gaaboard.com

Non GAA Discussion => General discussion => Topic started by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 12:39:27 PM

Title: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 12:39:27 PM
Surely the time is coming when English club chairmen and managers decide that he's just not worth the hassle?

There's only so many times you can stick two fingers up to your club's fan base.

Lad needs taught about when to fight his battles.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 12:47:17 PM
Agreed, the lad is a twat.... There isn't too many families in N.I who can say they haven't had  life changing events that came about because of the troubles... But ffs man move on you look like a eejit
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: imtommygunn on July 19, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
What's he done or said now??
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: beer baron on July 19, 2015, 12:56:23 PM
What's he done or said now??

He stood sideways when the rest of the team stood forwards for GSTQ i think in a preseason friendly. A non-story.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 12:59:20 PM
Before a game yesterday they played the National anthem, while the rest looked on way he turned and put head down and faced other way... Let it go and move on. A non story yes but ffs sake wise up
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on July 19, 2015, 01:03:18 PM
What's he done or said now??

He stood sideways when the rest of the team stood forwards for GSTQ i think in a preseason friendly. A non-story.
The guy should realise he is earning a living in England.
I might just about agree with his decision not to wear a poppy but if he did do that for an anthem then I find it ridiculous.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Maroon Manc on July 19, 2015, 01:09:15 PM
What's he done or said now??

He stood sideways when the rest of the team stood forwards for GSTQ i think in a preseason friendly. A non-story.
The guy should realise he is earning a living in England.
I might just about agree with his decision not to wear a poppy but if he did do that for an anthem then I find it ridiculous.

Agreed, he either likes the attention he's going to continue getting or is extremely thick.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on July 19, 2015, 01:18:16 PM

He's entitled to stand how he likes. If he'd walked about, shouted or flailed his arms it'd have been disrespectful. He stood quietly with his head bowed.

I wouldn't disrespect any national anthem but neither would I conform in any shape to acknowledge GSTQ in this or any other context
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 19, 2015, 01:21:56 PM
why are they playing GSTQ at a pre season friendly? why should he stand for it if thats how he feels. complete non story.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 01:28:14 PM
Duffleking, correct me if I'm wrong here, but is it okay to be disrespectful as long as a) it's only a little bit respectful, and b) it involves the UK? But in any other scenarios it'd be out of order?

Sheedy, an anthem playing before a a sporting event is a non story.  Happens across the world every minute of the day. Someone using that non event to make a political statement against the country in which he lives and works, well that actually is a story. Because it's downright disrespectful.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 01:30:27 PM
why are they playing GSTQ at a pre season friendly? why should he stand for it if thats how he feels. complete non story.

Christ we've all conformed to something that we don't like doing, but we do it out respect.. I'm not into religion at all but hey I'll go to weddings funerals christening and whatever out of respect to person who's invited me, when they asked us to stand up sit down kneel during the service ill do it... Just get on with it and stop drawing attention to yourself
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on July 19, 2015, 01:31:31 PM
He stood quietly the way he was facing before the anthems began. The rest turned towards the flag.

What would you have him do?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Boycey on July 19, 2015, 01:35:58 PM
Jesus he's an awful eejit,

I echo Laoislad and Maroon Mancs view of it
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on July 19, 2015, 01:38:51 PM
Out of interest... would you stand for GSTQ if it was played in the North?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 01:39:24 PM
He stood quietly the way he was facing before the anthems began. The rest turned towards the flag.

What would you have him do?

Stand as the rest did, normal,  None of the players sang it or put hand heart ... Most ain't English either. Make a proper statement by refusing to play for the English teams.... That would really put them in their place.... No wait...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on July 19, 2015, 01:43:11 PM
Out of interest... would you stand for GSTQ if it was played in the North?

No?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: gallsman on July 19, 2015, 01:56:39 PM
He stood quietly the way he was facing before the anthems began. The rest turned towards the flag.

What would you have him do?

Stand as the rest did, normal,  None of the players sang it or put hand heart ... Most ain't English either. Make a proper statement by refusing to play for the English teams.... That would really put them in their place.... No wait...

The variable there is that (I assume) most of the others come from countries where the Brits didn't shoot civilians for fun.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: trileacman on July 19, 2015, 02:00:18 PM
He stood quietly the way he was facing before the anthems began. The rest turned towards the flag.

What would you have him do?

Stand as the rest did, normal,  None of the players sang it or put hand heart ... Most ain't English either. Make a proper statement by refusing to play for the English teams.... That would really put them in their place.... No wait...

The variable there is that (I assume) most of the others come from countries where the Brits didn't shoot civilians for fun.

The list of countries where England have never in the past shot civilians for fun would be very short.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on July 19, 2015, 02:24:50 PM

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: armaghniac on July 19, 2015, 02:41:45 PM
He shouldn't choose to work in England if he cannot tolerate their customs.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: RealSpiritof98 on July 19, 2015, 02:46:57 PM
They turned and faced the union Jack, to do that you might as well sing the song. He bowed his head and stood silently. Unlike many in this country he remembers the disgusting way we (catholics/Nationalist) were treated by the British Establishment/Army. I respect the man for this. As a community all things Nazi is taboo to be mentioned even though the war was 70 years ago. Yet we are advised to move on. Im in no way a dissident supporter BTW
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 02:49:03 PM
He stood quietly the way he was facing before the anthems began. The rest turned towards the flag.

What would you have him do?

Stand as the rest did, normal,  None of the players sang it or put hand heart ... Most ain't English either. Make a proper statement by refusing to play for the English teams.... That would really put them in their place.... No wait...

The variable there is that (I assume) most of the others come from countries where the Brits didn't shoot civilians for fun.

The list of countries where England have never in the past shot civilians for fun would be very short.

I'd say the list of countries that haven't shot people for fun is even smaller... Those African and Asian and don't forget the Americas ffs!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: give her dixie on July 19, 2015, 03:17:32 PM
So if someone is living and working in the UK they should respect the GSTQ anthem and stand respectfully anytime it's played?

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 03:28:14 PM
So if someone is living and working in the UK they should respect the GSTQ anthem and stand respectfully anytime it's played?

Proof again that every debate on the Internet is only 2 replies away from full on histrionics.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 03:39:20 PM
So if someone is living and working in the UK they should respect the GSTQ anthem and stand respectfully anytime it's played?

No, but you don't find it a little silly? Ireland played both the north and England played the Republic lately and both sides stood during the anthems I assume and I don't think the Irish team turned away... Someone could tell me different I didn't see that part of the match
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 19, 2015, 03:40:40 PM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 03:45:17 PM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!

Let's get this clear - you are calling me a fcukwit for asking that someone has a bit of manners?

And then in your next statement you feel empowered enough to make a sweeping judgment about how all English people feel.

Ahem.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on July 19, 2015, 03:50:33 PM
Fair play to him. He unashamedly sticks to his beliefs nor does he forget where he's from. Doesn't give a fcuk either.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 03:53:41 PM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!

Its a non story I've already agreed on that I think he's a bit silly and drawing attention to himself for no reason... I say move on and show that you're  actually an adult.. Best to take the high road sometimes and not come across like a fleg protester 😉
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 04:15:27 PM
Fair play to him. He unashamedly sticks to his beliefs nor does he forget where he's from. Doesn't give a fcuk either.

You could describe Margaret Thatcher in almost identical words.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on July 19, 2015, 04:28:07 PM
Fair play to him. He unashamedly sticks to his beliefs nor does he forget where he's from. Doesn't give a fcuk either.

You could describe Margaret Thatcher in almost identical words.
And?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 19, 2015, 04:34:35 PM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!

Let's get this clear - you are calling me a fcukwit for asking that someone has a bit of manners?

And then in your next statement you feel empowered enough to make a sweeping judgment about how all English people feel.

Ahem.
Are you a fcukwit?
What's your policy basis for comparison on what constitutes manners here?
Having lived there and have English friends and relations - I know they'd not bat an eyelid over this - only those chavs and wans that want to be offended are doing so it seems!

His decision - agree or disagree - who are you/we to advise/cast dispersion !
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 19, 2015, 04:36:58 PM
... and the point being that you are extolling bad behaviour as virtuous.

If it was Davy Tweed turning his back on his teammates during the Irish anthem, would you find yourself having respect for him for following his beliefs?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 19, 2015, 04:39:08 PM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!

Its a non story I've already agreed on that I think he's a bit silly and drawing attention to himself for no reason... I say move on and show that you're  actually an adult.. Best to take the high road sometimes and not come across like a fleg protester 😉
Comprendez
But he obv had his reasons
It's not as if he actually did anything here!!

If this was the rugby thread regarding the Irish national anthem we'd have fellas on here by now stating that we should get rid of playing the anthem before games... I'm still waiting on these lads to turn up here!!

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 04:52:05 PM
He's got his reasons that's fine, we've all got reasons to dislike the British establishment standing the other way head down won't make a pile of difference to it...

But I'll not call you a fuckwit for your view on it
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 19, 2015, 04:59:29 PM
He's got his reasons that's fine, we've all got reasons to dislike the British establishment standing the other way head down won't make a pile of difference to it...

But I'll not call you a fuckwit for your view on it
Good - I didn't call you one either!
Some of the quotes were pure fuckwittery !!

Good to see James is afforded the grace to make his own decisions!

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on July 19, 2015, 05:31:09 PM
... and the point being that you are extolling bad behaviour as virtuous.

If it was Davy Tweed turning his back on his teammates during the Irish anthem, would you find yourself having respect for him for following his beliefs?

Completely different scenario. It is not the anthem of the team he is playing for.

You're a very sensible poster wobbler but you're miles off with this. Mcclean has done nothing wrong and took a very moderate and respectful avenue of non engagement if.you ask me.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: RealSpiritof98 on July 19, 2015, 05:33:55 PM
People just go out of their way to get offended these days!!!!!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: annapr on July 19, 2015, 05:35:04 PM
McClean acts and looks like a thug. He's an embarrassment.
He's not a very good footballer either IMO.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on July 19, 2015, 05:46:20 PM
Did he turn away when Ireland played England recently?

I don't understand what his problem is stand up and respect the anthem like everyone else. I understand the Poppy thing but this smacks of attention seeking. Its standard practice in sport to stand respectfully for your opponent nations anthem even if they are a crowd of c***ts!!!

He's let himself down here!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 19, 2015, 05:47:06 PM
McClean acts and looks like a thug. He's an embarrassment.
interesting view!! Care to give some examples of how or when he acted like a thug or how he looks like one. He didn't act like a thug in this case. Some people get offended over very little.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: T Fearon on July 19, 2015, 07:23:31 PM
McLean is storing up trouble for himself.Fair enough if he doesn't want to wear a poppy,but to snub the national anthem of the country where he is in handsomely remunerated employment is going to have WBA fans on his back never mind rival fans.Also he is plying his trade in the suburbs of Birmingham where the pub bombings are still fresh in the memory.Why make life hard for yourself?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: snoopdog on July 19, 2015, 07:31:57 PM
He is a bit stupid to say the least. Plus he wouldn't remember the troubles. He is too young. Granted he is entitled to his opinion but he is only shooting himself in foot. A lot of wba fans didn't want him in first place
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on July 19, 2015, 08:02:28 PM
Am I missing something here? He was standing for the anthem. When the irish anthem is played I turn to face the flag. I wouldn't turn to face another flag I would stand facing forward out of respect. The fact his head is down is a non issue too. Anyone that feels he is out of order, catch yourself on. Show a bit of support for your countryman as there are enough people about to knock him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 19, 2015, 08:12:26 PM
Am I missing something here? He was standing for the anthem. When the irish anthem is played I turn to face the flag. I wouldn't turn to face another flag I would stand facing forward out of respect. The fact his head is down is a non issue too. Anyone that feels he is out of order, catch yourself on. Show a bit of support for your countryman as there are enough people about to knock him.

And when you get the chance to stand for some other anthem you should do that, if an English lad that played for Ireland (and there has been a lot) turned away from flag and put his head down you'd respect him also. Which is fair enough?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on July 19, 2015, 08:22:22 PM
Probably be worse if he went on like GAA lads do during Amhrán nabhFiann... Last Saturday in Thurles most did stretches, one lad cleared his nose and another picked his shorts out of his hole.

That would wind them up.
/Jim.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: gallsman on July 19, 2015, 08:43:05 PM
Probably be worse if he went on like GAA lads do during Amhrán nabhFiann... Last Saturday in Thurles most did stretches, one lad cleared his nose and another picked his shorts out of his hole.

That would wind them up.
/Jim.

That's a very good point - outside ulster, the anthem hasn't been respected at matches for years. Players breaking off, "Come on Cork/Tipp/the Cats/the Dubs", chants echoing out with two full lines of the song to go. Highly embarrassing
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: andoireabu on July 19, 2015, 09:43:29 PM
http://www.balls.ie/football/video-did-james-mcclean-really-turn-his-back-on-the-british-national-anthem/301693 (http://www.balls.ie/football/video-did-james-mcclean-really-turn-his-back-on-the-british-national-anthem/301693)

A pic paints a 1000 words...doesn't mean they are the right ones.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: GJL on July 19, 2015, 10:41:18 PM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!

Its a non story I've already agreed on that I think he's a bit silly and drawing attention to himself for no reason... I say move on and show that you're  actually an adult.. Best to take the high road sometimes and not come across like a fleg protester 😉

Did he have a family member killed in Bloody Sunday?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: balladmaker on July 20, 2015, 12:18:36 AM
Quote
Am I missing something here? He was standing for the anthem. When the irish anthem is played I turn to face the flag. I wouldn't turn to face another flag I would stand facing forward out of respect. The fact his head is down is a non issue too. Anyone that feels he is out of order, catch yourself on. Show a bit of support for your countryman as there are enough people about to knock him.

+1
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Windmill abu on July 20, 2015, 02:12:39 AM
Quote
Am I missing something here? He was standing for the anthem. When the irish anthem is played I turn to face the flag. I wouldn't turn to face another flag I would stand facing forward out of respect. The fact his head is down is a non issue too. Anyone that feels he is out of order, catch yourself on. Show a bit of support for your countryman as there are enough people about to knock him.

+1

He stood for a National Anthem which he probably did not think he would have to to do when he signed for W.B.A.
If allegiance to the British Queen was a prerequisite to playing football in either the Premiership or the Championship, then a lot less players and a lot more equality/employment lawyers may have become rich on the Sky money financing British football.

BTW If he had turned around and acknowledged GSTQ, would he now be accused of respecting a Holocaust supporter?(allegedly), or would it be swept underthe carpet like Lizzie's Nazi salutes.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: OakleafCounty on July 20, 2015, 07:45:39 AM
Probably be worse if he went on like GAA lads do during Amhrán nabhFiann... Last Saturday in Thurles most did stretches, one lad cleared his nose and another picked his shorts out of his hole.

That would wind them up.
/Jim.

That's a very good point - outside ulster, the anthem hasn't been respected at matches for years. Players breaking off, "Come on Cork/Tipp/the Cats/the Dubs", chants echoing out with two full lines of the song to go. Highly embarrassing

That happens in Ulster too.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: OgraAnDun on July 20, 2015, 08:28:48 AM
... and the point being that you are extolling bad behaviour as virtuous.

If it was Davy Tweed turning his back on his teammates during the Irish anthem, would you find yourself having respect for him for following his beliefs?

Completely different scenario. It is not the anthem of the team he is playing for.

You're a very sensible poster wobbler but you're miles off with this. Mcclean has done nothing wrong and took a very moderate and respectful avenue of non engagement if.you ask me.


+1
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: annapr on July 20, 2015, 08:47:27 AM
Did he turn away when Ireland played England recently?

I don't understand what his problem is stand up and respect the anthem like everyone else. I understand the Poppy thing but this smacks of attention seeking. Its standard practice in sport to stand respectfully for your opponent nations anthem even if they are a crowd of c***ts!!!

He's let himself down here!
Agree fully with this,as I'm sure anyone with an ounce of sense would also.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 20, 2015, 09:49:38 AM
Did he turn away when Ireland played England recently?

I don't understand what his problem is stand up and respect the anthem like everyone else. I understand the Poppy thing but this smacks of attention seeking. Its standard practice in sport to stand respectfully for your opponent nations anthem even if they are a crowd of c***ts!!!

He's let himself down here!

He didn't start the game so the question never arose. It's a pertinent question though. He started against Scotland when we played them in Parkhead. Did he do the same there? Is it any anthem of the UK he objects to, or just ditties about the Queen? I can see him getting tied in knots trying to establish what the principle is here.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on July 20, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
Did he turn away when Ireland played England recently?

I don't understand what his problem is stand up and respect the anthem like everyone else. I understand the Poppy thing but this smacks of attention seeking. Its standard practice in sport to stand respectfully for your opponent nations anthem even if they are a crowd of c***ts!!!

He's let himself down here!

He didn't start the game so the question never arose. It's a pertinent question though. He started against Scotland when we played them in Parkhead. Did he do the same there? Is it any anthem of the UK he objects to, or just ditties about the Queen? I can see him getting tied in knots trying to establish what the principle is here.
Is this not a moot point? When GSTQ is playing he'll not be facing the flag anyway.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on July 20, 2015, 02:32:16 PM
http://www.balls.ie/football/video-did-james-mcclean-really-turn-his-back-on-the-british-national-anthem/301693 (http://www.balls.ie/football/video-did-james-mcclean-really-turn-his-back-on-the-british-national-anthem/301693)

A pic paints a 1000 words...doesn't mean they are the right ones.

Don't go getting in the way of the hate item of the moment.  The internet will crash
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 20, 2015, 02:51:29 PM
Did he turn away when Ireland played England recently?

I don't understand what his problem is stand up and respect the anthem like everyone else. I understand the Poppy thing but this smacks of attention seeking. Its standard practice in sport to stand respectfully for your opponent nations anthem even if they are a crowd of c***ts!!!

He's let himself down here!

He didn't start the game so the question never arose. It's a pertinent question though. He started against Scotland when we played them in Parkhead. Did he do the same there? Is it any anthem of the UK he objects to, or just ditties about the Queen? I can see him getting tied in knots trying to establish what the principle is here.
Is this not a moot point? When GSTQ is playing he'll not be facing the flag anyway.

Probably, but I think it's useful to establish what he is trying to accomplish - assuming there really was a 'snub'.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on July 20, 2015, 06:21:57 PM
I think there is a difference between this, a very legitimate action,
a ni u 21 player looking at his boots while GSTQ is being played



and what McClean makes an issue of  while playing for an English club. He could do something similar to what Gnevin once called 'doing a DeV',  look at the flag and think of Brighton.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: eddie d on July 20, 2015, 07:23:38 PM
Am I missing something here? He was standing for the anthem. When the irish anthem is played I turn to face the flag. I wouldn't turn to face another flag I would stand facing forward out of respect. The fact his head is down is a non issue too. Anyone that feels he is out of order, catch yourself on. Show a bit of support for your countryman as there are enough people about to knock him.

He turned towards the flag like the rest of the team, then he turned back and put his head down, which would clearly draw attention to him. He could have stood facing it with his head down. If he had, I don't think he would have disrespected any of the victims from the troubles. Likewise he would have kept his own fans happy, and the trolls quiet.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyHarp on July 20, 2015, 11:02:28 PM
WBA fans have apparently penned quite a witty chant for McClean for the coming season. I think he'll love it.

God save our James McClean,
Long live our James McClean,
God save McClean.
Send us victorious,
His tricks are glorious,
Long to score goals for us,
God save McClean
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 20, 2015, 11:43:13 PM
WBA fans have apparently penned quite a witty chant for McClean for the coming season. I think he'll love it.

God save our James McClean,
Long live our James McClean,
God save McClean.
Send us victorious,
His tricks are glorious,
Long to score goals for us,
God save McClean

He'll hardly stand for that
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Armamike on July 20, 2015, 11:47:37 PM
Stupid boy.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Bord na Mona man on July 21, 2015, 04:56:18 PM
Hypothetical question.
If you were playing in Wimbledon back in the day, would you have bowed or curtsied to the Royal Box on Centre Court?

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 21, 2015, 05:08:20 PM
Hypothetical question.
If you were playing in Wimbledon back in the day, would you have bowed or curtsied to the Royal Box on Centre Court?

Probably.... Loads doing it from West Belfast now when they collect their OBEs MBEs, if you get opportunity to play centre court you'll not be the type of person who won't give a feck about politics...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hardy on July 21, 2015, 05:11:45 PM
I think only Brits bow and curtsy these days and that only to their own monarch. I certainly don't think it's protocol for republicans (citizens of a republic - careful now) to bow or curtsy to anyone. You wouldn't have known that with all the bishop-ring-kissing that used to go on in the early decades of this republic. I wonder was it a coincidence that bishop-snogging as a form of devotional display came to an end here around the same time that young wans started displaying their form of devotion by throwing their knickers at Dicky Rock?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on July 21, 2015, 06:09:13 PM
should have sat on the ground for US anthem...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: heganboy on July 21, 2015, 07:45:32 PM
some goal all the same:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=84&v=NvG1vcyUP88
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: whitey on July 21, 2015, 08:14:03 PM
If he finds the Brits that objectionable, maybe he should just find a different league to play in.

I admire his principled stand, BUT he is paid in Sterling (which has the Queens portrait) and some of the taxes he pays goes to fund the British Army. So lets see how far he is willing to go to stand up for what he believes in
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on July 21, 2015, 08:19:36 PM
If he finds the Brits that objectionable, maybe he should just find a different league to play in.

I admire his principled stand, BUT he is paid in Sterling (which has the Queens portrait) and some of the taxes he pays goes to fund the British Army. So lets see how far he is willing to go to stand up for what he believes in
That's the same argument Loyalists use. I get your point though.

At the end of the day he's a millionaire, I just think a lot of his posturing is to try and keep up appearances for whenever he's back home.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: heganboy on July 21, 2015, 08:22:18 PM
wait,
you think cos he's rich his political views go out the window?

The exact opposite of American politics. I'm rich so you should believe what I believe...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 21, 2015, 08:43:03 PM
If he finds the Brits that objectionable, maybe he should just find a different league to play in.

I admire his principled stand, BUT he is paid in Sterling (which has the Queens portrait) and some of the taxes he pays goes to fund the British Army. So lets see how far he is willing to go to stand up for what he believes in
That's the same argument Loyalists use. I get your point though.

At the end of the day he's a millionaire, I just think a lot of his posturing is to try and keep up appearances for whenever he's back home.

A millionaire?? Are you sure about that? So when he's home do you think there are people who'll give him problems while playing for a EPL team?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on July 21, 2015, 08:43:35 PM
I fear that James has backed himself into a hole. Some home fans could make his tenure unbearable.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: dferg on July 21, 2015, 09:23:32 PM
If he finds the Brits that objectionable, maybe he should just find a different league to play in.

I admire his principled stand, BUT he is paid in Sterling (which has the Queens portrait) and some of the taxes he pays goes to fund the British Army. So lets see how far he is willing to go to stand up for what he believes in
That's the same argument Loyalists use. I get your point though.

At the end of the day he's a millionaire, I just think a lot of his posturing is to try and keep up appearances for whenever he's back home.

A millionaire?? Are you sure about that? So when he's home do you think there are people who'll give him problems while playing for a EPL team?

His salary is 780k per year.  I'm sure he had more than 1 signing on bonus etc when joining a new team. plus X years of premiership/championship football. 

What exactly did he do wrong?  He looked uncomfortable when standing for GSTQ.  He didn't drop his trousers or anything.  Fair play to him for standing his ground same with the poppy.  The easy option is to just wear one, he would get much less grief plus be more marketable if he went with the crowd.  I'd be surprised if many people in England cared that an Irish person didn't turn to the flag when GSTQ was on.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on July 21, 2015, 09:30:41 PM
Wonder what his reaction will be when the queen awards him an OBE for services to crap football teams.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on July 21, 2015, 09:44:32 PM

Really don't understand the resentment towards McClean's professional career and the desire to denigrate it. On the run of things, he has done exceptionally well compared to the majority who head across to England and carved out a fantastic career that any of us would love.

What's with booting the clubs he has played for?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on July 21, 2015, 11:29:04 PM
Wonder what his reaction will be when the queen awards him an OBE for services to crap football teams.

In fairness to get to the standard to play for these teams is a fair journey! Crap as they may seem to you. I laugh at people who talk about Irish lads who play for Championship sides and say they never made it as a footballer. I tell you they still make a lot of money.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 22, 2015, 09:39:08 AM
Wonder what his reaction will be when the queen awards him an OBE for services to crap football teams.

In fairness to get to the standard to play for these teams is a fair journey! Crap as they may seem to you. I laugh at people who talk about Irish lads who play for Championship sides and say they never made it as a footballer. I tell you they still make a lot of money.

Football is played by hundreds of millions of people. They probably all aspire at some stage to make a career out of it. If you do, you're one of 1%. Damn it, one of the 0.01%.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Over the Bar on July 22, 2015, 10:19:13 AM
I graduated from QUB and none of my family stood for GSTQ.  My brother graduated in England so we all stood for it.  When in Rome etc.  I've no problem standing for the National Anthem of any county in that country.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on July 22, 2015, 11:16:59 AM
Some sensitive souls on here, I apologise for offending Wigan, WBA, Sunderland and Derry city. You are all special! On the point he should have faced the flag but hung his head. Just as the Northern RCs do on the the NI team, as previously stated. His taxes going towards the Ministry Of Defence is also a fair point.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: TheOptimist on July 22, 2015, 11:31:17 AM
Wonder what his reaction will be when the queen awards him an OBE for services to crap football teams.

In fairness to get to the standard to play for these teams is a fair journey! Crap as they may seem to you. I laugh at people who talk about Irish lads who play for Championship sides and say they never made it as a footballer. I tell you they still make a lot of money.

The Bentley/Lamborghini/Land Rover he drives around in suggests he isn't doing to bad for himself. What car do you drive?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on July 22, 2015, 11:38:09 AM
Wonder what his reaction will be when the queen awards him an OBE for services to crap football teams.

In fairness to get to the standard to play for these teams is a fair journey! Crap as they may seem to you. I laugh at people who talk about Irish lads who play for Championship sides and say they never made it as a footballer. I tell you they still make a lot of money.


The Bentley/Lamborghini/Land Rover he drives around in suggests he isn't doing to bad for himself. What car do you drive?
Bentley and Land Rover.. Two great British car brands .
Sure he hardly drives one of them now with his hatred of all things British...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 22, 2015, 11:40:32 AM
If Sunderland and WBA are crap, what word can we use to describe teams worse than them? It's not about being 'offended' on their behalf, it's about taking a reductive view of James McClean's career which is really rather impressive.

Speaking of being offended, here's a surprising defence of McClean from - I can't believe I'm writing this - the Torygraph (NB I can't  bring myself to read the comments):

Quote
James McClean's flag snub starts an undignified race to be offended

The West Brom midfielder's perceived lack of respect for the England flag has attracted a frankly absurd level of criticism
   
By Jonathan Liew 5:38PM BST 21 Jul 2015 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11753541/James-McCleans-flag-snub-starts-an-undignified-race-to-be-offended.html)

Let me tell you a secret. I don’t much like the national anthem. Quite apart from the fact that sending a lady “happy and glorious” when she is already worth an estimated £340 million and lives in a big palace is probably just a touch superfluous, it’s not even a very nice tune. La Marseillaise, there’s an anthem. The Italian one is a delight. God Save The Queen lacks any verve or spirit. It’s tame, dry, unsure of itself. It’s a Malted Milk biscuit in musical form.

So on an artistic level at least, I can empathise with James McClean. Last week the West Brom winger was in South Carolina for a pre-season friendly when, in a curious display of ostentation far outstripping the prestige of the actual game, the national anthems were played and the English flag unfurled overhead. While his team-mates turned to face the flag, McClean turned his back and refused to acknowledge it.

McClean is from a Republican area of Derry in Northern Ireland, and has previously opted not to wear a Remembrance Day poppy because of his political beliefs. For this he received death threats, taunts about the IRA, boos from his own fans. Despite all this, it is McClean’s impoliteness under the microscope, as if he were a house guest who has insulted the decor. His manager Tony Pulis publicly rebuked him, warning of a developing “stigma around him” and ordering him to “face the flag” in future. A Derry MP advised West Brom to sack McClean, adding that “he’s not worth the trouble”.

Now, McClean’s politics might not be to everyone’s taste, and nor might his methods of expressing them. But in an age when footballers are becoming increasingly anodyne, there is something refreshing about one who believes in something; anything. Not that you know it from the furious reaction. One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them, and sure enough McClean’s gesture provoked the sort of anger that the internet has turned into a performance art.

The criticism essentially runs thus: if McClean is content to earn a living in Britain, why does he hate it so much? Why not go back to where he came from (which, we should probably point out, is technically also Britain)?

This idea that earning a living from a country should entail tolerance for its customs and rituals remains surprisingly tenacious, if inconsistently applied. At what stage, for example, should we inform the Chinese and Russian investors buying up large swathes of London about the ancient British tradition that houses are lived in, rather than left empty and used as investment vehicles? Jose Mourinho, meanwhile, admitted in an interview last year that he dislikes British food. Are we obliged to lynch him, or can we just put him on a plane home? Instead, McClean’s lack of reverence is singled out, largely by the same people who thought Gazza pretending to play the flute during the Old Firm derby was absolutely hilarious.

In 1938 the England team famously performed the Nazi salute whilst playing in Berlin. And the irony is that had one of the England players dissented and turned his back on the swastika, he would now be hailed as a principled hero. McClean, meanwhile, is being reproached for turning his back on God Save The Queen, which as we’ve established isn’t even a good song. Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous.

The issue for the game here is obvious enough. Footballers seem increasingly disconnected from the wider world, and the McClean furore encapsulates why. Take a stand and get pilloried by fans, dressed down by your manager, painted as a troublemaker. Far better to keep your head down, son. Don’t cause any trouble. Face the flag.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on July 22, 2015, 11:53:07 AM
I graduated from QUB and none of my family stood for GSTQ.  My brother graduated in England so we all stood for it.  When in Rome etc.  I've no problem standing for the National Anthem of any county in that country.
James was in the USA.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hardy on July 22, 2015, 08:05:01 PM
If Sunderland and WBA are crap, what word can we use to describe teams worse than them? It's not about being 'offended' on their behalf, it's about taking a reductive view of James McClean's career which is really rather impressive.

Speaking of being offended, here's a surprising defence of McClean from - I can't believe I'm writing this - the Torygraph (NB I can't  bring myself to read the comments):

Quote
James McClean's flag snub starts an undignified race to be offended

The West Brom midfielder's perceived lack of respect for the England flag has attracted a frankly absurd level of criticism
   
By Jonathan Liew 5:38PM BST 21 Jul 2015 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11753541/James-McCleans-flag-snub-starts-an-undignified-race-to-be-offended.html)

Let me tell you a secret. I don’t much like the national anthem. Quite apart from the fact that sending a lady “happy and glorious” when she is already worth an estimated £340 million and lives in a big palace is probably just a touch superfluous, it’s not even a very nice tune. La Marseillaise, there’s an anthem. The Italian one is a delight. God Save The Queen lacks any verve or spirit. It’s tame, dry, unsure of itself. It’s a Malted Milk biscuit in musical form.

So on an artistic level at least, I can empathise with James McClean. Last week the West Brom winger was in South Carolina for a pre-season friendly when, in a curious display of ostentation far outstripping the prestige of the actual game, the national anthems were played and the English flag unfurled overhead. While his team-mates turned to face the flag, McClean turned his back and refused to acknowledge it.

McClean is from a Republican area of Derry in Northern Ireland, and has previously opted not to wear a Remembrance Day poppy because of his political beliefs. For this he received death threats, taunts about the IRA, boos from his own fans. Despite all this, it is McClean’s impoliteness under the microscope, as if he were a house guest who has insulted the decor. His manager Tony Pulis publicly rebuked him, warning of a developing “stigma around him” and ordering him to “face the flag” in future. A Derry MP advised West Brom to sack McClean, adding that “he’s not worth the trouble”.

Now, McClean’s politics might not be to everyone’s taste, and nor might his methods of expressing them. But in an age when footballers are becoming increasingly anodyne, there is something refreshing about one who believes in something; anything. Not that you know it from the furious reaction. One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them, and sure enough McClean’s gesture provoked the sort of anger that the internet has turned into a performance art.

The criticism essentially runs thus: if McClean is content to earn a living in Britain, why does he hate it so much? Why not go back to where he came from (which, we should probably point out, is technically also Britain)?

This idea that earning a living from a country should entail tolerance for its customs and rituals remains surprisingly tenacious, if inconsistently applied. At what stage, for example, should we inform the Chinese and Russian investors buying up large swathes of London about the ancient British tradition that houses are lived in, rather than left empty and used as investment vehicles? Jose Mourinho, meanwhile, admitted in an interview last year that he dislikes British food. Are we obliged to lynch him, or can we just put him on a plane home? Instead, McClean’s lack of reverence is singled out, largely by the same people who thought Gazza pretending to play the flute during the Old Firm derby was absolutely hilarious.

In 1938 the England team famously performed the Nazi salute whilst playing in Berlin. And the irony is that had one of the England players dissented and turned his back on the swastika, he would now be hailed as a principled hero. McClean, meanwhile, is being reproached for turning his back on God Save The Queen, which as we’ve established isn’t even a good song. Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous.

The issue for the game here is obvious enough. Footballers seem increasingly disconnected from the wider world, and the McClean furore encapsulates why. Take a stand and get pilloried by fans, dressed down by your manager, painted as a troublemaker. Far better to keep your head down, son. Don’t cause any trouble. Face the flag.

That was well worth reading for the most quotable quote I've seen in a long time:

One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: trileacman on July 22, 2015, 11:35:23 PM
If Sunderland and WBA are crap, what word can we use to describe teams worse than them? It's not about being 'offended' on their behalf, it's about taking a reductive view of James McClean's career which is really rather impressive.

Speaking of being offended, here's a surprising defence of McClean from - I can't believe I'm writing this - the Torygraph (NB I can't  bring myself to read the comments):

Quote
James McClean's flag snub starts an undignified race to be offended

The West Brom midfielder's perceived lack of respect for the England flag has attracted a frankly absurd level of criticism
   
By Jonathan Liew 5:38PM BST 21 Jul 2015 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11753541/James-McCleans-flag-snub-starts-an-undignified-race-to-be-offended.html)

Let me tell you a secret. I don’t much like the national anthem. Quite apart from the fact that sending a lady “happy and glorious” when she is already worth an estimated £340 million and lives in a big palace is probably just a touch superfluous, it’s not even a very nice tune. La Marseillaise, there’s an anthem. The Italian one is a delight. God Save The Queen lacks any verve or spirit. It’s tame, dry, unsure of itself. It’s a Malted Milk biscuit in musical form.

So on an artistic level at least, I can empathise with James McClean. Last week the West Brom winger was in South Carolina for a pre-season friendly when, in a curious display of ostentation far outstripping the prestige of the actual game, the national anthems were played and the English flag unfurled overhead. While his team-mates turned to face the flag, McClean turned his back and refused to acknowledge it.

McClean is from a Republican area of Derry in Northern Ireland, and has previously opted not to wear a Remembrance Day poppy because of his political beliefs. For this he received death threats, taunts about the IRA, boos from his own fans. Despite all this, it is McClean’s impoliteness under the microscope, as if he were a house guest who has insulted the decor. His manager Tony Pulis publicly rebuked him, warning of a developing “stigma around him” and ordering him to “face the flag” in future. A Derry MP advised West Brom to sack McClean, adding that “he’s not worth the trouble”.

Now, McClean’s politics might not be to everyone’s taste, and nor might his methods of expressing them. But in an age when footballers are becoming increasingly anodyne, there is something refreshing about one who believes in something; anything. Not that you know it from the furious reaction. One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them, and sure enough McClean’s gesture provoked the sort of anger that the internet has turned into a performance art.

The criticism essentially runs thus: if McClean is content to earn a living in Britain, why does he hate it so much? Why not go back to where he came from (which, we should probably point out, is technically also Britain)?

This idea that earning a living from a country should entail tolerance for its customs and rituals remains surprisingly tenacious, if inconsistently applied. At what stage, for example, should we inform the Chinese and Russian investors buying up large swathes of London about the ancient British tradition that houses are lived in, rather than left empty and used as investment vehicles? Jose Mourinho, meanwhile, admitted in an interview last year that he dislikes British food. Are we obliged to lynch him, or can we just put him on a plane home? Instead, McClean’s lack of reverence is singled out, largely by the same people who thought Gazza pretending to play the flute during the Old Firm derby was absolutely hilarious.

In 1938 the England team famously performed the Nazi salute whilst playing in Berlin. And the irony is that had one of the England players dissented and turned his back on the swastika, he would now be hailed as a principled hero. McClean, meanwhile, is being reproached for turning his back on God Save The Queen, which as we’ve established isn’t even a good song. Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous.

The issue for the game here is obvious enough. Footballers seem increasingly disconnected from the wider world, and the McClean furore encapsulates why. Take a stand and get pilloried by fans, dressed down by your manager, painted as a troublemaker. Far better to keep your head down, son. Don’t cause any trouble. Face the flag.

That was well worth reading for the most quotable quote I've seen in a long time:

One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them.

That's actually the worst thing about social media. If I wanted the opinion of idiots I'd ask for it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hardy on July 22, 2015, 11:46:42 PM
It's important to know what's going on in idiot minds. There are more of them than us and they have votes.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ONeill on July 22, 2015, 11:54:46 PM

(NB I can't  bring myself to read the comments):


joestrummer • 41 minutes ago
The appalling ignorance regarding Irish politics shown by the author of this article is palpably clear.

There is no place in Northern Ireland called Derry, but County Londonderry.

Why is Gazza mimicking playing a flute during an Old Firm game often dragged up as a contentious act,when flute bands are part of both sides of the cultural divide over there ?

It offended no-one.

Should he have mimicked playing a saxophone or a trombone instead ?

As for the obvious attention-seeker McClean, would anyone even know who he is without his predictable and tiresome everyone look at me antics ?

The only irony in this article is that with his Scottish Planter surname, McClean won't be seen as " genuine Irish " by the hardline Irish Republicans he's trying to impress, or even decent folk from Southern Ireland who're not too keen on Nordies from over the border misappropriating their Irish identity.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ONeill on July 23, 2015, 12:03:43 AM
inglis • 8 hours ago
The Irish are shameless. An over-developed sense of entitlement fed continually by Hollywood propaganda leads them to play the American market every chance they get furthermore and makes an exhibition of this kind no surprise at all. McClean's opinions are his own affair. As an Englishman I too would ignore the British national anthem [and unionist flag]. It's the breathtaking presumption of insulting a people in whose country he is a guest, and where he is permitted, like Mr Woo, to earn a fine living, that tells even historical ignoramuses all they need to know about this loathsome nation. Is it so hard to predict reaction if English players abroad [e.g. Scotland] pulled a similar stunt? What counts for a lot is where you get your journalists. You expect few favours even from your own in this country, but none at all from outlanders. They're not here because they like us you know.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hardy on July 23, 2015, 12:05:29 AM
Now we're getting somewhere. In no time Joe and the National Affront will have recruiting-sergeanted all of us into the James McClean, republican hero camp.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ONeill on July 23, 2015, 12:08:20 AM
And finally.....

