Danny Drinkwater

[BTRFTG]

7 minutes ago, whoklldredrobin said:

You obviously have had no experience of alcoholism, recovery, or AA – how dare you suggest a recovering alcoholic (or addict of any kind) has 'taken the easy way out'?

An alcoholic is always an alcoholic, whether they are in recovery or not. They cannot drink in moderation. One drink can lead to serious relapse. Their recovery is dependent on them hitting rock bottom and making a seismic change in their behaviour  so that they are able to live their lives on a daily basis without drink  It requires constant vigilance and hard work. It is NOT easy and they do deserve praise. 

 

That, as I pointed out, is one interpretation but is just that, an interpretation. Those who founded AA did so on those principals, that's how they're clients are defined, that's how they demand them to be.

It does NOT, ever define those clients. 

Try reading again what I wrote and if you still believe the content of your post then my point has been proven.

Edited February 10, 2022 by BTRFTG

[East End Old Boy]

6 hours ago, PhilC said:

 

Rather than taking a cheap swipe at Downsy do you not think that part of the problem might just be with the PA system, that has been frequently discussed here over the years?

 

Just a thought....

Strange that I can hear the names of the substitute home team players when announced, so the speakers, if used properly, can be heard!

Just a thought……! 

[PhilC]

34 minutes ago, East End Old Boy said:

Strange that I can hear the names of the substitute home team players when announced, so the speakers, if used properly, can be heard!

Just a thought……! 

Fair enough! Just felt like a cheap dig at "Downsy" 

[redsquirrel]

6 hours ago, whoklldredrobin said:

You obviously have had no experience of alcoholism, recovery, or AA – how dare you suggest a recovering alcoholic (or addict of any kind) has 'taken the easy way out'?

An alcoholic IS always an alcoholic, whether they are in recovery or not. They cannot drink in moderation. One drink can lead to serious relapse. Their recovery is dependent on them hitting rock bottom and making a seismic change in their behaviour  so that they are able to live their lives on a daily basis without drink  It requires constant vigilance and hard work. It is NOT easy and they do deserve praise. 

 

firstly,absolutely spot on.  im not looking for praise,i dont need it now as ive realised how important life is to me but i have to do it without booze.  i gave up on millenium night,  believe it or not,the bloke that was there for me if ever i felt i was going to relapse was robbored, (in a professional capacity)  i never had to call in need but he was there for me,. something i will always be grateful for. 22years on,could i drink in moderation if i wanted to??  i still couldnt trust myself enough to try it and its certainly not worth risking my life with my partner for

[redsquirrel]

7 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

That, as I pointed out, is one interpretation but is just that, an interpretation. Those who founded AA did so on those principals, that's how they're clients are defined, that's how they demand them to be.

It does NOT, ever define those clients. 

Try reading again what I wrote and if you still believe the content of your post then my point has been proven.

i do to a degree  agree with what you  are saying also. i tried AA  on more than one occasion and left meetings either going to the offy or pub as i found it a bit religious and depressing. everybody is different,the best thing to do is do what works for you and not what people want you to do.  in anycase,you wont do anything until you really do hit rock bottom and have to try something

Edited February 10, 2022 by redsquirrel
spelling

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

I sympathise with him but living up to his surname may have been the way to go. 

[Port Said Red]

It didn't sound like he was getting much sympathy or understanding from the Reading end. Never did like Reading or their plastic fans though.

[MarcusX]

13 hours ago, BTRFTG said:

We disagree.

These days its deemed acceptable to excuse all sorts of behavioural failings as an issue with 'mental health'. In Drinkwater's case maybe it is, maybe it isn't. That's the problem, it's non-falsifiable.

Now one might question why it is some with 'mental health' issues seek to publicise the fact rather than, if cognisant of their own failings, attempt to sort matters away from the stress and glare of scrutiny (as any competent mental health professional might advise?) Even the term 'mental health' is culturally ambiguous. Although the negative outcomes of mental illness/disorder may be similar to those of poor 'mental health' they are not necessarily the same and should not so be assumed.

You're correct nobody chooses to 'go off the rails', same a folks don't choose to have a low IQ but reality is, baselined against a social norm, such folks will always exist (though over time who falls where on the curve will change.) Now some might argue Drinkwater has over the years demonstrated through the consistency of his behaviour who he is, because that's his personality type. That's different from 'mental health'. He's not the first footballer so to do, nor will he be the last. He may no longer be happy with who he perceives himself to be and may seek to deploy techniques to amend his behaviour. If so, good luck to him and I wish him well in his endeavour. But citing 'mental health' is sometimes the modern equivalent of the 'get of of jail free' card. Do I have sympathy for his personality? Of course I don't, that's who he is. Do I excuse him for his failings? No, again that's who he is.

And the reason this is a 'first world problem' is unlike the majority of folks on this planet, many of whom do suffer intolerably poor mental health, they don't have the luxury to sit around and dwell on it. They're minute by minute facing famine, or war, or death, or persecution, or extreme poverty and there is an observed correlation between 'reported' mental health issues and affluence. Some theories postulate that our Western comforts and affluence is now the prime cause for our reported mental health outcomes. That we've an iatrogenic 'mental health' crisis.  I happen to believe there's a grain of truth in that.

Fwiw I think this was a better reply than you’re first one and I don’t find myself immediately disagreeing with everything.

I think there may be some truth to the end of your post - or could it be (I don’t know) that western worlds have become more aware that actually these problems exist? In the same way that if someone had a fractured leg but didn’t know they may try and battle on, but cause them self greater difficulty further on? I have to say I never truly understood what “anxiety” was until the last few months when I realised I’ve been suffering with it a little. All brought on by a combination of stress at work and long covid breathing issues - but externally to my partner it appeared as someone always in a mood, never wanting to go out (because all I wanted to do was get into bed) and seriously lacking motivation to train
 

I personally don’t think there’s any “luxury” in dwelling on mental health issues regardless of how many 0s your bank account has. As far as we know he’s not about to lose his home any time soon - but then when my dad has his problems that to his credit was the one payment he secured each month before blowing the rest. Even then, having a roof over your head doesn’t make the problems go away.

sorry if the first response was a bit sharp but as you can see it’s something that’s deeply affected me and my family so I see it differently and tend to defend / give people the benefit of the doubt