Punishment

[king canary 7,599]

9 minutes ago, Rivvo said:

KC and Nutty? Harsh.

Understandable to be fair.

[king canary 7,599]

13 hours ago, hogesar said:

Not paid attention to the whole thing so apologies if I missed posts inbetween but in Nuttys defence is him posting an image of chains on a Troy Deeney thread any different to your Mendham quote?

If anyone cares, I think they're both tw*ts.

I'd argue it is, he'd argue it isn't, we'd go round in circles so I'm not going to bother at this point.

Clearly I bothered him enough last night to go digging up posts from 3 years ago to try and make a point, which is just quite sad in my opinion. But I'm blocking him rather than clogging up the forum with these endless circular arguments. I'm actually a bit annoyed at myself for getting sucked back in to his **** again but there you go. 

[nutty nigel 7,527]

Blocking is very therapeutic👍

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Blocking is very therapeutic👍

And easier than admitting your own hypocrisy. 😉

 

To be honest, I found the reaction to a little jibe at one of our rivals utterly ridiculous, yet entirely in keeping with the world at the moment. The irrational and desperate need to be offended or pick fault with something dependent on who said it is represented everywhere at the moment. I'm as guilty as KC though especially where the Government are concerned. So I suppose I'm a hypocrite too (see, that wasn't difficult, was it?) but I'd argue overseeing the deaths of 100,000 of the citizens you govern probably gives me more justification than a ****ing picture taking the **** at Troy Deeney. But that's just me. 

 

I guess I'm saying that if you want to be angry about something or offended by a picture, there's plenty out there and your real enemy is definitely not on a ****ing football forum. 

 

Stay safe. 

[nutty nigel 7,527]

 

 

[king canary 7,599]

6 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

And easier than admitting your own hypocrisy. 😉

 

To be honest, I found the reaction to a little jibe at one of our rivals utterly ridiculous, yet entirely in keeping with the world at the moment. The irrational and desperate need to be offended or pick fault with something dependent on who said it is represented everywhere at the moment. I'm as guilty as KC though especially where the Government are concerned. So I suppose I'm a hypocrite too (see, that wasn't difficult, was it?) but I'd argue overseeing the deaths of 100,000 of the citizens you govern probably gives me more justification than a ****ing picture taking the **** at Troy Deeney. But that's just me. 

 

I guess I'm saying that if you want to be angry about something or offended by a picture, there's plenty out there and your real enemy is definitely not on a ****ing football forum. 

 

Stay safe. 

'Son, someone is disagreeing with me on the pinkun, be a good lad and log on to defend my honour' 

[nutty nigel 7,527]

Blocking's going well then...

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

8 minutes ago, king canary said:

'Son, someone is disagreeing with me on the pinkun, be a good lad and log on to defend my honour' 

😄 He doesn't need my help with the likes of you KC as has been demonstrated by him tying you in knots and having you running for the block button rather than admitting your own hypocrisy. Grow up, lad. 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,158]

There's an old - and very true - saying. Life makes hypocrites of us all. 

[TheGunnShow 5,937]

1 minute ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

There's an old - and very true - saying. Life makes hypocrites of us all. 

Absolutely. Expecting a belief to maintain its form in all circumstances strikes me as a bit irrational.

[king canary 7,599]

24 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

😄 He doesn't need my help with the likes of you KC as has been demonstrated by him tying you in knots and having you running for the block button rather than admitting your own hypocrisy. Grow up, lad. 

Yes there is some hyporcisy in my statements that were made 3 years apart. Shoot me.

Now if your dad could admit that the same in his desire to remind Deeney of his past crime while also being oddly upset that Peter Mendham couldn't have a book launch at Jarrolds that would be wonderful. 

[nutty nigel 7,527]

Still going remarkably well 🙃👍

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

Yes there is some hyporcisy in my statements that were made 3 years apart. Shoot me.

Now if your dad could admit that the same in his desire to remind Deeney of his past crime while also being oddly upset that Peter Mendham couldn't have a book launch at Jarrolds that would be wonderful. 

Shooting you seems a bit extreme.

Is he upset? I thought he was just pointing out the disparity between one violent criminal walking straight back into their privileged and extremely well paid job while another was forced to rebuild from pretty much scratch. Both were professional footballers, (one current, one ex), both committed crimes that they clearly regretted, yet one seems to have been granted an easier path to public perception of redemption because - in part - he retained some on-pitch value. 

If Mendham had still been a key component of our midfield on release, would he have got his book launch? I don't know. I suppose the other question is whether Norwich City would have retained his registration on release from prison after serving time for violent crime and what that says about the club and the moral stance they take and convey to the fans and wider public. I suspect not. But I don't know and as such what that says about the two clubs isn't clearly defined. 

On the one hand are Watford the great advocates of belief in rehabilitation or are they guilty of brushing the misdemeanours of a violent criminal under the carpet and reinstating him to a position of great privilege in a way that 99.99% of those guilty of such crimes could only dream of? 

I dunno. I do know I'm definitely overthinking this. 