So Bar • 9 hours ago
I have no problem with it, the player is simply an uneducated cretin that knows no better, a product of a blinkered upbringing. Before and during WWII, the republic were neutrals, although in many respects supported the Nazi regime against Britain, yet fail to consider should Hitler have invaded them, the majority of the population would have been liquidated for being sub humans in their eyes. At the very best, those remaining alive would now be speaking German as a first language. This is the thanks we now get for winning the war against tyranny and oppression, such a grateful race. God save the Queen.

Utdtilidie  So Bar • 9 hours ago
They re-fuelled the Nazi U-Boats in WWII, This is how they tried to remain neutral ?

OISIN  Utdtilidie • 9 hours ago
& how did the Irish do that = no books in history has wrote that =where yo there I pass that on 2 historians I think you could make a lot of money of this new development

OISIN  Utdtilidie • 9 hours ago
whilst your royal family have been shown worldwide 2 give the Nazi salute & support during the early years which started the whole mess & your whole royal family r German u really r thick

douzpwa  OISIN • 3 hours ago
It is you who is thick, the Queen was born here you stupid ignorant moron! The Queen was born at 2.40am on 21 April 1926 at 17 Bruton Street in Mayfair, London just one of many in the Royal family born here you Pathetic twisted ignorant spud!
 
Peter  douzpwa • 2 hours ago
The royal family are of very recent and undeniable German descent. They even changed the family name to Windsor in an attempt to appear more English. God save your German queen.

douzpwa  Peter • 15 minutes ago
I believe the comment made said the whole Royal family ARE German and we both know this is simply not true! If your going to use that old chestnut of descendents then many of the people of the uk come from many parts of the World! Really Peter I wont insult your intelligence am sure you read the oisin comment as I did!

douzpwa  Peter • 26 minutes ago
Why send this drivel reply when you wont even allow me to reply to this comment? Link takes me to nowhere near the comment!

So Bar  Peter • an hour ago
Bigot? Oh the irony.

So Bar  OISIN • 9 hours ago
I fail to see what how giving a Nazi salute in any way supported this atrocious regime. Those were in the days where everyone was none the wiser in respect of Hitler's aim and atrocities, so get a grip. They were simply unfortunate errors of judgment, yet the republic systematically provided support to Hitler's effort during the war, this simply cannot be denied. Me thinks it is you that needs to read up on your history.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on July 23, 2015, 12:28:51 AM
What would happen if West Brom make the cup final and McClean has to meet Charlie or Wills on the red carpet?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: trileacman on July 23, 2015, 12:40:38 AM
It's important to know what's going on in idiot minds. There are more of them than us and they have votes.

True but you can usually predict the choice of idiots in an election by looking for the most abhorrent option to your sensibilities and sticking your money on that one. Northern Ireland being an iron-clad example.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rrhf on July 23, 2015, 07:29:51 AM
What would happen if West Brom make the cup final and McClean has to meet Charlie or Wills on the red carpet?
Do a Martin johnson.  Put them on the f**king grass.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: MoChara on July 23, 2015, 01:25:27 PM
I see nothing wrong with it, it wasn't his national anthem why would he stand looking at the flag for someone elses?

Also what does where he work have to do with it, do you have to change your nationality when you move away for work. I'm pretty sure his contract is just to play football for West Brom.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: OgraAnDun on July 23, 2015, 03:08:38 PM
And finally.....

So Bar • 9 hours ago
I have no problem with it, the player is simply an uneducated cretin that knows no better, a product of a blinkered upbringing. Before and during WWII, the republic were neutrals, although in many respects supported the Nazi regime against Britain, yet fail to consider should Hitler have invaded them, the majority of the population would have been liquidated for being sub humans in their eyes. At the very best, those remaining alive would now be speaking German as a first language. This is the thanks we now get for winning the war against tyranny and oppression, such a grateful race. God save the Queen.

Utdtilidie  So Bar • 9 hours ago
They re-fuelled the Nazi U-Boats in WWII, This is how they tried to remain neutral ?

OISIN  Utdtilidie • 9 hours ago
& how did the Irish do that = no books in history has wrote that =where yo there I pass that on 2 historians I think you could make a lot of money of this new development

OISIN  Utdtilidie • 9 hours ago
whilst your royal family have been shown worldwide 2 give the Nazi salute & support during the early years which started the whole mess & your whole royal family r German u really r thick

douzpwa  OISIN • 3 hours ago
It is you who is thick, the Queen was born here you stupid ignorant moron! The Queen was born at 2.40am on 21 April 1926 at 17 Bruton Street in Mayfair, London just one of many in the Royal family born here you Pathetic twisted ignorant spud!
 
Peter  douzpwa • 2 hours ago
The royal family are of very recent and undeniable German descent. They even changed the family name to Windsor in an attempt to appear more English. God save your German queen.

douzpwa  Peter • 15 minutes ago
I believe the comment made said the whole Royal family ARE German and we both know this is simply not true! If your going to use that old chestnut of descendents then many of the people of the uk come from many parts of the World! Really Peter I wont insult your intelligence am sure you read the oisin comment as I did!

douzpwa  Peter • 26 minutes ago
Why send this drivel reply when you wont even allow me to reply to this comment? Link takes me to nowhere near the comment!

So Bar  Peter • an hour ago
Bigot? Oh the irony.

So Bar  OISIN • 9 hours ago
I fail to see what how giving a Nazi salute in any way supported this atrocious regime. Those were in the days where everyone was none the wiser in respect of Hitler's aim and atrocities, so get a grip. They were simply unfortunate errors of judgment, yet the republic systematically provided support to Hitler's effort during the war, this simply cannot be denied. Me thinks it is you that needs to read up on your history.



I had no idea the English education system failed their citizens so miserably.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 23, 2015, 04:27:23 PM
I had no idea the English education system failed their citizens so miserably.

Those people are a feature of the system, not a bug.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on July 23, 2015, 07:00:19 PM
That was well worth reading for the most quotable quote I've seen in a long time:
Quote
One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them.

Only catching up on this now and I was going to quote that line.

But since it has already been done, I will simply quote this excellent paragraph:

Quote
In 1938 the England team famously performed the Nazi salute whilst playing in Berlin. And the irony is that had one of the England players dissented and turned his back on the swastika, he would now be hailed as a principled hero. McClean, meanwhile, is being reproached for turning his back on God Save The Queen, which as we’ve established isn’t even a good song. Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thebigfella on July 23, 2015, 09:49:09 PM
If Sunderland and WBA are crap, what word can we use to describe teams worse than them? It's not about being 'offended' on their behalf, it's about taking a reductive view of James McClean's career which is really rather impressive.

Speaking of being offended, here's a surprising defence of McClean from - I can't believe I'm writing this - the Torygraph (NB I can't  bring myself to read the comments):

Quote
James McClean's flag snub starts an undignified race to be offended

The West Brom midfielder's perceived lack of respect for the England flag has attracted a frankly absurd level of criticism
   
By Jonathan Liew 5:38PM BST 21 Jul 2015 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/11753541/James-McCleans-flag-snub-starts-an-undignified-race-to-be-offended.html)

Let me tell you a secret. I don’t much like the national anthem. Quite apart from the fact that sending a lady “happy and glorious” when she is already worth an estimated £340 million and lives in a big palace is probably just a touch superfluous, it’s not even a very nice tune. La Marseillaise, there’s an anthem. The Italian one is a delight. God Save The Queen lacks any verve or spirit. It’s tame, dry, unsure of itself. It’s a Malted Milk biscuit in musical form.

So on an artistic level at least, I can empathise with James McClean. Last week the West Brom winger was in South Carolina for a pre-season friendly when, in a curious display of ostentation far outstripping the prestige of the actual game, the national anthems were played and the English flag unfurled overhead. While his team-mates turned to face the flag, McClean turned his back and refused to acknowledge it.

McClean is from a Republican area of Derry in Northern Ireland, and has previously opted not to wear a Remembrance Day poppy because of his political beliefs. For this he received death threats, taunts about the IRA, boos from his own fans. Despite all this, it is McClean’s impoliteness under the microscope, as if he were a house guest who has insulted the decor. His manager Tony Pulis publicly rebuked him, warning of a developing “stigma around him” and ordering him to “face the flag” in future. A Derry MP advised West Brom to sack McClean, adding that “he’s not worth the trouble”.

Now, McClean’s politics might not be to everyone’s taste, and nor might his methods of expressing them. But in an age when footballers are becoming increasingly anodyne, there is something refreshing about one who believes in something; anything. Not that you know it from the furious reaction. One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them, and sure enough McClean’s gesture provoked the sort of anger that the internet has turned into a performance art.

The criticism essentially runs thus: if McClean is content to earn a living in Britain, why does he hate it so much? Why not go back to where he came from (which, we should probably point out, is technically also Britain)?

This idea that earning a living from a country should entail tolerance for its customs and rituals remains surprisingly tenacious, if inconsistently applied. At what stage, for example, should we inform the Chinese and Russian investors buying up large swathes of London about the ancient British tradition that houses are lived in, rather than left empty and used as investment vehicles? Jose Mourinho, meanwhile, admitted in an interview last year that he dislikes British food. Are we obliged to lynch him, or can we just put him on a plane home? Instead, McClean’s lack of reverence is singled out, largely by the same people who thought Gazza pretending to play the flute during the Old Firm derby was absolutely hilarious.

In 1938 the England team famously performed the Nazi salute whilst playing in Berlin. And the irony is that had one of the England players dissented and turned his back on the swastika, he would now be hailed as a principled hero. McClean, meanwhile, is being reproached for turning his back on God Save The Queen, which as we’ve established isn’t even a good song. Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous.

The issue for the game here is obvious enough. Footballers seem increasingly disconnected from the wider world, and the McClean furore encapsulates why. Take a stand and get pilloried by fans, dressed down by your manager, painted as a troublemaker. Far better to keep your head down, son. Don’t cause any trouble. Face the flag.

That was well worth reading for the most quotable quote I've seen in a long time:

One of the great things about social media is that it allows you to find out what idiots are thinking without actually having to talk to them.

That's actually the worst thing about social media. If I wanted the opinion of idiots I'd ask for it.

Ah the irony.....
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: eddie d on July 23, 2015, 10:05:29 PM
"Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous"

Going by the photographs McClean faced the flag with everyone else, then turned away from it. Clearly bringing attention to himself.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: STREET FIGHTER on July 23, 2015, 11:47:56 PM
Each to their own.....

The castigation of JMcC here is unbelievable.

He his own views on the issues.

Rightly or wrongly he has shown great courage given the the backlash that was facing him.....
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 24, 2015, 12:25:45 AM
Each to their own.....

The castigation of JMcC here is unbelievable.

He his own views on the issues.

Rightly or wrongly he has shown great courage given the the backlash that was facing him.....

Castigation?? He's been called silly stupid or petulant.... And strong brave and having courage by others.. Get a grip.. Each to their point of view on the subject eh?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: trileacman on July 24, 2015, 12:40:09 AM
I actually really admire his stance on the poppy, it was always dignified and countered the perpetuation of the myth that the Englishmen killing Afghani shepherds from a Chinook were heroes. However his current actions aren't as readily defensible.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on July 24, 2015, 01:06:03 AM
I actually really admire his stance on the poppy, it was always dignified and countered the perpetuation of the myth that the Englishmen killing Afghani shepherds from a Chinook were heroes. However his current actions aren't as readily defensible.

I agree.

I wouldn't want to wear a poppy, but this is getting silly.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jell 0 Biafra on July 24, 2015, 03:51:29 AM
A bit off-topic, but what reason is there for anthems to be played at events not involving national teams anyway?   At a stretch, I can see it for finals, just to give a bit of pomp to the occasion, but this crack of playing the anthem--of whatever country--prior to most every match in every sport gives me a pain in the hoop.   

Would nearly make me re-evaluate in which country I draw my salary if every feckin country in the world wasn't at it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Two Hands FFS on July 24, 2015, 08:16:10 AM
Kirk Broadfoot given 10 match ban for sectarian abuse to McClean in match last season.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 24, 2015, 09:31:51 AM
"Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous"

Going by the photographs McClean faced the flag with everyone else, then turned away from it. Clearly bringing attention to himself.

I don't see the relationship between your comment and the bit you quoted.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: imtommygunn on July 24, 2015, 09:39:28 AM
Kirk Broadfoot given 10 match ban for sectarian abuse to McClean in match last season.
Chanting anti IRA slogans at him apparently.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 24, 2015, 09:44:09 AM
Kirk Broadfoot has been handed a staggering 10-game ban for a sectarian tirade against James McClean - Mirror

Kirk Broadfoot has been handed a staggering 10-game ban for launching a verbal tirade against James McClean - Daily Record

::)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: illdecide on July 24, 2015, 11:10:06 AM
I read this article in yesterday's Daily Mirror and thought it was good and actually someone with a bit of sense...



Asking God to save the British Army's commander-in-chief would, to quote one of his critics, be “insulting, stupid and hypocritical” to those he cares about
 
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991 (http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991)

 
 
Youtube/Charleston Battery James McClean turns his back during national anthem
Personal protest: McClean didn't turn to face the flag or sing the anthem     

There are several ways a footballer is usually shamed on the news pages, rather than the sports ones, during a summer.

He lets his country down by blasting a penalty over a bar in a foreign stadium, lets his club down by getting drunk in a Las Vegas swimming pool, or lets himself down as a kiss-and-tell merchant spills the beans on his inability to rise to the occasion in a budget hotel in Stoke.

But it’s rare for a player to get slaughtered on the news pages for refusing to let down his own people.

That is what  has happened to James McClean, after turning away from the flag of St George and refusing to sing the British national anthem before a game on West Brom’s US pre-season tour:

“Fury at Premier League star who turned his back on God Save the Queen” screamed a right-wing tabloid, extracting that fury from a rent-a-quote Democratic Ulster Unionist MP.

Meanwhile, a broadsheet football writer told his audience of retired generals that McClean’s behaviour was “insulting, stupid and hypocritical. This was a disrespectful act that hints at something ugly in his views.”

Naturally, there followed a thunderstorm of ill-informed, scum-based bile on Twitter with social media’s finest brains likening him to Jihadi John and calling for his deportation (which would be the first internal deportation ever).

As the Mail reminded us, Derry-born McClean is “no stranger to controversy” when it comes to Anglo-Irish politics, having previously refused to wear a shirt with a poppy sewn into it, as he saw it as “a gesture of disrespect for the innocent people who lost their lives in the Troubles.”

For those who don’t get that principle (or those who refuse to), let me explain.

McClean isn’t just another rabble-rousing Fenian who refuses to let the past go.



Gareth Copley 
Opting out: McClean plays without a poppy on his shirt for Wigan last season

He is a man from a specific area of a specific city which, until recently, was so subjugated by the British state that voting was rigged to ensure the unionist minority always ruled.

That, in turn, saw the Catholic majority kept at the bottom of the housing and job vacancy lists.

They took to the streets in civil-rights marches, which became anti-internment marches, like the one in 1972 in which British soldiers opened fire on 26 unarmed civilians, killing 14, many of whom were shot while fleeing or helping the wounded. And the truth of Bloody Sunday was denied and covered up by the British state for more than a generation.

That is why McClean can’t find it in him to pay tribute to the British Army, including its commander-in-chief the Queen.

Do you really think he should be forced to sing a ditty asking God to save her so she can reign over him, gloriously?

Christ only knows why the Yanks choose to play national anthems at club games anyway, but if a Palestinian whose relatives had been bombed in Gaza was playing for Maccabi Haifa in Texas, would we call him a hypocritical sc**bag for refusing to join in with the Israeli anthem?

How about a black American playing in Alabama and refusing to salute the Confederate flag?

Surely, unless you’ve lived inside their skin, you cannot moralise about their instinctive reaction?

McClean wasn’t saying he hated his English fans, team-mates or employers, but the symbols of the British state.

To many Derry Catholics that flag, and that anthem, open deep wounds.

Some, like Martin McGuinness, have been able to let the wounds heal. Others, like McClean, haven’t.

That’s why he feels uncomfortable asking God to save the head of the British Army. Because to quote one of his many hysterical critics, to do so would appear “insulting, stupid and hypocritical” to the people he cares about.

Which is why instead of attacking his treachery we should be commending his courage.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on July 24, 2015, 11:14:00 AM
Kirk Broadfoot has been handed a staggering 10-game ban for a sectarian tirade against James McClean - Mirror

Kirk Broadfoot has been handed a staggering 10-game ban for launching a verbal tirade against James McClean - Daily Record

::)

A new hero for the occupied six fans
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 24, 2015, 12:41:16 PM
Kirk Broadfoot has been handed a staggering 10-game ban for a sectarian tirade against James McClean - Mirror

Kirk Broadfoot has been handed a staggering 10-game ban for launching a verbal tirade against James McClean - Daily Record

::)

A new hero for the occupied six fans

Wouldn't have too many players in the Irish League playing if they handed out sectarian/verbal tirade during the games against Linfield and the rest ;) v  Cliftonville and DC
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: 50fiftyball on July 24, 2015, 04:55:25 PM
Surely the time is coming when English club chairmen and managers decide that he's just not worth the hassle?

There's only so many times you can stick two fingers up to your club's fan base.

Lad needs taught about when to fight his battles.

Exactly, how is he sticking two fingers up to the fanbase? He trains, plays, and represents the team and takes part in everything a team member is expected to do as a professional soccer player. If he turns his back on the English national anthem and flag that is 100% his own choice, show me a rule or point out somewhere in the book it states he must adhere to it? Your the one seeking attention, much like all his twitter criticisers, jumping on the media bandwagon and dragging down something which has absolutely nothing to do with the game of football itself.

It isn't in his contract, and until it is, he can play away and turn his back on the English flag before every game if that were the case.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on July 24, 2015, 05:10:00 PM
Exactly, how is he sticking two fingers up to the fanbase? He trains, plays, and represents the team and takes part in everything a team member is expected to do as a professional soccer player. If he turns his back on the English national anthem and flag that is 100% his own choice, show me a rule or point out somewhere in the book it states he must adhere to it? Your the one seeking attention, much like all his twitter criticisers, jumping on the media bandwagon and dragging down something which has absolutely nothing to do with the game of football itself.

It isn't in his contract, and until it is, he can play away and turn his back on the English flag before every game if that were the case.

When his next contract is coming up, a manager may look at him and think that AN Other is likely to be less hassle, there's not much difference between the two so this could be the tiebreaker etc

Then again, there's likely to be a manager out there who admires how:


Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: OakleafCounty on July 24, 2015, 05:15:33 PM
http://www.derryjournal.com/news/james-mcclean-backs-derry-name-change-bid-1-6868486 He loves the banter.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: eddie d on July 25, 2015, 12:18:07 AM
"Of course, the analogy doesn’t work, because it implies some sort of correlation between the Queen and the Nazi salute, which would be entirely ludicrous"

Going by the photographs McClean faced the flag with everyone else, then turned away from it. Clearly bringing attention to himself.

I don't see the relationship between your comment and the bit you quoted.

No relationship, the quotation was in reply to other posters referring to the English team and the Nazi salute in the 1930's
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: moysider on July 25, 2015, 12:53:59 AM
He agreed to play for an English team and is paid well. The season ticket pundits that are paying his wages must love that.
Nobody asked him to sing the bloody thing. Just stand up with the all the other lads and keep his mouth shut. Ulster rugby players playing for Ireland have been doing that for years, but they don t disrespect the anthem by turning away.

let him do his stuff on the pitch. He's a footballer - let him become a politician when he can't play footballer any more. He can play a bit but all I see mostly is a mess of tattoos and this disrespect to a club and fans that pays his wages.

He d want to cop himself on. If he doesn t like the vibe there why not go play in Greece or Turkey where they would be no chance of being offended?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: STREET FIGHTER on July 25, 2015, 01:01:07 AM
Each to their own.....

The castigation of JMcC here is unbelievable.

He his own views on the issues.

Rightly or wrongly he has shown great courage given the the backlash that was facing him.....

Castigation?? He's been called silly stupid or petulant.... And strong brave and having courage by others.. Get a grip.. Each to their point of view on the subject eh?

Good man.

Each to their own is right.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on July 25, 2015, 01:36:45 AM
Wonder what his reaction will be when the queen awards him an OBE for services to crap football teams.

Crap football teams? Really? What teams did you play for if the teams he played for are crap? Barca, Real Madrid?

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on July 25, 2015, 01:47:28 AM
All I see when watching that is a lad who realizes what is going to go down and does his best to make the best out of an uncomfortable situation, I am sure some of his mates on the team were pissed at him but fair fcuks to him.

There are enough shinners taking the queens shilling, why should McLean not do the same, the man is entitled to make a living and hold political views, as are we all.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Mayo4Sam14 on July 25, 2015, 01:49:22 AM
Duffleking, correct me if I'm wrong here, but is it okay to be disrespectful as long as a) it's only a little bit respectful, and b) it involves the UK? But in any other scenarios it'd be out of order?

Sheedy, an anthem playing before a a sporting event is a non story.  Happens across the world every minute of the day. Someone using that non event to make a political statement against the country in which he lives and works, well that actually is a story. Because it's downright disrespectful.

A political statement against the country Who invaded his country and killed many
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Mayo4Sam14 on July 25, 2015, 01:51:22 AM



Hero
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Mayo4Sam14 on July 25, 2015, 01:58:32 AM
I'm laughing at the fcukwits that are making an issue out of this!

I'm sure the non chav English wouldn't actually care he wasn't facing their flag or singing their anthem!

Let's get this clear - you are calling me a fcukwit for asking that someone has a bit of manners?

And then in your next statement you feel empowered enough to make a sweeping judgment about how all English people feel.

Ahem.

Its kind of like karma, maybe the English should've had a bit of manners and not invaded our country and started killing innocent people for fun, and, while were on the subject of manners, remember the golden rule of sharing. Well maybe if there's millions of people dying of starvation in the country next to you then maybe you stop taking their f**king food, the English could have stopped or at least severely lessened the impact of the famine at anytime
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Mayo4Sam14 on July 25, 2015, 02:07:54 AM
All I see when watching that is a lad who realizes what is going to go down and does his best to make the best out of an uncomfortable situation, I am sure some of his mates on the team were pissed at him but fair fcuks to him.

There are enough shinners taking the queens shilling, why should McLean not do the same, the man is entitled to make a living and hold political views, as are we all.

Exactly
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Mayo4Sam14 on July 25, 2015, 02:10:25 AM
Surprised by the amount of Brits on here
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Windmill abu on July 25, 2015, 02:29:53 AM
I, like many others grew up in "the six counties" during the troubles when sectarian abuse  in the workplace was rife. Thankfully the vast majority of obstacles preventing Catholics either achieving or maintaining employment have been abolished due to employment legislation.

If James McLean was called in front of his employers representative (Tony Pulis) to be admonished for not standing for GSTQ here, there would be equality campaigners and politicians queueing up to back his decision.

I would seriously doubt if facing the Union Flag is part of his employment contract.

I cannot find during (admittedly limited internet searching)W.B.A. having GSTQ played before overseas preseason tours before.

The more I look at it this seems to have been orchestrated to put McLean under pressure, where the UK employment legislation doesn't apply, for his refusal to wear the blood stained poppy which is almost obligatory while working in the UK.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyHarp on July 25, 2015, 07:06:17 AM
I, like many others grew up in "the six counties" during the troubles when sectarian abuse  in the workplace was rife. Thankfully the vast majority of obstacles preventing Catholics either achieving or maintaining employment have been abolished due to employment legislation.

If James McLean was called in front of his employers representative (Tony Pulis) to be admonished for not standing for GSTQ here, there would be equality campaigners and politicians queueing up to back his decision.

I would seriously doubt if facing the Union Flag is part of his employment contract.

I cannot find during (admittedly limited internet searching)W.B.A. having GSTQ played before overseas preseason tours before.

The more I look at it this seems to have been orchestrated to put McLean under pressure, where the UK employment legislation doesn't apply, for his refusal to wear the blood stained poppy which is almost obligatory while working in the UK.
[/b]

😅 I think we have finally lost the run off ourselves on this thread.......So, the situation as you see it is that WBA spent money on signing a player then orchestrate a scenario when they can put him under pressure with regards to a very sensitive issue relating to Northern Ireland because he wouldn't wear a poppy? Who do you think is behind this? WBA board? Tony Pulis? The Queen? The paranoia doesn't make life any easier! 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on July 25, 2015, 10:41:20 AM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: charlieTully on July 25, 2015, 11:15:18 AM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991

That sums it up perfectly. close this up now, nothing more to be said.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Windmill abu on July 25, 2015, 11:28:18 AM
I, like many others grew up in "the six counties" during the troubles when sectarian abuse  in the workplace was rife. Thankfully the vast majority of obstacles preventing Catholics either achieving or maintaining employment have been abolished due to employment legislation.

If James McLean was called in front of his employers representative (Tony Pulis) to be admonished for not standing for GSTQ here, there would be equality campaigners and politicians queueing up to back his decision.

I would seriously doubt if facing the Union Flag is part of his employment contract.

I cannot find during (admittedly limited internet searching)W.B.A. having GSTQ played before overseas preseason tours before.

The more I look at it this seems to have been orchestrated to put McLean under pressure, where the UK employment legislation doesn't apply, for his refusal to wear the blood stained poppy which is almost obligatory while working in the UK.
[/b]

😅 I think we have finally lost the run off ourselves on this thread.......So, the situation as you see it is that WBA spent money on signing a player then orchestrate a scenario when they can put him under pressure with regards to a very sensitive issue relating to Northern Ireland because he wouldn't wear a poppy? Who do you think is behind this? WBA board? Tony Pulis? The Queen? The paranoia doesn't make life any easier!

Unless WBA have a policy/habit of playing GSTQ at their overseas games, then why do it on this occasion when a player with known issues regarding Loyalty to the crown and crown forces is playing.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: T Fearon on July 25, 2015, 12:14:59 PM
I reckon Pulis was simply saying to Mc CLean,"I will shortly be facing relegation once again,I don't need this crap,just face the flag,any flag,when anyone's national anthem is being played,ffs!"
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on July 25, 2015, 02:32:47 PM
Surprised by the amount of Brits on here

No shit! I am not surprised, disgusted but not surprised.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Boycey on July 25, 2015, 03:10:40 PM
I, like many others grew up in "the six counties" during the troubles when sectarian abuse  in the workplace was rife. Thankfully the vast majority of obstacles preventing Catholics either achieving or maintaining employment have been abolished due to employment legislation.

If James McLean was called in front of his employers representative (Tony Pulis) to be admonished for not standing for GSTQ here, there would be equality campaigners and politicians queueing up to back his decision.

I would seriously doubt if facing the Union Flag is part of his employment contract.

I cannot find during (admittedly limited internet searching)W.B.A. having GSTQ played before overseas preseason tours before.

The more I look at it this seems to have been orchestrated to put McLean under pressure, where the UK employment legislation doesn't apply, for his refusal to wear the blood stained poppy which is almost obligatory while working in the UK.

You're away with the fairies if you think this was orchestrated to put pressure on McClean...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hardy on July 25, 2015, 03:16:59 PM

I, like many others grew up in "the six counties" during the troubles when sectarian abuse  in the workplace was rife. Thankfully the vast majority of obstacles preventing Catholics either achieving or maintaining employment have been abolished due to employment legislation.

If James McLean was called in front of his employers representative (Tony Pulis) to be admonished for not standing for GSTQ here, there would be equality campaigners and politicians queueing up to back his decision.

I would seriously doubt if facing the Union Flag is part of his employment contract.

I cannot find during (admittedly limited internet searching)W.B.A. having GSTQ played before overseas preseason tours before.

The more I look at it this seems to have been orchestrated to put McLean under pressure, where the UK employment legislation doesn't apply, for his refusal to wear the blood stained poppy which is almost obligatory while working in the UK.
[/b]

😅 I think we have finally lost the run off ourselves on this thread.......So, the situation as you see it is that WBA spent money on signing a player then orchestrate a scenario when they can put him under pressure with regards to a very sensitive issue relating to Northern Ireland because he wouldn't wear a poppy? Who do you think is behind this? WBA board? Tony Pulis? The Queen? The paranoia doesn't make life any easier!

Unless WBA have a policy/habit of playing GSTQ at their overseas games, then why do it on this occasion when a player with known issues regarding Loyalty to the crown and crown forces is playing.

As far as I could see, GSTQ wasn't played by WBA.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on July 25, 2015, 03:35:25 PM
Whisht now Hardy. Haven't you realised that a proud Irishman could never possibly step out of line, unless they were goaded or tricked into it by those devious, double-crossing, never-happy-unless-they're-up-to-no-good Brits?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 25, 2015, 04:17:02 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 04:30:04 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.

So one paper has one columnist who's view is same as yours and he's right? Nob
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 25, 2015, 04:37:25 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.

So one paper has one columnist who's view is same as yours and he's right? Nob
so your view is the same as the sun, the telegraph and the dup etc and you call me the nob. croppies lie down and know your place.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ludermor on July 25, 2015, 05:04:59 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 05:16:42 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.

So one paper has one columnist who's view is same as yours and he's right? Nob
so your view is the same as the sun, the telegraph and the dup etc and you call me the nob. croppies lie down and know your place.

I've put my view up, I thought he was silly and an attention seeker, I've lived in the thick of it for many years right through the troubles, I doubt very much this lad ever seen a fecking pee shooter during his time of troubles.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 05:21:31 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: east down gael on July 25, 2015, 05:52:16 PM
The man has a right to his political views no matter where or when he grew up.growing up 'in the thick of the troubles' doesn't give anyone more of a right to be less happy with what the British or their army have done here in the last 100 years.
  Also, growing up in the creggan I'm more than sure he would have seen as much as anyone, ceasefire or no ceasefire.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 07:27:07 PM
The man has a right to his political views no matter where or when he grew up.growing up 'in the thick of the troubles' doesn't give anyone more of a right to be less happy with what the British or their army have done here in the last 100 years.
  Also, growing up in the creggan I'm more than sure he would have seen as much as anyone, ceasefire or no ceasefire.

Don't be stupid...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on July 25, 2015, 08:08:42 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait

You guys do mean the 6 counties yes?  And not the loyalist 'Ulster'? If Tommy Bowes for example turned away you'd assume he was getting annoyed by fly buzzing around his hand or the like
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 08:37:22 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait

You guys do mean the 6 counties yes?  And not the loyalist 'Ulster'? If Tommy Bowes for example turned away you'd assume he was getting annoyed by fly buzzing around his hand or the like

Yes same Ulster you live in, now are you going to answer it or not?? And Tommy Bowe without the s
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on July 25, 2015, 09:34:41 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait

You guys do mean the 6 counties yes?  And not the loyalist 'Ulster'? If Tommy Bowes for example turned away you'd assume he was getting annoyed by fly buzzing around his hand or the like

Yes same Ulster you live in, now are you going to answer it or not?? And Tommy Bowe without the s

I wasn't asked a question.  I was just wondering about you ludermors definition of Ulster.  Re Mcclean, it doesnt bother me in the slightest what he does whilst standing to any anthem.  Very few boys let out a bigger roar of  COME ON DERRY than myself before amhran na bhfiann  has finished
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 25, 2015, 09:55:25 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 10:15:25 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?

Lets deal with the first one eh?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: hardstation on July 25, 2015, 10:19:27 PM
The man is there to play soccer. The club pays him money to play soccer. They don't pay him to remember young fellas who were sent out to be slaughtered in the fields of Flanders. They don't pay him to respect the queen.

The complete nonsense of playing national anthems, wearing poppies, black armbands, minutes silences, minutes applauses needs to be scrapped at all sporting events.

People pay their money to watch soccer, rugby, hurling or whatever chosen sport, not for a glorification of national sovereignty or emotional solidarity.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hardy on July 25, 2015, 10:36:53 PM
The complete nonsense of playing national anthems, wearing poppies, black armbands, minutes silences, minutes applauses needs to be scrapped at all sporting events.

Now we're starting to make sense.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: imtommygunn on July 25, 2015, 11:01:36 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?

What would the chances be of the palestinian playing for an israeli team?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 25, 2015, 11:20:21 PM
The man is there to play soccer. The club pays him money to play soccer. They don't pay him to remember young fellas who were sent out to be slaughtered in the fields of Flanders. They don't pay him to respect the queen.

The complete nonsense of playing national anthems, wearing poppies, black armbands, minutes silences, minutes applauses needs to be scrapped at all sporting events.

People pay their money to watch soccer, rugby, hurling or whatever chosen sport, not for a glorification of national sovereignty or emotional solidarity.

I've already agreed to that from the start
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: T Fearon on July 25, 2015, 11:32:18 PM
Last time GSTQ was played at a WBA game was the 1968 FA Cup Final when Jeff Astle netted the winner against Everton.

McClean would do well to observe protocol and concentrate on football.

On a more sickening note I read an interview with Sir Terence Wogan in the Daily Mail today.Apparently he lives close to Windsor Castle and frequently drops in for lunch with Her Majesty and says he practiced the "N Ireland" accent with her ahead of her last visit to the six counties so that she could understand conversations.Totally nauseating
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 25, 2015, 11:40:23 PM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?

What would the chances be of the palestinian playing for an israeli team?
what if the aforementioned Palestinian player was a left sided midfielder playing for wba in a pre season friendly against an Israeli team and they decided to play the anthems of the countries those teams came from? What if?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on July 25, 2015, 11:44:04 PM
Last time GSTQ was played at a WBA game was the 1968 FA Cup Final when Jeff Astle netted the winner against Everton.

McClean would do well to observe protocol and concentrate on football.

On a more sickening note I read an interview with Sir Terence Wogan in the Daily Mail today.Apparently he lives close to Windsor Castle and frequently drops in for lunch with Her Majesty and says he practiced the "N Ireland" accent with her ahead of her last visit to the six counties so that she could understand conversations.Totally nauseating
Why would a good Nationalist/Republican Irishman like yourself be reading Daily Mail or a story in it about the likes of Wogan.?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: T Fearon on July 25, 2015, 11:45:05 PM
Because it was free in a coffee shop! ;D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: hardstation on July 25, 2015, 11:45:17 PM
Wasn't there a case where somebody kicked up a fuss against sponsorship from Wonga or some company like that? A Newcastle player?

Follow protocol etc is all well and good but I remember being in Croke Park for a Tyrone and Armagh game and some eejit decided that a minute silence for the 7/7 bombings would be a good idea. What in undern fcuk it had to do with that match is beyond me. Many supporters from both counties let it be known that they were not keen on the idea.

Shite like that has no place in sport and should be rejected by all.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Nigel White on July 26, 2015, 12:01:34 AM
Last time GSTQ was played at a WBA game was the 1968 FA Cup Final when Jeff Estel netted the winner against Everton.

McClean would do well to observe protocol and concentrate on football.

On a more sickening note I read an interview with Sir Terence Wogan in the Daily Mail today.Apparently he lives close to Windsor Castle and frequently drops in for lunch with Her Majesty and says he practiced the "N Ireland" accent with her ahead of her last visit to the six counties so that she could understand conversations.Totally nauseating
I think Terry Wogan is a great guy and good luck to him if he's able to drop in to lunch with Her Majesty.  To be fair theres lots of things other than that that would nauseate me.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 26, 2015, 12:02:55 AM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?

What would the chances be of the palestinian playing for an israeli team?
what if the aforementioned Palestinian player was a left sided midfielder playing for wba in a pre season friendly against an Israeli team and they decided to play the anthems of the countries those teams came from? What if?

So now I know you are a nob, completely avoided the question with another question while not answering the question because of one columnists view,  you think you're right! Seriously?? Get back to primary school
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on July 26, 2015, 01:32:43 AM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.

So one paper has one columnist who's view is same as yours and he's right? Nob
so your view is the same as the sun, the telegraph and the dup etc and you call me the nob. croppies lie down and know your place.

I've put my view up, I thought he was silly and an attention seeker, I've lived in the thick of it for many years right through the troubles, I doubt very much this lad ever seen a fecking pee shooter during his time of troubles.

What the feck does it matter if he has seen a gun or not?

To have Republican views does not make you a militant.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on July 26, 2015, 06:48:51 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: omaghjoe on July 26, 2015, 07:20:30 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on July 26, 2015, 07:24:48 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on July 26, 2015, 10:03:45 AM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?

What would the chances be of the palestinian playing for an israeli team?
what if the aforementioned Palestinian player was a left sided midfielder playing for wba in a pre season friendly against an Israeli team and they decided to play the anthems of the countries those teams came from? What if?

So now I know you are a nob, completely avoided the question with another question while not answering the question because of one columnists view,  you think you're right! Seriously?? Get back to primary school
you have a view, i have a different view. i believe my view is right but there you go. your on this board long enough to know that once you have to resort to name calling or insults your starting to lose any argument but maybe you think it makes you sound big and clever. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 26, 2015, 10:35:25 AM
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/brian-reade-column-james-mcclean-6117991
couldnt have summed it up any better. all the mcclean knockers on here should be ashamed of themselves and theres plenty of our fellow posters who couldnt wait to come on and join with the DUP and the tory press in condeming him.
Would you have the same view if some Ulster rugby players turned their back when Amhrán Na bhFiann is played

Would be uproar ffs... But on columnist might say... Fair f**ks to the Ulster lad as he grew up..... No wait
strange comparison lads, what If a palestinian footballer refused to recognise the Israeli anthem would he be castigated as well?

What would the chances be of the palestinian playing for an israeli team?
what if the aforementioned Palestinian player was a left sided midfielder playing for wba in a pre season friendly against an Israeli team and they decided to play the anthems of the countries those teams came from? What if?

So now I know you are a nob, completely avoided the question with another question while not answering the question because of one columnists view,  you think you're right! Seriously?? Get back to primary school
you have a view, i have a different view. i believe my view is right but there you go. your on this board long enough to know that once you have to resort to name calling or insults your starting to lose any argument but maybe you think it makes you sound big and clever.

Fair enough but answer my question and well we agree to disagree eh?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on July 26, 2015, 08:52:40 PM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on July 26, 2015, 09:44:34 PM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on July 27, 2015, 11:48:22 AM
Some sensitive souls on here, I apologise for offending Wigan, WBA, Sunderland and Derry city. You are all special! On the point he should have faced the flag but hung his head. Just as the Northern RCs do on the the NI team, as previously stated. His taxes going towards the Ministry Of Defence is also a fair point.
There is a slight difference between NI Catholics playing for NI and James McClean. I believe playing for an English team he could have faced the flag and bowed his head. NI deliberately play the English anthem. NI Catholics can choose not to play for them. That said McClean seems to have taken a principled stand...right or wrong.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on July 27, 2015, 05:27:57 PM
Some sensitive souls on here, I apologise for offending Wigan, WBA, Sunderland and Derry city. You are all special! On the point he should have faced the flag but hung his head. Just as the Northern RCs do on the the NI team, as previously stated. His taxes going towards the Ministry Of Defence is also a fair point.
There is a slight difference between NI Catholics playing for NI and James McClean. I believe playing for an English team he could have faced the flag and bowed his head. NI deliberately play the English anthem. NI Catholics can choose not to play for them. That said McClean seems to have taken a principled stand...right or wrong.
GSTQ is the UK national anthem.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on July 27, 2015, 07:09:47 PM
Some sensitive souls on here, I apologise for offending Wigan, WBA, Sunderland and Derry city. You are all special! On the point he should have faced the flag but hung his head. Just as the Northern RCs do on the the NI team, as previously stated. His taxes going towards the Ministry Of Defence is also a fair point.
There is a slight difference between NI Catholics playing for NI and James McClean. I believe playing for an English team he could have faced the flag and bowed his head. NI deliberately play the English anthem. NI Catholics can choose not to play for them. That said McClean seems to have taken a principled stand...right or wrong.
GSTQ is the UK national anthem.
Well England is the only country that uses it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Nigel White on July 27, 2015, 11:41:24 PM
What happens if England is playing NI.  Do they play GSTQ twice?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 28, 2015, 12:32:55 AM
What happens if England is playing NI.  Do they play GSTQ twice?

