Wigan’s cartoon mural - when is it too far?

[GUBRATS]

On 26/06/2022 at 15:21, Wigan Riversider said:

Watch the build up to the incident.

Something was bound to happen.

In conclusion, I defend noone in relation to thuggery but there are always at least two sides to every story.

This is complete BLX 

Flowers instigated an attack , then did it again after retaliation by Hohaia , then committed what would have been a custodial sentence offence on an unconscious prone person on the floor 

So your conclusion is complete BLX , because by saying " something was bound to happen " isn't true , the only reason anything happened is because Flowers lost all control , and if you lose all control , you should not be playing any sport , one of the fundamental aims of sport is having control of your emotions and actions 

So by your conclusion you are defending thuggery , yes you are right , there were 2 sides , one was playing the toughest team sport in the world where you don't take a backward step no matter how big your opponent , the other became a deranged thug cowardly hitting somebody completely defenceless 

Enjoy your night 

[GUBRATS]

6 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Had Wigan commission this and then  asked the artist to remove any references to such episodes, then there is just a chance, as slight chance of course, that some people might have criticised the club for censorship. As it s, its those very people who are  proposing censorship.   I realise that is not because its Wigan and the objections would have applied the same standard to any club. 

If it had depicted an incident as bad as this then yes 

[Jughead]

28 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Had Wigan commission this and then  asked the artist to remove any references to such episodes, then there is just a chance, as slight chance of course, that some people might have criticised the club for censorship. As it s, its those very people who are  proposing censorship.   I realise that is not because its Wigan and the objections would have applied the same standard to any club. 

Had Wigan asked for things to be removed, the public wouldn’t know as it wouldn’t be public knowledge. 

 

[gingerjon]

36 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Had Wigan commission this and then  asked the artist to remove any references to such episodes, then there is just a chance, as slight chance of course, that some people might have criticised the club for censorship. As it s, its those very people who are  proposing censorship.   I realise that is not because its Wigan and the objections would have applied the same standard to any club. 

No one is proposing censorship.

But one of the consequences of free speech is that people judge you on what you choose to say.

[Dunbar]

8 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

No one is proposing censorship.

But one of the consequences of free speech is that people judge you on what you choose to say.

As is human nature, the rhetoric just escalates in these discussions. 

I don't want to censor Wigan and I am not offended by this cartoon poster. 

I just think it was a bad decision to include these incidents in the light hearted way the poster is presented... it would have been so much better to focus on the many many positive things in the clubs history (or at least not trivialise the negative stuff).

[Wigan Riversider]

45 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

This is complete BLX 

Flowers instigated an attack , then did it again after retaliation by Hohaia , then committed what would have been a custodial sentence offence on an unconscious prone person on the floor 

So your conclusion is complete BLX , because by saying " something was bound to happen " isn't true , the only reason anything happened is because Flowers lost all control , and if you lose all control , you should not be playing any sport , one of the fundamental aims of sport is having control of your emotions and actions 

So by your conclusion you are defending thuggery , yes you are right , there were 2 sides , one was playing the toughest team sport in the world where you don't take a backward step no matter how big your opponent , the other became a deranged thug cowardly hitting somebody completely defenceless 

Enjoy your night 

Answer what I asked:

S Edwards.

Wembley 1990.

BLX according to you.

Did it not happen?

[GUBRATS]

1 minute ago, Wigan Riversider said:

Answer what I asked:

S Edwards.

Wembley 1990.

BLX according to you.

Did it not happen?

Requote your post without the bit I highlighted and replied to , and I'll happily reply to it 

[Wigan Riversider]

48 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

 

Your dismissal of my points relating to facts is alarming.

According to you, there are not 2 sides to every story.

Believe me: there are.

By 'sides' I do not mean teams ie those on the pitch.

 

[Wigan Riversider]

8 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Requote your post without the bit I highlighted and replied to , and I'll happily reply to it 

See my 1531 post yesterday and inform me how I am wrong about S Edwards Wembley 1990.

How is it, in your subjective opinion: BLX?

I await your response.

[GUBRATS]

12 minutes ago, Wigan Riversider said:

See my 1531 post yesterday and inform me how I am wrong about S Edwards Wembley 1990.

How is it, in your subjective opinion: BLX?

I await your response.

