Simpleton Gas

8 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 First-choice or not, they'll be soaking up a fair wage, given their experience. Mr AlSaaed will have to sell a lot of KFC at his outlets in Kuwait City to afford what is, for you, quite an ambitious summer's spending.

FWIW I expect your season to progress better than it's started. Top 6 is by no means impossible, although you'd experience a Yeovil-like rude awakening if you did manage to make it up. The second tier is a whole different ballgame than it was in the 90s. 

 

If they are serious about top six, they need to sign a proven striker. Otherwise, top 10 would a good season. 

Just now, Open End Numb Legs said:

Had a look at their forum to see if there was any support for the Barton ban on the BP. About 50/50. Plenty of questions about why? What have the BP done wrong? No one can say why other than a publicity stunt by Barton and the news is all biased to City.

What do they expect? The bigger and better club will always get top billing, it works that way everywhere.

Sounds accurate reporting to me, would City try to build a stand without planning permission?:-

I think Joey does have a point. The way the teams are discussed. With City it is always a serious business tone whereas Rovers it's always a patronizing, rag bag, plucky under dog and not so relevant tone.

The pretext for the ban is apparently the BEP's reporting on the Bright sacking. However, I agree with posters who have suggested Barton is actually guided by his own financial motivations. 

3 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

Mate. You're club can't even afford enough advertising boards to cover the entire background.

Mate. Its 'Your'. 

7 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

 

“******* SMILE!!!!!!”

Welcome to Bristol Jack...Ashton Gate looks a lot better from a long distance, doesn't it?

4 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

As has been said, good in their time, but now...

We've seen at City (more than once) how veteran defenders who were PL quality in their heyday can be cruelly exposed by fleet-footed attackers. 

 

:laugh:.

Friend and Hunt aren't first choices - they are cover for the RB and LB positions. The Dad Army's jokes were briefly amusing but overlooked the essential point that, of the likely first-choice back four, Wilson is the only one over 22. 

2 minutes ago, Malago said:

The same can be said of Joey Barton.

Indeed - I have previously criticised JB for this. 

1 minute ago, Port Said Red said:

Have you bothered to read his explanation of what was posted at the time? Probably not. 

He had posted the same picture when any royal baby had been announced for the previous 15 years, no matter their cultural heritage, qhich of course was pretty much 100% white. He posted it instead of the little Lord Fauntleroy, picture which he also used in the past, because he found that one first. It was only when he posted the picture that it was pointed out to him that it could be considered racist, that he realised the connotations because of Megan's heritage. He immediately removed it. But the BBC decided to take the safe route of the ultimate sanction.

Baker tweeted: "Sorry my gag pic of the little fella in the posh outfit has whipped some up.

"Never occurred to me because, well, mind not diseased.

soon as those good enough to point out it's possible connotations got in touch, down it came.

And that's it.

Now stand by for sweary football tweets."

If you have read his autobiography, you will know that he was briefly married to a girl of African descent, a singer from Darts, but of course the Twittersphere decided he was guilty and should be cancelled, because one tweet defines your whole outlook on life.

 

I'm trying to imagine circumstances under which I would willingly decide to read Danny Baker's autobiography, but I'm really struggling....

As I said, I believe he was guilty of outstanding stupidity, not racism. However, any reasonable observer would struggle to believe that he looked at the photo and did not realise how it would be construed. 

'Has whipped some up' and 'mind not diseased' also implies that the fault is in the observer, not in what he actually did. The lack of contrition is striking. 

2 minutes ago, RedRock said:

Simples. Listening to you lot blathering on constantly about how big/good/loved you were on his radio show which, back in the day, was one of the finest national football phone-ins. He no doubt, did a ‘compare and contrast’, between those expressed views and his own visits to both Bristol clubs (and elsewhere) following his beloved Millwall.

Well unfortunately, by virtue of his extremely ill-advised Tweet, Mr Baker has effectively been blacklisted (probably unfairly, as I don't believe he did this with racist intent) and is no longer employable within the media. If he can't tweet properly, then why should anyone care what he thinks about another football club? 

Even before this, he was renowned as a gobsh*te who would say the first thing that came into his head.

5 minutes ago, RedRock said:

He actually knows an awful lot about Bristol Rovers. He described your supporters on national radio as ‘pathological liars’. 

He had deduced that even before you started inflating the size of your away support, claiming to be the sixth richest Club in the Country, everyone’s second team and prowed owners of a brand new stadium. What next. City never took the Tote? 

And precisely how did Mr Baker come to be an authority on Bristol Rovers? 

6 minutes ago, City Rocker said:

So pleased to find you're still here, my friend! Though I suspect our many Rovers visitors who read the thread daily (hiya!!) will be desperate for you to stop embarrassing them. From our perspective though, please stay! 

