Messages

[ladies World Cup]

Not to mention you are implying Aluko isn't competent to talk about ladies soccer.

I can't see a place where i said Aluko was incompetent.

In fairness she explains herself fairly well here....

So if she's not incompetent, then she's hardly a surprising choice as a pundit for the ladies World Cup. But that wouldn't fit the narrative you're pushing and fits with the picture that your more worried about the labels being attached to people than actual racism or abuse of woman's rights.

The issue is she publicly singled out Ian Wright as a Pundit for taking too many female game gigs.
This looks to have influenced ITV's decision making in Hiring for the Euro's (Not the World Cup  ).
You clearly have little knowledge on this story and are running with the herd mentality.
This is not a Racial issue as Wrighty is a Black man. It is a Man's Rights issue.

Finally, I doubt you looked at the Video I posted. It answers many of the issues - if you chose to see them.

You weighted in on a post discussing racism to talk about the increased labelling of people as if that's a bigger issue than the actual racism itself. That to me shows where your priorities lie. That you're concerned about people getting called out on things than actual incidents of discrimination. I never mentioned that it was a racist issue. You brought up your concern about people being increasingly labelled racist and against woman's rights and then went on to use an example that so far is just your opinion with nothing to back it up. I hate to break it to ya but your opinion doesn't count as knowledge. Thats the positive side of the internet, bullish!te can be called out.

The issue is she publicly singled out Ian Wright as a Pundit for taking too many female game gigs.
This looks to have influenced ITV's decision making in Hiring for the Euro's (Not the World Cup  ).
You clearly have little knowledge on this story and are running with the herd mentality.
This is not a Racial issue as Wrighty is a Black man. It is a Man's Rights issue.

Finally, I doubt you looked at the Video I posted. It answers many of the issues - if you chose to see them.

FFS, 🤦 as I said before, show me this special knowledge that you seem to think you have, showing that Aluko's comments impacted anything with ITV?
Should be easy for us as you seem to be very in the know. 😂
That's despite the fact ITV backed Wright and that Wright confirmed his none appearance had nothing to do with the row.
I saw that video before, what is it you think I should be taking from it?

[ladies World Cup]

Not to mention you are implying Aluko isn't competent to talk about ladies soccer.

I can't see a place where i said Aluko was incompetent.

In fairness she explains herself fairly well here....

So if she's not incompetent, then she's hardly a surprising choice as a pundit for the ladies World Cup. But that wouldn't fit the narrative you're pushing and fits with the picture that your more worried about the labels being attached to people than actual racism or abuse of woman's rights.

The issue is she publicly singled out Ian Wright as a Pundit for taking too many female game gigs.
This looks to have influenced ITV's decision making in Hiring for the Euro's (Not the World Cup  ).
You clearly have little knowledge on this story and are running with the herd mentality.
This is not a Racial issue as Wrighty is a Black man. It is a Man's Rights issue.

Finally, I doubt you looked at the Video I posted. It answers many of the issues - if you chose to see them.

You weighted in on a post discussing racism to talk about the increased labelling of people as if that's a bigger issue than the actual racism itself. That to me shows where your priorities lie. That you're concerned about people getting called out on things than actual incidents of discrimination. I never mentioned that it was a racist issue. You brought up your concern about people being increasingly labelled racist and against woman's rights and then went on to use an example that so far is just your opinion with nothing to back it up. I hate to break it to ya but your opinion doesn't count as knowledge. Thats the positive side of the internet, bullish!te can be called out.

Not to mention you are implying Aluko isn't competent to talk about ladies soccer.

I can't see a place where i said Aluko was incompetent.

In fairness she explains herself fairly well here....

So if she's not incompetent, then she's hardly a surprising choice as a pundit for the ladies World Cup. But that wouldn't fit the narrative you're pushing and fits with the picture that your more worried about the labels being attached to people than actual racism or abuse of woman's rights.

Is the world more racist now than ever before?

Nah, no more than there is more anti-Semitism. Labelling has just got more intense and highlighted. Labelling is used to control the Narrative. To create issues that are not always there. To give minorities to much power and cause resentment, rather than creating a form of equality.

To be fair, the internet has allowed for an increased level of racism. And as such, an increase in the calling out of that racism.

Racism and Women rights card has allowed people like Eni Aluko influence ITV in not having Ian Wright as a pundit for the Women's Euros.
Wrights enthusiasm and love of the Womens game as well as his connection and attraction to a watching male audience is a loss. But once Aluko played the 'He's taking the jobs of women card' - ITV's hands were tied and her own appearance was assured.   

ITV supported Wright in that row not Aluko. Aluko had a fair point in that there are very limited opportunities for woman pundits in comparison to men's. She just shouldn't have mentioned Wright, who as you said, has been a strong advocate for Woman's football. If anything from that incident, it was Aluko that got a backlash not Wright.

But actions speak louder than words and ITV's actions show the contrary.

Wright said it was nothing to do with his row with Aluko.

He would say that, wouldn't he?

Wrighty was the larger than large personality of the last Women's Euros.

It was a no brainer to ask Wrighty back - He knows the Women's Game - He is respected by the Male football fraternity - He attracts viewership from the male football fraternity.

We all want rights for women. For them to be treated well and have equality. To some peoples surprise equality is a two way street. Aluko played the taking women's jobs card. It wasn't about equality or ability.

You're running a narrative without knowing it's correct. That for me is one of the major dangers about the internet right there.

No, the narrative is pretty clear. Aluko says Wrighty a competent male is taking jobs from women in punditry.

Aluko gets the gig, Wrighty does not.

As I say, you're making up a narrative, and that's why there's an increase in "labelling". It's much easier now to project your opinion to a wider audience.
Not to mention you are implying Aluko isn't competent to talk about ladies soccer.

