received 7 likes.  

Number16's quote was a criticism of Folau being criticised. Another 5 likes. 

frank's post was also a response to condemnation of Folau. 

This was all in the first half a page or so, I didn't bother quoting after that. I haven't even bothered to quote AJ as I would be here all day. 

I remember Gareth Thomas getting some abuse at Cas (IIRC), maybe our fan-base aint as open-minded as we like to believe.  Incidentally he posted yesterday that he will not be watching any RL games with Folau in. Again, he mustn't be Martyn Sadler's mate. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

Have you been up all night posting the same antithetical posts?

Go to bed man. 

I havent finished my bible reading yet 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

I find it deeply puzzling you don't get so offended by people who have bashed their partners or terrorirised an innocent family but someone quotes a.few words from the bible and you think the world has ended 

Your and others priorities are severely mixed up 

Can you point to the thread about that where your comments would have any relevance? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I accept that people haven't come out and said 'I agree Gays are going to hell' - it's why I posted the examples of defence and justification of his behaviour and their condemnation of any sanction or criticism of his words.

Well I think we’re reading different posts as I can’t really see anyone defending his words. There are people querying why drunk drivers or wife beaters didn’t seem to generate as much bad publicity but I can’t see anyone really trying to justify him or suggesting we give him a break (although with so many pages, it’s possible I missed that)
 

He’s been criticised by virtually everyone. Not everyone will agree on what the reaction to his (ridiculous) views should be but that doesn’t mean people back him - they clearly don’t. 

Share this post


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

I remember Gareth Thomas getting some abuse at Cas (IIRC), maybe our fan-base aint as open-minded as we like to believe.  Incidentally he posted yesterday that he will not be watching any RL games with Folau in. Again, he mustn't be Martyn Sadler's mate. 

No, although I would be happy if he was. I had several discussions with him when he was with the Crusaders and he always seemed both intelligent and genuine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fairfolly said:

I can not believe that after 43 pages of discussion on this subject there are still 2 or 3 posters who deliberately keep missing the point. He is a very good R.L. player, over and over again, he may be, that is not the point. He has beliefs that he should have kept to himself, he did not, he decided to spout his rubbish to all and sundry. In my eyes that tells me the idiot needs counselling and in my opinion Catalan should have steered well clear of him until he denounced what he had said. If not, fine,that is his choice,but until he does leave him in the wilderness.

       

Yeh, but wife-beaters, paedophiles and rapists.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, aj1908 said:

I havent finished my bible reading yet 

I should concentrate on become more sardonic before attempting to finish the Bible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dave T said:

Can you point to the thread about that where your comments would have any relevance? 

As a response to a lot of your posts for example 

One of your posts said they were punished and apologised unlike folau 

Even that's a bad argument 

I don't get offended by folaus comments.  I think he's a religious nutjob

Take Matthew lodge that bothered me.

If the game is going to set such a low standard for it's players then so.be it 

Share this post


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

Well I think we’re reading different posts as I can’t really see anyone defending his words. There are people querying why drunk drivers or wife beaters didn’t seem to generate as much bad publicity but I can’t see anyone really trying to justify him or suggesting we give him a break (although with so many pages, it’s possible I missed that)
 

He’s been criticised by virtually everyone. Not everyone will agree on what the reaction to his (ridiculous) views should be but that doesn’t mean people back him - they clearly don’t. 

We clearly are reading different posts, the criticism hasn't been universal at all. 

Share this post


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

No, although I would be happy if he was. I had several discussions with him when he was with the Crusaders and he always seemed both intelligent and genuine.

I don't think the fact he is genuine or regarding his intellect is the issue! 

Share this post


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

 

 

 

The above quotes are from the very first page. Ian's comments are absolutely a defence of him spouting those views and received 7 likes.  

Number16's quote was a criticism of Folau being criticised. Another 5 likes. 

frank's post was also a response to condemnation of Folau. 

This was all in the first half a page or so, I didn't bother quoting after that. I haven't even bothered to quote AJ as I would be here all day. 

I remember Gareth Thomas getting some abuse at Cas (IIRC), maybe our fan-base aint as open-minded as we like to believe.  Incidentally he posted yesterday that he will not be watching any RL games with Folau in. Again, he mustn't be Martyn Sadler's mate. 

Dave, I don’t think those posts back Folau, they are possibly personal arguments between posters? 

Perhaps the posters concerned would clear it up whether or not they were defending Folau or not? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, aj1908 said:

As a response to a lot of your posts for example 

One of your posts said they were punished and apologised unlike folau 

Even that's a bad argument 

I don't get offended by folaus comments.  I think he's a religious nutjob

Take Matthew lodge that bothered me.

If the game is going to set such a low standard for it's players then so.be it 

So believing that criminals being punished and showing remorse equals not being offended by criminals? It is quite the opposite. 

I'll repeat what a previous poster said, you should get some sleep.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dave T said:

So believing that criminals being punished and showing remorse equals not being offended by criminals? It is quite the opposite. 

I'll repeat what a previous poster said, you should get some sleep.

I'm at.the gym lol 

Share this post


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

We clearly are reading different posts, the criticism hasn't been universal at all. 

Not everyone has to agree with you, they can think he’s an idiot without thinking he should be banned from the game. Personally I’m of the opinion he should not be in RL but I aren’t making that decision.

We head down a dangerous path when we have people declaring how strongly you should react to a certain incident. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wildcat said:

I don't think the fact he is genuine or regarding his intellect is the issue! 

Not in the wider context of this thread, but in the context of Dave T's comment about me, it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, for the avoidance of any doubt, could anyone who agrees with Folaus’ views, or maybe thinks he’s not so bad, come forward? 

Share this post


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

Dave, I don’t think those posts back Folau, they are possibly personal arguments between posters? 

Perhaps the posters concerned would clear it up whether or not they were defending Folau or not? 

These posts were all the first responses by those posters to the initial post condemning Folau's comments and the decision to hire him. There was an immediate explanation that he was just repeating the bible, no criticism at all. And then two attacks on the opening poster for his view that they find Folau's comments and Catalans hiring poor. 

I'm not sure how else those posts can be read. As a first post in the thread, to attack the view that this is a bad development surely can be seen as a defence?

Share this post


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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...