They did at Windsor I believe, when they played it for the North the English booed it
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on July 28, 2015, 09:02:34 AM
Some sensitive souls on here, I apologise for offending Wigan, WBA, Sunderland and Derry city. You are all special! On the point he should have faced the flag but hung his head. Just as the Northern RCs do on the the NI team, as previously stated. His taxes going towards the Ministry Of Defence is also a fair point.
There is a slight difference between NI Catholics playing for NI and James McClean. I believe playing for an English team he could have faced the flag and bowed his head. NI deliberately play the English anthem. NI Catholics can choose not to play for them. That said McClean seems to have taken a principled stand...right or wrong.
GSTQ is the UK national anthem.
Still divisive and used by NI to show the croppies playing for them who's in charge. Its the UK NA because England decrees it so.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on July 29, 2015, 12:49:59 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: omaghjoe on July 29, 2015, 07:12:40 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

Missed this
 :D
Jaysus Main St for all my windin at ye, ye never unloaded like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWgp-vSs7zI


 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 29, 2015, 08:17:06 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

Main street I don't think James grew up in that environment either, if you have been to Derry post ceasefire I think the Catholics have it pretty good considering the make up of the city... Lovely place to and as far as cities go in N.I its very much catholic run...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 29, 2015, 05:14:29 PM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

Main street I don't think James grew up in that environment either, if you have been to Derry post ceasefire I think the Catholics have it pretty good considering the make up of the city... Lovely place to and as far as cities go in N.I its very much catholic run...
certain Derry city based friends of mine have told me that harassment of nationalists/republicans/Catholics was still going on in the City (city side) for years after GFA. I haven't heard anything about this in past two years from him but know that the resurgence of INLA in the city is for reasons arising from this.
so Derry isn't quite the quiet peaceful spot you might think it is. Maybe the city centre is...
again though maybe this has improved and changed in past two years ...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on July 29, 2015, 05:44:32 PM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

Main street I don't think James grew up in that environment either, if you have been to Derry post ceasefire I think the Catholics have it pretty good considering the make up of the city... Lovely place to and as far as cities go in N.I its very much catholic run...
certain Derry city based friends of mine have told me that harassment of nationalists/republicans/Catholics was still going on in the City (city side) for years after GFA. I haven't heard anything about this in past two years from him but know that the resurgence of INLA in the city is for reasons arising from this.
so Derry isn't quite the quiet peaceful spot you might think it is. Maybe the city centre is...
again though maybe this has improved and changed in past two years ...

OF COURSE IT IS GOING ON A DAILY BASIS!

MORE EVIDENCE TODAY, WHICH IS MORE SINISTER, THAT THE BRITISH ARMY WAS TAKING PART IN HOUSE RAIDS IN GALLIAGH.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 29, 2015, 11:46:41 PM
Right I'm confused... Is Derry back to the seventies and late 80's? Get a fecking grip lads ffs... Its prospering because of the equality it never had as is the other cities towns and villages around N.I..  Won't ever been a Irish utopia but a thousand times better than the shit hole we were subjected to
.. But hey some people are sun a different yarn and believe everything they are told
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on July 30, 2015, 03:20:45 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

But of course behind your remarkable pomposity, you didn't point out what EXACTLY my outrageous error was.

But then I don't expect you to explore that. The removal of articles 2 & 3 was a condition of the GFA no matter how much you want to pretend the facts are different.

Not a single supporter of McClean's actions is willing to address my point about his willingness to stand to attention to a partitionist anthem. Why is that?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JPGJOHNNYG on July 30, 2015, 09:53:20 AM
Timing or what? Its as if someone was reading this blog lol.

http://www.irishnews.com/news/2015/07/30/news/british-soldiers-involved-in-house-searches-in-derry-206404/
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: MoChara on July 30, 2015, 10:12:14 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

But of course behind your remarkable pomposity, you didn't point out what EXACTLY my outrageous error was.

But then I don't expect you to explore that. The removal of articles 2 & 3 was a condition of the GFA no matter how much you want to pretend the facts are different.

Not a single supporter of McClean's actions is willing to address my point about his willingness to stand to attention to a partitionist anthem. Why is that?

Amhrán na bhFiann was written in 1907, pre-partition, and is held as the national anthem of Ireland everyone whether you believe it to be 26 or 32 counties. And the Tri-colour predates that by the guts of a century.

If it was Irelands Call you might have a point but it isn't so you don't

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on July 30, 2015, 10:39:57 AM
Shouldn't he look away from the Free State flag also when the Free State Anthem is played? Especially since the removal of articles 2 & 3 in the GFA?

Or can you be pro-partition while holding strong Republican views?

Answers please, in football speak *, on a tattoo, on a wags arse, to the nearest Red Top.

* (e.g. well obviously, at the end of the day, we've got these views and he's entitled to go for the ball there...etc)

Huh? Articles 2 & 3 weren't removed in the GFA.

It was a condition of the GFA that a referendum to have them be removed be put to the people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Articles_2_and_3_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland)
Therefore it was the referendum result that did it,  not the GFA's commitment to hold a referendum.
Muppet, for a guy with pretence to superiority, looking down on McClean, you happen to  jump in with both feet and write some dumb nonsense yourself  ;D
You even make omaghjoe look smart  and that's some feat.

Oh ffs children! No GFA and we would still have articles 2 & 3. That was the quid pro quo. The 94.4% majority shows the referendum was merely a formality. So much for jumping in with nonsense.

And you accuse others of a 'pretence to superiority'.  ;D
Yet another pile of nonsenses from our aptly named Muppet.
You have a difficulty to express yourself with accuracy and clarity and in the context of  your condescending attitude to McClean you made a a serious error, which omaghjoe picked up on.
Not many would would take a bind bit of notice of what you predictably blabber on about, endlessly, in these nordie relates threads, but  in the context of yet another condescending post about republicans you fcked up and have not the moral fortitude to admit it. Whilst I am not surprised at the absence of moral courage,  I reserve the right to highlight it.
 
Fwiw I appreciates James' act of disengagement for what it was, a respectful act.
He didn't scratch his balls, chew gum, jump up and down stretching, feigning a careless action, he took a deliberate dignified respectful action. I don't necessarily  agree with it, but I didn't grow up in Derry with british government, british army, ruc, udr, b specials   sectarian stormont civil service, judiciary . uvf uda  etc  all  working in harmony trying to rectify me.
A "n+igger" in Alabama had more protection than a nationalist in Derry.
If it's in James' dna to act in that dignified way then i won't be poking fun at his intelligence.

But of course behind your remarkable pomposity, you didn't point out what EXACTLY my outrageous error was.

But then I don't expect you to explore that. The removal of articles 2 & 3 was a condition of the GFA no matter how much you want to pretend the facts are different.

Not a single supporter of McClean's actions is willing to address my point about his willingness to stand to attention to a partitionist anthem. Why is that?

That's because it's totally irrelevant.  My understanding is that McClean's objection to GSTQ is that it is the anthem of the country (sic) whose army and police forces (with the knowledge and backing of the Government) killed innocent people in his home town.  Your analogy would only work if the Gardai or Irish Army had done the same.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 30, 2015, 09:43:36 PM
Right I'm confused... Is Derry back to the seventies and late 80's? Get a fecking grip lads ffs... Its prospering because of the equality it never had as is the other cities towns and villages around N.I..  Won't ever been a Irish utopia but a thousand times better than the shit hole we were subjected to
.. But hey some people are sun a different yarn and believe everything they are told
Go check it out chief!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 30, 2015, 09:47:28 PM
Right I'm confused... Is Derry back to the seventies and late 80's? Get a fecking grip lads ffs... Its prospering because of the equality it never had as is the other cities towns and villages around N.I..  Won't ever been a Irish utopia but a thousand times better than the shit hole we were subjected to
.. But hey some people are sun a different yarn and believe everything they are told
Go check it out chief!!

I've been recently. Probably more recently than you I'd imagine
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 30, 2015, 11:14:59 PM
Right I'm confused... Is Derry back to the seventies and late 80's? Get a fecking grip lads ffs... Its prospering because of the equality it never had as is the other cities towns and villages around N.I..  Won't ever been a Irish utopia but a thousand times better than the shit hole we were subjected to
.. But hey some people are sun a different yarn and believe everything they are told
Go check it out chief!!

I've been recently. Probably more recently than you I'd imagine
Undoubtedly you have!
But where did you visit - did you not see the post from the Derry city native?

I'm avoiding the place tbh but could find out handy enough.
But given tickles post and the resurgence of inla - I know it's not all sweetness and light up around top of the hill on waterside or in creggan and rosemount estates

How else would the inla get so much support again? Fond reminiscing?

I'd doubt if it is as bad as 70's/80's but I have posted on here in the past that There is a prob with excessive police harassment in Derry city environs.

Don't get all prissy with me over this! It's no big deal ( for us anyway)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thebigfella on July 30, 2015, 11:57:38 PM
Right I'm confused... Is Derry back to the seventies and late 80's? Get a fecking grip lads ffs... Its prospering because of the equality it never had as is the other cities towns and villages around N.I..  Won't ever been a Irish utopia but a thousand times better than the shit hole we were subjected to
.. But hey some people are sun a different yarn and believe everything they are told
Go check it out chief!!

I've been recently. Probably more recently than you I'd imagine
Undoubtedly you have!
But where did you visit - did you not see the post from the Derry city native?

I'm avoiding the place tbh but could find out handy enough.
But given tickles post and the resurgence of inla - I know it's not all sweetness and light up around top of the hill on waterside or in creggan and rosemount estates

How else would the inla get so much support again? Fond reminiscing?

I'd doubt if it is as bad as 70's/80's but I have posted on here in the past that There is a prob with excessive police harassment in Derry city environs.

Don't get all prissy with me over this! It's no big deal ( for us anyway)

The supporters DLA was cut?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on July 31, 2015, 12:16:21 AM
Right I'm confused... Is Derry back to the seventies and late 80's? Get a fecking grip lads ffs... Its prospering because of the equality it never had as is the other cities towns and villages around N.I..  Won't ever been a Irish utopia but a thousand times better than the shit hole we were subjected to
.. But hey some people are sun a different yarn and believe everything they are told
Go check it out chief!!

I've been recently. Probably more recently than you I'd imagine
Undoubtedly you have!
But where did you visit - did you not see the post from the Derry city native?

I'm avoiding the place tbh but could find out handy enough.
But given tickles post and the resurgence of inla - I know it's not all sweetness and light up around top of the hill on waterside or in creggan and rosemount estates

How else would the inla get so much support again? Fond reminiscing?

I'd doubt if it is as bad as 70's/80's but I have posted on here in the past that There is a prob with excessive police harassment in Derry city environs.

Don't get all prissy with me over this! It's no big deal ( for us anyway)

The supporters DLA was cut?

What a witty retort.


Yawn.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on July 31, 2015, 12:58:15 PM
Since when did police searching for evidence of dissident criminality become harassment? Are they supposed to allow these areas to be run by the INLA/CIRA/RIRA etc?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: OakleafCounty on July 31, 2015, 02:05:06 PM
Since when did police searching for evidence of dissident criminality become harassment? Are they supposed to allow these areas to be run by the INLA/CIRA/RIRA etc?

I know, how dare they do their jobs. The people that are being 'harassed' are well known dissidents like Gary Donnelly. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on July 31, 2015, 02:55:11 PM
Since when did police searching for evidence of dissident criminality become harassment? Are they supposed to allow these areas to be run by the INLA/CIRA/RIRA etc?

I know, how dare they do their jobs. The people that are being 'harassed' are well known dissidents like Gary Donnelly.
feck the dissidents
the info I had was that ordinary folk were getting the heavy handed approach and ott stuff as if times hadn't changed.
again that info is from two years or so ago.
but this kind of behaviour has played into the hands of the dissidents / inla specifically
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on July 31, 2015, 04:59:27 PM
Yes, people with no affiliation to Republican groups are being stopped and searched.

Republicans who don't support militant action are getting stopped and searched.

Families of Republicans are getting stopped and searched. The home of Peggy O'Hara who died recently had her house searched while the mourners were grieving.

The British army are still here and how many people have come out on this board and condemned it? The vast majority of the posts want more harassment of the local people of Derry than the 're-emergence' of foreign soldiers on our streets.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: OakleafCounty on July 31, 2015, 05:56:09 PM
Yes, people with no affiliation to Republican groups are being stopped and searched.

Republicans who don't support militant action are getting stopped and searched.

Families of Republicans are getting stopped and searched. The home of Peggy O'Hara who died recently had her house searched while the mourners were grieving.

The British army are still here and how many people have come out on this board and condemned it? The vast majority of the posts want more harassment of the local people of Derry than the 're-emergence' of foreign soldiers on our streets.

Who?

Of course Peggy O'Haras home was going to be searched. People dressed in their INLA clothing were in and around it the previous day. If there were no dissidents there wouldn't need to be searches.

The vast majority of people in Derry are not being stopped by the police let alone army who I have seen in over a decade.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on July 31, 2015, 06:22:53 PM
Yes, people with no affiliation to Republican groups are being stopped and searched.

Republicans who don't support militant action are getting stopped and searched.

Families of Republicans are getting stopped and searched. The home of Peggy O'Hara who died recently had her house searched while the mourners were grieving.

The British army are still here and how many people have come out on this board and condemned it? The vast majority of the posts want more harassment of the local people of Derry than the 're-emergence' of foreign soldiers on our streets.

Was up in Derry last week and didn't even see police nevermind getting searched!!

But in all fairness what is the police to do?? They cant just phone them up and say, hey we got a tip off and we'd like to search your house!!  The sooner everybody moves on the better... Christ I remember the weekly raids during the summers of my youth!! Was bit surreal looking back
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: MoChara on August 03, 2015, 10:30:33 AM
If you think there isn't a disparity in policing in the North you need look no further than the 12th where an Orangeman tried to run over people in a car and got bail, yet the peelers recommended two people "provocatively" waving a tricolor were refused. By all means it sounds like the two fellas were fools but I can't imagine they are the greater menace to society.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on August 03, 2015, 01:03:16 PM
If you think there isn't a disparity in policing in the North you need look no further than the 12th where an Orangeman tried to run over people in a car and got bail, yet the peelers recommended two people "provocatively" waving a tricolor were refused. By all means it sounds like the two fellas were fools but I can't imagine they are the greater menace to society.

That's a courts thing and nothing to do with policing, I may be wrong on that.... And we are going off thread... Its fair to say some posters think he's a fool and some don't... I doubt very much he gives a shit.. But for ones saying Derry is like the bad old days is completely wrong
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lynchbhoy on August 03, 2015, 02:16:44 PM
If you think there isn't a disparity in policing in the North you need look no further than the 12th where an Orangeman tried to run over people in a car and got bail, yet the peelers recommended two people "provocatively" waving a tricolor were refused. By all means it sounds like the two fellas were fools but I can't imagine they are the greater menace to society.

That's a courts thing and nothing to do with policing, I may be wrong on that.... And we are going off thread... Its fair to say some posters think he's a fool and some don't... I doubt very much he gives a shit.. But for ones saying Derry is like the bad old days is completely wrong
It is prob not as bad as the 'bad old days' but it's not right and intentionally harassing non Political people is not going on elsewhere as far as I've heard! Plus that kind of mentality and heavy handed policing belongs in the bad old days.
You might know a bit about that belfast cesspit but it's obv you are not up to speed and know sfa and even less than I do about modern day Derry city and such happenings in surrounding suburbs
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on August 03, 2015, 02:24:23 PM
Some times people go out of their way to be harassed.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on August 03, 2015, 02:28:38 PM
If you think there isn't a disparity in policing in the North you need look no further than the 12th where an Orangeman tried to run over people in a car and got bail, yet the peelers recommended two people "provocatively" waving a tricolor were refused. By all means it sounds like the two fellas were fools but I can't imagine they are the greater menace to society.

That's a courts thing and nothing to do with policing, I may be wrong on that.... And we are going off thread... Its fair to say some posters think he's a fool and some don't... I doubt very much he gives a shit.. But for ones saying Derry is like the bad old days is completely wrong
It is prob not as bad as the 'bad old days' but it's not right and intentionally harassing non Political people is not going on elsewhere as far as I've heard! Plus that kind of mentality and heavy handed policing belongs in the bad old days.
You might know a bit about that belfast cesspit but it's obv you are not up to speed and know sfa and even less than I do about modern day Derry city and such happenings in surrounding suburbs

Thankfully I don't, be there once every other week for work and like Belfast I've never been given that heavy handed policing but hey maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: MoChara on August 03, 2015, 05:24:36 PM
If you think there isn't a disparity in policing in the North you need look no further than the 12th where an Orangeman tried to run over people in a car and got bail, yet the peelers recommended two people "provocatively" waving a tricolor were refused. By all means it sounds like the two fellas were fools but I can't imagine they are the greater menace to society.

That's a courts thing and nothing to do with policing, I may be wrong on that.... And we are going off thread... Its fair to say some posters think he's a fool and some don't... I doubt very much he gives a shit.. But for ones saying Derry is like the bad old days is completely wrong

The decision to give bail is the court but the PSNI make their recommendations based on their version of events.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: cornerback on August 10, 2015, 11:03:50 PM
http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643 (http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on August 10, 2015, 11:53:00 PM
World still turning
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jeepers Creepers on August 11, 2015, 08:59:48 AM
http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643 (http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643)

Was checking The Guardian live match feed last night and even they pointed out how odd that Alan Parry refer to him as the 'NorthernIreland man from Londonderry....
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on August 11, 2015, 09:21:40 AM
If you think there isn't a disparity in policing in the North you need look no further than the 12th where an Orangeman tried to run over people in a car and got bail, yet the peelers recommended two people "provocatively" waving a tricolor were refused. By all means it sounds like the two fellas were fools but I can't imagine they are the greater menace to society.

That's a courts thing and nothing to do with policing, I may be wrong on that.... And we are going off thread... Its fair to say some posters think he's a fool and some don't... I doubt very much he gives a shit.. But for ones saying Derry is like the bad old days is completely wrong
It is prob not as bad as the 'bad old days' but it's not right and intentionally harassing non Political people is not going on elsewhere as far as I've heard! Plus that kind of mentality and heavy handed policing belongs in the bad old days.
You might know a bit about that belfast cesspit but it's obv you are not up to speed and know sfa and even less than I do about modern day Derry city and such happenings in surrounding suburbs
LB Im from and live in Derry City.  Your talking balls.   
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Esmarelda on August 11, 2015, 09:22:48 AM
World still turning
Indeed I don't think there's been an event that has changed that, and certainly not one originating from the GAA board.

Should we down keyboards?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on August 11, 2015, 09:25:49 AM
World still turning
Indeed I don't think there's been an event that has changed that, and certainly not one originating from the GAA board.

Should we down keyboards?

Yes
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on August 11, 2015, 09:45:08 AM
http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643 (http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643)

Was checking The Guardian live match feed last night and even they pointed out how odd that Alan Parry refer to him as the 'NorthernIreland man from Londonderry....


I don't think it was odd - it was very pointed though. Lads have been sacked for less by this same company. Pretty poor from the commentator is you ask me.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on August 11, 2015, 10:00:18 AM
http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643 (http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643)

Was checking The Guardian live match feed last night and even they pointed out how odd that Alan Parry refer to him as the 'NorthernIreland man from Londonderry....


I don't think it was odd - it was very pointed though. Lads have been sacked for less by this same company. Pretty poor from the commentator is you ask me.

Agreed. Why would he bother? It was so specific and pointed that it was obviously intentional. And he'd know McLean played for the RoI, so it was a political statement in my view. Probably annoyed at McLean's actions re poppies and GSTQ.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Walter Cronc on August 11, 2015, 10:07:50 AM
http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643 (http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643)

Was checking The Guardian live match feed last night and even they pointed out how odd that Alan Parry refer to him as the 'NorthernIreland man from Londonderry....


I don't think it was odd - it was very pointed though. Lads have been sacked for less by this same company. Pretty poor from the commentator is you ask me.

Yeah but Sky cant really charge him can they?? Technically he did'nt state anything wrong.....the bollix!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on August 11, 2015, 10:16:39 AM
McClean should be more concerned about getting hauled off at half time on his debut than anything a commentator says.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on August 11, 2015, 10:17:19 AM
McClean should be more concerned about getting hauled off at half time on his debut than anything a commentator says.

True too. And looking like he wouldn't get a kick in a horsebox.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on August 11, 2015, 10:19:27 AM
Am I imagining it, or did Roy Keane once avoid shaking Prince Charles' hand when collecting the FA Cup off him? I thought I read that before, but maybe I'm raving.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Esmarelda on August 11, 2015, 10:25:06 AM
World still turning
Indeed I don't think there's been an event that has changed that, and certainly not one originating from the GAA board.

Should we down keyboards?

Yes
On all topics that don't stop the world turning?

You really shouldn't have bothered replying to me at all then.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on August 11, 2015, 10:46:49 AM
McClean should be more concerned about getting hauled off at half time on his debut than anything a commentator says.


I'm sure he is.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: gallsman on August 11, 2015, 11:00:33 AM
Someone on twitter pointed out that he'd hardly refer to Sterling as "the Jamaican" which I thought quite funny. True, too.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: snoopdog on August 11, 2015, 11:26:43 AM
Is mc clean not from Derry Londonderry and is that 2 named city not in a place recognised as northern ireland. God some people have little to worry about
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on August 11, 2015, 12:53:47 PM
Someone on twitter pointed out that he'd hardly refer to Sterling as "the Jamaican" which I thought quite funny. True, too.

Once the truth is out about drug junkie Mo Farah then he will become Mohammad Farah.

I suspect a similar fate for the cricketer Moeen Ali.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on August 11, 2015, 12:58:07 PM
Someone on twitter pointed out that he'd hardly refer to Sterling as "the Jamaican" which I thought quite funny. True, too.

Once the truth is out about drug junkie Mo Farah then he will become Mohammad Farah.

I suspect a similar fate for the cricketer Moeen Ali.

Hmm. Monty Panesar has not become Mudhsuden Singh Panesar now that he is on slow slide to obscurity (and possibly worse).
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Walter Cronc on August 11, 2015, 01:00:09 PM
Someone on twitter pointed out that he'd hardly refer to Sterling as "the Jamaican" which I thought quite funny. True, too.

Once the truth is out about drug junkie Mo Farah then he will become Mohammad Farah.

I suspect a similar fate for the cricketer Moeen Ali.

Hmm. Monty Panesar has not become Mudhsuden Singh Panesar now that he is on slow slide to obscurity (and possibly worse).

Monty is a Sikh. Big difference in attitudes towards Sikhs and Muslims
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on August 11, 2015, 02:09:12 PM
Monty is a Sikh. Big difference in attitudes towards Sikhs and Muslims

I recall being sat on a bus where a passenger pointed at a Sikh outside and yelled "f*** off Bin Laden!" I think you overstate how clued in people are about the differences between the two.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Walter Cronc on August 11, 2015, 02:12:56 PM
Monty is a Sikh. Big difference in attitudes towards Sikhs and Muslims

I recall being sat on a bus where a passenger pointed at a Sikh outside and yelled "f*** off Bin Laden!" I think you overstate how clued in people are about the differences between the two.

I wasn't referring to the general public, more the written press and sporting media.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on August 11, 2015, 02:18:06 PM
I wasn't referring to the general public, more the written press and sporting media.

Fair enough, you might be right there.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on August 11, 2015, 03:11:34 PM
Monty is a Sikh. Big difference in attitudes towards Sikhs and Muslims

I recall being sat on a bus where a passenger pointed at a Sikh outside and yelled "f*** off Bin Laden!" I think you overstate how clued in people are about the differences between the two.

Was it Dan Quayle?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: mylestheslasher on August 11, 2015, 04:16:25 PM
http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643 (http://www.joe.ie/sport/sky-sports-commentator-says-james-mcclean-is-from-londonderry-twitter-gets-angry/507643)

Was checking The Guardian live match feed last night and even they pointed out how odd that Alan Parry refer to him as the 'NorthernIreland man from Londonderry....


I don't think it was odd - it was very pointed though. Lads have been sacked for less by this same company. Pretty poor from the commentator is you ask me.

I have a skybox thing that allows me to watch Sky for free (well for £20 a year) , all the channels and sport etc. I think I am going to get two more now and cancel the basic sky package I have. Alan Parry would be better talk shite about soccer than talk shite about something his tiny brain cant comprehend.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on August 11, 2015, 05:37:45 PM
Alan Parry and James McClean are two (Petty) peas in a pod.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on September 10, 2015, 01:04:20 AM
A message from Sean Dolans GAC (Creggan, Derry City)

The club would like to thank former Sean Dolans player and West Brom and Ireland winger James McClean for offering to sponsor a new team kit for the senior team. Fair play James for not forgetting your roots and thanks very much
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on September 10, 2015, 06:57:14 AM
Legend
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on September 10, 2015, 07:28:56 AM
Great lad and not a bad player either
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ludermor on September 10, 2015, 07:54:03 AM
Legend

Doesn't take much to be considered a legend these days.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on September 10, 2015, 07:55:55 AM
Wait to ye hear the craic when the Birmingham lads find out who Sean Dolan was!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on September 10, 2015, 08:02:27 AM
Legend

Doesn't take much to be considered a legend these days.
Okay.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on September 29, 2015, 12:09:39 AM

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Tony Baloney on September 29, 2015, 12:21:25 AM
Good man James.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: joemamas on September 29, 2015, 01:01:11 AM
Good man James.

Good for him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on October 04, 2015, 10:41:46 PM
I was at Selhurst Park on Saturday and saw James play very well. Brunt got more abuse than McLean, because of previous. But the Palace fans are great and the Ultras never stopped singing and were very entertaining, as was the eagle flying up and down the pitch and the Crystals cheerleaders.

And then I met James in Belfast City airport (we must have been on the same flight home) - top man!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Gabriel_Hurl on October 17, 2015, 08:17:26 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on October 17, 2015, 08:34:40 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see

He celebrates with his fans,  an opposition player acts the big man towards him.  What did you want mcclean to do?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 17, 2015, 08:43:02 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see

He celebrates with his fans,  an opposition player acts the big man towards him.  What did you want mcclean to do?

Which fans did he celebrate in front of?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on October 17, 2015, 08:48:02 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see

He celebrates with his fans,  an opposition player acts the big man towards him.  What did you want mcclean to do?


Which fans did he celebrate in front of?

He raises a fist to the away fans who've baited him all game.  In bother?  Newsworthy?  Naw
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 17, 2015, 08:55:41 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see

He celebrates with his fans,  an opposition player acts the big man towards him.  What did you want mcclean to do?


Which fans did he celebrate in front of?

He raises a fist to the away fans who've baited him all game.  In bother?  Newsworthy?  Naw

That is quite a step from what you said first up though.

As for baiting, as a small example, all those black players of the 1970s, 1980s & even into the 1990s managed to ignore far worse baiting without reacting.

Why is it always James? I know it was probably an impulsive reaction that he would rather hadn't happened, but it is newsworthy, and his club will be pissed off.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on October 17, 2015, 09:09:19 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see

He celebrates with his fans,  an opposition player acts the big man towards him.  What did you want mcclean to do?


Which fans did he celebrate in front of?

He raises a fist to the away fans who've baited him all game.  In bother?  Newsworthy?  Naw

That is quite a step from what you said first up though.

As for baiting, as a small example, all those black players of the 1970s, 1980s & even into the 1990s managed to ignore far worse baiting without reacting.

Why is it always James? I know it was probably an impulsive reaction that he would rather hadn't happened, but it is newsworthy, and his club will be pissed off.

His own fans didn't sound too pissed off.  I suppose it's today's 'hate'  topic.  All aboard
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rodney trotter on October 17, 2015, 09:17:49 PM
http://t.co/BYFG0NYo4d
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 17, 2015, 09:20:23 PM
The boy in a bit of bother today as well I see

He celebrates with his fans,  an opposition player acts the big man towards him.  What did you want mcclean to do?


Which fans did he celebrate in front of?

He raises a fist to the away fans who've baited him all game.  In bother?  Newsworthy?  Naw

That is quite a step from what you said first up though.

As for baiting, as a small example, all those black players of the 1970s, 1980s & even into the 1990s managed to ignore far worse baiting without reacting.

Why is it always James? I know it was probably an impulsive reaction that he would rather hadn't happened, but it is newsworthy, and his club will be pissed off.

His own fans didn't sound too pissed off.  I suppose it's today's 'hate'  topic.  All aboard

Ah right.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 18, 2015, 08:58:06 AM
So players are expected to take dogs abuse and not react. Is this because players are supposed to be "role models" and not just lads who can run about and kick a ball?

People need to cop on. He clenched his fist to give a wee bit back to the crowd who were at him all day. Fair play to him. The abuse probably drove him on to win the game so well done idiot Sunderland fans. Hope ye go down and bring big Sham with ye.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on October 18, 2015, 09:19:39 AM
So players are expected to take dogs abuse and not react. Is this because players are supposed to be "role models" and not just lads who can run about and kick a ball?

People need to cop on. He clenched his fist to give a wee bit back to the crowd who were at him all day. Fair play to him. The abuse probably drove him on to win the game so well done idiot Sunderland fans. Hope ye go down and bring big Sham with ye.

Nothing really in that ..... Very hard not to react to d**kheads who abuse you the whole game... You should try and be a referee... Feck it never stops, usually last game of the season you give a bit back... The look on their faces 😊

Anyway he got my bet up.. Well done lad
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 18, 2015, 09:42:24 AM
I did try to be a ref but they wouldn't have me! Signed up last spring and only got told about the course half an hour before it started. They only want to recruit young lads (teenagers/early twenties) who never played football in their lives.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on October 18, 2015, 09:46:19 AM
I did try to be a ref but they wouldn't have me! Signed up last spring and only got told about the course half an hour before it started. They only want to recruit young lads (teenagers/early twenties) who never played football in their lives.

That's mad.... You need game experience... If you've played senior at the very least you'll get some respect... Poor selection process but I suppose in soccer how many of those referees played at a decent level?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 18, 2015, 10:47:45 AM
So players are expected to take dogs abuse and not react. Is this because players are supposed to be "role models" and not just lads who can run about and kick a ball?

People need to cop on. He clenched his fist to give a wee bit back to the crowd who were at him all day. Fair play to him. The abuse probably drove him on to win the game so well done idiot Sunderland fans. Hope ye go down and bring big Sham with ye.

No. It is because professional footballers are expected to be professional.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 18, 2015, 11:02:32 AM
So players are expected to take dogs abuse and not react. Is this because players are supposed to be "role models" and not just lads who can run about and kick a ball?

People need to cop on. He clenched his fist to give a wee bit back to the crowd who were at him all day. Fair play to him. The abuse probably drove him on to win the game so well done idiot Sunderland fans. Hope ye go down and bring big Sham with ye.

No. It is because professional footballers are expected to be professional.


What does that mean? Professional doesn't mean you're not human! I'm sure there were plenty of "professionals" abusing him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 18, 2015, 11:10:40 AM
McClean is a tool. Trouble follows him everywhere like a bad smell, mainly of his own doing.
I'm sure its not nice listening to abuse from the crowd but he isn't the only player who gets it.
You don't see other players reacting like him. He's getting well paid to kick a ball around for 90mins,he should shut the fcuk up and get on with it and stop reacting to every knob who shouts (or tweets) abuse to him
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 18, 2015, 11:16:23 AM
So the consensus is that it's ok to shout abuse at people if they are well paid and in the public eye. If the receiver of the abuse reacts in even a minor way they are the villain.

I don't accept that narrative. To me that's absolute rubbish.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 18, 2015, 11:17:08 AM
McClean is a tool. Trouble follows him everywhere like a bad smell, mainly of his own doing.
I'm sure its not nice listening to abuse from the crowd but he isn't the only player who gets it.
You don't see other players reacting like him. He's getting well paid to kick a ball around for 90mins,he should shut the fcuk up and get on with it and stop reacting to every knob who shouts (or tweets) abuse to him


At least he's not biting or racially abusing opponents I suppose.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 18, 2015, 11:17:47 AM
McClean is a tool. Trouble follows him everywhere like a bad smell, mainly of his own doing.
I'm sure its not nice listening to abuse from the crowd but he isn't the only player who gets it.
You don't see other players reacting like him. He's getting well paid to kick a ball around for 90mins,he should shut the fcuk up and get on with it and stop reacting to every knob who shouts (or tweets) abuse to him


At least he's not biting or racially abusing opponents I suppose.
Grow up.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 18, 2015, 11:19:06 AM
McClean is a tool. Trouble follows him everywhere like a bad smell, mainly of his own doing.
I'm sure its not nice listening to abuse from the crowd but he isn't the only player who gets it.
You don't see other players reacting like him. He's getting well paid to kick a ball around for 90mins,he should shut the fcuk up and get on with it and stop reacting to every knob who shouts (or tweets) abuse to him


At least he's not biting or racially abusing opponents I suppose.
Grow up.


 ;D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 18, 2015, 11:28:53 AM
So the consensus is that it's ok to shout abuse at people if they are well paid and in the public eye. If the receiver of the abuse reacts in even a minor way they are the villain.

I don't accept that narrative. To me that's absolute rubbish.
He didn't react in a minor way, he went to to the away fans to goad them.
I can guarantee if an ex United player done the same to united fans you'd be the first on here crying about it.
McClean should just get on with being the average footballer that he is.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ziggy90 on October 18, 2015, 11:41:18 AM
McClean was dead right, don't give it if you can't take it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: GJL on October 18, 2015, 01:11:07 PM
Fair play to him. The lad stands up for what he believes in.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on October 18, 2015, 02:37:26 PM
Fair play to him. The lad stands up for what he believes in.

And in fairness, he has not said anything out of order when he does open his mouth.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 18, 2015, 05:15:19 PM
So players are expected to take dogs abuse and not react. Is this because players are supposed to be "role models" and not just lads who can run about and kick a ball?

People need to cop on. He clenched his fist to give a wee bit back to the crowd who were at him all day. Fair play to him. The abuse probably drove him on to win the game so well done idiot Sunderland fans. Hope ye go down and bring big Sham with ye.

No. It is because professional footballers are expected to be professional.


What does that mean? Professional doesn't mean you're not human! I'm sure there were plenty of "professionals" abusing him.

It means you must behave according to your contractual obligations, which includes amongst other things, a code of conduct. If you don't want to be bound by a code of conduct, or any rules, don't sign the contract.

I expect him to face a disrepute charge, and imho he deserves it.

Why, like Balotelli, is it always McClean?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: mylestheslasher on October 18, 2015, 09:51:07 PM
Personally I think if some lout in the crowd is roaring sectarian abuse at you then you can goad away, f**k them. You may not like  McClean and maybe he is only an average footballer but he does possess some principles which in the modern day of filthy rich ball bags diving and cheating, is ok by me.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 19, 2015, 06:24:54 AM
Personally I think if some lout in the crowd is roaring sectarian abuse at you then you can goad away, f**k them. You may not like  McClean and maybe he is only an average footballer but he does possess some principles which in the modern day of filthy rich ball bags diving and cheating, is ok by me.

Principles are fine, I agree with his not wearing the poppy for example. I wouldn't wear it.

But this has become a circus and everytime he reacts the circus gets bigger.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: nrico2006 on October 19, 2015, 08:16:22 AM
Surely we should know now that in the opinions of some tubes on this board that it is not ok to give out or talk about GAA players as they are 'amateurs' but it is fine if someone is getting paid.

Not a big McClean fan but this weekends incident is nothing he should be condemned for, sticking the fist in the air to opposition fans is hardly a big deal and it really doesn't offend anyone either - on the otherhand though, the fans shouting sectarian abuse at him for 90 minutes are the ones in the wrong here but sure blah blah blah he is a professional and shouldn't react blah blah blah.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: illdecide on October 19, 2015, 08:53:47 AM
I agree with nrico here...a lot of you guys getting your knickers in a twist over nothing. He got verbally abused all during the game and went over after the game to shake his fist back at them to celebrate his teams victory and now he's a tool or whatever else he got called...FFS talk about making mountains out of molehills. He got stick and gave a bit back...end of story, doesn't matter if he's an amateur or a wealthy professional footballer. What difference does that make.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: imtommygunn on October 19, 2015, 08:57:18 AM
Sure loads of guys scoring in the premier league etc go over to away fans and put their hand behind their ear to suggest that they can't hear them any more. Happens quite regularly...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: annapr on October 19, 2015, 09:51:23 AM
Tony Pulis summed it up pretty well when he said McClean isn't the sharpest tool in the box.
He's only causing more trouble for himself by doing stupid things like he did on Saturday.
He should just ignore it and get on with it,now he has only gone and made sure he will get even more abuse in the future, but then as Pulis indicated he probably hasn't the brains to realise that.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on October 19, 2015, 10:04:08 AM
Didn't Gary Neville do something similar to Liverpool fans after United got a late winner at Old Trafford? I don't see much harm in it to be honest. At least it shows they care a bit. McLean probably shouldn't get involved, as it would make life easier for him, but you know sometimes, f**k them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: balladmaker on October 19, 2015, 10:14:11 AM
Fair play to him, he's passionate about his football, the win meant a lot to him, so he's entitled to express his emotions at the end.  He clenched his fist, big deal, was hardly the Nazi salute or two fingers ffs. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: orangeman on October 19, 2015, 10:18:53 AM
Tony Pulis summed it up pretty well when he said McClean isn't the sharpest tool in the box.
He's only causing more trouble for himself by doing stupid things like he did on Saturday.
He should just ignore it and get on with it,now he has only gone and made sure he will get even more abuse in the future, but then as Pulis indicated he probably hasn't the brains to realise that.

Pulis put it nicely alright without offending him.

The media will torture him. They will follow him round / set him up for the next episode.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on October 19, 2015, 10:23:55 AM
Tony Pulis summed it up pretty well when he said McClean isn't the sharpest tool in the box.
He's only causing more trouble for himself by doing stupid things like he did on Saturday.
He should just ignore it and get on with it,now he has only gone and made sure he will get even more abuse in the future, but then as Pulis indicated he probably hasn't the brains to realise that.

Pulis put it nicely alright without offending him.

The media will torture him. They will follow him round / set him up for the next episode.
Eh?  You wouldn't need to be the sharpest tool in the box to realise that pulis was insulting him  :D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 19, 2015, 10:32:28 AM
Tony Pulis summed it up pretty well when he said McClean isn't the sharpest tool in the box.
He's only causing more trouble for himself by doing stupid things like he did on Saturday.
He should just ignore it and get on with it,now he has only gone and made sure he will get even more abuse in the future, but then as Pulis indicated he probably hasn't the brains to realise that.