 

 

[Oulu 0]

23 minutes ago, king canary said:

 

Now if your dad could admit that the same in his desire to remind Deeney of his past crime while also being oddly upset that Peter Mendham couldn't have a book launch at Jarrolds that would be wonderful. 

Both good posters. But you stated you would not clog the message-board then demand an online apology. Come on. I have read this website for years and it is a shame to see fighting when things go so well on the pitch.

[king canary 7,599]

11 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Shooting you seems a bit extreme.

Is he upset? I thought he was just pointing out the disparity between one violent criminal walking straight back into their privileged and extremely well paid job while another was forced to rebuild from pretty much scratch. Both were professional footballers, (one current, one ex), both committed crimes that they clearly regretted, yet one seems to have been granted an easier path to public perception of redemption because - in part - he retained some on-pitch value. 

If Mendham had still been a key component of our midfield on release, would he have got his book launch? I don't know. I suppose the other question is whether Norwich City would have retained his registration on release from prison after serving time for violent crime and what that says about the club and the moral stance they take and convey to the fans and wider public. I suspect not. But I don't know and as such what that says about the two clubs isn't clearly defined. 

On the one hand are Watford the great advocates of belief in rehabilitation or are they guilty of brushing the misdemeanours of a violent criminal under the carpet and reinstating him to a position of great privilege in a way that 99.99% of those guilty of such crimes could only dream of? 

I dunno. I do know I'm definitely overthinking this. 

 

 

All good points, well made (although I'd argue the severity of nearly killing someone with a knife vs a drunken brawl probably also need to be taken into account). I just wish I could get the same from NN.

The reason I've blocked him (and will keep it that way) is not because I'm unable to admit when I'm wrong. It is because I find every time I get into one of these debates with him he won't just actually state his view on the matter at hand as you've done- instead its all answering your question with a question, cryptic throwaway sentences or twisting a point out of all context. So all I end up doing is getting frustrated by the stupidity of it all. 

Moving on...

Edited January 27, 2021 by king canary

[nutty nigel 7,527]

Going fantastically well now🙃🙃👍

[Greavsy 2,412]

1 hour ago, Duncan Edwards said:

😄 He doesn't need my help with the likes of you KC as has been demonstrated by him tying you in knots and having you running for the block button rather than admitting your own hypocrisy. Grow up, lad. 

Son blindly defending his dads "honour" on a forum is commendable and understandable. 

Just a shame Duncan can't see it for what it really is. 

NN avoiding the point, again. Shocker! 

For info Duncan, has your daddy dearest blocked me rather than admiting his own hypocrisy too? 

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

40 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Son blindly defending his dads "honour" on a forum is commendable and understandable. 

Just a shame Duncan can't see it for what it really is. 

NN avoiding the point, again. Shocker! 

For info Duncan, has your daddy dearest blocked me rather than admiting his own hypocrisy too? 

How have I "blindly defended" anyone? I've expanded on and clearly explained what I think. 

I have absolutely no idea whether he has you blocked or not. Send him a message and ask him🤷‍♂️

[TheGunnShow 5,937]

1 hour ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Shooting you seems a bit extreme.

Is he upset? I thought he was just pointing out the disparity between one violent criminal walking straight back into their privileged and extremely well paid job while another was forced to rebuild from pretty much scratch. Both were professional footballers, (one current, one ex), both committed crimes that they clearly regretted, yet one seems to have been granted an easier path to public perception of redemption because - in part - he retained some on-pitch value. 

If Mendham had still been a key component of our midfield on release, would he have got his book launch? I don't know. I suppose the other question is whether Norwich City would have retained his registration on release from prison after serving time for violent crime and what that says about the club and the moral stance they take and convey to the fans and wider public. I suspect not. But I don't know and as such what that says about the two clubs isn't clearly defined. 

On the one hand are Watford the great advocates of belief in rehabilitation or are they guilty of brushing the misdemeanours of a violent criminal under the carpet and reinstating him to a position of great privilege in a way that 99.99% of those guilty of such crimes could only dream of? 

I dunno. I do know I'm definitely overthinking this. 

 

 

I'd say the problem I personally find here is that criticising Deeney for it is a bit askew. I don't think anyone's arguing that he's been lucky to be given the chance, and I don't think anyone's disputing that if he hadn't been talismanic that he wouldn't have been given it either so pragmatics probably ruled over principle in the eyes of some.

However, as per my initial post in the Deeney thread, I'd think the problem is that people see it as an exception when such opportunities should really be the norm. The judge said he deserved 10 months. If you think that's insufficient, the problem is with the judging, not with Deeney. He can only serve the sentence he is given.

Rather than seeing Deeney as privileged, the criticism should really be aimed at how Mendham was treated.

Edited January 27, 2021 by TheGunnShow
*wrong thread reference.

[Greavsy 2,412]

14 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

How have I "blindly defended" anyone? I've expanded on and clearly explained what I think. 

I have absolutely no idea whether he has you blocked or not. Send him a message and ask him🤷‍♂️

Edwards family member misses the point.  Again.

I'm not fussed or care that he's blocked me, was just pointing out the continued hypocrisy in his posts. I dont expect you to understand that though. 

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

18 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Edwards family member misses the point.  Again.