Is the world more racist now than ever before?

Nah, no more than there is more anti-Semitism. Labelling has just got more intense and highlighted. Labelling is used to control the Narrative. To create issues that are not always there. To give minorities to much power and cause resentment, rather than creating a form of equality.

To be fair, the internet has allowed for an increased level of racism. And as such, an increase in the calling out of that racism.

Racism and Women rights card has allowed people like Eni Aluko influence ITV in not having Ian Wright as a pundit for the Women's Euros.
Wrights enthusiasm and love of the Womens game as well as his connection and attraction to a watching male audience is a loss. But once Aluko played the 'He's taking the jobs of women card' - ITV's hands were tied and her own appearance was assured.   

ITV supported Wright in that row not Aluko. Aluko had a fair point in that there are very limited opportunities for woman pundits in comparison to men's. She just shouldn't have mentioned Wright, who as you said, has been a strong advocate for Woman's football. If anything from that incident, it was Aluko that got a backlash not Wright.

But actions speak louder than words and ITV's actions show the contrary.

Wright said it was nothing to do with his row with Aluko.

He would say that, wouldn't he?

Wrighty was the larger than large personality of the last Women's Euros.

It was a no brainer to ask Wrighty back - He knows the Women's Game - He is respected by the Male football fraternity - He attracts viewership from the male football fraternity.

We all want rights for women. For them to be treated well and have equality. To some peoples surprise equality is a two way street. Aluko played the taking women's jobs card. It wasn't about equality or ability.

You're running a narrative without knowing it's correct. That for me is one of the major dangers about the internet right there.

Is the world more racist now than ever before?

Nah, no more than there is more anti-Semitism. Labelling has just got more intense and highlighted. Labelling is used to control the Narrative. To create issues that are not always there. To give minorities to much power and cause resentment, rather than creating a form of equality.

To be fair, the internet has allowed for an increased level of racism. And as such, an increase in the calling out of that racism.

Racism and Women rights card has allowed people like Eni Aluko influence ITV in not having Ian Wright as a pundit for the Women's Euros.
Wrights enthusiasm and love of the Womens game as well as his connection and attraction to a watching male audience is a loss. But once Aluko played the 'He's taking the jobs of women card' - ITV's hands were tied and her own appearance was assured.   

ITV supported Wright in that row not Aluko. Aluko had a fair point in that there are very limited opportunities for woman pundits in comparison to men's. She just shouldn't have mentioned Wright, who as you said, has been a strong advocate for Woman's football. If anything from that incident, it was Aluko that got a backlash not Wright.

But actions speak louder than words and ITV's actions show the contrary.

Wright said it was nothing to do with his row with Aluko.

Is the world more racist now than ever before?

Nah, no more than there is more anti-Semitism. Labelling has just got more intense and highlighted. Labelling is used to control the Narrative. To create issues that are not always there. To give minorities to much power and cause resentment, rather than creating a form of equality.

To be fair, the internet has allowed for an increased level of racism. And as such, an increase in the calling out of that racism.

Racism and Women rights card has allowed people like Eni Aluko influence ITV in not having Ian Wright as a pundit for the Women's Euros.
Wrights enthusiasm and love of the Womens game as well as his connection and attraction to a watching male audience is a loss. But once Aluko played the 'He's taking the jobs of women card' - ITV's hands were tied and her own appearance was assured.   

ITV supported Wright in that row not Aluko. Aluko had a fair point in that there are very limited opportunities for woman pundits in comparison to men's. She just shouldn't have mentioned Wright, who as you said, has been a strong advocate for Woman's football. If anything from that incident, it was Aluko that got a backlash not Wright.

Is the world more racist now than ever before?

Nah, no more than there is more anti-Semitism. Labelling has just got more intense and highlighted. Labelling is used to control the Narrative. To create issues that are not always there. To give minorities to much power and cause resentment, rather than creating a form of equality.

To be fair, the internet has allowed for an increased level of racism. And as such, an increase in the calling out of that racism.

Their personalities are different. One the one hand, they're not as cynical or as cute with the dark arts. On the other, they're not as free-flowing or as filled with quality either.

He seems to leave out the exact same could be said about the Kerry team. Neither team is as strong as their noughties equivalent imo.

Has Darragh not been carrying an injury? Someone mentioned he was in a boot before warm up in last game.
In my view, if you're benching DC, you're giving up any chance. It'll take him, MxCurry and Donnelly to be flying to give us a chance. While his form may have dipped, him and McCurry are still our main hope for scores. Without him I don't give us a chance.

All true. You would imagine that if he is as good as he is meant to be, West Ham are hardly going to tear up the contract if he plays the game

Would you jeopardise a million pound career if there was any risk? As great as it would be to play in an AI final, imagine getting so close to every kids dream just to miss out at the last second.

Billy Hogan
Seamus Lavin
Sean Rafferty
Ronan Ryan
Donal Keogan
Sean Coffey
Ciaran Caulfield
Bryan Menton
Adam O'Neill
Conor Duke
Ruairi Kinsella
Mathew Costello
Jordan Morris
Keith Curtis
Eoghan Frayne

Possibly Clifford to get a spot if he has a good semi and final.

I thought McGeary was excellent. Good 2-pointer and did a lot of trojan work in defence. Kicked one free straight to touch but I don't remember the other instances of him losing possession. One of the few players to have a good 1st and 2nd half. Thought Morgan was in the running for MOTM too or Teague who got nailed by a blow to the head but never tired.

Thought Morgan was strong yesterday as well. Has got to grips with the new kick outs now, and despite a lack of runners is hitting them well. Good to see.

Very true. Tried Linekers there but no joy. Apparently Finnegan's is showing.

Any decent Irish pub in Magaluf area that'll be showing games tomorrow?