Pulis put it nicely alright without offending him.

The media will torture him. They will follow him round / set him up for the next episode.
Yup,that's exactly what will happen. The guy is just making trouble for himself.
Of course it must be hard not to react but now that he has done the abuse will just get worse and the media will make huge deals about every little reaction now.
On MOTD2 they reported McClean lost the plot and never mentioned the Sunderland players losing the plot,this is the situation now McClean has put himself in all of his own making.The British media are never going to back him.
Not the sharpest is right.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on October 19, 2015, 10:36:55 AM
Soccer fans think they can abuse a player for 90 minutes and then when same player says "see that boys" they get all insulted .

Sunderland fans should be channeling their anger elsewhere . 

McClean is an alright sort. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 19, 2015, 10:45:52 AM
I agree with nrico here...a lot of you guys getting your knickers in a twist over nothing. He got verbally abused all during the game and went over after the game to shake his fist back at them to celebrate his teams victory and now he's a tool or whatever else he got called...FFS talk about making mountains out of molehills. He got stick and gave a bit back...end of story, doesn't matter if he's an amateur or a wealthy professional footballer. What difference does that make.
I'm not getting my knickers in a twist about anything. I couldn't care less what the chap does,and I don't think it was anything particularly bad he did,more stupid than bad.
All I'm saying is,for his own sake,he would be better off saying/doing nothing and getting on with playing football.
The guy has a reputation and doing something like he did on Saturday will only enhance that.
He ran the length of the pitch to goad the opposition fans,it was stupid thing to do.
He is making things worse for himself.I'm not sure how anyone could see it any other way.
As I said I don't really care all that much,I'm just giving my opinion so my knickers are perfectly untwisted thank you very much.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Il Bomber Destro on October 19, 2015, 10:48:09 AM
McClean comes across as a really good guy. People keep saying that makes a rod for his own back by not compromising on principles that clearly mean a great deal to him and the community he grew up in.

Some people when they make it big are quick to forget where they came from, McClean is not one of those. I don't think it's anything to do with McClean not being bright, I think he's fully aware of the consequences of his actions but is willing to take the (unjust) flak that comes his way as a consequence of standing up for his beliefs.

Be it money, popularity, career opportunities or receiving vitriolic abuse, McClean suffers it not because he's a an idiot but because he has uncompromising morals. Maybe if people tried to understand the community he grew up in and the tragedy and hardships inflicted on it by the British armed forces and state they would understand.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: johnneycool on October 19, 2015, 10:52:00 AM
Personally I think if some lout in the crowd is roaring sectarian abuse at you then you can goad away, f**k them. You may not like  McClean and maybe he is only an average footballer but he does possess some principles which in the modern day of filthy rich ball bags diving and cheating, is ok by me.

Was there sectarian abuse thrown at him or are you just surmising?

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: GJL on October 19, 2015, 10:54:20 AM
McClean comes across as a really good guy. People keep saying that makes a rod for his own back by not compromising on principles that clearly mean a great deal to him and the community he grew up in.

Some people when they make it big are quick to forget where they came from, McClean is not one of those. I don't think it's anything to do with McClean not being bright, I think he's fully aware of the consequences of his actions but is willing to take the (unjust) flak that comes his way as a consequence of standing up for his beliefs.

Be it money, popularity, career opportunities or receiving vitriolic abuse, McClean suffers it not because he's a an idiot but because he has uncompromising morals. Maybe if people tried to understand the community he grew up in and the tragedy and hardships inflicted on it by the British armed forces and state they would understand.

Good post. I would hardly think he is too worried about the British media and what they think of him. He is getting massive money to play football and I doubt if he will hang around when he has finished playing. Fair play to him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 19, 2015, 11:57:19 AM
McClean comes across as a really good guy. People keep saying that makes a rod for his own back by not compromising on principles that clearly mean a great deal to him and the community he grew up in.

Some people when they make it big are quick to forget where they came from, McClean is not one of those. I don't think it's anything to do with McClean not being bright, I think he's fully aware of the consequences of his actions but is willing to take the (unjust) flak that comes his way as a consequence of standing up for his beliefs.

Be it money, popularity, career opportunities or receiving vitriolic abuse, McClean suffers it not because he's a an idiot but because he has uncompromising morals. Maybe if people tried to understand the community he grew up in and the tragedy and hardships inflicted on it by the British armed forces and state they would understand.

Good post. I would hardly think he is too worried about the British media and what they think of him. He is getting massive money to play football and I doubt if he will hang around when he has finished playing. Fair play to him.


Absolutely agree. I'd say what the d**kheads on MOTD2 or other British media think of him are of no concern to McClean.

And he is certainly not thick. He expresses himself very well when people bother to listen to his viewpoint. People that stand up for what they think is right are few and far between nowadays - it should be encouraged. However, what the ruling classes want is people who lie down like dogs and accept everything - that's why the likes of McClean are subject to massive overreactions.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: gallsman on October 19, 2015, 12:01:38 PM
Fair play to him. Unless there's a clause in his contract that prohibits him from doing anything of the sort, I don't see how his actions could be seen as unprofessional. He didn't abuse anyone from what I can see, just showed a crowd of yobs what they could do with their own abuse. Maybe he does make a bit of a rod for himself but better that and to have some principles rather than just coasy by. Think he's been let down by Pulis and his  comments.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 19, 2015, 12:22:48 PM
McClean comes across as a really good guy. People keep saying that makes a rod for his own back by not compromising on principles that clearly mean a great deal to him and the community he grew up in.

Some people when they make it big are quick to forget where they came from, McClean is not one of those. I don't think it's anything to do with McClean not being bright, I think he's fully aware of the consequences of his actions but is willing to take the (unjust) flak that comes his way as a consequence of standing up for his beliefs.

Be it money, popularity, career opportunities or receiving vitriolic abuse, McClean suffers it not because he's a an idiot but because he has uncompromising morals. Maybe if people tried to understand the community he grew up in and the tragedy and hardships inflicted on it by the British armed forces and state they would understand.

Good post. I would hardly think he is too worried about the British media and what they think of him. He is getting massive money to play football and I doubt if he will hang around when he has finished playing. Fair play to him.


 I'd say what the d**kheads on MOTD2 or other British media think of him are of no concern to McClean.

I'd say you're wrong.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: skeog on October 19, 2015, 12:43:41 PM
if i was james i would not be in england at all getting abuse from idiots
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: maldini on October 19, 2015, 12:49:52 PM
He'll be Celtic's first signing next summer
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Keyser soze on October 19, 2015, 12:52:08 PM
It is clear there is a commentator's bias towards McClean, the commentator said that he is 'clearly losing the plot here' in reference to McClean when it was manifestly obvious that it was a Siunderland player who was the aggressor and who instigated the entire player involvement in this incident.

Having said that it was a very stupid thing to do in goading the crowd by him in th first place.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on October 19, 2015, 12:53:55 PM
if i was james i would not be in england at all getting abuse from idiots

I think Saturday was his first day where he got stick .  It was from a former club so nothing to see.

By and large I think there is little reaction to JMC in England.  To be honest he is a mediocre pro playing in a mediocre side.  He is not good enough to generate hate from opposition.  Also we are living in a period of relative peace so tensions are not high.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 19, 2015, 01:00:22 PM
Why is it that every time McClean makes the news every other comment is on how average, mediocre and poor McClean is as a footballer? What actual relevance has that? I hear it will be Sunderland that will be getting in bother with the FA for their chanting  ;D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 19, 2015, 01:05:09 PM
It is clear there is a commentator's bias towards McClean, the commentator said that he is 'clearly losing the plot here' in reference to McClean when it was manifestly obvious that it was a Siunderland player who was the aggressor and who instigated the entire player involvement in this incident.

Having said that it was a very stupid thing to do in goading the crowd by him in th first place.
Yeah without a doubt and I mentioned the same myself a few posts back.. The Sky commentator also saying he was from Londonderry in Northern Ireland a few weeks back.
That's why I believe he isn't helping himself.
As someone just said maybe he would be better off out of England altogether.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on October 19, 2015, 01:09:37 PM
Why is it that every time McClean makes the news every other comment is on how average, mediocre and poor McClean is as a footballer? What actual relevance has that? I hear it will be Sunderland that will be getting in bother with the FA for their chanting  ;D

My point was that he is getting little abuse because he is an average footballer and we are in a period of relative peace.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: illdecide on October 19, 2015, 02:19:48 PM
I agree with nrico here...a lot of you guys getting your knickers in a twist over nothing. He got verbally abused all during the game and went over after the game to shake his fist back at them to celebrate his teams victory and now he's a tool or whatever else he got called...FFS talk about making mountains out of molehills. He got stick and gave a bit back...end of story, doesn't matter if he's an amateur or a wealthy professional footballer. What difference does that make.
I'm not getting my knickers in a twist about anything. I couldn't care less what the chap does,and I don't think it was anything particularly bad he did,more stupid than bad.
All I'm saying is,for his own sake,he would be better off saying/doing nothing and getting on with playing football.
The guy has a reputation and doing something like he did on Saturday will only enhance that.
He ran the length of the pitch to goad the opposition fans,it was stupid thing to do.
He is making things worse for himself.I'm not sure how anyone could see it any other way.
As I said I don't really care all that much,I'm just giving my opinion so my knickers are perfectly untwisted thank you very much.

What colour are they?... ;)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: balladmaker on October 19, 2015, 02:32:40 PM
Quote
McClean comes across as a really good guy.

I've met James on a few different occasions, a nicer, no BS, down to earth fella, you won't meet. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on October 19, 2015, 02:44:15 PM
Quote
McClean comes across as a really good guy.

I've met James on a few different occasions, a nicer, no BS, down to earth fella, you won't meet.

I don't think anybody's really questioning that I'm sure he is a nice guy away from it all. . . the problem is he seems to be buck stupid and courts controversy!

If he doesn't want to stand for GSTQ or wear a poppy that's fine but winding up Rangers fans along with his tirades on Twitter and then with winding up the Sunderland supporters I just don't understand it. He's a professional footballer and these things affect his job so why do it?!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 19, 2015, 03:27:49 PM
Quote
McClean comes across as a really good guy.

I've met James on a few different occasions, a nicer, no BS, down to earth fella, you won't meet.

I don't think anybody's really questioning that I'm sure he is a nice guy away from it all. . . the problem is he seems to be buck stupid and courts controversy!

If he doesn't want to stand for GSTQ or wear a poppy that's fine but winding up Rangers fans along with his tirades on Twitter and then with winding up the Sunderland supporters I just don't understand it. He's a professional footballer and these things affect his job so why do it?!!
Seemingly he just likes winding people up too much. I know someone who's a personal friend of his and was told as much back when Martin o Neill barred him from Twitter. There's nothing overly malicious in what he does, football in England has become almost too sanitised, any slight controversy gets grossly exaggerated nowadays.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on October 19, 2015, 03:59:09 PM
Quote
McClean comes across as a really good guy.

I've met James on a few different occasions, a nicer, no BS, down to earth fella, you won't meet.

I don't think anybody's really questioning that I'm sure he is a nice guy away from it all. . . the problem is he seems to be buck stupid and courts controversy!

If he doesn't want to stand for GSTQ or wear a poppy that's fine but winding up Rangers fans along with his tirades on Twitter and then with winding up the Sunderland supporters I just don't understand it. He's a professional footballer and these things affect his job so why do it?!!
Seemingly he just likes winding people up too much. I know someone who's a personal friend of his and was told as much back when Martin o Neill barred him from Twitter. There's nothing overly malicious in what he does, football in England has become almost too sanitised, any slight controversy gets grossly exaggerated nowadays.

Exactly!!! For that reason if you were a fairly controversial footballer anyway would you not try and stay away from avoidable controversy?!

If I was his manager I'd be telling him I want to see him in the newspaper for scoring goals not being a twat!! In fairness I think Pulis will only take so much before he f**ks him out or he sorts himself out!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 19, 2015, 04:11:08 PM
Quote
McClean comes across as a really good guy.

I've met James on a few different occasions, a nicer, no BS, down to earth fella, you won't meet.

I don't think anybody's really questioning that I'm sure he is a nice guy away from it all. . . the problem is he seems to be buck stupid and courts controversy!

If he doesn't want to stand for GSTQ or wear a poppy that's fine but winding up Rangers fans along with his tirades on Twitter and then with winding up the Sunderland supporters I just don't understand it. He's a professional footballer and these things affect his job so why do it?!!
Seemingly he just likes winding people up too much. I know someone who's a personal friend of his and was told as much back when Martin o Neill barred him from Twitter. There's nothing overly malicious in what he does, football in England has become almost too sanitised, any slight controversy gets grossly exaggerated nowadays.

Exactly!!! For that reason if you were a fairly controversial footballer anyway would you not try and stay away from avoidable controversy?!

If I was his manager I'd be telling him I want to see him in the newspaper for scoring goals not being a twat!! In fairness I think Pulis will only take so much before he f**ks him out or he sorts himself out!
Vicious circle as he is a bit dopey!
What would Pulis do though? He's obviously gonna stand by his player and clearly he's done very little to deserve all the attention. I'd have done the same lol
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 19, 2015, 04:20:18 PM
Ah feck it, if that's how he wants to behave let him at it.  Football managers want to stamp the character out of lads and turn them into ball playing robots (which is fair enough).  Fair dues to him for being controversial, he's a break from the blandness.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Kickham csc on October 19, 2015, 04:44:03 PM
OK, so this is how I see it

McClean comes from an Irish city, which seen 13 of its citizens murdered by the British Army, to play football in Britain

Lad refuses to wear poppy while playing for Sunderland

Sunderland refuse to let the lad issue a letter to explain his actions

Player transferred to Wigan, and refuses to wear poppy while playing for them

Wigan allow McClean to issue a letter, which quite logically states that he supports what the British army did in WWI and WWII, but as it also represents the Northern conflict where 13 of its people were murdered by the army without anyone held accountable, then he can't support wearing it (understandable position)

Mclean plays against Sunderland, is taunted through the entire match by supporters using racial hate filled (anti Irish) chants

McClean reacts with a fist pump in the air

Two Sunderland players physically confront McClean......

And people on here think that McClean is in the wrong!!!!!!!

In my opinion, Sunderland should be walking on eggshells, as they have failed to control both supporters and two players, and McClean didn't physically confront any Sunderland players
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on October 19, 2015, 05:26:44 PM
OK, so this is how I see it

McClean comes from an Irish city, which seen 13 of its citizens murdered by the British Army, to play football in Britain

Lad refuses to wear poppy while playing for Sunderland

Sunderland refuse to let the lad issue a letter to explain his actions

Player transferred to Wigan, and refuses to wear poppy while playing for them

Wigan allow McClean to issue a letter, which quite logically states that he supports what the British army did in WWI and WWII, but as it also represents the Northern conflict where 13 of its people were murdered by the army without anyone held accountable, then he can't support wearing it (understandable position)

Mclean plays against Sunderland, is taunted through the entire match by supporters using racial hate filled (anti Irish) chants

McClean reacts with a fist pump in the air

Two Sunderland players physically confront McClean......

And people on here think that McClean is in the wrong!!!!!!!

In my opinion, Sunderland should be walking on eggshells, as they have failed to control both supporters and two players, and McClean didn't physically confront any Sunderland players

Why does he need to leave the rest of his team mates to confront the Sunderland supporters? Can he not fist pump somewhere else?

I'm all for a player having a personality like a Bullard or a Davide Luiz but if your personality is landing you in bother with the FA and affecting how you go about your work then you're expressing yourself in the wrong way!!

Adebayor was a f**king tube when he did it and McClean is no better. Brings it on himself!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Boycey on October 19, 2015, 05:27:59 PM
I'd very much subscribe to the 'if you give it out you must be able to take it back' way of thinking, so in isolation I'd see very little wrong with what McClean did on Saturday, but he seems to have gotten an uncanny knack of getting himself talked about more often for things other than his footballing ability.....

  If you're going to be a maverick as such you probably need the talent to back it up for your own sake. Players like Suarez and Cantona were indulged by their clubs beause they were worth it but players like McClean are 10 a penny. If things turned sour for him at WBA would there be a queue of Premier League clubs waiting to take him on? probably not...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: red hander on October 19, 2015, 05:30:27 PM
Soccer fans think they can abuse a player for 90 minutes and then when same player says "see that boys" they get all insulted .

Sunderland fans should be channeling their anger elsewhere . 

McClean is an alright sort.

+1

What was even more pathetic was the Sunderland players who confronted him ... they'd be better served to do the job they're extremely well paid for and dig their perennially shit team out of the relegation mire rather than trying to impress the travelling support of ignorant mackem gobshites  by showing how much they really 'care' about them and about any perceived 'insult' aimed in their direction. HTF they're relegated and put out of their misery at long last  ::)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 20, 2015, 01:15:01 AM
He has been given a formal warning by the FA.

To him and his supporters this will be seen as a victory.

To everyone else, it will be seen as process. He will face a real sanction the next time and this is merely boxing off any smart barrister getting him off on a technicality imho.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Muck Savage on October 20, 2015, 02:26:23 AM
OK, so this is how I see it

McClean comes from an Irish city, which seen 13 of its citizens murdered by the British Army, to play football in Britain

Lad refuses to wear poppy while playing for Sunderland

Sunderland refuse to let the lad issue a letter to explain his actions

Player transferred to Wigan, and refuses to wear poppy while playing for them

Wigan allow McClean to issue a letter, which quite logically states that he supports what the British army did in WWI and WWII, but as it also represents the Northern conflict where 13 of its people were murdered by the army without anyone held accountable, then he can't support wearing it (understandable position)

Mclean plays against Sunderland, is taunted through the entire match by supporters using racial hate filled (anti Irish) chants

McClean reacts with a fist pump in the air

Two Sunderland players physically confront McClean......

And people on here think that McClean is in the wrong!!!!!!!

In my opinion, Sunderland should be walking on eggshells, as they have failed to control both supporters and two players, and McClean didn't physically confront any Sunderland players

I 100% agree with this. The man has been subjected to all sorts of abuse from his own supporters at Sunderland and had death treats sent to him. Why wouldn't he give a good old FxxK you (he didn't give any sort of finger salute) to those supporters that are allowed to sing abuse all day long at him. There will be some craic when West Brom play Sunderland up north!
Fair play to him I say.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: nrico2006 on October 20, 2015, 08:11:18 AM
OK, so this is how I see it

McClean comes from an Irish city, which seen 13 of its citizens murdered by the British Army, to play football in Britain

Lad refuses to wear poppy while playing for Sunderland

Sunderland refuse to let the lad issue a letter to explain his actions

Player transferred to Wigan, and refuses to wear poppy while playing for them

Wigan allow McClean to issue a letter, which quite logically states that he supports what the British army did in WWI and WWII, but as it also represents the Northern conflict where 13 of its people were murdered by the army without anyone held accountable, then he can't support wearing it (understandable position)

Mclean plays against Sunderland, is taunted through the entire match by supporters using racial hate filled (anti Irish) chants

McClean reacts with a fist pump in the air

Two Sunderland players physically confront McClean......

And people on here think that McClean is in the wrong!!!!!!!

In my opinion, Sunderland should be walking on eggshells, as they have failed to control both supporters and two players, and McClean didn't physically confront any Sunderland players

Why does he need to leave the rest of his team mates to confront the Sunderland supporters? Can he not fist pump somewhere else?

I'm all for a player having a personality like a Bullard or a Davide Luiz but if your personality is landing you in bother with the FA and affecting how you go about your work then you're expressing yourself in the wrong way!!

Adebayor was a f**king tube when he did it and McClean is no better. Brings it on himself!

Good post Kickham. 

As for fist pumping elsewhere, surely it is pointless to do it to your own fans and it seems logical enough that you would do it to the particular section that were abusing you for the entire match.  Hardly rocket science.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: hardstation on October 20, 2015, 08:25:37 AM
Some soccer fans attend matches to continually racially abuse players, mock the Hillsborough & Munich disasters, spend the majority of the game making V and w@nker signs at opposing fans but there is outrage if a player fist pumps at these people. Ridiculous.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Esmarelda on October 20, 2015, 09:15:36 AM
Some soccer fans attend matches to continually racially abuse players, mock the Hillsborough & Munich disasters, spend the majority of the game making V and w@nker signs at opposing fans but there is outrage if a player fist pumps at these people. Ridiculous.
Exactly.

I saw a few of the Irish supporters giving it the old w@nker sign against the Germans. Such a crowd of morons. Grown men doing this and they describe it as passion.

Ideally McClean should keep away as many have done before him. But I'm not going to condemn him for it.

Anybody that stands in the safety of the stands abusing another individual is a coward and an idiot. Then you get the "I've paid my money so I'll shout what I want" view.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on October 20, 2015, 09:30:53 AM
Wullie Frazer at it again . . .


Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on October 20, 2015, 09:37:02 AM
What is the principle at stake here? That players should be allowed wind up away fans? Yes, in an ideal world you should be able to give as good as you get, but anyone who knows their Shakespeare knows you don't hold the mob to the same standard as individuals. The same applies to the apes who confronted him, and I think McClean would be entitled to feel aggrieved that they seem to have gotten away with their behaviour. But with respect to confronting the crowd, he needs to swallow his pride.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 20, 2015, 12:29:18 PM
What is the principle at stake here? That players should be allowed wind up away fans? Yes, in an ideal world you should be able to give as good as you get, but anyone who knows their Shakespeare knows you don't hold the mob to the same standard as individuals. The same applies to the apes who confronted him, and I think McClean would be entitled to feel aggrieved that they seem to have gotten away with their behaviour. But with respect to confronting the crowd, he needs to swallow his pride.

But you are equating what they have done here Deiseach.  McClean didn't 'give as good as he got', he was subjected to sectarian and racist abuse for most of the game.  He pumped his fist.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on October 20, 2015, 12:39:09 PM
What is the principle at stake here? That players should be allowed wind up away fans? Yes, in an ideal world you should be able to give as good as you get, but anyone who knows their Shakespeare knows you don't hold the mob to the same standard as individuals. The same applies to the apes who confronted him, and I think McClean would be entitled to feel aggrieved that they seem to have gotten away with their behaviour. But with respect to confronting the crowd, he needs to swallow his pride.

But you are equating what they have done here Deiseach.  McClean didn't 'give as good as he got', he was subjected to sectarian and racist abuse for most of the game.  He pumped his fist.

Was the abuse racist or sectarian ????

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 20, 2015, 12:40:57 PM
OK, so this is how I see it

McClean comes from an Irish city, which seen 13 of its citizens murdered by the British Army, to play football in Britain

Lad refuses to wear poppy while playing for Sunderland

Sunderland refuse to let the lad issue a letter to explain his actions

Player transferred to Wigan, and refuses to wear poppy while playing for them

Wigan allow McClean to issue a letter, which quite logically states that he supports what the British army did in WWI and WWII, but as it also represents the Northern conflict where 13 of its people were murdered by the army without anyone held accountable, then he can't support wearing it (understandable position)

Mclean plays against Sunderland, is taunted through the entire match by supporters using racial hate filled (anti Irish) chants

McClean reacts with a fist pump in the air

Two Sunderland players physically confront McClean......

And people on here think that McClean is in the wrong!!!!!!!

In my opinion, Sunderland should be walking on eggshells, as they have failed to control both supporters and two players, and McClean didn't physically confront any Sunderland players
So everyone is wrong bar McClean.
OK got it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on October 20, 2015, 12:42:34 PM
Who is everyone? There's quite a few supporting him on this.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on October 20, 2015, 12:43:17 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 20, 2015, 12:47:31 PM
Who is everyone? There's quite a few supporting him on this.
I meant everyone else is to blame when McClean gets into trouble. 
None of it is his fault apparently.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on October 20, 2015, 12:48:54 PM
Because a fist pump is not an obscene gesture? I don't get the opprobrium directed at McLean on this one. He wouldn't be my favourite player, and I do think he probably draws a lot on himself (and I'm sure he knows this too but just doesn't care) but I think he reacted like a human being.

In this instance, he was getting dogs abuse all day, and just went down and gave a fist pump and celebrated in front of them. I'm sure it would have been easier for him if he hadn't, but I understand why he did and I can't really castigate him for it.

 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on October 20, 2015, 12:49:50 PM
Who is everyone? There's quite a few supporting him on this.
I meant everyone else is to blame when McClean gets into trouble. 
None of it is his fault apparently.

Sorry, I see what you mean. But again, the only reason he is in 'trouble' is because some people think he should have let the abuse wash off him. That's fierce easy to say when you're not getting the abuse.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Clov on October 20, 2015, 12:51:31 PM
The semantics of the gesture are obviously important here. Would people have players sanctioned for cupping their ear towards the opposition stands after scoring?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Clov on October 20, 2015, 12:56:13 PM
Regardless of what you think about the McClean gesture, the lack of willingness of the media/football commentariat to call out the 'mob' in this case is more worrying imo.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on October 20, 2015, 12:56:37 PM
Well, the timing too. It was after the game was over. So if he went down and cupped his ear to them after the game it probably would have been a 'big deal' as well.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on October 20, 2015, 12:57:44 PM
Who is everyone? There's quite a few supporting him on this.
I meant everyone else is to blame when McClean gets into trouble. 
None of it is his fault apparently.

Sorry, I see what you mean. But again, the only reason he is in 'trouble' is because some people think he should have let the abuse wash off him. That's fierce easy to say when you're not getting the abuse.

My complements on the juxtaposition of fierce and easy.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on October 20, 2015, 12:59:35 PM
Regardless of what you think about the McClean gesture, the lack of willingness of the media/football commentariat to call out the 'mob' in this case is more worrying imo.

The Belfast Telegraph uses every opportunity to abuse McClean with a headline, irrespective of the underlying story.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 20, 2015, 12:59:59 PM
Who is everyone? There's quite a few supporting him on this.
I meant everyone else is to blame when McClean gets into trouble. 
None of it is his fault apparently.

Sorry, I see what you mean. But again, the only reason he is in 'trouble' is because some people think he should have let the abuse wash off him. That's fierce easy to say when you're not getting the abuse.
I don't think what he done was all that bad as I said previously,if another player with less of a reputation done it there wouldn't be half the fuss if any at all.
I just think if you do have that sort of reputation you would be better of ignoring it and not responding. The abuse will just double for him now and it will have to affect his performance on the pitch.The media will hound him,some say he won't care but I don't believe that.
I doubt there will be too many clubs will be bothered with him if WBA get tired of him and decide he's more trouble than he's worth,he isn't exactly a Suarez is he.I'm sure they could do without him.
Sometimes actually I find(even on here) you wind a lot more people up by not saying anything at all. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on October 20, 2015, 01:02:04 PM
I think there's a distinction between what might be called excited gestures after a goal and post-match reactions when you are entitled to expect a cooler head. Clov is right about the manner in which the media/football commentariat is treating it though. It's sinister how Danny Graham and Lee Cattermole have gotten away with behaviour which should be a straightforward case of loss of control. No questions for Fat Sam on the behaviour of his new charges. It looks like the fact it got mentioned in the referee's report means there is no further action, but shouldn't that mean the referee erred in not giving them some kind of card?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 20, 2015, 01:12:58 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?

Because a fist pump isn't obscene.

Edit - Didn't really answer the question.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 20, 2015, 01:13:14 PM
What is the principle at stake here? That players should be allowed wind up away fans? Yes, in an ideal world you should be able to give as good as you get, but anyone who knows their Shakespeare knows you don't hold the mob to the same standard as individuals. The same applies to the apes who confronted him, and I think McClean would be entitled to feel aggrieved that they seem to have gotten away with their behaviour. But with respect to confronting the crowd, he needs to swallow his pride.

But you are equating what they have done here Deiseach.  McClean didn't 'give as good as he got', he was subjected to sectarian and racist abuse for most of the game.  He pumped his fist.

Both.

Was the abuse racist or sectarian ????
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Esmarelda on October 20, 2015, 02:23:35 PM
I think there's a distinction between what might be called excited gestures after a goal and post-match reactions when you are entitled to expect a cooler head. Clov is right about the manner in which the media/football commentariat is treating it though. It's sinister how Danny Graham and Lee Cattermole have gotten away with behaviour which should be a straightforward case of loss of control. No questions for Fat Sam on the behaviour of his new charges. It looks like the fact it got mentioned in the referee's report means there is no further action, but shouldn't that mean the referee erred in not giving them some kind of card?
Hardly any need for that. I'd equate that to lads shouting abuse from the stands. :P
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on October 20, 2015, 02:24:20 PM
Hardly any need for that. I'd equate that to lads shouting abuse from the stands. :P

;D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: mylestheslasher on October 20, 2015, 02:25:18 PM
I remember Ian Wright dropping his shorts in front of some abusive fans and everyone thought it was hilarious. The british soccer louts deserve to get some abuse back.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on October 20, 2015, 03:51:41 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: GJL on October 20, 2015, 04:01:36 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 20, 2015, 04:18:24 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)
;D
You have all the answers don't you EC Unique GJL..
Who exactly is having a go at him because he is Northern Irish..btw would McClean like to be called Northern Irish?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Maroon Manc on October 21, 2015, 10:09:16 AM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)

Disagree, if Rooney had something like that 5 years ago he'd have been hammered by the press as would Beckham in his heyday.

As for McClean the player I'm amazed he plays for a premiership club.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on October 21, 2015, 10:19:34 AM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)
;D
You have all the answers don't you EC Unique GJL..
Who exactly is having a go at him because he is Northern Irish..btw would McClean like to be called Northern Irish?

rather than southern Irish? which he ain't, whether he likes it of not... The Irish passport (which I've change back and forth from over the years) doesn't make you any more Irish than what you feel... It doesn't allow you to vote in Ireland unless you live in it? 

He could have raised his footballing profile a bit more had he choose to stay with the North and been playing in France next summer.. as it is he'll be on his holidays early  ;D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 21, 2015, 11:12:41 AM
Spoken like a true OWCer 😂😂
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: PW Nally on October 21, 2015, 11:46:41 AM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)
;D
You have all the answers don't you EC Unique GJL..
Who exactly is having a go at him because he is Northern Irish..btw would McClean like to be called Northern Irish?

rather than southern Irish? which he ain't, whether he likes it of not... The Irish passport (which I've change back and forth from over the years) doesn't make you any more Irish than what you feel... It doesn't allow you to vote in Ireland unless you live in it? 

He could have raised his footballing profile a bit more had he choose to stay with the North and been playing in France next summer.. as it is he'll be on his holidays early  ;D
Is that your Mrs. posting on your behalf again?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on October 21, 2015, 12:08:29 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)

Disagree, if Rooney had something like that 5 years ago he'd have been hammered by the press as would Beckham in his heyday.

As for McClean the player I'm amazed he plays for a premiership club.

There are a lot of average footballers playing in the premiership.

It is not as good as its purveyors would have you think.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on October 21, 2015, 12:20:07 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)

Disagree, if Rooney had something like that 5 years ago he'd have been hammered by the press as would Beckham in his heyday.

As for McClean the player I'm amazed he plays for a premiership club.

he's performing better than Rooney @ the moment I'd say
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Maroon Manc on October 21, 2015, 02:00:48 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)

Disagree, if Rooney had something like that 5 years ago he'd have been hammered by the press as would Beckham in his heyday.

As for McClean the player I'm amazed he plays for a premiership club.

he's performing better than Rooney @ the moment I'd say

I agree but based on his last 15 league games Rooney isn't a premier league player.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 02:39:04 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?

Because a fist pump isn't obscene.

Edit - Didn't really answer the question.

Neither is this:




But he was properly reprimanded.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: blewuporstuffed on October 21, 2015, 02:46:52 PM
David Beckham famously, (and quite rightly) gave West Hams fans the finger after they chanted sick stuff about his family. Nobody expected him to just grin and bear it.

The fact that he is Irish leaves him an easy target for the British press. The fact that he is Northern Irish leaves him a target for some on here. (which is really pathetic IMO)

Disagree, if Rooney had something like that 5 years ago he'd have been hammered by the press as would Beckham in his heyday.

As for McClean the player I'm amazed he plays for a premiership club.

is it any worse than the Gary Neville  celebration directed at Liverpool fans a few years ago?

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=gary+neville+celebration&FORM=VIRE2#view=detail&mid=B0BB2965251C65DE2A0FB0BB2965251C65DE2A0F (http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=gary+neville+celebration&FORM=VIRE2#view=detail&mid=B0BB2965251C65DE2A0FB0BB2965251C65DE2A0F)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on October 21, 2015, 02:57:30 PM
What was chanted at Gary Neville was perfectly fair comment! As what was said about his mother, and his sister, and his brother...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 02:59:19 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?

Because a fist pump isn't obscene.

Edit - Didn't really answer the question.


Neither is this:




But he was properly reprimanded.

No, but it's quite clearly sectarian.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 03:07:38 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?

Because a fist pump isn't obscene.

Edit - Didn't really answer the question.


Neither is this:




But he was properly reprimanded.

No, but it's quite clearly sectarian.

By definition, so is politics and arguably many aspects of sport.

The issue isn't sectarianism imho, it is incitement. Gazza was clearly guilty of that. And Mcclean is straying dangerously close to that line too.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Maroon Manc on October 21, 2015, 03:21:34 PM
I don't recall too many controversies involving Gary Neville before or after that incident.

I'm not sure if its already been mentioned but there was an element of playing up to his own fans by McClean although on second thought I'm not sure he's bright enough to think of that.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 03:57:16 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?

Because a fist pump isn't obscene.

Edit - Didn't really answer the question.


Neither is this:




But he was properly reprimanded.

No, but it's quite clearly sectarian.

By definition, so is politics and arguably many aspects of sport.

The issue isn't sectarianism imho, it is incitement. Gazza was clearly guilty of that. And Mcclean is straying dangerously close to that line too.

If McClean is guilty of incitement then all displays of celebration in football would have to be banned.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: blewuporstuffed on October 21, 2015, 04:13:14 PM
I don't recall too many controversies involving Gary Neville before or after that incident.

I'm not sure if its already been mentioned but there was an element of playing up to his own fans by McClean although on second thought I'm not sure he's bright enough to think of that.

What has that got to do with anything?
BY the way, I don't really have an issue with what Neville did, even as a Liverpool fan, im just pointing out that mc clean certainly did no worse with a fist pump to the away fans.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 21, 2015, 04:26:40 PM
I don't recall too many controversies involving Gary Neville before or after that incident.

I'm not sure if its already been mentioned but there was an element of playing up to his own fans by McClean although on second thought I'm not sure he's bright enough to think of that.

What has that got to do with anything?
BY the way, I don't really have an issue with what Neville did, even as a Liverpool fan, im just pointing out that mc clean certainly did no worse with a fist pump to the away fans.
I'm sure he means Neville was rarely getting in trouble unlike McClean.
Also in fairness to Neville he was playing for the club he loved with a passion against their biggest rivals.
West Brom Sunderland hardly the same and I doubt McClean was doing it for the love of his club.
The two incidents aren't comparable IMO.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 04:32:04 PM
Whatever the nature or scale of the abuse, the principle for a professional sportsman should be that you don't react in kind. If a fist pump is acceptable, why would flicking the bird or dropping your kecks be off limits?

Because a fist pump isn't obscene.

Edit - Didn't really answer the question.


Neither is this:




But he was properly reprimanded.

No, but it's quite clearly sectarian.

By definition, so is politics and arguably many aspects of sport.

The issue isn't sectarianism imho, it is incitement. Gazza was clearly guilty of that. And Mcclean is straying dangerously close to that line too.

If McClean is guilty of incitement then all displays of celebration in football would have to be banned.

Yea, and why not all celebrations of any kind? Weekends and holidays too. No hyperbola to far on this board.

Anyway, I didn't say he was guilty of incitement, I said he is straying close to that line. Sending gestures to the opposing fans, to wind them up, would appear to me to be straying very close to incitement. As for the behaviour of those fans, that is another story altogether. Soccer has long turned a blind eye some vile supporters.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 06:30:13 PM
Agreed wrt to the level of behaviour amongst football supporters.  So we're not comparing what Gazza did with McClean's actions then?  McClean wasn't guilty of incitement whereas Gazza was.  I don't see much point in bringing it up in that case.

Also, was it not you that had a hissy fit with me a couple of weeks ago for sarcastic replies?  Maybe you should take your own advice.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 06:39:55 PM
Agreed wrt to the level of behaviour amongst football supporters.  So we're not comparing what Gazza did with McClean's actions then?  McClean wasn't guilty of incitement whereas Gazza was.  I don't see much point in bringing it up in that case.

Also, was it not you that had a hissy fit with me a couple of weeks ago for sarcastic replies?  Maybe you should take your own advice.

I was following your lead.

Unless this was a serious comment: "If McClean is guilty of incitement then all displays of celebration in football would have to be banned."
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 06:53:47 PM
Agreed wrt to the level of behaviour amongst football supporters.  So we're not comparing what Gazza did with McClean's actions then?  McClean wasn't guilty of incitement whereas Gazza was.  I don't see much point in bringing it up in that case.

Also, was it not you that had a hissy fit with me a couple of weeks ago for sarcastic replies?  Maybe you should take your own advice.

I was following your lead.

Unless this was a serious comment: "If McClean is guilty of incitement then all displays of celebration in football would have to be banned."

There was no sarcasm in that statement.  I was following the thing through to it's logical conclusion IMO.  And even if you genuinely did think I was being sarcastic, it didn't take much bait for the 'holier than thou' persona to fall by the wayside.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 07:33:29 PM
Agreed wrt to the level of behaviour amongst football supporters.  So we're not comparing what Gazza did with McClean's actions then?  McClean wasn't guilty of incitement whereas Gazza was.  I don't see much point in bringing it up in that case.

Also, was it not you that had a hissy fit with me a couple of weeks ago for sarcastic replies?  Maybe you should take your own advice.

I was following your lead.

Unless this was a serious comment: "If McClean is guilty of incitement then all displays of celebration in football would have to be banned."

There was no sarcasm in that statement.  I was following the thing through to it's logical conclusion IMO.  And even if you genuinely did think I was being sarcastic, it didn't take much bait for the 'holier than thou' persona to fall by the wayside.

Ah, back to the ad hominem again.

'Hissy fit' & 'holier than thou' can be added to your more usual lines

At least you seem to be tired of telling me that I think that I am always right. It is amazing how many people say something like this, while very obviously thinking exactly the same thing about themselves.

My issue with your sarcastic posts was that you didn't offer any comment on those issues, just the sarcasm. Sarcasm, irony or any other form of wit is fine by me.

Here is an example of what I meant:

I was going to ask some of you if your teachers had ever told you "you're only cheating yourself", but I'm not convinced you have all had a formal education.

How witty.

And another.....

Fair enough muppet, you must be right.  As always.

Nine innocent people were shot by a maniac with a gun and your contribution is to pluck some image of the aftermath and use it to have a go at the police.

I think this says more about your prejudices than anything else.

Yawn. I am pointing out the insensitive treatment of survivors, as I see it. With the benefit of hindsight, we can see it was a completely pointless. exercise But even before we had the benefit of hindsight, we could reasonably argue that it was likely to pointless by asking how often has this approach yielded results in the past?

But you keep throwing out your insults and personalising the debate, 'as always'.

I don't know. You tell me, you seem to be well versed on how to handle these incidents from a policing point of view so why don't you enlighten us?