I'm not fussed or care that he's blocked me, was just pointing out the continued hypocrisy in his posts. I dont expect you to understand that though. 

You were fussed enough to ask. I answered. Hope this helps. 

[Greavsy 2,412]

12 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

You were fussed enough to ask. I answered. Hope this helps. 

I therefore suggest you read the question again. 

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

4 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I therefore suggest you read the question again. 

No need. You asked if he had blocked you rather than admitting some perceived (by you) hypocrisy. I told you I don't know. I still don't. 

You really do need to talk to Nutty Nigel about it. 👍

[Greavsy 2,412]

19 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

No need. You asked if he had blocked you rather than admitting some perceived (by you) hypocrisy. I told you I don't know. I still don't. 

You really do need to talk to Nutty Nigel about it. 👍

You really are as dim as your old man. I bet he's so proud. Maybe try to understand the question then.

Oh but you very cleary don't understand how blocking works, which confirms my first point. 

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

6 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

You really are as dim as your old man. I bet he's so proud. Maybe try to understand the question then.

Oh but you very cleary don't understand how blocking works, which confirms my first point. 

Aw, thanks. You’re not the first person to imply that I’m thick, I doubt you’ll be the last.
 

As I’ve continually told you, I don’t know if he has blocked you. I am perfectly aware of how it works, but I don’t know if he has blocked you or not. I seem to remember advising you to message him to ask him as he’ll be able to supply a definitive answer.  
 

Hope this helps. 

[Greavsy 2,412]

27 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Aw, thanks. You’re not the first person to imply that I’m thick, I doubt you’ll be the last.
 

As I’ve continually told you, I don’t know if he has blocked you. I am perfectly aware of how it works, but I don’t know if he has blocked you or not. I seem to remember advising you to message him to ask him as he’ll be able to supply a definitive answer.  
 

Hope this helps. 

I'll repeat the question here. Please read it all, not just the first part. I assume you can process that ok. 

For info Duncan, has your daddy dearest blocked me rather than admiting his own hypocrisy too? 

I have no intention of messaging him, but do explain how exactly I can do that when he has blocked me, as stated in my original post. 

You could ask a friend, oh hold on didn't he get banned.... Maybe uncle Frank could help.

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

10 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

I'll repeat the question here. Please read it all, not just the first part. I assume you can process that ok. 

For info Duncan, has your daddy dearest blocked me rather than admiting his own hypocrisy too? 

I have no intention of messaging him, but do explain how exactly I can do that when he has blocked me, as stated in my original post. 

You could ask a friend, oh hold on didn't he get banned.... Maybe uncle Frank could help.

Again, I'll repeat the answer. I don't know if he has blocked you rather than respond to your accusations of hypocrisy. 

Oh, hang on, you are now claiming that he HAS blocked you. Well this really has been a waste of everybody's time, hasn't it? 

My friend, Mark? Strangely, if I want to talk to him I can ring him, text him, message him, email him or tweet him so him being banned from here is really no obstacle to our ability to chat or for me to ask him anything.

I don't have an Uncle Frank. I do have an Uncle Douglas but even if I did need some help to contact Mark, he wouldn't be able to help because he has no idea who Mark is. 

Hope this helps. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

For what it's worth I met Peter Mendham last year when he reffed my lad's football match. Best ref we've had, communicated well with the boys and had a good chat with him after the game. Seems a decent bloke, deeply regrets his crime that he's served his punishment for and, from what I understand, has even made peace with the victim.

Edited January 27, 2021 by canarydan23

[Greavsy 2,412]

22 minutes ago, Duncan Edwards said:

Again, I'll repeat the answer. I don't know if he has blocked you rather than respond to your accusations of hypocrisy. 

Oh, hang on, you are now claiming that he HAS blocked you. Well this really has been a waste of everybody's time, hasn't it? 

My friend, Mark? Strangely, if I want to talk to him I can ring him, text him, message him, email him or tweet him so him being banned from here is really no obstacle to our ability to chat or for me to ask him anything.

I don't have an Uncle Frank. I do have an Uncle Douglas but even if I did need some help to contact Mark, he wouldn't be able to help because he has no idea who Mark is. 

Hope this helps. 

Ahh finally you understand the question. If only youd read all the question in my first post could have saved everyone the time. But the Edwards are good at avoiding the question. 

 

 

[Duncan Edwards 2,230]

1 minute ago, Greavsy said:

Ahh finally you understand the question. If only youd read all the question in my first post could have saved everyone the time. But the Edwards are good at avoiding the question. 

 

 

I understood it from the beginning. My answer hasn't changed. I still don't know. Yet subsequently you advised that you knew that he HAD blocked you. So I'm assuming the question you meant to ask was "Nutty Nigel has blocked me. Is that because he doesn't want to answer my accusations of hypocrisy?" I still don't know. Is it a recent blocking? When did you start calling him a hypocrite? Do the dates marry up? Without his input any conclusion you make will still be speculative and based on assumptions. 

As I've said throughout this delightful little discussion, I have no idea whether he has blocked you, or the reason (if he has) why.

Uncle Douglas says Hi. So does Mark.

Hope this helps.