Anyway, without getting into the Danny Baker discussion (he is as passionate an anti-racist as he is an anti-royalist), you'll be well aware, no doubt, of Rovers' history as the perennial right-wing bigots of Bristol football, famously hosting the National Front selling its newspaper at home games. Meanwhile, conversely, the distinctly anti-racist Socialist Worker was on sale at City in the early 90s.

I would direct you to the eye-wateringly racist material that he posted on Twitter. I'm sorry, anybody with a brain in their head would have realised how deeply inappropriate it was - it would have even raised eyebrows in a NF publication!

I'm not in a position to comment on this, but I can say that Bristol was quite a racist city until quite recently and even now is far from the multicultural nirvana that it is caricatured as. However, I have absolutely no reason to believe that City fans were more progressive in this regard, and here its worth noting that I have recently highlighted a number of cultural sensitivities for the attention of several contributors. 

I can however say with considerably greater certainty that your socialist credentials have been brought into clear question by the extent to which you have bent over for Mr Lansdown and his fortune. 

2 minutes ago, redsontour said:

Holy crap, you are seriously going with that? 
Tell you what… https://www.thenationalnews.com/lifestyle/fashion/2022/03/08/the-fight-for-the-hijab-muslim-women-lament-their-lack-of-freedom-to-choose/?outputType=amp

Hijab isn’t an article of religious oppression, it’s a cultural choice, that is suppressed in some places by religious zealots, and not only those zealots that claim to follow Islam… it’s the choice to or nor to that’s cracked down on by some

Some people need serious education…and  I don’t just mean in the Middle East…

 

 

You make a very good point - in some north African (also historically Turkey) countries, the wearing of the hijab is actually suppressed by the political authorities.

It seems that some in the west would like to save Middle Eastern women from themselves and their own choices? 

54 minutes ago, RedRaw said:

And what happens to women who try to fight against Muslim traditions I.e. wearing a hijab

The initial question was framed in relation to Jordan, a generally fairly liberal Muslim country, so let's focus on that specific example. Women are not generally forced to wear the hijab, and so they do not need to fight against it. The question doesn't necessarily arise.

8 minutes ago, BrightCiderLife said:

Let’s get your whataboutery back to some sort of context. 
 

Can you see any link between that and why some alleged victims of alleged domestic violence decline to give evidence against their alleged abusers? I think that’s what happened for both Barton and Greenwood isn’t it?

Its interesting - in the Barton case, his wife's refusal to give evidence was cited as a reason for the trial not going ahead, despite the fact that there were alleged eyewitnesses, in addition to the testimony of the attending police officer/s and physical injuries.

My original assumption was that the trial could still go ahead, even though his wife withdrew her initial allegations. 

However, this did not appear to be the case. Presumably, this exposes a major gap in the protection of alleged domestic violence victims, as I'm guessing many women are actually reluctant to give evidence? 

However, in both cases, the club can only act in accordance with what the law permits. 

11 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Selective, a bit like you and your fellow gasheads with the truth,

Wasn't it Danny Baker who wrote (not that many of your dwindling fan base can read)

Bristol rovers fans are compulsive liars and that Bristol rovers were the most pointless club in the football league (that's and achiement since you've only been a league club for 8 years)

What would Danny Baker know about Bristol Rovers? And, more to the point, why would I care? 

He is a Millwall-supporting loudmouth who was sacked by the BBC for tweeting extraordinarily racist material. 

Just now, RedRaw said:

And what happens to women who try to fight against Muslim traditions I.e. wearing a hijab

Its interesting - there's no requirement within Islam for women to wear the hijab. It is more linked to patriarchy and culture than religion.

One of the most common misconceptions is that women are forced by their fathers or male authority figures to wear the hijab. Another, which largely follows by implication, is that women from the same family will all wear the hijab - however, this isn't always the case. 

The requirement for women to wear the hijab is actually quite recent and is strongly linked to the emergence of political Islam. In places like Palestine, Turkey, North Africa and Jordan, women are generally free to make a choice on the matter. 

19 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

This lot of now maimed Middle Eastern women would welcome the freedom of choice to not wear hijabs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-64503873

Amazing, how you go from coming on another team's forum to try to boast about your side's inaugural victory of the season and denigrate our club in the most feeble way possible ['22 years ago you had a chairman who many years before he became a millionaire businessman and joined you, played music on stage for a manufactured pop band'] to trying to excuse the widespread suppression of women's rights across much of the Middle East.  What a bizarre corner you've backed yourself into. 

Par for course for someone whose only defence of a convicted wife-beater is whattoutism. 

An interesting link, but Iran is not generally spoken of as part of the Middle East. You are presumably also aware that the Islamic Republic is towards the more extreme end of the Islamic political spectrum, which leaves you open to the charge of cherry-picking. 

The region is not just defined in geographical terms, but also in ethnic, religious and cultural terms. Iran is generally spoken of as something separate from the Middle East, and as an external force that acts on the region.