And you seem to be intolerant of 'smartarse responses' yourself, unless of course they are your own smartarse responses.  ;D Presumably they are all ok?

You referred to this paragraph twice. And the usual 'none so blind' twice.

Are we to believe that Bolt has run considerably faster than all of these men, fuelled only by his favoured diet of chicken nuggets? When you consider the other high-profile Jamaican athletes, such as Veronica Campbell Brown and Sherone Simpson, who have fallen foul of doping rules, coupled with the historically lax approach of Jamaican officials to anti-doping, it all starts to look rather ominous. Is Bolt really the only high-profile Jamaican not to succumb to doping? The fastest man in the history of humankind, who trains with dopers, races against known dopers and has been linked with a notorious Mexican chemist. Surely not!

I don't read that as stating that Bolt was caught and that there is a big cover up.

I read it as suggesting that it is highly unlikely Bolt isn't juicing.

Now again please, for the completely 'blind', where in that paragraph does it clearly point to him being caught and it being covered up, as against the suggestion that it is unlikely that he is the only one not juicing?

He's saying that other high profile Jamaican athetes have been caught, which would indicate that they do indeed test, and test enough to catch a few of the dopers (even the high-profile ones).  He then says that this is coupled with Jamaica's histoically lax approach to "anti-doping" - ie. not drug testing.  This is where my opinion came from.

Lance Armstrong's famous "I've never failed a drugs test" line should read "I've never failed a drugs test that you guys know about"

I honestly don't see what you are implying, but you may be right. He may be treating very carefully due to libel laws etc.

The difference with Armstrong and Bolt is that while they were winning, Armstrong's cheating teammates were not failing tests or at least not publicly. Bolt's are.

I think you're proving my point here muppet.  If Armstrong's teammates had been cheating and failing tests (like Bolt's) and he was still massively outperforming them, would logic not lead you to conclude that either:

1. Some sort of cover up was going on wrt Armstrong's test results
2. Armstrong was Superman

I've been half following this conversation, did you show yet where he's been caught doping  or did you back your way out of that one??

Instead of taking time to post, maybe you should use that time to read back through.  I believe the phrase is "close your mouth and open your ears".

That's a no then so, carry on..

Ah, another one reduced to the smartarse responses.  Reading mustn't be your thing Boycey.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 21, 2015, 07:38:24 PM

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 08:13:33 PM
Agreed wrt to the level of behaviour amongst football supporters.  So we're not comparing what Gazza did with McClean's actions then?  McClean wasn't guilty of incitement whereas Gazza was.  I don't see much point in bringing it up in that case.

Also, was it not you that had a hissy fit with me a couple of weeks ago for sarcastic replies?  Maybe you should take your own advice.

I was following your lead.

Unless this was a serious comment: "If McClean is guilty of incitement then all displays of celebration in football would have to be banned."

There was no sarcasm in that statement.  I was following the thing through to it's logical conclusion IMO.  And even if you genuinely did think I was being sarcastic, it didn't take much bait for the 'holier than thou' persona to fall by the wayside.

Ah, back to the ad hominem again.

'Hissy fit' & 'holier than thou' can be added to your more usual lines

At least you seem to be tired of telling me that I think that I am always right. It is amazing how many people say something like this, while very obviously thinking exactly the same thing about themselves.

My issue with your sarcastic posts was that you didn't offer any comment on those issues, just the sarcasm. Sarcasm, irony or any other form of wit is fine by me.

Here is an example of what I meant:

I was going to ask some of you if your teachers had ever told you "you're only cheating yourself", but I'm not convinced you have all had a formal education.

How witty.

And another.....

Fair enough muppet, you must be right.  As always.

Nine innocent people were shot by a maniac with a gun and your contribution is to pluck some image of the aftermath and use it to have a go at the police.

I think this says more about your prejudices than anything else.

Yawn. I am pointing out the insensitive treatment of survivors, as I see it. With the benefit of hindsight, we can see it was a completely pointless. exercise But even before we had the benefit of hindsight, we could reasonably argue that it was likely to pointless by asking how often has this approach yielded results in the past?

But you keep throwing out your insults and personalising the debate, 'as always'.

I don't know. You tell me, you seem to be well versed on how to handle these incidents from a policing point of view so why don't you enlighten us?

And you seem to be intolerant of 'smartarse responses' yourself, unless of course they are your own smartarse responses.  ;D Presumably they are all ok?

You referred to this paragraph twice. And the usual 'none so blind' twice.

Are we to believe that Bolt has run considerably faster than all of these men, fuelled only by his favoured diet of chicken nuggets? When you consider the other high-profile Jamaican athletes, such as Veronica Campbell Brown and Sherone Simpson, who have fallen foul of doping rules, coupled with the historically lax approach of Jamaican officials to anti-doping, it all starts to look rather ominous. Is Bolt really the only high-profile Jamaican not to succumb to doping? The fastest man in the history of humankind, who trains with dopers, races against known dopers and has been linked with a notorious Mexican chemist. Surely not!

I don't read that as stating that Bolt was caught and that there is a big cover up.

I read it as suggesting that it is highly unlikely Bolt isn't juicing.

Now again please, for the completely 'blind', where in that paragraph does it clearly point to him being caught and it being covered up, as against the suggestion that it is unlikely that he is the only one not juicing?

He's saying that other high profile Jamaican athetes have been caught, which would indicate that they do indeed test, and test enough to catch a few of the dopers (even the high-profile ones).  He then says that this is coupled with Jamaica's histoically lax approach to "anti-doping" - ie. not drug testing.  This is where my opinion came from.

Lance Armstrong's famous "I've never failed a drugs test" line should read "I've never failed a drugs test that you guys know about"

I honestly don't see what you are implying, but you may be right. He may be treating very carefully due to libel laws etc.

The difference with Armstrong and Bolt is that while they were winning, Armstrong's cheating teammates were not failing tests or at least not publicly. Bolt's are.

I think you're proving my point here muppet.  If Armstrong's teammates had been cheating and failing tests (like Bolt's) and he was still massively outperforming them, would logic not lead you to conclude that either:

1. Some sort of cover up was going on wrt Armstrong's test results
2. Armstrong was Superman

I've been half following this conversation, did you show yet where he's been caught doping  or did you back your way out of that one??

Instead of taking time to post, maybe you should use that time to read back through.  I believe the phrase is "close your mouth and open your ears".

That's a no then so, carry on..

Ah, another one reduced to the smartarse responses.  Reading mustn't be your thing Boycey.

Fine bit of research muppet.  The thing is, I didn't berate anyone for using sarcasm, I was merely pointing out your haste to jump in with it, after recently pulling me for doing the same (see 'holier than thou').  So unfortunately your research has been a waste of time.

PS. Just when you mention using sarcasm without comment on the issue, weren't we discussing James McClean?  You ignored the rest of my post on your 'point' regarding Gazza and the flute playing. Or were you just agreeing with me?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 08:19:02 PM
"weren't we discussing James McClean?"

No.

You moved the discussion onto hissy fits and holier than thou.  ;D

As for Gazza. You defended McClean saying a fist pump wasn't an obscene gesture. I posted Gazza being a flute and said that this wasn't an obscene gesture either.

You then changed you point from' obscene' to 'sectarian'. I responded to that one as well.

We were doing fine until you gave up and went 'hissy fit' and 'smartarse', to use your own words.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 09:17:54 PM
"weren't we discussing James McClean?"

No.

You moved the discussion onto hissy fits and holier than thou.  ;D

As for Gazza. You defended McClean saying a fist pump wasn't an obscene gesture. I posted Gazza being a flute and said that this wasn't an obscene gesture either.

You then changed you point from' obscene' to 'sectarian'. I responded to that one as well.

We were doing fine until you gave up and went 'hissy fit' and 'smartarse', to use your own words.

No, I made two points in that post. One referring to the issue and one referring to your sarcasm.  You ignored the former.  If you check, you'll find that your post was the first one not to mention the issues pertaining to the thread.

Regarding your little synopsis, there's many things that McClean's gesture wasn't that I didn't mention.  Must I mention them all?  You said yourself that the issues weren't the same so I fail to see the relevance of the photo.  I've asked you to explain but you've yet to oblige.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 21, 2015, 10:46:56 PM
"weren't we discussing James McClean?"

No.

You moved the discussion onto hissy fits and holier than thou.  ;D

As for Gazza. You defended McClean saying a fist pump wasn't an obscene gesture. I posted Gazza being a flute and said that his wasn't an obscene gesture either.

You then changed you point from' obscene' to 'sectarian'. I responded to that one as well.

We were doing fine until you gave up and went 'hissy fit' and 'smartarse', to use your own words.

No, I made two points in that post. One referring to the issue and one referring to your sarcasm.  You ignored the former.  If you check, you'll find that your post was the first one not to mention the issues pertaining to the thread.

Regarding your little synopsis, there's many things that McClean's gesture wasn't that I didn't mention.  Must I mention them all?  You said yourself that the issues weren't the same so I fail to see the relevance of the photo.  I've asked you to explain but you've yet to oblige.

I have explained. But you keep ignoring it.

I'll oblige you yet again. You said McClean's gesture wasn't obscene. I posted Gazza's photo, for which he was reprimanded, which I mentioned, and I said that it wasn't obscene either. That was exactly my point. Can you see the comparison?

Gazza's behaviour not being obscene didn't save him from censure. Thus your point about obscenity was irrelevant. I didn't feel the need to spoon feed you the point, but I now realise this was a mistake. If McClean's gesture was ok because as you said, it wasn't obscene, then surely Gazza's was ok too? That was the comparison.

Then you said this:

" You ignored the rest of my post on your 'point' regarding Gazza and the flute playing. Or were you just agreeing with me?""

I most certainly didn't ignore your post on Gazza. After I dealt with your point on it not being obscene, in reply you said Gazza's gesture was sectarian. I responded to that. I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.

Then you went all hyperbolic, talking about banning all forms of celebration (how would you even define this?), which I thought was just sarcasm, because I certainly didn't think it was a serious point.








Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on October 21, 2015, 11:00:14 PM
Muppet v Franko

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 21, 2015, 11:42:17 PM
"weren't we discussing James McClean?"

No.

You moved the discussion onto hissy fits and holier than thou.  ;D

As for Gazza. You defended McClean saying a fist pump wasn't an obscene gesture. I posted Gazza being a flute and said that his wasn't an obscene gesture either.

You then changed you point from' obscene' to 'sectarian'. I responded to that one as well.

We were doing fine until you gave up and went 'hissy fit' and 'smartarse', to use your own words.

No, I made two points in that post. One referring to the issue and one referring to your sarcasm.  You ignored the former.  If you check, you'll find that your post was the first one not to mention the issues pertaining to the thread.

Regarding your little synopsis, there's many things that McClean's gesture wasn't that I didn't mention.  Must I mention them all?  You said yourself that the issues weren't the same so I fail to see the relevance of the photo.  I've asked you to explain but you've yet to oblige.

I have explained. But you keep ignoring it.

I'll oblige you yet again. You said McClean's gesture wasn't obscene. I posted Gazza's photo, for which he was reprimanded, which I mentioned, and I said that it wasn't obscene either. That was exactly my point. Can you see the comparison?

Gazza's behaviour not being obscene didn't save him from censure. Thus your point about obscenity was irrelevant. I didn't feel the need to spoon feed you the point, but I now realise this was a mistake. If McClean's gesture was ok because as you said, it wasn't obscene, then surely Gazza's was ok too? That was the comparison.

Then you said this:

" You ignored the rest of my post on your 'point' regarding Gazza and the flute playing. Or were you just agreeing with me?""

I most certainly didn't ignore your post on Gazza. After I dealt with your point on it not being obscene, in reply you said Gazza's gesture was sectarian. I responded to that. I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.

Then you went all hyperbolic, talking about banning all forms of celebration (how would you even define this?), which I thought was just sarcasm, because I certainly didn't think it was a serious point.

You have reached new depths of pedantry with this one.  OK, it wasn't 'obscene or offensive', is that OK?  Does 'offensive' cover the myriad of other things that the gesture wasn't (racist/sectarian/homophobic/sexually explicit/politically incorrect...) or do I have to list them all individually?

James McClean made a celebratory gesture towards the opposition fans in a bid to wind them up.  You attempted to equate this to Gazza's blatant sectarian act.  There is no comparison.  You may as well have posted a picture of Cantona's Kung Fu kick, for all the relevance it had.

And as for your last paragraph, maybe I need to spoon feed it you.  The particular type of sectarianism that Gazza was involving himself in with little dance was responsible for many deaths and was one which Scottish football had and still has a massive problem with.  What point are you trying to make with this drivel about soccer being full of it?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 22, 2015, 08:56:41 AM

I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.
That's a very generous definition.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 22, 2015, 06:36:27 PM

I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.
That's a very generous definition.

Really?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sectarian?s=t (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sectarian?s=t)

1.
of or relating to sectaries or sects.
2.
narrowly confined or devoted to a particular sect.
3.
narrowly confined or limited in interest, purpose, scope, etc.


Some people seem to define everything as it pertains to their world only (ironically that falls under the definition sectarian). By narrowly limiting one's views on, say religion, or politics, or for example dressing yourself up in one colour and rabidly shouting insults at a bunch of people wearing another colour, that is sectarian, as defined above.

Many football supporters around the world have died because of sectarianism.

My view on McClean is simple. The fans abusing him are scumbags. The FA, UEFA and FIFA have long turned a blind eye to the behaviour of soccer fans. However imho, by reacting to the scumbags, McClean let himself and his employers down down.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on October 22, 2015, 06:57:34 PM
"weren't we discussing James McClean?"

No.

You moved the discussion onto hissy fits and holier than thou.  ;D

As for Gazza. You defended McClean saying a fist pump wasn't an obscene gesture. I posted Gazza being a flute and said that his wasn't an obscene gesture either.

You then changed you point from' obscene' to 'sectarian'. I responded to that one as well.

We were doing fine until you gave up and went 'hissy fit' and 'smartarse', to use your own words.

No, I made two points in that post. One referring to the issue and one referring to your sarcasm.  You ignored the former.  If you check, you'll find that your post was the first one not to mention the issues pertaining to the thread.

Regarding your little synopsis, there's many things that McClean's gesture wasn't that I didn't mention.  Must I mention them all?  You said yourself that the issues weren't the same so I fail to see the relevance of the photo.  I've asked you to explain but you've yet to oblige.

I have explained. But you keep ignoring it.

I'll oblige you yet again. You said McClean's gesture wasn't obscene. I posted Gazza's photo, for which he was reprimanded, which I mentioned, and I said that it wasn't obscene either. That was exactly my point. Can you see the comparison?

Gazza's behaviour not being obscene didn't save him from censure. Thus your point about obscenity was irrelevant. I didn't feel the need to spoon feed you the point, but I now realise this was a mistake. If McClean's gesture was ok because as you said, it wasn't obscene, then surely Gazza's was ok too? That was the comparison.

Then you said this:

" You ignored the rest of my post on your 'point' regarding Gazza and the flute playing. Or were you just agreeing with me?""

I most certainly didn't ignore your post on Gazza. After I dealt with your point on it not being obscene, in reply you said Gazza's gesture was sectarian. I responded to that. I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.

Then you went all hyperbolic, talking about banning all forms of celebration (how would you even define this?), which I thought was just sarcasm, because I certainly didn't think it was a serious point.

You have reached new depths of pedantry with this one.  OK, it wasn't 'obscene or offensive', is that OK?  Does 'offensive' cover the myriad of other things that the gesture wasn't (racist/sectarian/homophobic/sexually explicit/politically incorrect...) or do I have to list them all individually?

James McClean made a celebratory gesture towards the opposition fans in a bid to wind them up.  You attempted to equate this to Gazza's blatant sectarian act.  There is no comparison.  You may as well have posted a picture of Cantona's Kung Fu kick, for all the relevance it had.

And as for your last paragraph, maybe I need to spoon feed it you.  The particular type of sectarianism that Gazza was involving himself in with little dance was responsible for many deaths and was one which Scottish football had and still has a massive problem with.  What point are you trying to make with this drivel about soccer being full of it?

McLean took shit for long enough and slapped it up the supporters who doled out the abuse, paying for a ticket does not give you license to hurl abuse, throw banana's or coins at players.

Some people go out of their way to be offended apparently. ::)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on October 22, 2015, 07:48:56 PM
"weren't we discussing James McClean?"

No.

You moved the discussion onto hissy fits and holier than thou.  ;D

As for Gazza. You defended McClean saying a fist pump wasn't an obscene gesture. I posted Gazza being a flute and said that his wasn't an obscene gesture either.

You then changed you point from' obscene' to 'sectarian'. I responded to that one as well.

We were doing fine until you gave up and went 'hissy fit' and 'smartarse', to use your own words.

No, I made two points in that post. One referring to the issue and one referring to your sarcasm.  You ignored the former.  If you check, you'll find that your post was the first one not to mention the issues pertaining to the thread.

Regarding your little synopsis, there's many things that McClean's gesture wasn't that I didn't mention.  Must I mention them all?  You said yourself that the issues weren't the same so I fail to see the relevance of the photo.  I've asked you to explain but you've yet to oblige.

I have explained. But you keep ignoring it.

I'll oblige you yet again. You said McClean's gesture wasn't obscene. I posted Gazza's photo, for which he was reprimanded, which I mentioned, and I said that it wasn't obscene either. That was exactly my point. Can you see the comparison?

Gazza's behaviour not being obscene didn't save him from censure. Thus your point about obscenity was irrelevant. I didn't feel the need to spoon feed you the point, but I now realise this was a mistake. If McClean's gesture was ok because as you said, it wasn't obscene, then surely Gazza's was ok too? That was the comparison.

Then you said this:

" You ignored the rest of my post on your 'point' regarding Gazza and the flute playing. Or were you just agreeing with me?""

I most certainly didn't ignore your post on Gazza. After I dealt with your point on it not being obscene, in reply you said Gazza's gesture was sectarian. I responded to that. I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.

Then you went all hyperbolic, talking about banning all forms of celebration (how would you even define this?), which I thought was just sarcasm, because I certainly didn't think it was a serious point.

You have reached new depths of pedantry with this one.  OK, it wasn't 'obscene or offensive', is that OK?  Does 'offensive' cover the myriad of other things that the gesture wasn't (racist/sectarian/homophobic/sexually explicit/politically incorrect...) or do I have to list them all individually?

James McClean made a celebratory gesture towards the opposition fans in a bid to wind them up.  You attempted to equate this to Gazza's blatant sectarian act.  There is no comparison.  You may as well have posted a picture of Cantona's Kung Fu kick, for all the relevance it had.

And as for your last paragraph, maybe I need to spoon feed it you.  The particular type of sectarianism that Gazza was involving himself in with little dance was responsible for many deaths and was one which Scottish football had and still has a massive problem with.  What point are you trying to make with this drivel about soccer being full of it?

McLean took shit for long enough and slapped it up the supporters who doled out the abuse, paying for a ticket does not give you license to hurl abuse, throw banana's or coins at players.

Some people go out of their way to be offended apparently. ::)
James McLean being a prime example.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 22, 2015, 10:03:34 PM

I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.
That's a very generous definition.

Really?
Yes, really. It's like saying I'm homophobic for not being attracted to other men.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 22, 2015, 10:12:49 PM

I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.
That's a very generous definition.

Really?
Yes, really. It's like saying I'm homophobic for not being attracted to other men.

Can you post up a credible definition of homophobic that backs that up?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on October 22, 2015, 11:55:25 PM
Muppet v Franko




Is the guy in the middle blind or pished or anti tennis?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Billys Boots on October 23, 2015, 09:05:09 AM
I think that's from the old Hitchcock classic movie 'Strangers on a Train'.  That's the bad guy not watching the tennis - he's trying to freak out the main protagonist in the story, who happens to be a tennis player.  Just saying like, to lighten the mood ...  :P.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on October 23, 2015, 10:22:12 AM

I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.
That's a very generous definition.

Really?
Yes, really. It's like saying I'm homophobic for not being attracted to other men.

Can you post up a credible definition of homophobic that backs that up?
Homophobia is the fear and/or hatred of gay men. Hating something is the same as not liking something. I don't like gay men (in that way). Ergo, "by definition", I'm homophobic.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on October 23, 2015, 10:56:36 AM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 23, 2015, 12:34:47 PM

I said that sport and politics, for example, are by definition sectarian. Splitting one group of supporters on one side of an arena and a different group in another is by definition sectarian. Soccer is full of sectarianism. The local derbies around the world are the very definition of sectarianism.
That's a very generous definition.

Really?
Yes, really. It's like saying I'm homophobic for not being attracted to other men.

Can you post up a credible definition of homophobic that backs that up?
Homophobia is the fear and/or hatred of gay men. Hating something is the same as not liking something  I don't like gay men (in that way). Ergo, "by definition", I'm homophobic.

Here is where it all goes wrong.

Using your logic, if not liking gay men 'in that way', is the same as hating gay men, then I take it you hate your mother?  :D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on October 23, 2015, 12:53:47 PM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

Hard to argue with that .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on October 23, 2015, 12:57:33 PM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

Hard to argue with that .

No problem with any of it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: deiseach on October 23, 2015, 12:59:06 PM
Poppy Watch thread seems to be running late this year.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: finbar o tool on October 23, 2015, 01:17:53 PM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

the only thing i would have say against the above is this line - "then he is an attention seeker".

yes he is a pro, yes he should probably know better, but if he is getting a lot of real hatred from the crowd saying horrible shit for 90minutes in your ear, you would be tempted to respond with some kind of gesture. right or wrong. some people can take that crap and smile back/give a thumbs up, but some others struggle with it. its a bit harsh to call him an attention seeker IMO.
its up to West Brom to help him through these situations in the appropriate manner and get him mentally stronger to deal with these situations. man manage.

other than that, agree with the rest Jim.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on October 23, 2015, 01:47:31 PM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

Like finbar, I've no problem with any of it apart from the attention seeker part.  He was unable to control himself in the face of provocation when his profession would dictate (rightly or wrongly) that he should have been.  Maybe makes him a bit irrational and hot headed but it doesn't make him an attention seeker.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on October 23, 2015, 02:01:43 PM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

Like finbar, I've no problem with any of it apart from the attention seeker part.  He was unable to control himself in the face of provocation when his profession would dictate (rightly or wrongly) that he should have been.  Maybe makes him a bit irrational and hot headed but it doesn't make him an attention seeker.

Fair enough point, but I guess if he was being irrational I he didn't know better, at least for that moment.

/Jim.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2015, 12:14:41 AM
No Poppy on McClean's shirt today.

As they say around here, another the same McClean shirt will do him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on November 01, 2015, 02:11:26 AM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

Like finbar, I've no problem with any of it apart from the attention seeker part.  He was unable to control himself in the face of provocation when his profession would dictate (rightly or wrongly) that he should have been.  Maybe makes him a bit irrational and hot headed but it doesn't make him an attention seeker.

Fair enough point, but I guess if he was being irrational I he didn't know better, at least for that moment.

/Jim.
A player is the brunt of vile racist/ethnic abuse all through the match and makes some harmless gesture in response towards those racist fans at the end of the match and they get more annoyed?  I would take a different  perspective than the usual reactionary 'blame the player' 'blame the abused' . To my way of thinking,  blaming the abused is brainless. Blame Neil Lennon for the vile abuse he received while playing in scotland because he deserved it , he earned it. because he was an angry unlikable character, therefore he provoked the response, it was not bigoted abuse because Neil provoked it, it was just normal abuse?
Do you blame the black players for the abuse they receive? Would you pass censure on a black player reacting to racist abuse?
Do you blame Mido for the vile abuse he received?
Of course not, it's not socially acceptable to blame a player of colour, or a player of a different religion  for being the cause of the abuse dished his way
but when it comes to vile abuse dished towards a player of Irish ethnicity, we have plenty lining up to tell the player how to behave in such a manner as not to aggravate these fascist types.
Not a word on sanctioning the idiotic sunderland players or not a word  on the football club to use video evidence to select some of the loud mouthed bigots and ban them from football.
The abuse directed at McClean is redirected racism.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on November 01, 2015, 01:25:38 PM
Of the 3 big controversies around James McClean I would say:

1) "Abandoning" OWC for Republic of Ireland:

I understand the anger in OWC support over this.  That said, it is likely that kids will grow up in a system and play for team in front of them.  However, I think if James felt "Irish" as in an affinity for the Republic of Ireland team, he should have worked that out by the time he got to U-20s. Also claiming to have felt uncomfortable standing to GSTQ in Windsor before matches when he hadn't actually played there for OWC was a bit of a blooper.  So I get why he is a figure of ire for them.

2) Gesturing to the crowd:

He s long enough a pro to know that the standard of behaviour expected of players in this context is higher than that expect of attendees at soccer matches.  Wrong or right that is reality.  He should  know better.  If he did know better and still did it, then he is an attention seeker.

3) Not wearing the Poppy:

1,000% right in doing as he does.  Has always been reasonable in explaining his reasons.  Frankly it says more about "Poppy Facism" and it's prevalence in certain parts of British society, particularly in the ranks of Northern Irish unionists.

I suspect he is a bit of giddy buck but as a few of his charity gestures have shown, far from worst in the world.

/Jim.

Like finbar, I've no problem with any of it apart from the attention seeker part.  He was unable to control himself in the face of provocation when his profession would dictate (rightly or wrongly) that he should have been.  Maybe makes him a bit irrational and hot headed but it doesn't make him an attention seeker.

Fair enough point, but I guess if he was being irrational I he didn't know better, at least for that moment.

/Jim.
A player is the brunt of vile racist/ethnic abuse all through the match and makes some harmless gesture in response towards those racist fans at the end of the match and they get more annoyed?  I would take a different  perspective than the usual reactionary 'blame the player' 'blame the abused' . To my way of thinking,  blaming the abused is brainless. Blame Neil Lennon for the vile abuse he received while playing in scotland because he deserved it , he earned it. because he was an angry unlikable character, therefore he provoked the response, it was not bigoted abuse because Neil provoked it, it was just normal abuse?
Do you blame the black players for the abuse they receive? Would you pass censure on a black player reacting to racist abuse?
Do you blame Mido for the vile abuse he received?
Of course not, it's not socially acceptable to blame a player of colour, or a player of a different religion  for being the cause of the abuse dished his way
but when it comes to vile abuse dished towards a player of Irish ethnicity, we have plenty lining up to tell the player how to behave in such a manner as not to aggravate these fascist types.
Not a word on sanctioning the idiotic sunderland players or not a word  on the football club to use video evidence to select some of the loud mouthed bigots and ban them from football.
The abuse directed at McClean is redirected racism.

Well put.

My question is why is the English FA not looking into this and acting on it, there are opposing players getting after him, their fans chime in and nothing gets done about it? West Brom should be all over this to protect him but no, to investigate would insult the poppy wearers and we can't have that now can we!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on November 01, 2015, 08:08:28 PM
Was watching a few premier league games over the weekend and noticed that hardly anyone in the crowd is wearing Poppys. Boo boo to them ira b**tards. No surrender etc.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Kidder81 on November 07, 2015, 04:30:44 PM
Both sets of fans booing him today apparently
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 05:00:34 PM
Would happen in every stadium ... On a side note great goal
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Kidder81 on November 07, 2015, 05:04:29 PM
Would happen in every stadium ... On a side note great goal

Has it been happening in every stadium ?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 05:15:14 PM
Would happen in every stadium ... On a side note great goal

Has it been happening in every stadium ?

Yes
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 05:21:38 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 05:24:17 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 05:30:46 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 05:40:17 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...


Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 05:51:42 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...

It might mean a lot to the FA, but it doesn't for everyone. That's why it shouldn't be put on the shirts.

He's still playing in the PL but the FA should have made a statement that any player has the choice or not to wear a Poppy without being ridiculed or abused. They have ostracised McClean because of beliefs and that is totally unacceptable.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Boycey on November 07, 2015, 06:00:44 PM
Saw  the 1st half today, there was a faint murmur from Utd fans when McClean got the ball possibly caused by a very poor tackle by him on Blind in the 1st minute... Heard nothing from WBA supporters and would doubt very much he would be booed by them to be honest..
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 06:08:49 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...

It might mean a lot to the FA, but it doesn't for everyone. That's why it shouldn't be put on the shirts.

He's still playing in the PL but the FA should have made a statement that any player has the choice or not to wear a Poppy without being ridiculed or abused. They have ostracised McClean because of beliefs and that is totally unacceptable.

Right at what point do you not understand?? He's not wearing one nor made to (or anyone else for that matter)... The abuse he's getting will come regardless on whether the FA, prince Charles or the Queen said its fine not to wear one....
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: annapr on November 07, 2015, 06:17:01 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...

It might mean a lot to the FA, but it doesn't for everyone. That's why it shouldn't be put on the shirts.

He's still playing in the PL but the FA should have made a statement that any player has the choice or not to wear a Poppy without being ridiculed or abused. They have ostracised McClean because of beliefs and that is totally unacceptable.
That man in your avatar was wearing a poppy the other night on TV.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 06:35:01 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...

It might mean a lot to the FA, but it doesn't for everyone. That's why it shouldn't be put on the shirts.

He's still playing in the PL but the FA should have made a statement that any player has the choice or not to wear a Poppy without being ridiculed or abused. They have ostracised McClean because of beliefs and that is totally unacceptable.

Right at what point do you not understand?? He's not wearing one nor made to (or anyone else for that matter)... The abuse he's getting will come regardless on whether the FA, prince Charles or the Queen said its fine not to wear one....

Didn't you read my last post?? It shouldn't be connected with sport. That's the point. It puts players who might have issues with it, in an awkward situation, where they are damned if they do or damned if they dont.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 07:01:57 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...

It might mean a lot to the FA, but it doesn't for everyone. That's why it shouldn't be put on the shirts.

He's still playing in the PL but the FA should have made a statement that any player has the choice or not to wear a Poppy without being ridiculed or abused. They have ostracised McClean because of beliefs and that is totally unacceptable.

Right at what point do you not understand?? He's not wearing one nor made to (or anyone else for that matter)... The abuse he's getting will come regardless on whether the FA, prince Charles or the Queen said its fine not to wear one....

Didn't you read my last post?? It shouldn't be connected with sport. That's the point. It puts players who might have issues with it, in an awkward situation, where they are damned if they do or damned if they dont.

I cant keep up, you keep moving the goal posts..... Its not connected to sport.. The players have a choice, its up to them whether they feel awkward in not wearing one... Jesus !! We cant complain about other peoples politics' if we want others to try and accept ours.. You'd have nothing to complain about ffs!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on November 07, 2015, 07:09:35 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 07:11:13 PM
I think it's despicable that players are forced to wear a Poppy on their shirts. It has absolutely nothing to do with sport.

It's not just McClean that finds it offensive. There are many nationalities who might think otherwise: Argentinian, Chinese, German, Spanish, Italian, Japanese... Let's face it, any country that Britain has been to war with/invaded/occupied, which is most of the world.

And you know that?? McLean is not forced or has he worn one... The nationalities you speak of have same opportunities.... Stop talking rubbish

Did the FA or Premier League defend McClean for not wearing one? No.

Which post are you going with?? He's playing football in the EPL and hasn't lost his job because of it so what are you on about?? The FA are encouraging it because to them it means a lot... Stop looking for trouble and you wont find any...

It might mean a lot to the FA, but it doesn't for everyone. That's why it shouldn't be put on the shirts.

He's still playing in the PL but the FA should have made a statement that any player has the choice or not to wear a Poppy without being ridiculed or abused. They have ostracised McClean because of beliefs and that is totally unacceptable.

Right at what point do you not understand?? He's not wearing one nor made to (or anyone else for that matter)... The abuse he's getting will come regardless on whether the FA, prince Charles or the Queen said its fine not to wear one....

Didn't you read my last post?? It shouldn't be connected with sport. That's the point. It puts players who might have issues with it, in an awkward situation, where they are damned if they do or damned if they dont.

I cant keep up, you keep moving the goal posts..... Its not connected to sport.. The players have a choice, its up to them whether they feel awkward in not wearing one... Jesus !! We cant complain about other peoples politics' if we want others to try and accept ours.. You'd have nothing to complain about ffs!

I think you should give the iPad to a grown up, and have a wee lie down.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 07:21:38 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?

Nothing fair f**ks to him, is that concisely enough?? But this crap that people are being made to wear one is utter bullshit... Its 2015 not the 1800's ... As for Mcclean in general he courts controversy but I cant knock him for standing up for his belief's..

We all in life do things that we don't want to do he's chosen to do his in the public eye..... Be alright though all he needs to do is buy another wheelchair or give someone a nice Xmas gift...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on November 07, 2015, 07:44:50 PM

Genuinely confused as to the source of your animosity towards the lad.

As an aside, although in theory noone is forced to wear the poppy, the emotional blackmail and public outcry when someone declines means it takes considerable backbone to exercise your free will.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 07:59:17 PM

Genuinely confused as to the source of your animosity towards the lad.

As an aside, although in theory noone is forced to wear the poppy, the emotional blackmail and public outcry when someone declines means it takes considerable backbone to exercise your free will.

I said he courts controversy... I don't know the lad personally and neither do you... I said fair f**ks to him so again I still don't know what I've done to make it that ive ill feeling towards him... Soccer players' generally don't have any backbone in my view... The diving and gurnning they do on the pitch is awful
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 08:02:47 PM

As an aside, although in theory noone is forced to wear the poppy, the emotional blackmail and public outcry when someone declines means it takes considerable backbone to exercise your free will.

+1
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 08:08:25 PM

As an aside, although in theory noone is forced to wear the poppy, the emotional blackmail and public outcry when someone declines means it takes considerable backbone to exercise your free will.

+1

 Emotionally weak would be a better description ... If you feel forced then that's wrong... I doubt any of the players were put into that position they are wearing it cause they want to... Absolutely no story here
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: DuffleKing on November 07, 2015, 08:11:58 PM

You seem like a decent sort but the logic, presumption and opinions you piece together in this thread make no sense
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 08:19:33 PM

As an aside, although in theory noone is forced to wear the poppy, the emotional blackmail and public outcry when someone declines means it takes considerable backbone to exercise your free will.

+1

 Emotionally weak would be a better description ... If you feel forced then that's wrong... I doubt any of the players were put into that position they are wearing it cause they want to... Absolutely no story here

You can't speak for every footballer in the PL.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 07, 2015, 08:20:08 PM

You seem like a decent sort but the logic, presumption and opinions you piece together in this thread make no sense

It's not just me then.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 08:32:19 PM

As an aside, although in theory noone is forced to wear the poppy, the emotional blackmail and public outcry when someone declines means it takes considerable backbone to exercise your free will.

+1

 Emotionally weak would be a better description ... If you feel forced then that's wrong... I doubt any of the players were put into that position they are wearing it cause they want to... Absolutely no story here

You can't speak for every footballer in the PL.

Neither can you.... Look back on your posts
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 08:33:39 PM

You seem like a decent sort but the logic, presumption and opinions you piece together in this thread make no sense

Lets agree to disagree then... Your view is what it is
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rrhf on November 07, 2015, 09:15:47 PM
Is it not time for the irish govn to challenge the racism.. fascism. Whatever.. im saying that and have no  problem with poppy wearing among friends etc.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on November 07, 2015, 09:24:40 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?

Nothing fair f**ks to him, is that concisely enough?? But this crap that people are being made to wear one is utter bullshit... Its 2015 not the 1800's ...As for Mcclean in general he courts controversy but I cant knock him for standing up for his belief's..

We all in life do things that we don't want to do he's chosen to do his in the public eye..... Be alright though all he needs to do is buy another wheelchair or give someone a nice Xmas gift...
Your wrong about that milltown.  Thomas Niblock was taken off air by the bbc for a while for not wearing one.  Plenty of other examples.  The pundits would all be told to wear one.  Plenty of noble English men have given off about poppy facism (perfect term) that has been in overdrive for some years now
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: clarshack on November 07, 2015, 09:24:56 PM
Is it not time for the irish govn to challenge the racism.. fascism. Whatever.. im saying that and have no  problem with poppy wearing among friends etc.

Yes, i'm sick of this nonsense every year. Somebody needs to intervene and put this sh*t to bed once and for all.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 09:41:37 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?

Nothing fair f**ks to him, is that concisely enough?? But this crap that people are being made to wear one is utter bullshit... Its 2015 not the 1800's ...As for Mcclean in general he courts controversy but I cant knock him for standing up for his belief's..

We all in life do things that we don't want to do he's chosen to do his in the public eye..... Be alright though all he needs to do is buy another wheelchair or give someone a nice Xmas gift...
Your wrong about that milltown.  Thomas Niblock was taken off air by the bbc for a while for not wearing one.  Plenty of other examples.  The pundits would all be told to wear one.  Plenty of noble English men have given off about poppy facism (perfect term) that has been in overdrive for some years now

Did he lose his job?? Did they stop his wages?? Is he still working for the BBC? Some people have little to worry about... Do you get annoyed at flegs ??
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 09:42:57 PM
Is it not time for the irish govn to challenge the racism.. fascism. Whatever.. im saying that and have no  problem with poppy wearing among friends etc.

Yes, i'm sick of this nonsense every year. Somebody needs to intervene and put this sh*t to bed once and for all.

Is this a serious post??
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: hardstation on November 07, 2015, 09:49:30 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?

Nothing fair f**ks to him, is that concisely enough?? But this crap that people are being made to wear one is utter bullshit... Its 2015 not the 1800's ...As for Mcclean in general he courts controversy but I cant knock him for standing up for his belief's..

We all in life do things that we don't want to do he's chosen to do his in the public eye..... Be alright though all he needs to do is buy another wheelchair or give someone a nice Xmas gift...
Your wrong about that milltown.  Thomas Niblock was taken off air by the bbc for a while for not wearing one.  Plenty of other examples.  The pundits would all be told to wear one.  Plenty of noble English men have given off about poppy facism (perfect term) that has been in overdrive for some years now

Did he lose his job?? Did they stop his wages?? Is he still working for the BBC? Some people have little to worry about... Do you get annoyed at flegs ??
You've lost it if you see no issue with that, Milltown. An employer stops a man from doing his job because he won't wear a poppy and you can't see an issue? "He's still getting paid" is the biggest cop out shite I've ever heard.

Btw, I've no real issue with flags but I'm not being made to fly one.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 07, 2015, 09:56:41 PM
I notice Mr Sidebottom doesn't sport one.
Good on you boy.
I presume it's now a voluntary thing in BBC 6 Cos and UTV.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 09:58:34 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?

Nothing fair f**ks to him, is that concisely enough?? But this crap that people are being made to wear one is utter bullshit... Its 2015 not the 1800's ...As for Mcclean in general he courts controversy but I cant knock him for standing up for his belief's..

We all in life do things that we don't want to do he's chosen to do his in the public eye..... Be alright though all he needs to do is buy another wheelchair or give someone a nice Xmas gift...
Your wrong about that milltown.  Thomas Niblock was taken off air by the bbc for a while for not wearing one.  Plenty of other examples.  The pundits would all be told to wear one.  Plenty of noble English men have given off about poppy facism (perfect term) that has been in overdrive for some years now

Did he lose his job?? Did they stop his wages?? Is he still working for the BBC? Some people have little to worry about... Do you get annoyed at flegs ??
You've lost it if you see no issue with that, Milltown. An employer stops a man from doing his job because he won't wear a poppy and you can't see an issue? "He's still getting paid" is the biggest cop out shite I've ever heard.