I went to the trouble of finding your post ,editing out the bit I wasn't replying to , then replying to the bit that was relevant , if you want me to comment on the bit I edited out , re post it , and I'll reply to it 

[Padge]

6 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Provoked ? , Flowers was the ' provoker ' , I am disturbed by everything , the incident , the way Wigan fans only start watching the play after Flowers initial strike , the ridiculous ' time ' ban rather than match ban , the fact my club signed the sweet and lovely person , the fact this has been included at all , the fact nobody of authority at Wigan isn't it seems isn't ' disturbed by it , the ridiculous comic effect , and the fact it hasn't been removed , changed yet 

Will that do ? , I spend every game telling idiots at Leigh to stop singing disgusting songs about Wigan and insults aimed at Yorkshire clubs , our game doesn't need them , and it'd be better off without the likes of you 

End of 

And the first line of what you quote from me was a dig at those saying it should be in there but not that bit of it.

The rest of your rant is pointless as it is just that, a rant.

[GUBRATS]

21 minutes ago, Padge said:

And the first line of what you quote from me was a dig at those saying it should be in there but not that bit of it.

The rest of your rant is pointless as it is just that, a rant.

Yes it was a rant , but as I put , if you are so blinded by loyalty to your club that you cannot see that everything about this incident was because of your player losing all control , and the stupidity of then portraying it as some comedic ' klonk ' then the sport doesn't need or want people like you involved in it 

Nighty  nite 

 

Or you either

Edited June 27, 2022 by GUBRATS

[Jinking Jimmy]

Sadly the inclusion of the Ben Flower incident in the Wigan “mishmash” has resulted in some disgraceful and sickening comments on social media with reference to the suicide of Terry Newton which must be very distressing for his family. Everybody is allowed an opinion but some people have taken it too far and should be ashamed of themselves.

[GUBRATS]

11 minutes ago, Jinking Jimmy said:

Sadly the inclusion of the Ben Flower incident in the Wigan “mishmash” has resulted in some disgraceful and sickening comments on social media with reference to the suicide of Terry Newton which must be very distressing for his family. Everybody is allowed an opinion but some people have taken it too far and should be ashamed of themselves.

Heard about this yesterday , not nice , but not unexpected 

[Dave W]

Someone should Photoshop the Flower incident image into Guernica

[Padge]

14 hours ago, GUBRATS said:

Yes it was a rant , but as I put , if you are so blinded by loyalty to your club that you cannot see that everything about this incident was because of your player losing all control , and the stupidity of then portraying it as some comedic ' klonk ' then the sport doesn't need or want people like you involved in it 

Nighty  nite 

 

Or you either

Once again, you haven't read my post before wanting to have a go. Read what I posted.

[JohnM]

On 27/06/2022 at 19:26, gingerjon said:

No one is proposing censorship.

But one of the consequences of free speech is that people judge you on what you choose to say.

Some on here want to censor it. 

The woke world is full of people who censor.

People's  judgements are so often wrong, and deliberately so in many cases, in order to support their prejudices,  bias, agendas and more.

[glossop saint]

7 hours ago, JohnM said:

Some on here want to censor it. 

The woke world is full of people who censor.

People's  judgements are so often wrong, and deliberately so in many cases, in order to support their prejudices,  bias, agendas and more.

I've not gone through the thread post by post but are you sure that people want to censor it?

Even those who I am sure you would describe as 'woke' seem to just think it is insensitive and untasteful as opposed to wanting it to be removed.

[Dave T]

1 minute ago, glossop saint said:

I've not gone through the thread post by post but are you sure that people want to censor it?

Even those who I am sure you would describe as 'woke' seem to just think it is insensitive and untasteful as opposed to wanting it to be removed.

John just makes stuff up and goes on about cancelling on almost every thread just so he can talk about people being woke. 

Some would suggest he has an agenda. 

[JohnM]

42 minutes ago, glossop saint said:

I've not gone through the thread post by post but are you sure that people want to censor it?

Even those who I am sure you would describe as 'woke' seem to just think it is insensitive and untasteful as opposed to wanting it to be removed.

No one wants to censor it. They just want it removed.

 

[glossop saint]

8 minutes ago, JohnM said:

No one wants to censor it. They just want it removed.

 

Again, I've not seen anyone calling for it to be removed.

[JohnM]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/arts/design/emmett-till-whitney-biennial-schutz.html

[Dunbar]

40 minutes ago, JohnM said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/27/arts/design/emmett-till-whitney-biennial-schutz.html

That article is behind a paywall.  I will probably wait to subscribe until the New York Times does a piece on the Wigan RL 150 year mishmash and its artistic value balanced against its controversy.

[Dave W]

9 hours ago, JohnM said:

Some on here want to censor it. 

The woke world is full of people who censor.

People's  judgements are so often wrong, and deliberately so in many cases, in order to support their prejudices,  bias, agendas and more.

Why are you so obsessed with goading people into writing something that fits in with your ludicrous "anti-woke" agenda all the time?

It's getting tedious. Nobody's rising to the bait.

There's only one person on here rattling on about censorship and you'll find him in the mirror.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Dave W

[GUBRATS]

Remove it