1 minute ago, JBFC II said:

So you'd rather aim to be small time and bounce between league one, two and non-league than show any ambition and get within a game of being in the Premier League.

If you find us reaching the championship play off final at Wembley a source of content amusement, how do you think we view you lot getting relegated to non league against a team playing in your kit, having celebrated survival the week before? Theres total levels to this

I don't really have any ambition to go higher than the Championship. I don't like the PL and I think it is becoming increasingly impossible for teams from the lower leagues to genuinely compete - teams hit a glass ceiling and then steadily decline.

The costs of competing at that level are too great - look at Reading. You could conceivably go even further and emulate your successive relegations of 1976-80. Bigger clubs than you have done this. 

Both are forms of schadenfreude aren't they? I take a mild pleasure in watching you fall flat on your face - I'm not actively invested in it, like some of our fanbase. 

18 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

I see you are back.

Any chance you might reply to this post?

I have no idea, but I'm sure you can tell me.

I will need to be more selective in dispensing my pearls of wisdom tonight, but I will reply on this.

The question doesn't even arise - charges have been dropped, and he has no case to answer. 

Man Utd are currently looking at how to reintegrate Greenwood into their squad, but it looks likely that he will be loaned out to a club abroad. There's no reason why he couldn't be loaned out to a UK club. 

2 minutes ago, Bizyer said:

Hmmmm, has anyone asked them in a poll that is guaranteed to be anonymous?

You are fully entitled to personally ask Muslim women their views on the hijab and the burka. 

5 minutes ago, JBFC II said:

As you were so concerned about 'tinpot' moments from the last century earlier on in the thread, intrigued by your views on these, all of which happened in the last decade?

I could go on, but I'm sure thatll give you enough to comment on for now...

Its interesting - Rovers have often adopted their 'small-time' (or 'tinpot') aspects in the same way that Wimbledon did in the 1980s, with the 'Crazy Gang' mentality - Steve Hamer, a former chairman, even directly drew this comparison. You'll recall that we actually embraced this at Twerton.

In contrast, it is City's attempt to make the leap into a genuine contender that invariably amuses. Watching you try and then fall flat on your face, as in the 2008 play-off final, is a continual source of amusement. You try so hard to be 'massive' but never quite make it. 

8 minutes ago, RedRaw said:

Come on guys, he’s a busy man. You’ve not heard from him today as he’s been taking training and then he has spent the afternoon swatting up on Middle Eastern values and reading the latest version of uk legal guide “crimes against women” edition 

 

The problem with your concern about 'crimes against women' in the ME is that it is entirely selective. People use it as a stick to beat the region with, and this is shown by the fact that they don't even bother to consult the women of the region on their 'oppression'. The hijab is an obvious example of this - westerners look at this as a form of oppression whereas many Muslim women view as an expression of their freedom of choice and not, by definition, as a form of 'oppression'. 

1 hour ago, Slacker said:

Is Hot Air coming back?I hope so.He is my favourite one yet.

That's very kind of you Slacker. Not to worry - I'll check in when time permits and will re-engage when I see something/anything worthy of my attention...

2 minutes ago, lenred said:

Jesus wept.  You still here?  Sad ****. 

As are you. Not still here. Thought I'd check in and see if the intellectuals of OTIB had anything else to add. 

32 minutes ago, richwwtk said:

I always got the impression that the music wasn't much more than a hobby for him

That's a very polite way of saying that you agree that BROS were sh*te. I like it - unusually classy for a City fan.

3 minutes ago, Fuber said:

Added to which, Patridge and Scott Brown both did community hours for their time. Brown however..


Partridge, Brooker, and Orr. were all also given a sentence, and suspended by the club for the same period.

I would expect the clubs to suspend them.

Alternatively, if we're working the whataboutism angle; If they - like Jevani - had beaten women, in for example Bristol City centre - then yes, I'd 100% expect them sacked, because I'm not some degenerate. At least the bouncer could defend himself in the indicated incident and did so.

In the same way I was 100% against the club employing Simpson. Moral fibre is determined by the individual, and its not your right to question anyone on this forum when you're attempting to draw compairsons in defence of your own player. Its a bit sickening to be honest. I'd feel like morals have improved slightly in almost 20 ****ing years.

The fact you're trying to even make this a debateable point while calling us tinpoint is the most ironic thing I've read on this forum for 20 years.

You are mistaken: there was no whatboutism and no attempt to relativize what has occurred. I simply object to BCFC fans pretending they have a moral high ground on this issue. 

Brown was sacked by Exeter and was then employed by BRFC. The matter has been handled by the courts, who have handed down their judgement. The player has indicated his intention to rehabilitate himself and the club have committed themselves to helping him do this. I consider the matter closed.

Partridge, Brooker and Orr were employed by City at the time of their offences. I personally would have fired them and encouraged them to pursue their careers at another club.