Btw, I've no real issue with flags but I'm not being made to fly one.

My point is he's still there... He obviously loves his job and hasn't thought it a big enough reason to kick up a fuss....

This poppy issue comes up every year by the usual suspects with the same comments... Me personally wouldn't wear one but wouldn't bat a eye lid at anyone who does because to me I'm able to accept other people's views... Whether they are right or not is neither here or there I'llgive my view on it and move on..... There are far bigger issues in life to worry about... We cant have it all our own way if we want people to be tolerant of our views the we need to do the same
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: hardstation on November 07, 2015, 10:03:43 PM
The main issue, as far as I can see, is not with people who choose to wear them but the scorn poured upon those who don't.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 10:11:09 PM
The main issue, as far as I can see, is not with people who choose to wear them but the scorn poured upon those who don't.

Yep arseholes the lot of them... Anybody that pours scorn over someone's beliefs is a bellend.... So.e people should take that on board... I've already said fair f**ks to the lad
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on November 07, 2015, 10:18:45 PM

MR2 - concisely, what's your issue with McClean not wearing a poppy?

Nothing fair f**ks to him, is that concisely enough?? But this crap that people are being made to wear one is utter bullshit... Its 2015 not the 1800's ...As for Mcclean in general he courts controversy but I cant knock him for standing up for his belief's..

We all in life do things that we don't want to do he's chosen to do his in the public eye..... Be alright though all he needs to do is buy another wheelchair or give someone a nice Xmas gift...
Your wrong about that milltown.  Thomas Niblock was taken off air by the bbc for a while for not wearing one.  Plenty of other examples.  The pundits would all be told to wear one.  Plenty of noble English men have given off about poppy facism (perfect term) that has been in overdrive for some years now

Did he lose his job?? Did they stop his wages?? Is he still working for the BBC? Some people have little to worry about... Do you get annoyed at flegs ??
no I don't get annoyed.  But I think there is a difference from having little to bother you and voicing a discontent with something being forced upon people.  I honestly don't have a problem with someone wearing one.  For me it's like charity, you should be doing it for the right reasons not just to be seen doing it.  Granted I think this is media generated problem.  The number of people wearing a poppy on British media, ie 99.9% does not reflect the general public. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on November 07, 2015, 10:21:36 PM
Hardstation beat me to it.  That's it in nutshell really
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 07, 2015, 10:28:58 PM
Hardstation beat me to it.  That's it in nutshell really

Yeah I agree that people wearing them for the wrong reasons are wrong, that's simple... Only have to go to shankill rathcoole this Sunday to see people wearing them and using it as a platform for all the wrong reasons...

But whole feck lads its fecking stupid getting your knickers in a twist over it and fighting other peoples battles... If they are man enough and against it they wont wear it...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: johnneycool on November 07, 2015, 11:16:30 PM
I was in a shopping centre in Bangor yesterday and was surprised at the amount of people not wearing them and that was with a bl stall in the middle of it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on November 08, 2015, 12:40:51 PM
http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/james-mcclean-hits-back-in-poppy-row-this-is-the-stupidity-i-have-to-put-up-with-34179003.html (http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/james-mcclean-hits-back-in-poppy-row-this-is-the-stupidity-i-have-to-put-up-with-34179003.html)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: balladmaker on November 08, 2015, 08:58:54 PM
Fair play to James McClean, he's made his position very clear from the outset, stands by his believes and won't compromise them for anyone.  The fact that he doesn't wear one in no way denigrates or insults those who died in the two world wars, why should it.  However, the blatant anti-Irish sentiments in the press and in Old Trafford yesterday under the guise of the poppy issue need to be questioned.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 08, 2015, 09:02:43 PM
Fair play to James McClean, he's made his position very clear from the outset, stands by his believes and won't compromise them for anyone.  The fact that he doesn't wear one in no way denigrates or insults those who died in the two world wars, why should it.  However, the blatant anti-Irish sentiments in the press and in Old Trafford yesterday under the guise of the poppy issue need to be questioned.

Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on November 08, 2015, 09:20:36 PM
Fair play to James McClean, he's made his position very clear from the outset, stands by his believes and won't compromise them for anyone.  The fact that he doesn't wear one in no way denigrates or insults those who died in the two world wars, why should it.  However, the blatant anti-Irish sentiments in the press and in Old Trafford yesterday under the guise of the poppy issue need to be questioned.

Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

Don't think it is anti-Irish. It's more a group of people who don't realise the issue(s). Also with football fans they'll jump on any bandwagon to put down an opposition player.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: 5 Sams on November 08, 2015, 09:28:04 PM
Poppies, Lilys, Flegs,..all bollix. Move on. I'm starting to think Jarlath was right.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: balladmaker on November 08, 2015, 09:46:46 PM
Quote
Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

I agree that it would happen in any stadium ... in England.  I also think that if it was an Italian or French or a player from any other nationality other than Ireland who would not wear the poppy, there'd be no more said about it, it would be a non-story.  There's an ongoing campaign against James McClean who is obviously proud to be Irish and wants no part in their jingoistic rituals relating to centuries of war-mongering around the globe, if he was anything other than Irish, there'd be no mention of it ... in  my opinion.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 08, 2015, 10:16:32 PM
Quote
Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

I agree that it would happen in any stadium ... in England.  I also think that if it was an Italian or French or a player from any other nationality other than Ireland who would not wear the poppy, there'd be no more said about it, it would be a non-story.  There's an ongoing campaign against James McClean who is obviously proud to be Irish and wants no part in their jingoistic rituals relating to centuries of war-mongering around the globe, if he was anything other than Irish, there'd be no mention of it ... in  my opinion.

I'd say all the Irish players in the EPL are proud to be Irish, what other nationalities do is up to them. Anyone wearing one does so because they want to, that's simple.... You are giving off about people giving off!! If James was born in the Waterside he'd be playing for N.Ireland and wearing two poppies' and you'd be giving off... Thankfully that's it for another year, we can find something to offend us pretty quick
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: bennydorano on November 08, 2015, 10:25:41 PM
Sure it is, Armistice Day is the 11th November, today is just Remembrance Sunday.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 08, 2015, 10:29:48 PM
Quote
Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

I agree that it would happen in any stadium ... in England.  I also think that if it was an Italian or French or a player from any other nationality other than Ireland who would not wear the poppy, there'd be no more said about it, it would be a non-story.  There's an ongoing campaign against James McClean who is obviously proud to be Irish and wants no part in their jingoistic rituals relating to centuries of war-mongering around the globe, if he was anything other than Irish, there'd be no mention of it ... in  my opinion.

There is little or nothing about mcclean in the uk media.  He got a bit of abuse the last few weekend but most don't give a fiddlers fcuk . 

I fully support McClean on the poppy but last weekend he had two tweets gloating the Sunderland and Rangers got beat drawing ire of loons. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on November 09, 2015, 01:37:17 AM
Quote
Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

I agree that it would happen in any stadium ... in England.  I also think that if it was an Italian or French or a player from any other nationality other than Ireland who would not wear the poppy, there'd be no more said about it, it would be a non-story.  There's an ongoing campaign against James McClean who is obviously proud to be Irish and wants no part in their jingoistic rituals relating to centuries of war-mongering around the globe, if he was anything other than Irish, there'd be no mention of it ... in  my opinion.

There is little or nothing about mcclean in the uk media.  He got a bit of abuse the last few weekend but most don't give a fiddlers fcuk . 

I fully support McClean on the poppy but last weekend he had two tweets gloating the Sunderland and Rangers got beat drawing ire of loons.

So what? He is entitled to gloat like any other football fan!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: illdecide on November 09, 2015, 09:37:50 AM
Milltown Row2 doesn't like James McClean...there said it ;D. Now move on ;)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 09, 2015, 10:24:30 AM
Milltown Row2 doesn't like James McClean...there said it ;D. Now move on ;)

 ::) ::)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Denn Forever on November 09, 2015, 10:39:29 AM
The Ulster Rugby Team didn't have a Poppy on their jerseys this weekend.  See what he's started.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Walter Cronc on November 09, 2015, 10:59:59 AM
Noticed that. I wonder will there be a loyalist picket outside Ravenhill now.

Neil Doak was wearing one.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 09, 2015, 11:18:47 AM
The Ulster Rugby Team didn't have a Poppy on their jerseys this weekend. 
Proper order.
Should be a matter of choice for individuals not an enforced thing.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 09, 2015, 12:15:09 PM
Noticed that. I wonder will there be a loyalist picket outside Ravenhill now.

Neil Doak was wearing one.

That crowd of fifth columnists have been at it for ages: Standing to Irish anthem in Dublin, players going to each other's weddings (and hence attending papist services), playing games on a Sunday, Tommy Bowe is not even from OWC!

Their supposed cosmopolitanism is purely a front to undermine Ulster Britishness and Protestantism.

They are never to be held up as an example.  Shame!

/Jim.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on November 09, 2015, 12:48:03 PM
The Ulster Rugby Team didn't have a Poppy on their jerseys this weekend.  See what he's started.

I bet that will change next year, even if they are not playing on Sunday or 11th.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 09, 2015, 02:01:55 PM
Quote
Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

I agree that it would happen in any stadium ... in England.  I also think that if it was an Italian or French or a player from any other nationality other than Ireland who would not wear the poppy, there'd be no more said about it, it would be a non-story.  There's an ongoing campaign against James McClean who is obviously proud to be Irish and wants no part in their jingoistic rituals relating to centuries of war-mongering around the globe, if he was anything other than Irish, there'd be no mention of it ... in  my opinion.

There is little or nothing about mcclean in the uk media.  He got a bit of abuse the last few weekend but most don't give a fiddlers fcuk . 

I fully support McClean on the poppy but last weekend he had two tweets gloating the Sunderland and Rangers got beat drawing ire of loons.

So what? He is entitled to gloat like any other football fan!

Stew, what would be the reaction in the US, if McClean played for a US sports team and refused to face the flag for the National Anthem? Or if he ignored and publicly criticised any veterans ceremony?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on November 09, 2015, 02:33:45 PM
Quote
Would you agree it would have been the same in any stadium? No anti Irish think you are making that bit up, huge generalization.

I agree that it would happen in any stadium ... in England.  I also think that if it was an Italian or French or a player from any other nationality other than Ireland who would not wear the poppy, there'd be no more said about it, it would be a non-story.  There's an ongoing campaign against James McClean who is obviously proud to be Irish and wants no part in their jingoistic rituals relating to centuries of war-mongering around the globe, if he was anything other than Irish, there'd be no mention of it ... in  my opinion.

There is little or nothing about mcclean in the uk media.  He got a bit of abuse the last few weekend but most don't give a fiddlers fcuk . 

I fully support McClean on the poppy but last weekend he had two tweets gloating the Sunderland and Rangers got beat drawing ire of loons.

So what? He is entitled to gloat like any other football fan!

Stew, what would be the reaction in the US, if McClean played for a US sports team and refused to face the flag for the National Anthem? Or if he ignored and publicly criticised any veterans ceremony?

A Muslim basketball player already did this a couple of years ago, people did no like it but after a day or two they moved on, in fairness he did not criticize the veterans.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 09, 2015, 03:24:24 PM
Was it this guy for the Cavs: http://nypost.com/2014/11/09/muslim-cav-protests-national-anthem-or-maybe-he-doesnt/ (http://nypost.com/2014/11/09/muslim-cav-protests-national-anthem-or-maybe-he-doesnt/)

I couldn't find another one.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Puckoon on December 19, 2015, 07:52:12 PM
Awful tackle today!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on December 19, 2015, 08:52:36 PM
He got away with a pretty bad lunge a few weeks ago v Spurs.

The next time he was going to be punished .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Puckoon on December 19, 2015, 09:32:50 PM
He'd have been punished for this one regardless. Was a leg breaker for sure.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: amanda on December 20, 2015, 02:03:56 AM
Don't know a great deal about football but that tatcle was really bad.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on October 31, 2016, 07:46:14 PM
Gregory Campbell takes a swipe at McClean.

It's Groundhog Day again.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on October 31, 2016, 08:28:29 PM
Is it this time of year again?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on October 31, 2016, 08:33:55 PM
Old news now.  McClean has ridden the storm and fair play to him for sticking to his guns
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on October 31, 2016, 08:34:55 PM
Is it this time of year again?

It's always 'this time of year again'
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thebar on October 31, 2016, 08:59:23 PM
Old news now.  McClean has ridden the storm and fair play to him for sticking to his guns

Fair play to McClean he said he wouldn't wear the poppy...believes in something and stuck to it irrespective of what others think....man deserves nothing but credit as you said old news move on.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on October 31, 2016, 10:21:47 PM
Every year an elderly neighbour comes to my door selling poppies.Although I do not support war or its practitioners,and certainly not the British Army I nevertheless make a small donation to maintain good neighbourliness and acknowledge help given like accepting parcels etc delivered for me during the day.I don't in any way feel like I'm endorsing the British Army by doing this,I'm just being a good neighbour as far as I'm concernec

What if he was selling porn mags, would you buy them too. You could also politely decline his poppy and if he were a decent neighbour he would think nothing of it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: RealSpiritof98 on October 31, 2016, 10:32:52 PM
Hes been playing rightly tbh, own up anyone who thought he was a martin oneill 1 season project. He has rallied well after Wigan. No point commenting on the other shite as he has set out his stall explained it to death and shouldnt have to every year.

What surprise Tony the big man with a keyboard but winces when the British Legion want his money.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Aaron Boone on October 31, 2016, 10:34:59 PM
Would this be counted as the Poppy Watch thread re-starting for 2016 ?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Tony Baloney on October 31, 2016, 10:35:59 PM
Would this be counted as the Poppy Watch thread re-starting for 2016 ?
It's a bit late but let's squeeze a few days out of it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: quit yo jibbajabba on October 31, 2016, 10:50:20 PM
Every year an elderly neighbour comes to my door selling poppies.Although I do not support war or its practitioners,and certainly not the British Army I nevertheless make a small donation to maintain good neighbourliness and acknowledge help given like accepting parcels etc delivered for me during the day.I don't in any way feel like I'm endorsing the British Army by doing this,I'm just being a good neighbour as far as I'm concernec

What if he was selling porn mags, would you buy them too. You could also politely decline his poppy and if he were a decent neighbour he would think nothing of it.

Im liking the sound of your neighbours chap
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on October 31, 2016, 11:04:45 PM
Every year an elderly neighbour comes to my door selling poppies.Although I do not support war or its practitioners,and certainly not the British Army I nevertheless make a small donation to maintain good neighbourliness and acknowledge help given like accepting parcels etc delivered for me during the day.I don't in any way feel like I'm endorsing the British Army by doing this,I'm just being a good neighbour as far as I'm concernec

What if he was selling porn mags, would you buy them too. You could also politely decline his poppy and if he were a decent neighbour he would think nothing of it.

Hell, yes. You don't heave to wear the poppy or read the magazines.

Would you rather travel to the Post Office to pick up parcels?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on October 31, 2016, 11:55:41 PM
Can't believe that this rubbish is still an issue with the Rule Britannia Brigade! He said his piece - move on!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2016, 12:11:01 AM
Can't believe that this rubbish is still an issue with the Rule Britannia Brigade! He said his piece - move on!

Exactly. Someone should tell Gregory that.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on November 01, 2016, 07:55:10 AM
Every year an elderly neighbour comes to my door selling poppies.Although I do not support war or its practitioners,and certainly not the British Army I nevertheless make a small donation to maintain good neighbourliness and acknowledge help given like accepting parcels etc delivered for me during the day.I don't in any way feel like I'm endorsing the British Army by doing this,I'm just being a good neighbour as far as I'm concernec

Just highlights how unprincipled a man you really are.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on November 01, 2016, 08:40:44 AM
Gregory said Mc Clean just can't help himself. In fact it is Gregory who just can't help himself. Gregory's bigotry is ingrained.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on November 01, 2016, 09:42:00 AM
a pic accompanying a couple of the gutter press's lambasting of young McClean for not wearing a poppy, had Raheem Sterling, also not wearing a poppy.

Gregory Campbell is an absolute spanner. There's not another part of the world where an inept hure like himself would hold any kind of position of power...only the timewarped black north
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Esmarelda on November 01, 2016, 09:44:09 AM
The neighbour happens to be an elderly lady who does a lot for us.My donation will not make a big difference,so I reckon the gesture is worth it.
What about Itchy's question about the porn?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2016, 10:27:17 AM
The English FA are just like Gregory. Going over the same ground again wanting to wear poppies on the shirts, even though FIFA doesn't allow it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 01, 2016, 10:39:16 AM
Every year an elderly neighbour comes to my door selling poppies.Although I do not support war or its practitioners,and certainly not the British Army I nevertheless make a small donation to maintain good neighbourliness and acknowledge help given like accepting parcels etc delivered for me during the day.I don't in any way feel like I'm endorsing the British Army by doing this,I'm just being a good neighbour as far as I'm concernec
Fair play Tony.

The whole poppy thing is a glorification of the British war machine which they rev up every time the economy goes into a spasm like the one we have now.
Unionist identity is srapped up in it.
Unionism is such a mess. Now they are flogging Brexit as the greatest thing since online porn.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: general_lee on November 01, 2016, 10:44:54 AM
Londongregory has the mindset of a teenager.. but then again so do all loyalists. I just wish McClean would call him out on it. He'd shite himself
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 01, 2016, 11:24:47 AM
Londongregory has the mindset of a teenager.. but then again so do all loyalists. I just wish McClean would call him out on it. He'd shite himself

Great to see Gregory focusing on real issues that affect the people of North .  Does he have anything to say ever on jobs , FDI , the pound , health service , education ???.  What a waste of space he is .  Did he ever have a job before politics .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on November 01, 2016, 11:39:17 AM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Principles of an alley cat.  What a buffoon.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on November 01, 2016, 11:43:58 AM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Idiot
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on November 01, 2016, 12:04:04 PM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Idiot

Can you elaborate why in this instance?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Kickham csc on November 01, 2016, 12:08:43 PM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Would you buy an Easter Lily from a kindly neighbour?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on November 01, 2016, 12:28:19 PM
Londongregory has the mindset of a teenager.. but then again so do all loyalists. I just wish McClean would call him out on it. He'd shite himself
Gregory is politician who wants to stay elected and has to be sure to stay ahead of the pack.
His calender is probably  preset for the annual reminder end of october to have a wee rant at McClean.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lurganblue on November 01, 2016, 12:43:10 PM
This old chestnut again.

James has outlined his reasons and it’s about time he is left alone fs.

On a similar note though I have often wondered why players of different nationalities don’t refuse to wear it on their top… Argentinians spring to mind.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 01, 2016, 01:03:12 PM
To be fair to the English media this story is a very very low priority . 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: foxcommander on November 01, 2016, 03:55:26 PM
To be fair to the English media this story is a very very low priority .

Your pal Gregory is doing his best to make it headline news again. He's got nothing better to do apart from currying yogurt or writing about Celtic fans in Gibraltar on Facebook.

That's how you keep your voting base coming back to the ballot box.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 01, 2016, 04:17:01 PM
To be fair to the English media this story is a very very low priority .

Your pal Gregory is doing his best to make it headline news again. He's got nothing better to do apart from currying yogurt or writing about Celtic fans in Gibraltar on Facebook.

That's how you keep your voting base coming back to the ballot box.

Gregory is no "pal" of mine bucko . 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: armaghniac on November 01, 2016, 04:18:54 PM
What is different about poppy and easter lily? They both commemorate militants and are misused in certain parts of Ireland?

One commemorates people trying to colonise a country, another people trying to end that colonisation.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thebigfella on November 01, 2016, 04:47:27 PM
What is different about poppy and easter lily? They both commemorate militants and are misused in certain parts of Ireland?

One commemorates people trying to colonise a country, another people trying to end that colonisation.

Christ and I thought the poppy fascists were bad
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on November 01, 2016, 05:28:11 PM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Idiot

Can you elaborate why in this instance?

Donating money to something you don't agree with  :o  as for Tony not want to create bad feelings   :D
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on November 01, 2016, 05:38:43 PM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Idiot

Can you elaborate why in this instance?

He feels he has to buy one to avoid pissing off this aul biddy.  She ain't no "kindly neighbour" if that's the way she takes it.  She's a bigot.  And all he's doing by buying one under duress is placating said bigot.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2016, 05:53:49 PM
This old chestnut again.

James has outlined his reasons and it’s about time he is left alone fs.

On a similar note though I have often wondered why players of different nationalities don’t refuse to wear it on their top… Argentinians spring to mind.

And Germans, Spanish, French, Chinese, American, Portuguese, Dutch, Italian, Russian...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: foxcommander on November 01, 2016, 05:58:29 PM
To be fair to the English media this story is a very very low priority .

Your pal Gregory is doing his best to make it headline news again. He's got nothing better to do apart from currying yogurt or writing about Celtic fans in Gibraltar on Facebook.

That's how you keep your voting base coming back to the ballot box.

Gregory is no "pal" of mine bucko .

Yeah. Right  ;)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2016, 06:00:06 PM
Re: T's neighbour - I'm not sure why someone would go to a catholic household to sell poppies, given the connotations. I think said neighbour's antics are much worse than T (for buying one), as she's using their relationship to put T in a no win situation, to buy something he's obviously not comfortable buying.

If I was selling GAA flags, I wouldn't knock on a Protestant neighbours door. Not unless they were known GAA fans.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 01, 2016, 06:04:54 PM
Re: T's neighbour - I'm not sure why someone would go to a catholic household to sell poppies, given the connotations. I think said neighbour's antics are much worse than T (for buying one), as she's using their relationship to put T in a no win situation, to buy something he's obviously not comfortable buying.

If I was selling GAA flags, I wouldn't knock on a Protestant neighbours door. Not unless they were known GAA fans.

This is Tony we are talking about.

He is anti-United Ireland, can't post his disgust at the 26 counties enough and wants to live in a bigot's dreamworld of religious intolerance.

Of course he buys a poppy.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: keep her low this half on November 01, 2016, 06:46:45 PM
I have worked in a variety of factories in Protestant areas, Newtownards, Castlereagh etc. In all of these poppies have been for sale in the canteen which made me uncomfortable although I have never bought one and never would. It does however make things distinctly uncomfortable when you are the only person in an office/ workshop not wearing one. It is one of the reasons that my admiration for James McClean has risen exponentially each year as he refuses to be brow beaten by these bigots. Good for you James keep setting an example for all of us who have to work in areas where our beliefs make us outsiders.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2016, 07:18:26 PM
It's all down to perception perhaps.The average unionist cherishes Remembrance Sunday,as part of their culture.The average unionist reasons that Irish Catholics and Protestants fought and died side by side in British Uniforms,and sees no reason why she shouldn't approach all neighbouring homes in an attempt to sell poppies.I regard my neighbour as an average unionist.

I am not offended,I make a very small donation,then destroy the poppy whenever she leaves.No big deal.

Yes both religions fought, but the average unionist would have to be totally ignorant/deluded/stupid to think there's no chance whatsoever of causing any offence/embarrassment by knocking on a catholic door.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: yellowcard on November 01, 2016, 07:47:51 PM
The easy option for McClean would probably be to 'grin and bear it'. I'd like to think that put in his position that I would do the same but you can imagine that he has been put under serious pressure from establishment figures to bow down and yet he has refused to yield. There is something very noble and principled about that stance. An act of total loyalty.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 01, 2016, 08:28:06 PM
Not if its your perception

Anyone unaware of the sensitivities surrounding the Poppy has obviously been living under a rock.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: hardstation on November 01, 2016, 08:40:24 PM
I'm shocked that Tony's wife tried to bate a Protestant woman out of the Vatican. Fair play to the woman for standing up for herself and not allowing this to happen.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on November 01, 2016, 09:50:52 PM
I have worked in a variety of factories in Protestant areas, Newtownards, Castlereagh etc. In all of these poppies have been for sale in the canteen which made me uncomfortable although I have never bought one and never would. It does however make things distinctly uncomfortable when you are the only person in an office/ workshop not wearing one. It is one of the reasons that my admiration for James McClean has risen exponentially each year as he refuses to be brow beaten by these bigots. Good for you James keep setting an example for all of us who have to work in areas where our beliefs make us outsiders.
Well done for for maintaining your position in such circumstances.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on November 01, 2016, 09:53:57 PM
Bit two faced to buy a poppy from poor old dear next door then rip it up as soon as she has left. She might be on the gaaboard Tony and she'll be so mad she will shite in one of your parcels.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Dougal Maguire on November 01, 2016, 10:04:50 PM
Poppy and Easter Lily are one and the same in my opinion.Wouldn't wear either or attend militaristic commemorations of any kind.But I'm not going to create bad feelings with kindly neighbours over any emblems.Its not worth it and the poppy is automatically ripped and binned when I close the door.

Idiot

Can you elaborate why in this instance?
Indeed, spineless hypocrite would be more appropriate
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Farrandeelin on November 01, 2016, 10:11:04 PM
It's all down to perception perhaps.The average unionist cherishes Remembrance Sunday,as part of their culture.The average unionist reasons that Irish Catholics and Protestants fought and died side by side in British Uniforms,and sees no reason why she shouldn't approach all neighbouring homes in an attempt to sell poppies.I regard my neighbour as an average unionist.

I am not offended,I make a very small donation,then destroy the poppy whenever she leaves.No big deal.
You could at least destroy it in front of her.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Franko on November 01, 2016, 10:58:51 PM

She is no bigot.She practically minds my house Ffs.My wife is a personal friend of her niece and actually took her to Rome last year,and couldn't bate her out of the Vatican so fascinated was she.


You can have respect for other people's points of views without agreeing with them.I also understand a lot of people don't see the poppy as a symbol of militarism but rather a means of helping war cannon fodder to survive in peace time, and this includes thousands of Irishmen who fought and died in the British Army in both World Wars.

In any case isn't the freestate government represented at high levels at all war commemoration ceremonies in the North now.

She's a bigot and she's making a bit of a **** of you too.  Yer gettin played.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Take Your Points on November 01, 2016, 11:23:12 PM
I live in an area of town where the residents are people of all religions and none.  Every year the poppy sellers call at every house and no one I know has any difficulty with them attempting to collect for their cause.  I am sure not everyone contributes but the door to door collection has continued for years.  It is no different from the many others who call at all of the houses in our area to collect for their causes.

In the same area, ticket sellers from GAA clubs regularly call on every house selling relatively expensive tickets even though they have travelled many miles from their own parishes hoping to make a sale in as many houses as possible for causes that have no relation to our community.  It would appear that no one turns the word on them as there is a regular stream of such ticket sellers in the area.

My observation this year is that there appears to be fewer people wearing poppies in public, numbers will probably increase as the we approach 11th November.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on November 01, 2016, 11:36:48 PM
I have worked in a variety of factories in Protestant areas, Newtownards, Castlereagh etc. In all of these poppies have been for sale in the canteen which made me uncomfortable although I have never bought one and never would. It does however make things distinctly uncomfortable when you are the only person in an office/ workshop not wearing one. It is one of the reasons that my admiration for James McClean has risen exponentially each year as he refuses to be brow beaten by these bigots. Good for you James keep setting an example for all of us who have to work in areas where our beliefs make us outsiders.

Same experience here. I even accompanied one of my customers to Germany for a trade show. My customer was wearing a poppy and one of the young German female hosts commented on his lovely flower and asked him what it was, lol. Rather embarrassing!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Dougal Maguire on November 01, 2016, 11:47:47 PM

She is no bigot.She practically minds my house Ffs.My wife is a personal friend of her niece and actually took her to Rome last year,and couldn't bate her out of the Vatican so fascinated was she.


You can have respect for other people's points of views without agreeing with them.I also understand a lot of people don't see the poppy as a symbol of militarism but rather a means of helping war cannon fodder to survive in peace time, and this includes thousands of Irishmen who fought and died in the British Army in both World Wars.

In any case isn't the freestate government represented at high levels at all war commemoration ceremonies in the North now.

She's a bigot and she's making a bit of a **** of you too.  Yer gettin played.
You're bang on. I'd say they have some great laughs about it down the British Legion.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lurganblue on November 02, 2016, 09:34:59 AM
This old chestnut again.

James has outlined his reasons and it’s about time he is left alone fs.

On a similar note though I have often wondered why players of different nationalities don’t refuse to wear it on their top… Argentinians spring to mind.

And Germans, Spanish, French, Chinese, American, Portuguese, Dutch, Italian, Russian...

exactly. baffles me. I also dont understand the mentality that all of the people/players of these nations should have to conform to this. But in the end, they all do it seems.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 02, 2016, 09:57:56 AM
Gregory is acting the troll.  He posts about this even though it's old ground.  He adds a trigger word like "Londonderry" and brings up McClean's comments about international football.  Next thing he receives a load of vitriol from republican posters.  He sighs and says look at them bigots.  Crowd in his own gallery do the same.  In fact he should be added to the troll thread here.

A clown.

As for McClean.  I wouldn't have time for all his outbursts or twittering but on this one he 1,000% in the right.  He doesn't want to wear a poppy, gave a reasoned explanation why and his club gets on with it.   Proponents say that British Legion is a charity, well then let people pick and chose what charity they support, end of.  They only ones who have an axe to grind are those that are politicising the bloody thing: UKIP, NF and Ulster Unionists.

Someone asked why Argentinians etc don't have a beef? I suspect it's because they don't have a cohort of bigots back in their homeland that have turned a charitable symbol into a badge of identity for their narrow vision of loyalty.

Oh and again: Gregory is a trolling clown.

/Jim.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: johnneycool on November 02, 2016, 10:43:38 AM
I have worked in a variety of factories in Protestant areas, Newtownards, Castlereagh etc. In all of these poppies have been for sale in the canteen which made me uncomfortable although I have never bought one and never would. It does however make things distinctly uncomfortable when you are the only person in an office/ workshop not wearing one. It is one of the reasons that my admiration for James McClean has risen exponentially each year as he refuses to be brow beaten by these bigots. Good for you James keep setting an example for all of us who have to work in areas where our beliefs make us outsiders.

I was on a factory floor on the Doagh Road back in the late 90's when a poppy seller appeared on the floor selling poppies. The lads I was meant to be training all stopped to buy one. One (from Rathcoole) asked if I wanted to buy one and I politely declined. He then made a comment about both protestants and catholics dying in the war and I agreed and then asked him when he'd even saw a catholic bishop leading the service at a cenotaph and he never responded.
Back to training we went and not another word of poppies.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on November 02, 2016, 10:53:44 AM
I have worked in a variety of factories in Protestant areas, Newtownards, Castlereagh etc. In all of these poppies have been for sale in the canteen which made me uncomfortable although I have never bought one and never would. It does however make things distinctly uncomfortable when you are the only person in an office/ workshop not wearing one. It is one of the reasons that my admiration for James McClean has risen exponentially each year as he refuses to be brow beaten by these bigots. Good for you James keep setting an example for all of us who have to work in areas where our beliefs make us outsiders.

I was on a factory floor on the Doagh Road back in the late 90's when a poppy seller appeared on the floor selling poppies. The lads I was meant to be training all stopped to buy one. One (from Rathcoole) asked if I wanted to buy one and I politely declined. He then made a comment about both protestants and catholics dying in the war and I agreed and then asked him when he'd even saw a catholic bishop leading the service at a cenotaph and he never responded.
Back to training we went and not another word of poppies.

Exact same story for me working in the Shipyard from 88 onwards, i've no problem with people wearing them (they have their reasons) but i always refused and never a word said... though I wouldnt wear a Lilly or a shamrock or any other flower to be honest
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 02, 2016, 11:24:27 AM
Gregory is acting the troll.  He posts about this even though it's old ground.  He adds a trigger word like "Londonderry" and brings up McClean's comments about international football.  Next thing he receives a load of vitriol from republican posters.  He sighs and says look at them bigots.  Crowd in his own gallery do the same.  In fact he should be added to the troll thread here.

A clown.

As for McClean.  I wouldn't have time for all his outbursts or twittering but on this one he 1,000% in the right.  He doesn't want to wear a poppy, gave a reasoned explanation why and his club gets on with it.   Proponents say that British Legion is a charity, well then let people pick and chose what charity they support, end of.  They only ones who have an axe to grind are those that are politicising the bloody thing: UKIP, NF and Ulster Unionists.

Someone asked why Argentinians etc don't have a beef? I suspect it's because they don't have a cohort of bigots back in their homeland that have turned a charitable symbol into a badge of identity for their narrow vision of loyalty.

Oh and again: Gregory is a trolling clown.

/Jim.

You've not seen the Top Gear Patagonia Special then?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 02, 2016, 11:48:11 AM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: johnneycool on November 02, 2016, 12:15:02 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

There should be a 5% war tax on everything, VAT, income and so forth and you'd soon see the common man rail against these wars even though we're paying for it somewhere along the line.

I'd also revert back to the old medieval days where whoever calls the war leads from the front. Bush jnr and Tony Blair wouldn't have been so keen to go to war if they'd to be the first men on the ground. Its easier to send someone else to fight your wars than do it yourself. There were no relations of Bush or Blair carried home in body bags for these "just" wars.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on November 02, 2016, 01:19:43 PM
I have worked in a variety of factories in Protestant areas, Newtownards, Castlereagh etc. In all of these poppies have been for sale in the canteen which made me uncomfortable although I have never bought one and never would. It does however make things distinctly uncomfortable when you are the only person in an office/ workshop not wearing one. It is one of the reasons that my admiration for James McClean has risen exponentially each year as he refuses to be brow beaten by these bigots. Good for you James keep setting an example for all of us who have to work in areas where our beliefs make us outsiders.

I was on a factory floor on the Doagh Road back in the late 90's when a poppy seller appeared on the floor selling poppies. The lads I was meant to be training all stopped to buy one. One (from Rathcoole) asked if I wanted to buy one and I politely declined. He then made a comment about both protestants and catholics uniuonists dying in the war and I agreed and then asked him when he'd even saw a catholic bishop leading the service at a cenotaph and he never responded.
Back to training we went and not another word of poppies.

He left out a word.

Actually, I think catholic clergy do get bit-parts in the ceremony these days
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 02, 2016, 03:22:06 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

That's why the Poppy Appeal is flogged every year. So really, the ordinary people, many who were against the wars in the first place, actually end up inadvertently paying for them. And mop up the mess created by their government. Try telling a unionist that though.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 02, 2016, 03:24:26 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

There should be a 5% war tax on everything, VAT, income and so forth and you'd soon see the common man rail against these wars even though we're paying for it somewhere along the line.

I'd also revert back to the old medieval days where whoever calls the war leads from the front. Bush jnr and Tony Blair wouldn't have been so keen to go to war if they'd to be the first men on the ground. Its easier to send someone else to fight your wars than do it yourself. There were no relations of Bush or Blair carried home in body bags for these "just" wars.

Governments aren't that stupid.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Take Your Points on November 02, 2016, 04:26:46 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

That's why the Poppy Appeal is flogged every year. So really, the ordinary people, many who were against the wars in the first place, actually end up inadvertently paying for them. And mop up the mess created by their government. Try telling a unionist that though.

Here is one unionist you won't have to convince:

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/army-veterans-let-down-doug-beattie-slams-executive-over-help-for-war-injured-34959676.html (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/army-veterans-let-down-doug-beattie-slams-executive-over-help-for-war-injured-34959676.html)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 02, 2016, 04:42:10 PM
God be with the good old days pre 1967 when Doug and co. didn't need to be pussyfooting around those awful Fenians and their politicians.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 02, 2016, 04:56:21 PM
I can see this going down well  :P

IFA want Northern Ireland to wear poppy (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/poll-ifa-asks-fifa-if-northern-ireland-team-can-wear-poppy-but-is-it-a-political-symbol-35180649.html)

/Jim
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 02, 2016, 05:14:53 PM
I can see this going down well  :P

IFA want Northern Ireland to wear poppy (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/poll-ifa-asks-fifa-if-northern-ireland-team-can-wear-poppy-but-is-it-a-political-symbol-35180649.html)

/Jim

Is Gregory the IFA President?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Jim_Murphy_74 on November 02, 2016, 05:16:53 PM
I can see this going down well  :P

IFA want Northern Ireland to wear poppy (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/poll-ifa-asks-fifa-if-northern-ireland-team-can-wear-poppy-but-is-it-a-political-symbol-35180649.html)

/Jim

Is Gregory the IFA President?

It's a good way to test the loyalty of any taigs. 

/Jim.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: bennydorano on November 02, 2016, 05:21:45 PM
f**k me boys you are easily annoyed. Poppy mania is mildly annoying at best.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: armaghniac on November 02, 2016, 05:52:03 PM
What is different about poppy and easter lily? They both commemorate militants and are misused in certain parts of Ireland?

One commemorates people trying to colonise a country, another people trying to end that colonisation.

Christ and I thought the poppy fascists were bad

What exactly was wrong, or fascist, about my statement?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Estimator on November 02, 2016, 06:42:29 PM
Regarding the 'Poppy on the jersey':

@oilysailor
The last time England played on November 11 was 1987 vs Yugoslavia. Shirts had on them an embroidered Umbro logo & an England badge.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 02, 2016, 06:44:27 PM
Regarding the 'Poppy on the jersey':

@oilysailor
The last time England played on November 11 was 1987 vs Yugoslavia. Shirts had on them an embroidered Umbro logo & an England badge.

Look what happened Yugoslavia after that!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 02, 2016, 07:11:37 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

I used to help out in a homeless shelter in London and a good chunk of the alcoholics were ex service with serious mental health issues who die 10 years before people in offices do.  The hypocrisy of the 11 Nov always sickened me. They don't take care of their soldiers. In 2003 they sent squaddies off to Iraq for what ?

Buying poppies is easy. Changing structural abuse is very hard.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 02, 2016, 07:14:07 PM
I can see this going down well  :P

IFA want Northern Ireland to wear poppy (http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/world-cup/poll-ifa-asks-fifa-if-northern-ireland-team-can-wear-poppy-but-is-it-a-political-symbol-35180649.html)

/Jim

Is Gregory the IFA President?
36% think it is not a political symbol
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on November 02, 2016, 07:20:03 PM
What's the difference between wearing a poppy or a freestate minister playing a full part in remembering British Army war dead,and Mary Mc Aleese travelling with the Queen of England to foreign killing fields to do so.

What war dead and what killing fields?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 02, 2016, 07:21:06 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

I used to help out in a homeless shelter in London and a good chunk of the alcoholics were ex service with serious mental health issues who die 10 years before people in offices do.  The hypocrisy of the 11 Nov always sickened me. They don't take care of their soldiers. In 2003 they sent squaddies off to Iraq for what ?

Buying poppies is easy. Changing structural abuse is very hard.

Oil.

I remember a few years ago when people were angry at Blair when lots of soldiers coffins where brought home. Sent to die in a needless war etc. And yet they still enlist.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Samforever on November 02, 2016, 07:32:50 PM
Did not Mary Mc Aleese,representing official Ireland,not accompany Queen Elizabeth to Flanders years ago,to commemorate British Soldiers killed in WW1.

What's with the  double "not"
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ONeill on November 02, 2016, 07:47:34 PM
I'm shocked that Tony's wife tried to bate a Protestant woman out of the Vatican. Fair play to the woman for standing up for herself and not allowing this to happen.

This shocked me too.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: trileacman on November 02, 2016, 07:49:11 PM
I'm shocked he has a wife.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on November 02, 2016, 07:50:45 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

I used to help out in a homeless shelter in London and a good chunk of the alcoholics were ex service with serious mental health issues who die 10 years before people in offices do.  The hypocrisy of the 11 Nov always sickened me. They don't take care of their soldiers. In 2003 they sent squaddies off to Iraq for what ?

Buying poppies is easy. Changing structural abuse is very hard.

Oil.

I remember a few years ago when people were angry at Blair when lots of soldiers coffins where brought home. Sent to die in a needless war etc. And yet they still enlist.
As do a good number from the ROI.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: yellowcard on November 02, 2016, 10:55:21 PM
First Brexit which was won primarily on immigration and racism issues and now England are supposedly ready to defy FIFA by wearing poppies. What an incredibly insular inward looking society middle England is proving to be. In the eyes of the world the message is 'we are England, we do what we want'. Today's Daily Mail front page was an absolute disgrace and totally irresponsible journalism, not that you'd expect any different.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 02, 2016, 11:14:05 PM
FIFA will bow down to them though.

Players will just want to play football. Do you think they give a toss about this bollix?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: yellowcard on November 02, 2016, 11:21:17 PM
FIFA will bow down to them though.

Players will just want to play football. Do you think they give a toss about this bollix?

Not at all (a lot of English footballers are as thick as two planks anyway) but it has been used as a political football yet the English FA are ignoring the directive. Based on Theresa Mays comments earlier today, there has undoubtedly been political interference at play. English society is forever changed since Brexit, god forbid if Trump also gets into the whitehouse as looks increasingly likely.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 02, 2016, 11:23:48 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

I used to help out in a homeless shelter in London and a good chunk of the alcoholics were ex service with serious mental health issues who die 10 years before people in offices do.  The hypocrisy of the 11 Nov always sickened me. They don't take care of their soldiers. In 2003 they sent squaddies off to Iraq for what ?

Buying poppies is easy. Changing structural abuse is very hard.

Oil.

I remember a few years ago when people were angry at Blair when lots of soldiers coffins where brought home. Sent to die in a needless war etc. And yet they still enlist.
As do a good number from the ROI.
Fuckin stupid eejits.
What kind of mentality makes people want to join another Country's armed forces?
Especially a war mongering country whose Government are forever looking to be wrecking someone else's Country.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: macdanger2 on November 02, 2016, 11:24:11 PM
First Brexit which was won primarily on immigration and racism issues and now England are supposedly ready to defy FIFA by wearing poppies. What an incredibly insular inward looking society middle England is proving to be. In the eyes of the world the message is 'we are England, we do what we want'. Today's Daily Mail front page was an absolute disgrace and totally irresponsible journalism, not that you'd expect any different.

What was the headline?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 02, 2016, 11:25:19 PM
The poppy appeal is used to raise funds for military personnel who fall on hard times .  Simply parliament voted to send the BA to war , parliament voted monies to pay for said war , parliament should them make sure soldiers are provided for on leaving army.

I used to help out in a homeless shelter in London and a good chunk of the alcoholics were ex service with serious mental health issues who die 10 years before people in offices do.  The hypocrisy of the 11 Nov always sickened me. They don't take care of their soldiers. In 2003 they sent squaddies off to Iraq for what ?

Buying poppies is easy. Changing structural abuse is very hard.

Oil.

I remember a few years ago when people were angry at Blair when lots of soldiers coffins where brought home. Sent to die in a needless war etc. And yet they still enlist.
As do a good number from the ROI.
Fuckin stupid eejits.
What kind of mentality makes people want to join another Country's armed forces?
Especially a war mongering country whose Government are forever looking to be wrecking someone else's Country.

Any country with emigrants has people who 'join another Country's armed forces'.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 02, 2016, 11:35:38 PM
Ehhhhh Muppet?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 02, 2016, 11:58:45 PM
Ehhhhh Muppet?

I should have said immigrants.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 03, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
Ahh right.
But it's one thing if you live in a Country for some time to join their armed forces but fcukn fruitcakes living in the,26 who decide to join the Brit murder machine.......... mind boggling idiocy..... especially given the 800 years etc
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: haranguerer on November 03, 2016, 08:31:55 AM
Christ - you must actually believe the queen and country shite - I would estimate approximately 0% join armed forces anywhere (when not at war at least) to 'serve their country'. Its a job and an escape for many with little prospects, marketed to portray a touch of glamour.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 03, 2016, 08:57:45 AM
Christ - you must actually believe the queen and country shite - I would estimate approximately 0% join armed forces anywhere (when not at war at least) to 'serve their country'. Its a job and an escape for many with little prospects, marketed to portray a touch of glamour.
Military means blind loyalty , nationalism and violence. US soldiers worship a flag. Brit soldiers worship a Queen. Israeli soldiers worship the idea that they are the most moral soldiers in the world.
They all emphasise service for country, meaningful sacrifice  and we will never forget the dead. FB is full of pictures of dead Vietnam soldiers accompanied by text saying please remember him. Underneath Yanks write "thank you for your service" . It is bizarre when you come from a country with no cult of the military except perhaps for the Sunday Independent.

 Things like 11 Nov feed the machine with new recruits. All the pomp, the royals, the thin elite women, the glamour.  They are also big into uniforms.  A uniform can change a nobody into a somebody. Plámás.

I never saw any comedians take the piss out of the military.  It must be too sensitive. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: dferg on November 03, 2016, 10:11:16 AM
Christ - you must actually believe the queen and country shite - I would estimate approximately 0% join armed forces anywhere (when not at war at least) to 'serve their country'. Its a job and an escape for many with little prospects, marketed to portray a touch of glamour.
Military means blind loyalty , nationalism and violence. US soldiers worship a flag. Brit soldiers worship a Queen. Israeli soldiers worship the idea that they are the most moral soldiers in the world.
They all emphasise service for country, meaningful sacrifice  and we will never forget the dead. FB is full of pictures of dead Vietnam soldiers accompanied by text saying please remember him. Underneath Yanks write "thank you for your service" . It is bizarre when you come from a country with no cult of the military except perhaps for the Sunday Independent.

 Things like 11 Nov feed the machine with new recruits. All the pomp, the royals, the thin elite women, the glamour.  They are also big into uniforms.  A uniform can change a nobody into a somebody. Plámás.

I never saw any comedians take the piss out of the military.  It must be too sensitive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbAkTFGDr84

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMc8AFK78XM
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on November 03, 2016, 01:19:23 PM
I admire James McClean for his stance given where he is from and the whole history of Bloody Sunday. I also understand why the poppy is so popular in Scotland and England where it is genuinely sold and worn in solidarity with a military that is often abandoned by the very government it serves, same happens in the US and Rock Stars such as Springsteen, Mellencamp and Young whilst being anti war do benefits for veterans. In the wee 6 though it has always been used as a means of reminding the croppies of their place. I'm not surprised the IFA are looking to wear one it shows just how committed they are to football for all and fits in with the anthem and fleg. Ulster Rugby mindful of their fan base got the balance right and fair play to them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hectic on November 03, 2016, 01:39:48 PM
Its as if the Poppy on the shirt is the act of remembrance and if it is not worn then those who gave their lives are somehow forgotten.  For me the Poppy fascism of the last decade plus is the single biggest insult/contradiction to the idea of remembering those who 'gave their lives for everyone's freedom'.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 03, 2016, 01:43:15 PM
I admire James McClean for his stance given where he is from and the whole history of Bloody Sunday. I also understand why the poppy is so popular in Scotland and England where it is genuinely sold and worn in solidarity with a military that is often abandoned by the very government it serves, same happens in the US and Rock Stars such as Springsteen, Mellencamp and Young whilst being anti war do benefits for veterans. In the wee 6 though it has always been used as a means of reminding the croppies of their place. I'm not surprised the IFA are looking to wear one it shows just how committed they are to football for all and fits in with the anthem and fleg. Ulster Rugby mindful of their fan base got the balance right and fair play to them.

It is important to give credit where credit is due. Fair play to them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 03, 2016, 01:48:37 PM
Christ - you must actually believe the queen and country shite - I would estimate approximately 0% join armed forces anywhere (when not at war at least) to 'serve their country'. Its a job and an escape for many with little prospects, marketed to portray a touch of glamour.
Military means blind loyalty , nationalism and violence. US soldiers worship a flag. Brit soldiers worship a Queen. Israeli soldiers worship the idea that they are the most moral soldiers in the world.
They all emphasise service for country, meaningful sacrifice  and we will never forget the dead. FB is full of pictures of dead Vietnam soldiers accompanied by text saying please remember him. Underneath Yanks write "thank you for your service" . It is bizarre when you come from a country with no cult of the military except perhaps for the Sunday Independent.

 Things like 11 Nov feed the machine with new recruits. All the pomp, the royals, the thin elite women, the glamour.  They are also big into uniforms.  A uniform can change a nobody into a somebody. Plámás.

I never saw any comedians take the piss out of the military.  It must be too sensitive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbAkTFGDr84

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMc8AFK78XM
GRMA
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 03, 2016, 01:52:01 PM
179 soldiers died for nothing

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/02/tony-blair-psychological-dominance-key-in-uk-joining-iraq-war-says-chilcot

Asked who was most responsible for the Iraq disaster, Chilcot answered: Blair, Straw, and defence secretary Geoff Hoon. Blair and Straw were more experienced and therefore most at fault, he suggested.
Chilcot said he was satisfied with the positive public reaction to his report. He said it was “particularly welcome” that it had been accepted by the bereaved families of the 179 British service personnel killed in Iraq between 2003-2009.
“As things stand I’m reasonably encouraged that there is an attempt in government to address those lessons,” he added.
Chilcot said he was often asked what his most important finding was, at the end of a marathon exercise which eventually ran to 2.6m-words, and 12 volumes. After saying it was a “whole range of things” he offered an answer: “Failure to exert and exercise sufficient collective responsibility for a very big decision.”
Andrew Tyrie, the chair of the Treasury select committee, said the parliamentary hearing had been a useful exercise. “Sir John has started to put the final pieces of his conclusions into the public domain,” he said. Tyrie added that Blair “did not feel the need to be constrained by facts when putting his case to parliament”.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 03, 2016, 04:15:00 PM
For those who wear a Poppy, maybe they should concentrate on, and highlight the needless slaughter of millions in both wars (and others), and pressurize their government, to make sure it doesn't happen again.

As for wearing of poppies , basically people are honouring and remembering soldiers who invaded other countries and blew the heads off the natives. What's heroic and honourable about that?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on November 03, 2016, 06:31:45 PM
I admire James McClean for his stance given where he is from and the whole history of Bloody Sunday. I also understand why the poppy is so popular in Scotland and England where it is genuinely sold and worn in solidarity with a military that is often abandoned by the very government it serves, same happens in the US and Rock Stars such as Springsteen, Mellencamp and Young whilst being anti war do benefits for veterans. In the wee 6 though it has always been used as a means of reminding the croppies of their place. I'm not surprised the IFA are looking to wear one it shows just how committed they are to football for all and fits in with the anthem and fleg. Ulster Rugby mindful of their fan base got the balance right and fair play to them.
Sad you feel that way. I was raised in the unionist community and Rembrance Day Services at school and church were about remembering the war dead.  That was the start and end of it.  Sad that it has been politicised in the way that it has in recent years.  By the way, I too don't like the poppy fascism", as it's called, and fully respect people's right not to wear one.  What I don't like is the insinuation that people who wear them are on the wind up or putting people in their place as you seem to think.
With regards to Ulster Rubgy, what's your view on the permanent War Memorial that was retained when the ground was re-developed?   
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: No wides on November 03, 2016, 08:51:48 PM
In my place of work poppy's are always for sale and are worn with pride bet I couldn't wear an Easter Lilly.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 03, 2016, 08:57:13 PM
I don't like the term "poppy facism".  At this stage the thing is boring .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hectic on November 03, 2016, 09:09:51 PM
I don't like the term "poppy facism".  At this stage the thing is boring .

So we should look up the Thesaurus then to find an equally fitting term for the hijacking of genuine remembrance to spread propaganda???
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 03, 2016, 09:15:20 PM
I don't like the term "poppy facism".  At this stage the thing is boring .

So we should look up the Thesaurus then to find an equally fitting term for the hijacking of genuine remembrance to spread propaganda???

Don't like the using world fascism unless the subject is really that .  The poppy appeal is jingoistic , ridiculous and a circus . 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hectic on November 03, 2016, 09:31:22 PM
I don't like the term "poppy facism".  At this stage the thing is boring .

So we should look up the Thesaurus then to find an equally fitting term for the hijacking of genuine remembrance to spread propaganda???

Don't like the using world fascism unless the subject is really that .  The poppy appeal is jingoistic , ridiculous and a circus .

Saves the reading.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: manfromdelmonte on November 03, 2016, 09:35:10 PM
I don't like the cult of the poppy

However, I found the war memorial in Canberra very moving with the number of poppies for Australian soldiers killed fighting for the Brits
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on November 04, 2016, 09:13:31 AM
I admire James McClean for his stance given where he is from and the whole history of Bloody Sunday. I also understand why the poppy is so popular in Scotland and England where it is genuinely sold and worn in solidarity with a military that is often abandoned by the very government it serves, same happens in the US and Rock Stars such as Springsteen, Mellencamp and Young whilst being anti war do benefits for veterans. In the wee 6 though it has always been used as a means of reminding the croppies of their place. I'm not surprised the IFA are looking to wear one it shows just how committed they are to football for all and fits in with the anthem and fleg. Ulster Rugby mindful of their fan base got the balance right and fair play to them.
Sad you feel that way. I was raised in the unionist community and Rembrance Day Services at school and church were about remembering the war dead.  That was the start and end of it.  Sad that it has been politicised in the way that it has in recent years.  By the way, I too don't like the poppy fascism", as it's called, and fully respect people's right not to wear one.  What I don't like is the insinuation that people who wear them are on the wind up or putting people in their place as you seem to think.
With regards to Ulster Rubgy, what's your view on the permanent War Memorial that was retained when the ground was re-developed?   
No issue with the memorial like many nationalists I have an uncle buried in Italy, killed at Monte Casino. But growing up in the North in the 60's and 70's the poppy like the union flag and the ulster banner were constantly used to remind us of our place. If unionists were genuinely interested in shared space they would not be so reluctant to give nationalist symbols etc equal status, but pigs will fly. Ulster Rugby have taken politics out of it and fair play.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 04, 2016, 09:32:43 AM
Militarism is part of Unionist identity. Queen, king Billy, the Somme, the orange order.   The poppy is all about the blood sacrifice of the Somme.Why is the identity  so tightly defined ? Because  its all bollocks. Before 1798 presbyterians were also vermin.

 They don't know who they are. Settlers never do. Same in the States. So easy to manipulate.
Taigs can read a poem from 2000 years ago and see themselves in it. They can learn the language. They can go to Dún Chaoin. They can find a word in a de Bhaldraithe dictionary that makes sense of it all. Or it might be the curl of a point in Croker. Or 2003.

Unionists can't.  Cos there is no historical continuity. There is just violence back there. The insecurity never leaves them. 1641 is forever.

Doire is much older than Londonderry.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 04, 2016, 09:37:10 AM
Had ww2 been the last conflict, the last British soldiers would now be in their late 80s. And in a few years all would be gone, and therefore the Poppy appeal becomes redundant, as no more servicemen need their help. When that happened, if people wanted to wear a Poppy, they should be given out for free. But the fact that wars have been ongoing since means there'll always be a need for the appeal.

So whatever way you look at it, even if someone protested about the invasions of Iraq/Afghanistan, they are supporting said invasions
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 04, 2016, 09:57:35 AM
Had ww2 been the last conflict, the last British soldiers would now be in their late 80s. And in a few years all would be gone, and therefore the Poppy appeal becomes redundant, as no more servicemen need their help. When that happened, if people wanted to wear a Poppy, they should be given out for free. But the fact that wars have been ongoing since means there'll always be a need for the appeal.

So whatever way you look at it, even if someone protested about the invasions of Iraq/Afghanistan, they are supporting said invasions

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-TrKy041Sk
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: The Gs Man on November 04, 2016, 10:11:36 AM
Militarism is part of Unionist identity. Queen, king Billy, the Somme, the orange order.   The poppy is all about the blood sacrifice of the Somme.Why is the identity  so tightly defined ? Because  its all bollocks. Before 1798 presbyterians were also vermin.

 They don't know who they are. Settlers never do. Same in the States. So easy to manipulate.
Taigs can read a poem from 2000 years ago and see themselves in it. They can learn the language. They can go to Dún Chaoin. They can find a word in a de Bhaldraithe dictionary that makes sense of it all. Or it might be the curl of a point in Croker. Or 2003.

Unionists can't.  Cos there is no historical continuity. There is just violence back there. The insecurity never leaves them. 1641 is forever.

Doire is much older than Londonderry.

That's a decent post there.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hectic on November 04, 2016, 10:13:45 AM
I don't have a massive problem with people wearing a poppy or wishing to remember.  In many instances there are very personal motives and on a more general scale there is very much a focus on the two world wars when many young men lost their lives in horrific warfare where in many cases they had been conscripted.  It is pretty sobering stuff if you were to put it in todays context and think of people close to you in those age groups. 

There are also those who will be remembering more recent conflicts with a focus on individuals rather than the detail of the conflicts themselves where the role of the British army is questionable at best.  Again this type of remembrance is fine in my book. 

Where I do have a problem is this more recent trend from those in positions of authority whether it be government or their stenographers in the mainstream media who seem to have complete power in dictating that a poppy should be worn and trying to force this by the serious lambasting of those who do not from television presenters to footballers and football teams etc. 

The great irony of course being that on one hand the original idea of the poppy, and continuing reason for many people was/is to 'remember those who gave their lives for our freedom' in the world wars yet any public person wishing to exercise their freedom of choice not to wear a poppy is not tolerated.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: muppet on November 04, 2016, 10:21:07 AM
I don't have a massive problem with people wearing a poppy or wishing to remember.  In many instances there are very personal motives and on a more general scale there is very much a focus on the two world wars when many young men lost their lives in horrific warfare where in many cases they had been conscripted.  It is pretty sobering stuff if you were to put it in todays context and think of people close to you in those age groups. 

There are also those who will be remembering more recent conflicts with a focus on individuals rather than the detail of the conflicts themselves where the role of the British army is questionable at best.  Again this type of remembrance is fine in my book. 

Where I do have a problem is this more recent trend from those in positions of authority whether it be government or their stenographers in the mainstream media who seem to have complete power in dictating that a poppy should be worn and trying to force this by the serious lambasting of those who do not from television presenters to footballers and football teams etc.

The great irony of course being that on one hand the original idea of the poppy, and continuing reason for many people was/is to 'remember those who gave their lives for our freedom' in the world wars yet any public person wishing to exercise their freedom of choice not to wear a poppy is not tolerated.

The Government will do anything to identify with the poppy.

Because the day those wearing poppies are pointing the finger squarely at them, is the day their power ends. Hence May's over the top reaction to the FIFA row.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ciaraa on November 04, 2016, 11:31:00 AM

They don't know who they are. Settlers never do.


What about the Celtic settlers in Ireland?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: MoChara on November 04, 2016, 12:09:54 PM
Seems FIFA are looking at the use of the 1916 logo on Ireland shirts in game against Switzerland in March.

It's outside their remit because that was a friendly I believe
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 04, 2016, 12:14:22 PM

They don't know who they are. Settlers never do.


What about the Celtic settlers in Ireland?

After say 2000 years you build up a decent back catalogue
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hectic on November 04, 2016, 12:52:53 PM
Seems FIFA are looking at the use of the 1916 logo on Ireland shirts in game against Switzerland in March.

It's outside their remit because that was a friendly I believe

I think they should award the opposition a 3-0 win.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Hectic on November 04, 2016, 12:56:57 PM
Seems FIFA are looking at the use of the 1916 logo on Ireland shirts in game against Switzerland in March.

It's outside their remit because that was a friendly I believe

I think they should award the opposition a 3-0 win.

And guess who squealed despite them getting wearing poppy armbands for a friendly a few years back!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Dire Ear on November 04, 2016, 01:28:32 PM
Seems FIFA are looking at the use of the 1916 logo on Ireland shirts in game against Switzerland in March.

It's outside their remit because that was a friendly I believe

Nelson Mc---------complete cnt

I think they should award the opposition a 3-0 win.

And guess who squealed despite them getting wearing poppy armbands for a friendly a few years back!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on November 04, 2016, 01:52:20 PM
Militarism is part of Unionist identity. Queen, king Billy, the Somme, the orange order.   The poppy is all about the blood sacrifice of the Somme.Why is the identity  so tightly defined ? Because  its all bollocks. Before 1798 presbyterians were also vermin.

 They don't know who they are. Settlers never do. Same in the States. So easy to manipulate.
Taigs can read a poem from 2000 years ago and see themselves in it. They can learn the language. They can go to Dún Chaoin. They can find a word in a de Bhaldraithe dictionary that makes sense of it all. Or it might be the curl of a point in Croker. Or 2003.

Unionists can't.  Cos there is no historical continuity. There is just violence back there. The insecurity never leaves them. 1641 is forever.

Doire is much older than Londonderry.

Plantation happened in at least 3 waves, the earliest around 1610. The 1641 rebellion sits high in unionist psyche. That's because all the depositions were from the landed families, and painted the natives as animalistic brutes who cut unborn babies from their mother's womb and roasted children on spits. The english army were of course angels.

And later, it was those horrible Hearts of Steel boys that were brutes. The Peep O'Day boys were only burning catholic homes to protect and defend their own.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on November 04, 2016, 02:33:41 PM
I see the Fai have been snitched to Fifa by the much despised whataboutery poppy brigade.

Fwiw, I agree with Fifa's uniform stance and regret that they were not so proactive when Irish players took to the field with black armbands to mark the death of ex royal Diana, like a candle in the wind.
If it means that Croats can't celebrate their pro nazi ww2 past on the field of play then it's a good thing and players like Di Canio can't give fascist salutes on the field to the horde.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on November 04, 2016, 02:50:47 PM
Soccer brings out the bad in people. 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on November 04, 2016, 03:08:47 PM
It appears difficult for people to understand the different connotations with the poppy in the UK. It really is no different to a pink ribbon for breast cancer. Even as an Irish nationalist I can understand that people would support the charity and its ideals without supporting the wars that the army fights. As with the USA it is mainly working class kids who end up as cannon fodder, shipped home with PTSD or missing limbs. The Government which offers little help for injured ex military has no sense of shame given their reaction to the whole Fifa thing. As I said before the poppy is divisive here in Ireland mainly because Unionists mis-used it in the past and the legions over here are no different to orange halls with their fleg flying.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 04, 2016, 04:04:00 PM
Militarism is part of Unionist identity. Queen, king Billy, the Somme, the orange order.   The poppy is all about the blood sacrifice of the Somme.Why is the identity  so tightly defined ? Because  its all bollocks. Before 1798 presbyterians were also vermin.

 They don't know who they are. Settlers never do. Same in the States. So easy to manipulate.
Taigs can read a poem from 2000 years ago and see themselves in it. They can learn the language. They can go to Dún Chaoin. They can find a word in a de Bhaldraithe dictionary that makes sense of it all. Or it might be the curl of a point in Croker. Or 2003.

Unionists can't.  Cos there is no historical continuity. There is just violence back there. The insecurity never leaves them. 1641 is forever.

Doire is much older than Londonderry.

Plantation happened in at least 3 waves, the earliest around 1610. The 1641 rebellion sits high in unionist psyche. That's because all the depositions were from the landed families, and painted the natives as animalistic brutes who cut unborn babies from their mother's womb and roasted children on spits. The english army were of course angels.

And later, it was those horrible Hearts of Steel boys that were brutes. The Peep O'Day boys were only burning catholic homes to protect and defend their own.
John Hewitt wrote a poem, the Colony,  about unionism from the point of view of a Roman centurion sent to put smacht on the barbarians but I could never find it online.
It is in this book

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/literature/poetry/ormsby92.htm

 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 04, 2016, 04:05:03 PM
It appears difficult for people to understand the different connotations with the poppy in the UK. It really is no different to a pink ribbon for breast cancer. Even as an Irish nationalist I can understand that people would support the charity and its ideals without supporting the wars that the army fights. As with the USA it is mainly working class kids who end up as cannon fodder, shipped home with PTSD or missing limbs. The Government which offers little help for injured ex military has no sense of shame given their reaction to the whole Fifa thing. As I said before the poppy is divisive here in Ireland mainly because Unionists mis-used it in the past and the legions over here are no different to orange halls with their fleg flying.
I used to live in the UK and I always thought the poppy was militaristic bollocks. They never looked after soldiers.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on November 04, 2016, 04:41:16 PM

They don't know who they are. Settlers never do.


What about the Celtic settlers in Ireland?

After say 2000 years you build up a decent back catalogue
And Viking settlers too?  Are they "scum" too? 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 04, 2016, 04:41:29 PM
I see the Fai have been snitched to Fifa by the much despised whataboutery poppy brigade.

Fwiw, I agree with Fifa's uniform stance and regret that they were not so proactive when Irish players took to the field with black armbands to mark the death of ex royal Diana, like a candle in the wind.
If it means that Croats can't celebrate their pro nazi ww2 past on the field of play then it's a good thing and players like Di Canio can't give fascist salutes on the field to the horde.

Did that really happen?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 04, 2016, 04:43:12 PM
I admire James McClean for his stance given where he is from and the whole history of Bloody Sunday. I also understand why the poppy is so popular in Scotland and England where it is genuinely sold and worn in solidarity with a military that is often abandoned by the very government it serves, same happens in the US and Rock Stars such as Springsteen, Mellencamp and Young whilst being anti war do benefits for veterans. In the wee 6 though it has always been used as a means of reminding the croppies of their place. I'm not surprised the IFA are looking to wear one it shows just how committed they are to football for all and fits in with the anthem and fleg. Ulster Rugby mindful of their fan base got the balance right and fair play to them.
Sad you feel that way. I was raised in the unionist community and Rembrance Day Services at school and church were about remembering the war dead.  That was the start and end of it.  Sad that it has been politicised in the way that it has in recent years.  By the way, I too don't like the poppy fascism", as it's called, and fully respect people's right not to wear one.  What I don't like is the insinuation that people who wear them are on the wind up or putting people in their place as you seem to think.
With regards to Ulster Rubgy, what's your view on the permanent War Memorial that was retained when the ground was re-developed?   
No issue with the memorial like many nationalists I have an uncle buried in Italy, killed at Monte Casino. But growing up in the North in the 60's and 70's the poppy like the union flag and the ulster banner were constantly used to remind us of our place. If unionists were genuinely interested in shared space they would not be so reluctant to give nationalist symbols etc equal status, but pigs will fly. Ulster Rugby have taken politics out of it and fair play.

Would that explain the motives of Tony's neighbour?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on November 04, 2016, 04:44:07 PM
I don't have a massive problem with people wearing a poppy or wishing to remember.  In many instances there are very personal motives and on a more general scale there is very much a focus on the two world wars when many young men lost their lives in horrific warfare where in many cases they had been conscripted.  It is pretty sobering stuff if you were to put it in todays context and think of people close to you in those age groups. 

There are also those who will be remembering more recent conflicts with a focus on individuals rather than the detail of the conflicts themselves where the role of the British army is questionable at best.  Again this type of remembrance is fine in my book. 

Where I do have a problem is this more recent trend from those in positions of authority whether it be government or their stenographers in the mainstream media who seem to have complete power in dictating that a poppy should be worn and trying to force this by the serious lambasting of those who do not from television presenters to footballers and football teams etc. 

The great irony of course being that on one hand the original idea of the poppy, and continuing reason for many people was/is to 'remember those who gave their lives for our freedom' in the world wars yet any public person wishing to exercise their freedom of choice not to wear a poppy is not tolerated.
Nail on head.  Excellent post.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 04, 2016, 04:48:36 PM
It appears difficult for people to understand the different connotations with the poppy in the UK. It really is no different to a pink ribbon for breast cancer. Even as an Irish nationalist I can understand that people would support the charity and its ideals without supporting the wars that the army fights. As with the USA it is mainly working class kids who end up as cannon fodder, shipped home with PTSD or missing limbs. The Government which offers little help for injured ex military has no sense of shame given their reaction to the whole Fifa thing. As I said before the poppy is divisive here in Ireland mainly because Unionists mis-used it in the past and the legions over here are no different to orange halls with their fleg flying.
I used to live in the UK and I always thought the poppy was militaristic bollocks. They never looked after soldiers.

That's obviously the impression they try to portray with the pushing of the Poppy. We really care about our boys, and you fought for our freedom etc, we'll look after you when you come home with your legs missing. When in reality it was legalised mass murder. The slaughter of millions and those in charge would do the same in the morning and it wouldn't cost them a second thought.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on November 04, 2016, 04:50:36 PM
I admire James McClean for his stance given where he is from and the whole history of Bloody Sunday. I also understand why the poppy is so popular in Scotland and England where it is genuinely sold and worn in solidarity with a military that is often abandoned by the very government it serves, same happens in the US and Rock Stars such as Springsteen, Mellencamp and Young whilst being anti war do benefits for veterans. In the wee 6 though it has always been used as a means of reminding the croppies of their place. I'm not surprised the IFA are looking to wear one it shows just how committed they are to football for all and fits in with the anthem and fleg. Ulster Rugby mindful of their fan base got the balance right and fair play to them.
Sad you feel that way. I was raised in the unionist community and Rembrance Day Services at school and church were about remembering the war dead.  That was the start and end of it.  Sad that it has been politicised in the way that it has in recent years.  By the way, I too don't like the poppy fascism", as it's called, and fully respect people's right not to wear one.  What I don't like is the insinuation that people who wear them are on the wind up or putting people in their place as you seem to think.
With regards to Ulster Rubgy, what's your view on the permanent War Memorial that was retained when the ground was re-developed?   
No issue with the memorial like many nationalists I have an uncle buried in Italy, killed at Monte Casino. But growing up in the North in the 60's and 70's the poppy like the union flag and the ulster banner were constantly used to remind us of our place. If unionists were genuinely interested in shared space they would not be so reluctant to give nationalist symbols etc equal status, but pigs will fly. Ulster Rugby have taken politics out of it and fair play.
Aye right.  I am afraid you are contradicting yourself here somewhat.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on November 04, 2016, 05:44:17 PM
I see the Fai have been snitched to Fifa by the much despised whataboutery poppy brigade.

Fwiw, I agree with Fifa's uniform stance and regret that they were not so proactive when Irish players took to the field with black armbands to mark the death of ex royal Diana, like a candle in the wind.
If it means that Croats can't celebrate their pro nazi ww2 past on the field of play then it's a good thing and players like Di Canio can't give fascist salutes on the field to the horde.

Did that really happen?

Yep - 6 Sept 1997 against Iceland (I think) in a World Cup qualifier

Was she ex'd before Chuck had her stamped out?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 04, 2016, 06:00:15 PM

They don't know who they are. Settlers never do.


What about the Celtic settlers in Ireland?

After say 2000 years you build up a decent back catalogue
And Viking settlers too?  Are they "scum" too?
The Vikings integrated, Michael.
Lochlannaigh. They brought in words like bord.

The Normans integrated

But the Ulster Scots never did.  And they are not scum.
They are just lost. And easy to manipulate

Now is really strange because for the first time in centuries Ireland is coherent and England is fucked
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 04, 2016, 06:01:22 PM
I see the Fai have been snitched to Fifa by the much despised whataboutery poppy brigade.

Fwiw, I agree with Fifa's uniform stance and regret that they were not so proactive when Irish players took to the field with black armbands to mark the death of ex royal Diana, like a candle in the wind.
If it means that Croats can't celebrate their pro nazi ww2 past on the field of play then it's a good thing and players like Di Canio can't give fascist salutes on the field to the horde.

Did that really happen?

Yep - 6 Sept 1997 against Iceland (I think) in a World Cup qualifier

Forget FIFA taking action. Why were Ireland players wearing black armbands?!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: stew on November 04, 2016, 06:33:02 PM
I see the Fai have been snitched to Fifa by the much despised whataboutery poppy brigade.

Fwiw, I agree with Fifa's uniform stance and regret that they were not so proactive when Irish players took to the field with black armbands to mark the death of ex royal Diana, like a candle in the wind.
If it means that Croats can't celebrate their pro nazi ww2 past on the field of play then it's a good thing and players like Di Canio can't give fascist salutes on the field to the horde.

Did that really happen?

Yep - 6 Sept 1997 against Iceland (I think) in a World Cup qualifier

Forget FIFA taking action. Why were Ireland players wearing black armbands?!

Correct, maybe the starting 11 were all from Dublin!

I had a lot of time for Diana, fine hen and all that, wonderful caring person but wtf were the FAI thinking? How was that ever a good idea?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on November 04, 2016, 11:09:21 PM
Maybe the armband was for the Merc.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 04, 2016, 11:26:41 PM
Maybe the armband was for the Merc.

Or Big Dodi. Maybe he had an Irish granny.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on November 05, 2016, 10:47:35 AM
Robert Fisk: Why I will never wear this symbol of betrayal again

05/11/2016 | 02:30
Yes, the boys and girls of the BBC and ITV, and all of Britain's lively media and sports personalities and politicians, are at it again.
They're flaunting their silly poppies once more to show their super-correctness in the face of history, as ignorant or forgetful as ever that their tired fashion accessory was inspired by a poem which urged the soldiers of the Great War of 1914-18 to go on killing and slaughtering.
But that's no longer quite the point, for I fear there are now darker reasons why these TV chumps and their MP interviewees sport their red compassion badges on their clothes.
For who are they commemorating? The dead of Sarajevo? Of Srebrenica? Of Aleppo?
Nope. The television bumpkins only shed their crocodile tears for the dead of World War I and II, who were (save for a colonial war or two) the last generation of Britons to get the chop before the new age of "we-bomb-you-die" technology ensured that their chaps - brown-eyed, for the most part, often Muslims, usually dark skinned - got blown to bits while the British chaps flew safely home to the mess for breakfast.
Yes, I rage against the poppy disgrace every year.
And yes, my father - 12th Battalion, The King's Liverpool Regiment, Third Battle of the Somme, the liberation of burning Cambrai, 1918 - finally abandoned the poppy charade when he learned of the hypocrisy and lies behind the war in which he fought.
His schoolboy son followed his father's example and never wore his wretched Flanders flower again.
Oddly, the dunderheads who are taking Britain out of the European Union on a carpet of equally deceitful lies - and I include Theresa May and her buffoonery of ministers - are guilty of even greater hypocrisy than the TV presenters whose poppies, for just a few days a year, take over the function of studio make-up artists (poppies distracting viewers from the slabs of paste on their TV faces).

For the fields of Flanders, the real mud and faeces and blood which those vile poppies are supposed to symbolise, showed just how European the dead generations were.
British soldiers went off to fight and die in their tens of thousands for little Catholic Belgium, today the seat of the EU where Nigel Farage disgraced his country by telling the grandchildren of those we went to fight for that they'd never done a day's work in their lives.

In France, British (and, of course, Irish) soldiers bled to death in even greater Golgothas - 20,000 alone on the first day of the Somme in 1916 - to save the nation which the British are now throwing out of our shiny new insular lives.
When Poles fought and died alongside British pilots in the 1940 Battle of Britain to save us from Nazi Germany, we idolised them, lionised them, wrote about their exploits in the RAF, filmed them, fell in love with them. For them, too, we pretend to wear the poppy.
But now the poppy wearers want to throw the children of those brave men out of Britain.

Shame is the only word I can find to describe our betrayal.
And perhaps I sniff something equally pernicious among the studio boys and girls. On Britain's international television channels, Christmas was long ago banned (save for news stories on the Pope).
There are no Christmas trees any more beside the presenters' desks, not a sprig of holly.
For we live in a multicultural society, in which such manifestations might be offensive to other "cultures" (I use that word advisedly, for culture to me means Beethoven and the poet Hafiz and Monet).
And for the same reason, our international screens never show the slightest clue of Eid festivities (save again for news stories) lest this, too, offends another "culture".
Yet the poppy just manages to sneak onto the screen of BBC World; it is permissible, you see, the very last symbol that "our" dead remain more precious than the millions of human beings Britain has killed, in the Middle East for example, for whom we wear no token of remembrance.
Lord Blair of Kut al-Amara will be wearing his poppy this week - but not for those he liquidated in his grotesque invasion of Iraq.
And in this sense, I fear that the wearing of the poppy has become a symbol of racism. In his old-fashioned way (and he read a lot about post-imperial history), I think my father, who was 93 when he died, understood this.
His example was one of great courage. He fought for his country and then, unafraid, he threw his poppy away.
Television celebrities do not have to fight for their country - yet they do not even have the guts to break this fake conformity and toss their sordid poppies in the office waste-paper bin.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on November 05, 2016, 01:44:22 PM
When James received all the abuse, vitriol, death threats, outrage, hate and condemnation from the general public, newspapers and  political leaders,  all that certified the wearing and not wearing of the poppy in the present day, as a political issue.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 05, 2016, 03:17:24 PM
 There was an English soccer game on Sky earlier and neither team had poppies on their jerseys.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: theticklemister on November 05, 2016, 05:59:15 PM
There was an English soccer game on Sky earlier and neither team had poppies on their jerseys.

That's a disgrace
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: armaghniac on November 05, 2016, 07:14:02 PM
There was an English soccer game on Sky earlier and neither team had poppies on their jerseys.

Enemies of the People.  Counter Revolutionaries.

Probably a shower of high court judges
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on November 05, 2016, 07:45:37 PM
There was an English soccer game on Sky earlier and neither team had poppies on their jerseys.

Which game was that?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 05, 2016, 08:29:29 PM
There was an English soccer game on Sky earlier and neither team had poppies on their jerseys.

Which game was that?

James McClean XI was one of them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Aaron Boone on November 05, 2016, 08:31:46 PM
Even Honey G has the poppy on Ex Factor.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on November 05, 2016, 09:51:20 PM
There was an English soccer game on Sky earlier and neither team had poppies on their jerseys.

Which game was that?
A team in white and a team in yellow. McClaren manages one of them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: michaelg on November 05, 2016, 10:14:51 PM

They don't know who they are. Settlers never do.


What about the Celtic settlers in Ireland?

After say 2000 years you build up a decent back catalogue
And Viking settlers too?  Are they "scum" too?
The Vikings integrated, Michael.
Lochlannaigh. They brought in words like bord.

The Normans integrated

But the Ulster Scots never did.  And they are not scum.
They are just lost. And easy to manipulate

Now is really strange because for the first time in centuries Ireland is coherent and England is fucked
Sure, don't we support the Ireland rugby team!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: manfromdelmonte on November 05, 2016, 10:27:46 PM
no such thing as 'celtic' settlers

there has never been any evidence for a mass migration to Ireland from mainland Europe between the Bronze and Iron ages - no real change in settlement patterns, nor in burial rites

more likely that the technology of how to make Iron and the craftsmanship and craftspeople moved out from the continent and Britain

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: T Fearon on November 06, 2016, 08:55:01 PM
McClean didn't feature in WBA squad today at all.Missed the minutes silence by both teams and the poppy display made by fans holding cards
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thebar on November 06, 2016, 08:58:17 PM
James McClean - A great man & footballer  :)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Dougal Maguire on November 12, 2016, 07:04:33 PM
Ironic he should score for his Country on the weekend that's in it. Fair play to him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: straightred on November 12, 2016, 07:22:22 PM
Ironic he should score for his Country on the weekend that's in it. Fair play to him.

brilliant performance from him
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on November 12, 2016, 07:40:11 PM
Was he wearing his Poppy?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on November 12, 2016, 07:53:28 PM
Legend
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on November 12, 2016, 09:28:23 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9wJMEH-bq8&sns=fb
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on November 12, 2016, 09:43:20 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9wJMEH-bq8&sns=fb
https://youtu.be/NVSkT6gUVpE
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: manfromdelmonte on November 13, 2016, 12:52:28 AM
3 goals in two games
fair play to him
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Dougal Maguire on November 13, 2016, 12:57:33 AM
Gregory Campbell will ge delighted for him
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Horse Box on November 13, 2016, 02:15:34 PM
Was he wearing his Poppy?

No .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Horse Box on November 13, 2016, 02:17:56 PM
Great tune bhoys !

https://youtu.be/NVSkT6gUVpE
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rodney trotter on December 04, 2016, 01:01:56 PM
Done well to avoid red yesterday https://t.co/YCUtrsWHEH

Wholehearted player, but reckless with the tackling.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 04, 2016, 03:04:34 PM
Done well to avoid red yesterday https://t.co/YCUtrsWHEH

Wholehearted player, but reckless with the tackling.

I don't even know why he got a yellow, he did nothing only pull on the ball
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rodney trotter on December 04, 2016, 04:12:04 PM
I don't know why your defending him for the sake it . If he did nothing. it wouldn't have resulted in a melee.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 04, 2016, 06:03:51 PM
I don't know why your defending him for the sake it . If he did nothing. it wouldn't have resulted in a melee.

Rodney, I watched the game. McClean pulled on the ball, other lad stuck out a sly kick at him and McClean reacted by jumping up face to face without laying a hand on him. Not sure what yellow was for not how he is lucky not to get a red but sure enlighten me if you saw it different.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: nrico2006 on December 04, 2016, 06:28:28 PM
Any link to video?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rodney trotter on December 05, 2016, 12:10:32 AM
I don't know why your defending him for the sake it . If he did nothing. it wouldn't have resulted in a melee.

Rodney, I watched the game. McClean pulled on the ball, other lad stuck out a sly kick at him and McClean reacted by jumping up face to face without laying a hand on him. Not sure what yellow was for not how he is lucky not to get a red but sure enlighten me if you saw it different.

You obviously didn't watch it too well

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiysa3b4dvQAhUpK8AKHVxBDaIQqQIIHTAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.derryjournal.com%2Fsport%2Ffootball%2Fwest-brom-boss-pulis-defends-james-mcclean-after-ugly-clash-with-pereyra-1-7711328&usg=AFQjCNHtdhDHpqPytlGWEzNTC_K_rUlmiA&bvm=bv.139782543,d.ZGg
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Fuzzman on December 05, 2016, 10:22:54 AM
Watched that last night and thought he's always a ticking time bomb but in one way he seemed to keep calm and keep his hands down. He certainly never seems to shy away from a hard tackle.

I just noticed that his teammates include 3 Norn Iron internationals Chris Brunt, Johnny Evans and Gareth McAuley.
I wonder how well they get on with McClean around the poppy wearing season.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 05, 2016, 02:10:38 PM
I don't know why your defending him for the sake it . If he did nothing. it wouldn't have resulted in a melee.

Rodney, I watched the game. McClean pulled on the ball, other lad stuck out a sly kick at him and McClean reacted by jumping up face to face without laying a hand on him. Not sure what yellow was for not how he is lucky not to get a red but sure enlighten me if you saw it different.

You obviously didn't watch it too well

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiysa3b4dvQAhUpK8AKHVxBDaIQqQIIHTAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.derryjournal.com%2Fsport%2Ffootball%2Fwest-brom-boss-pulis-defends-james-mcclean-after-ugly-clash-with-pereyra-1-7711328&usg=AFQjCNHtdhDHpqPytlGWEzNTC_K_rUlmiA&bvm=bv.139782543,d.ZGg

What Pulis said...

I was more concerned about James than anything else and trying to get him away from the incident, not that I think he did anything, but just to keep him away from it.

So again Rodney, tell me what McClean did to warrant him being lucky not to get a red card?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on March 30, 2017, 05:40:44 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-39441215

Class act
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on March 30, 2017, 05:59:08 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-39441215

Class act
Saw that earlier. Great stuff altogether.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: magpie seanie on March 30, 2017, 06:17:06 PM
Good lad McClean. Really seems to be a really good lad.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on March 30, 2017, 06:20:18 PM
Good lad McClean. Really seems to be a really good lad.

Yes, seems to be a very decent skin.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Newbridge Exile on March 30, 2017, 08:07:16 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-foyle-west-39441215

Class act

Comes across as genuine sound lad
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ziggysego on March 31, 2017, 12:24:01 AM
A true legend, yet people were still complaining on various news links on social media that he should have wore a poppy.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on March 31, 2017, 12:31:40 AM
He's 100% right about the poppy... never forgets where he comes from. He's class.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: GJL on March 31, 2017, 09:52:24 AM
He's 100% right about the poppy... never forgets where he comes from. He's class.
+1

A great lad with who stands up for what he believes. A lovely thing to do for the kids that seems to have kick started their football. Fair play to him.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: maddog on March 31, 2017, 10:58:12 AM
A true legend, yet people were still complaining on various news links on social media that he should have wore a poppy.

Don't be surprised by that. He could cure cancer and still be vilified for showing disrespect to the imperialist dead.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on March 31, 2017, 11:08:55 AM
Would anyone know anybody connected to this team?
The kids on the team I'm involved with are a bit younger than these kids but it be nice to hear from someone that is doing something similar as us.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on March 31, 2017, 01:53:49 PM
My Sister knows one of the coaches.  I'll get some contact details and PM you sure
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: macdanger2 on March 31, 2017, 05:00:58 PM
Fair play James, really seems like a decent fella
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: foxcommander on March 31, 2017, 06:17:15 PM
Makes a change from all the posers constantly taking selfies (i'm looking at you Ozil/Sanchez/Wilshere) or getting your drink spiked in nightclubs (Berahino).
Should be mandatory that players volunteer for some charity every week. Keep them grounded.

Good man James. Hopefully others follow your lead.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Windmill abu on March 31, 2017, 11:42:01 PM
Makes a change from all the posers constantly taking selfies (i'm looking at you Ozil/Sanchez/Wilshere) or getting your drink spiked in nightclubs (Berahino).
Should be mandatory that players volunteer for some charity every week. Keep them grounded.

Good man James. Hopefully others follow your lead.

James McClean leading by example again. Well done.

I don't understand what a mandatory volunteer is.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on March 31, 2017, 11:45:00 PM
Makes a change from all the posers constantly taking selfies (i'm looking at you Ozil/Sanchez/Wilshere) or getting your drink spiked in nightclubs (Berahino).
Should be mandatory that players volunteer for some charity every week. Keep them grounded.

Good man James. Hopefully others follow your lead.

James McClean leading by example again. Well done.

I don't understand what a mandatory volunteer is.
Conscription.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Avondhu star on April 01, 2017, 06:17:20 PM
Fair play James, really seems like a decent fella
A good decent lad with no east london type ideas about himself.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: take_yer_points on April 29, 2017, 07:16:53 PM
Interview on BBC this morning.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39752641
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Boycey on December 16, 2017, 11:39:56 PM
Christ you know it’s been a slow year in sport when James wins the RTE Sports Personality of the Year..
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Minder on December 17, 2017, 12:07:38 AM
Christ you know it’s been a slow year in sport when James wins the RTE Sports Personality of the Year..

Ireland won two competitive games and McClean scored one goal
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Avondhu star on December 17, 2017, 10:11:42 AM
Christ you know it’s been a slow year in sport when James wins the RTE Sports Personality of the Year..

Hard to understand except that so many are in thrall to the Premiership that they think even playing for a mediocre team merits being Sports Personality of Year
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: square_ball on December 17, 2017, 10:28:09 AM
Christ you know it’s been a slow year in sport when James wins the RTE Sports Personality of the Year..

Hard to understand except that so many are in thrall to the Premiership that they think even playing for a mediocre team merits being Sports Personality of Year

And he barely gets a game for them.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: mrdeeds on December 17, 2017, 12:24:36 PM
It's Sports Personality not Sports Ability. He definitely has personality. Not necessarily for the right reasons depending on your persuasion.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: square_ball on December 17, 2017, 12:28:36 PM
It’s called sportsperson of the year no mention of personality.

He may have been top irish footballer but nowhere near being the top sportsperson in the country this year.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: mrdeeds on December 17, 2017, 12:34:40 PM
It’s called sportsperson of the year no mention of personality.

He may have been top irish footballer but nowhere near being the top sportsperson in the country this year.

My mistake. Seen it referred to as Personality but must be mix up with BBC.

No way should he have got it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on December 17, 2017, 12:52:19 PM
Mcclean was one of the stand out performers in a mediocre ireland team and wears his heart on his sleeve in every game. But sportsperson of the year?? No chance.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on December 17, 2017, 01:09:01 PM
Great lad, richly deserved, well done James
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 17, 2017, 01:11:48 PM
Thought Joe Canning would have shaded it but James is a great role model - courage of his conviction on and off the filed.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on December 17, 2017, 02:03:51 PM
Thought Joe Canning would have shaded it but James is a great role model - courage of his conviction on and off the filed.

GAA stars rarely win
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on December 17, 2017, 02:14:32 PM
Well done to James McClean! A strong personality and a great servant for Irish Football! Loves playing for Ireland and it shows!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Milltown Row2 on December 17, 2017, 05:08:40 PM
Well done to James McClean! A strong personality and a great servant for Irish Football! Loves playing for Ireland and it shows!

Rest of the panel don’t love playing?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on December 17, 2017, 05:24:18 PM
Well done to James McClean! A strong personality and a great servant for Irish Football! Loves playing for Ireland and it shows!

Rest of the panel don’t love playing?

Where in the above quote did i say that? Take a Chill Pill!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Cunny Funt on December 17, 2017, 05:29:38 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 17, 2017, 05:57:28 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

More people voted for him  8)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Redhand Santa on December 17, 2017, 06:07:20 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

Personally I think Taylor is overrated especially when you consider the limited number of female boxers. She fought  a part time American the other night who had very limited fights both as an ameteur and professional and struggled to get past her. If any boxer was to get it Burnett would have been much more deserving winner.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 17, 2017, 07:25:25 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

Personally I think Taylor is overrated especially when you consider the limited number of female boxers. She fought  a part time American the other night who had very limited fights both as an ameteur and professional and struggled to get past her. If any boxer was to get it Burnett would have been much more deserving winner.

Struggled to get by her. She thumped her on points despite a ridiculous penalty point called by the referee.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Redhand Santa on December 17, 2017, 07:37:42 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

Personally I think Taylor is overrated especially when you consider the limited number of female boxers. She fought  a part time American the other night who had very limited fights both as an ameteur and professional and struggled to get past her. If any boxer was to get it Burnett would have been much more deserving winner.

Struggled to get by her. She thumped her on points despite a ridiculous penalty point called by the referee.

She did win easy on points but it was a very tough fight for her. She seems to have very quick hands but not much power. But maybe knockouts (autocorrect tried to correct this to knickers which would have messed up the sentence!) are unusual in women’s boxing. I just feel given the numbers involved and haven’t watched a lot of her fights that she’s over hyped.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on December 17, 2017, 08:17:26 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

If you gauged how hard you punched your fist into the air when McClean scored against Wales as opposed to the Taylors World title win - then your answer is there!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on December 17, 2017, 08:23:25 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

Because women's boxing is an abomination.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on December 17, 2017, 08:40:46 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Cunny Funt on December 17, 2017, 08:49:19 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

If you gauged how hard you punched your fist into the air when McClean scored against Wales as opposed to the Taylors World title win - then your answer is there!
Robbie Keanes late goal against Germany in the 2002 World cup was the last time i punched my fist into the air watching ROI play. Katie Taylor over overrated? more like underappreciated IMO.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on December 17, 2017, 08:52:45 PM
it proves how poor a sporting year we've had. no real stand out candidates and the winner came from a team that ultimately failed to qualify for the world cup. katie taylor, ryan burnett or joe canning for me with joe just shading it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Captain Obvious on December 17, 2017, 08:52:51 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?
Because the Derry wans would be voting morning, noon and night for him plus he wins a lot of the popular vote for not wearing a poppy.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 17, 2017, 08:53:50 PM
Can someone explain to me how McClean won that award last night instead of Katie Taylor?

Personally I think Taylor is overrated especially when you consider the limited number of female boxers. She fought  a part time American the other night who had very limited fights both as an ameteur and professional and struggled to get past her. If any boxer was to get it Burnett would have been much more deserving winner.

Struggled to get by her. She thumped her on points despite a ridiculous penalty point called by the referee.

She did win easy on points but it was a very tough fight for her. She seems to have very quick hands but not much power. But maybe knockouts (autocorrect tried to correct this to knickers which would have messed up the sentence!) are unusual in women’s boxing. I just feel given the numbers involved and haven’t watched a lot of her fights that she’s over hyped.

I could be wrong but I thought I read somewhere that the other champ in USA has never stopped an opponent. The power isn't in women's boxing and the rounds are only 2mins also. Taylor is a classy fighter, the woman she fought the other days was a brawler with a big punch but no boxing finesse.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: GJL on December 17, 2017, 09:15:44 PM
James is a good lad and I'm glad to see him win. Probably were better options but that's not his fault. As for women's boxing?? Terrible.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on December 17, 2017, 09:18:12 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?

I didn't say McClean was a worthy winner.

The Irish tiddlywinks champion would be more worthy than a woman boxer though.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on December 17, 2017, 09:27:37 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on December 17, 2017, 09:45:12 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...

I have to problem recognising Taylor. The title says Irish sports personality of the year 2017. It's not about being the best (well not really). It's about the Personality of the Sportsperson, how happy they made you feel and how attached you feel to that person.

Katie Taylor has achieved so much in her career. And her success makes me happy and proud. But I would not be as attached as I would be to Mayo football or Rep. of Ireland national side.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Tony Baloney on December 17, 2017, 09:56:42 PM
it proves how poor a sporting year we've had. no real stand out candidates and the winner came from a team that ultimately failed to qualify for the world cup. katie taylor, ryan burnett or joe canning for me with joe just shading it.
I'd give the award to Joe for "that point" alone. That Galway team were seen as perennial chokers and they rammed it down the throat of every begrudger, so for that alone he's ahead of McClean.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Captain Obvious on December 17, 2017, 10:20:02 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...

I have to problem recognising Taylor. The title says Irish sports personality of the year 2017. It's not about being the best (well not really). It's about the Personality of the Sportsperson, how happy they made you feel and how attached you feel to that person.

Katie Taylor has achieved so much in her career. And her success makes me happy and proud. But I would not be as attached as I would be to Mayo football or Rep. of Ireland national side.
RTÉ Sports Person of the Year which Katie Taylor won before in 2012. Are you mixing it up with the BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award?
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: From the Bunker on December 17, 2017, 10:23:40 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...

I have to problem recognising Taylor. The title says Irish sports personality of the year 2017. It's not about being the best (well not really). It's about the Personality of the Sportsperson, how happy they made you feel and how attached you feel to that person.

Katie Taylor has achieved so much in her career. And her success makes me happy and proud. But I would not be as attached as I would be to Mayo football or Rep. of Ireland national side.
RTÉ Sports Person of the Year which Katie Taylor won before in 2012. Are you mixing it up with the BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award?

Yeah, you are right! It Person rather than Personality - well that's that - Katie Taylor!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 17, 2017, 10:56:31 PM
Sports Person is open to interpretation like it could include their character and that. It's doesn't say best achiever in sport.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on December 17, 2017, 11:26:19 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...
the irony of you posting these two statements together  ;D
I'd love to see you playing against McLean.  Average footballer in the EPL, but anyone getting to that level would take the complete piss out of the local sunday league stars.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: laoislad on December 17, 2017, 11:32:19 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...
the irony of you posting these two statements together  ;D
I'd love to see you playing against McLean.  Average footballer in the EPL, but anyone getting to that level would take the complete piss out of the local sunday league stars.
The difference is I'm only saying McClean is average not the sport he plays. People here are slagging off women's boxing not just Taylor herself. I bet none of them would last a round against any female boxer.
I'd actually pay very good money to see the likes of BennyCake or EC Unique GJL get into a ring with Katie Taylor.
Btw I'd have McClean in my back pocket  8)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: HiMucker on December 17, 2017, 11:34:53 PM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...
the irony of you posting these two statements together  ;D
I'd love to see you playing against McLean.  Average footballer in the EPL, but anyone getting to that level would take the complete piss out of the local sunday league stars.
The difference is I'm only saying McClean is average not the sport he plays. People here are slagging off women's boxing not just Taylor herself. I bet none of them would last a round against any female boxer.
Btw I'd have McClean in my back pocket  8)
And Id bate Katie round the ring ;) :P
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on December 18, 2017, 12:23:09 AM
Fair play to JMC .  The public  voted and he won . 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on December 18, 2017, 04:10:48 AM
There are 2 kinds of winners.

1. Really outstanding sportspeople such as BOD, Roy Keane  and Shefflin.
2 The rest are in the Who he?  category. Nobody will remember McClean 20 years from now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTÉ_Sports_Person_of_the_Year
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 18, 2017, 08:31:11 AM
There are 2 kinds of winners.

1. Really outstanding sportspeople such as BOD, Roy Keane  and Shefflin.
2 The rest are in the Who he?  category. Nobody will remember McClean 20 years from now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTÉ_Sports_Person_of_the_Year

We'll certainly not forget Keane at home walking his dog when Ireland was playing the World Cup in 2002. McClean will be remembered.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on December 18, 2017, 10:12:05 AM
I was happy for McLean to win, even though I would have thought Katie was more deserving. However James McLean wears his heart on his sleeve on and off the field, and has never backed off his convictions. I think he's a sound lad, and the sort of fella that you'd like to have a few pints with. He does some daft things when discretion would be the better part of valour, but he does it with absolute belief in his stances. Probably the 'wrong' result, but I'm happy he won.

The bigger travesty is how the 'rapper' and his cohorts won the Team of the Year.


Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: JoG2 on December 18, 2017, 11:17:01 AM
I was happy for McLean to win, even though I would have thought Katie was more deserving. However James McLean wears his heart on his sleeve on and off the field, and has never backed off his convictions. I think he's a sound lad, and the sort of fella that you'd like to have a few pints with. He does some daft things when discretion would be the better part of valour, but he does it with absolute belief in his stances. Probably the 'wrong' result, but I'm happy he won.

The bigger travesty is how the 'rapper' and his cohorts won the Team of the Year.

Young McClean would be on the fizzy water though..but I agree, a good spud !
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on December 18, 2017, 11:55:46 PM
 Showjumping?? wtf!!  what do Dublin have to do?  even Donegal won that award in recent years

 In these modest times for Irish intl football McClean would probably be in for poty,  but for sports person of the year? that smells of a typical Nordie voting conspiracy.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Antrim Coaster on December 19, 2017, 01:07:41 AM
I was happy for McLean to win, even though I would have thought Katie was more deserving. However James McLean wears his heart on his sleeve on and off the field, and has never backed off his convictions. I think he's a sound lad, and the sort of fella that you'd like to have a few pints with. He does some daft things when discretion would be the better part of valour, but he does it with absolute belief in his stances. Probably the 'wrong' result, but I'm happy he won.

The bigger travesty is how the 'rapper' and his cohorts won the Team of the Year.

Dosen't drink.
Met him a couple of times and he's a sound skin.
No airs or graces about him
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rrhf on December 19, 2017, 07:04:51 AM
Certainly one of the best players Ireland have had in 15 years. Like a front footed Roy Keane. Sends out an important message that Irish soccer is not a cold house.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: bennydorano on December 19, 2017, 08:13:36 AM
https://amp.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/its-astonishing-paul-kimmage-disagrees-with-james-mcclean-winning-rt-sportsperson-of-the-year-36419081.html?__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Il Bomber Destro on December 19, 2017, 08:30:33 AM
Look - Why has this got to turn into a Womens Boxing is shite in order to prove McClean is a more worthy winner?
Taylor is a far more deserving winner. She's the best at what she does. McClean isn't even a very good footballer.  Plenty of heart but let's be honest he is fairly average.
I'd love to see some of you lads get into a boxing ring with Taylor...
the irony of you posting these two statements together  ;D
I'd love to see you playing against McLean.  Average footballer in the EPL, but anyone getting to that level would take the complete piss out of the local sunday league stars.
The difference is I'm only saying McClean is average not the sport he plays. People here are slagging off women's boxing not just Taylor herself. I bet none of them would last a round against any female boxer.
I'd actually pay very good money to see the likes of BennyCake or EC Unique GJL get into a ring with Katie Taylor.
Btw I'd have McClean in my back pocket  8)

Being average at pro mens football is much tougher than been excellent at women's pro boxing.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on December 22, 2017, 09:00:00 AM
Certainly one of the best players Ireland have had in 15 years. Like a front footed Roy Keane. Sends out an important message that Irish soccer is not a cold house.


https://m.independent.ie/sport/other-sports/ewan-mackennas-alternative-2017-sports-awards-dud-of-the-year-most-overrated-athlete-and-lifetime-achievement-36428548.html

Recently on Sky Sports' Soccer Saturday, an interesting stat flashed up as they analysed the poor performances of West Brom.

It surrounded James McClean and his 15 Premier League appearances so far this season as, in all of them, he'd yet to score and has yet to so much as muster an assist. But if the panel wanted to delve deeper into his skill-set and slight slump, more damning numbers were out there. Shots on target? Two. Shooting accuracy? Seventeen per cent. Cross accuracy? Twenty-three per cent. Accurate long balls? Three. Passes per game? Less than 10.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on December 22, 2017, 09:10:05 AM
James McClean is far from the best player in the world. But in typical Ewan McKenna fashion, he's ignoring some of the most important bits that make us love sport. The passion (sorry Dinny), the pride, the effort, the knowledge that you gave it everything you had. If I get to choose someone to represent me, I'd choose an honest, hard working player who loved playing for his country and who left absolutely everything he had on the pitch over a more talented but less emotionally invested alternative.

Think about it. Do you love sports because of the aesthetic pleasure of a well executed technical or athletic skill? A perfectly hit free kick, a brilliantly executed catch or a sideline puc, a perfect tight spiral and brilliant catch in the endzone, a lovely backline move and a try in the corner? Is that why you love sports, or is that just an inherent part of the sport itself, rather then the reason we love it? The reason I love sport, from GAA to darts and snooker, is because of the drama, the challenge, the competition, the drive, the beating heart, the energy, the sheer 'want' that we see competitors show. I want to watch sport that makes me feel that the competitors are giving it everything they have in a bid to be the best they can be, and better than the other team/player. I want to feel that they care, that they are more invested in it than the paycheck they'll get out of it. I want to feel it matters to them, because then it matters to me. James McLean makes me think, no, he makes me KNOW it matters to him.

For that, I think he's great.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: haranguerer on December 22, 2017, 09:29:11 AM
He's right about one thing at least - the public shouldn't be voting for these awards (or for any awards worth having)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: AZOffaly on December 22, 2017, 09:48:11 AM
That's true.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 22, 2017, 10:02:17 AM
Yis were bowing before him after the Wales game  8)
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: tonto1888 on December 22, 2017, 10:15:26 AM
James McClean is far from the best player in the world. But in typical Ewan McKenna fashion, he's ignoring some of the most important bits that make us love sport. The passion (sorry Dinny), the pride, the effort, the knowledge that you gave it everything you had. If I get to choose someone to represent me, I'd choose an honest, hard working player who loved playing for his country and who left absolutely everything he had on the pitch over a more talented but less emotionally invested alternative.

Think about it. Do you love sports because of the aesthetic pleasure of a well executed technical or athletic skill? A perfectly hit free kick, a brilliantly executed catch or a sideline puc, a perfect tight spiral and brilliant catch in the endzone, a lovely backline move and a try in the corner? Is that why you love sports, or is that just an inherent part of the sport itself, rather then the reason we love it? The reason I love sport, from GAA to darts and snooker, is because of the drama, the challenge, the competition, the drive, the beating heart, the energy, the sheer 'want' that we see competitors show. I want to watch sport that makes me feel that the competitors are giving it everything they have in a bid to be the best they can be, and better than the other team/player. I want to feel that they care, that they are more invested in it than the paycheck they'll get out of it. I want to feel it matters to them, because then it matters to me. James McLean makes me think, no, he makes me KNOW it matters to him.

For that, I think he's great.

I agree with all this but I do think there would have been more worthy winners. Ryan Burnett for example being one
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on December 22, 2017, 10:43:22 AM
James McClean is far from the best player in the world. But in typical Ewan McKenna fashion, he's ignoring some of the most important bits that make us love sport. The passion (sorry Dinny), the pride, the effort, the knowledge that you gave it everything you had. If I get to choose someone to represent me, I'd choose an honest, hard working player who loved playing for his country and who left absolutely everything he had on the pitch over a more talented but less emotionally invested alternative.

Think about it. Do you love sports because of the aesthetic pleasure of a well executed technical or athletic skill? A perfectly hit free kick, a brilliantly executed catch or a sideline puc, a perfect tight spiral and brilliant catch in the endzone, a lovely backline move and a try in the corner? Is that why you love sports, or is that just an inherent part of the sport itself, rather then the reason we love it? The reason I love sport, from GAA to darts and snooker, is because of the drama, the challenge, the competition, the drive, the beating heart, the energy, the sheer 'want' that we see competitors show. I want to watch sport that makes me feel that the competitors are giving it everything they have in a bid to be the best they can be, and better than the other team/player. I want to feel that they care, that they are more invested in it than the paycheck they'll get out of it. I want to feel it matters to them, because then it matters to me. James McLean makes me think, no, he makes me KNOW it matters to him.

For that, I think he's great.

I agree with all this but I do think there would have been more worthy winners. Ryan Burnett for example being one

I agree with you on Burnett but he has two problems with getting awards like this .

-  he is a from the north and hasn't exposure here owing to lack of Olympian status .  Barnes and Conlon are much more recognisable to the average punter .

-  most of his fights are on Sky .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: thewobbler on December 22, 2017, 10:50:14 AM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.

Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: seafoid on December 22, 2017, 10:52:44 AM
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the public. Mencken
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: charlieTully on December 22, 2017, 11:24:34 AM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: SHEEDY on December 22, 2017, 11:52:45 AM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Minder on December 22, 2017, 11:57:38 AM
As they say his second touch is usually a tackle
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: tonto1888 on December 22, 2017, 12:02:15 PM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

agreed. I think he is a decent footballer but it comes to down to this for me. In a pure footballing sense would I want him to sign for Celtic? The answer to that is no
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: ashman on December 22, 2017, 12:08:33 PM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

He was voted as best sportsperson of the year to be fair .  It was sports personality of the year .
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 22, 2017, 12:09:44 PM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

agreed. I think he is a decent footballer but it comes to down to this for me. In a pure footballing sense would I want him to sign for Celtic? The answer to that is no

He'd be a legend up there... and to be fair the standard in the Scottish league is crap 
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: tonto1888 on December 22, 2017, 12:11:15 PM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

agreed. I think he is a decent footballer but it comes to down to this for me. In a pure footballing sense would I want him to sign for Celtic? The answer to that is no

He'd be a legend up there... and to be fair the standard in the Scottish league is crap

Thats why I said in a pure footballing sense. He wouldn't add anything to the team and would be too expensive
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Orior on December 29, 2017, 09:04:28 PM
Why is this not updated yet for James?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_McClean
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lenny on December 30, 2017, 08:17:22 AM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

agreed. I think he is a decent footballer but it comes to down to this for me. In a pure footballing sense would I want him to sign for Celtic? The answer to that is no

He'd be a legend up there... and to be fair the standard in the Scottish league is crap

He's good enough for the lower half of the epl no bother but he's not good enough for celtic. He's nowhere near as good as Forrest, Roberts, Sinclair and if he cam he would hamper the progress of exciting prospects like mikey johnston.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 30, 2017, 12:40:37 PM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

agreed. I think he is a decent footballer but it comes to down to this for me. In a pure footballing sense would I want him to sign for Celtic? The answer to that is no

He'd be a legend up there... and to be fair the standard in the Scottish league is crap

He's good enough for the lower half of the epl no bother but he's not good enough for celtic. He's nowhere near as good as Forrest, Roberts, Sinclair and if he cam he would hamper the progress of exciting prospects like mikey johnston.

You're deluded if you actually believe that.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lenny on December 30, 2017, 12:47:41 PM
Teams often reflect their most important players, and McClean sums up Irish soccer these days. Hardworking and committed, but fundamentally not good enough to compete at a high level, and generally unlikeable.

If that’s the yardstick for an individual sporting award, then we have low standards.


He doesn't vote SDLP. Get over it.
I love james mcclean and the way he has the courage to stand up for what he believes in. I love the way he wears his heart on his sleeve when he's playing for ireland and he seems to care as much as the most passionate fan but that doesnt make him the best sports person ireland has produced this year.

agreed. I think he is a decent footballer but it comes to down to this for me. In a pure footballing sense would I want him to sign for Celtic? The answer to that is no

He'd be a legend up there... and to be fair the standard in the Scottish league is crap

He's good enough for the lower half of the epl no bother but he's not good enough for celtic. He's nowhere near as good as Forrest, Roberts, Sinclair and if he cam he would hamper the progress of exciting prospects like mikey johnston.

You're deluded if you actually believe that.

Not deluded at all. Joey Barton was Burnley’s player of the season the year before he joined the new rangers but he couldn’t hack it in the Scottish premier league. People accuse the spl of being championship standard but the reality is that outside the top 6 or 7 clubs in the epl all the rest are championship standard. McLean would be very good for most clubs in the spl but he wouldn’t improve Celtic.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Itchy on December 30, 2017, 01:00:35 PM
Havr to agree to differ then. If I look at a team like Burnley for example, I'd say they'd only be interested in 3 or maybe 4 of the Celtic team. If Celtics players were that good they'd already be at teams in the premier league's bottom half getting paid a lot more than they are today. That said I do think the likes if Sinclair, Dembele, Armstrong and tierney are very good players. But lustig, McGregor, Forrest are very ordinary and lose the ball way too much against poor opposition.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lenny on December 30, 2017, 01:19:07 PM
Havr to agree to differ then. If I look at a team like Burnley for example, I'd say they'd only be interested in 3 or maybe 4 of the Celtic team. If Celtics players were that good they'd already be at teams in the premier league's bottom half getting paid a lot more than they are today. That said I do think the likes if Sinclair, Dembele, Armstrong and tierney are very good players. But lustig, McGregor, Forrest are very ordinary and lose the ball way too much against poor opposition.

I agree with you to a certain extent. Burnley probably wouldn’t want too many Celtic players because they wouldn’t be an ungrade on their players. And likewise Celtic wouldn’t want too many Burnley players because they wouldn’t be an upgrade either. Ie both squads are of similar standard. McLean would do okay for Celtic but he wouldn’t improve the team and would be too costly.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 30, 2017, 01:26:58 PM
Looking at this rubbish McClean well up to that standard
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lenny on December 30, 2017, 01:58:33 PM
Looking at this rubbish McClean well up to that standard

I see you've been fooled into believing the myth of the epl. Yes it does have attractive games like arsenal v united, city v liverpool and spurs v chelsea but it also has bog standard very average games like stoke v huddersfield, watford  v stoke, swansea v bournemouth etc. These clubs are filled with average players very few of whom would improve the current celtic team. Of course there are a lot of players there who could come in and do a similar job but they wouldn't make any significant improvements. Mclean is pretty much up to the standard okay but he's not an improvement and he's on v high wages.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 30, 2017, 03:13:11 PM
Looking at this rubbish McClean well up to that standard

I see you've been fooled into believing the myth of the epl. Yes it does have attractive games like arsenal v united, city v liverpool and spurs v chelsea but it also has bog standard very average games like stoke v huddersfield, watford  v stoke, swansea v bournemouth etc. These clubs are filled with average players very few of whom would improve the current celtic team. Of course there are a lot of players there who could come in and do a similar job but they wouldn't make any significant improvements. Mclean is pretty much up to the standard okay but he's not an improvement and he's on v high wages.

Only thing is top of Scotland is bog standard...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lenny on December 30, 2017, 08:42:14 PM
Looking at this rubbish McClean well up to that standard

I see you've been fooled into believing the myth of the epl. Yes it does have attractive games like arsenal v united, city v liverpool and spurs v chelsea but it also has bog standard very average games like stoke v huddersfield, watford  v stoke, swansea v bournemouth etc. These clubs are filled with average players very few of whom would improve the current celtic team. Of course there are a lot of players there who could come in and do a similar job but they wouldn't make any significant improvements. Mclean is pretty much up to the standard okay but he's not an improvement and he's on v high wages.

Only thing is top of Scotland is bog standard...

I'm glad we're now in agreement - the top of the spl is about the same standard as the lower half of the epl or championship. The bottom half of the spl is more like league 1 standard. Celtic wouldn't make the top 6 in the epl as things stand but if they were in that league with the immediate 100 million plus injection they would get from tv money they would soon be challenging at the top of the table.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: longballin on December 30, 2017, 09:28:08 PM
Looking at this rubbish McClean well up to that standard

I see you've been fooled into believing the myth of the epl. Yes it does have attractive games like arsenal v united, city v liverpool and spurs v chelsea but it also has bog standard very average games like stoke v huddersfield, watford  v stoke, swansea v bournemouth etc. These clubs are filled with average players very few of whom would improve the current celtic team. Of course there are a lot of players there who could come in and do a similar job but they wouldn't make any significant improvements. Mclean is pretty much up to the standard okay but he's not an improvement and he's on v high wages.

Only thing is top of Scotland is bog standard...

I'm glad we're now in agreement - the top of the spl is about the same standard as the lower half of the epl or championship. The bottom half of the spl is more like league 1 standard. Celtic wouldn't make the top 6 in the epl as things stand but if they were in that league with the immediate 100 million plus injection they would get from tv money they would soon be challenging at the top of the table.

If you say so  :o
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Insane Bolt on March 13, 2019, 03:53:49 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47556396
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on March 13, 2019, 04:09:25 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47556396

That's such a good read great to see d**kheads like that get their comeuppance!!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: red hander on March 13, 2019, 05:02:33 PM
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47556396

That's such a good read great to see d**kheads like that get their comeuppance!!!

Chris McGimpsey, self-styled moderate, non-sectarian unionist. They just can't help themselves, it's inbred...
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on March 13, 2019, 05:39:58 PM
I wonder how much will have to paid to compensate for being called a super provo, that "would reflect the seriousness and gravity of the offending comments".
I see the Nolan program is not being held responsible for the slanderous comments of its guests but the guests have to take it in the goolies themselves.
'Slanderous' sounds so much better in a nordie accent.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: An Watcher on March 13, 2019, 06:50:07 PM
James McCleans a great lad.  He's been Ireland's best player for the last 2/3 years.  Just right to take boys like this up
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Dougal Maguire on March 13, 2019, 07:47:17 PM
Tom Elliott got £75,000, later reduced to £48,000 when Phil Flanagan tweeted : ‘Tom Elliot talks to @StephenNolan about the past. I wonder if he will reveal how many people he harassed or shot as a member of the UDR.’  Mind you I don’t think Phil ever paid him a red Rex!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: screenexile on March 13, 2019, 08:20:00 PM
I wonder how much will have to paid to compensate for being called a super provo, that "would reflect the seriousness and gravity of the offending comments".
I see the Nolan program is not being held responsible for the slanderous comments of its guests but the guests have to take it in the goolies themselves.
'Slanderous' sounds so much better in a nordie accent.

Even a nominal fee which I presume he will give to charity will be enough the ignominy and having to make a public apology is enough!!

“Super provo” what an absolute ****!!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Over the Bar on March 13, 2019, 08:51:18 PM
I wonder how much will have to paid to compensate for being called a super provo, that "would reflect the seriousness and gravity of the offending comments".
I see the Nolan program is not being held responsible for the slanderous comments of its guests but the guests have to take it in the goolies themselves.
'Slanderous' sounds so much better in a nordie accent.

Even a nominal fee which I presume he will give to charity will be enough the ignominy and having to make a public apology is enough!!

“Super provo” what an absolute ****!!
Nominal fee my arse.  The UUP and DUP have used politics to line their pockets. Hit him hardest where it hurts.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Applesisapples on March 14, 2019, 09:00:21 AM
I am not a fan of Nolan, he is quick however to call out remarks or callers/contributors who say anything remotely slanderous.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Main Street on March 14, 2019, 01:17:41 PM
I am not a fan of Nolan, he is quick however to call out remarks or callers/contributors who say anything remotely slanderous.
Considering the amount of nutjobs up there, you'd think the program would be broadcast with some 10 seconds delay, whereby 10 seconds  of anything contentious said could be wiped out with pressing the red button (it's always a red button).
But at least the station doesn't have to take responsibility.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: red hander on March 14, 2019, 05:51:51 PM
I am not a fan of Nolan, he is quick however to call out remarks or callers/contributors who say anything remotely slanderous.

Even quicker getting a super injunction
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: rrhf on March 15, 2019, 06:59:31 AM
Who was it that came out with the comment before that the Gaa was the IRA at play..
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Rossfan on March 15, 2019, 09:06:40 AM
Half of Unionism!
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: take_yer_points on May 01, 2019, 02:08:34 PM
Someone's got issues...

https://twitter.com/JamesMcC_14/status/1123559068273082368?s=09
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: imtommygunn on May 01, 2019, 02:25:47 PM
Some idiots about. How messed up do you need to be to spend your time doing a) thinking that and b) actually sending it.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: BennyCake on May 01, 2019, 03:51:24 PM
Someone's got issues...

https://twitter.com/JamesMcC_14/status/1123559068273082368?s=09

Tweet underneath... “any money in the card?”.  Class! :D

Some sad pathetic people out there. With terrible spelling too.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: Fionntamhnach on May 01, 2019, 04:22:51 PM
Someone's got issues...

https://twitter.com/JamesMcC_14/status/1123559068273082368?s=09 (https://twitter.com/JamesMcC_14/status/1123559068273082368?s=09)
The sc**bag that wrote it talks about Britain needing a Hitler to "deal with" the Irish, but I'd say there's a very high chance that come late October & early November the same d**khead will be prominently wearing a massive f**k off poppy on their chest, making damn sure everyone can see his virtue signalling. And it'll be the same one they have worn now for several years as they'll be fecked if they buying such a piece of bling every year while roaring amount British army veterans living in poverty.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: lurganblue on May 01, 2019, 04:24:36 PM
Football supporter who is a big fan of Hitler and the Nazi tactics... sounds like the search should centre around Stamford bridge.
Title: Re: James McClean
Post by: MoChara on May 02, 2019, 08:44:30 AM
The unoriginality of the comments annoys me as well, if I was going to go to the bother of slagging someone like this I'd come up with something good not just using the same tired cliches.