Delilah Subject To Controversy.

[TIL 1010 4,746]

https://www.stokesentinel.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/stoke-city-delilah-explained-wales-8103228

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-64488231

 

Well i for one had no idea this had been rumbling on since 2015.

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

Yes, I saw this and hadn't previously seen the killing aspect of the words anything particularly disturbing.

Perhaps I should have done.

There's a simple solution, just change the offending lyrics for something more agreeable. Easily done. 

It's a very popular and catchy song, and it needn't be banned if this is done.

[Midlands Yellow 3,984]

I read that as Delia and wondered if she’d performed on the pitch again. 

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Anyway, I'm listening to some Bullet for My Valentine.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

Just now, BroadstairsR said:

Yes, I saw this and hadn't previously seen the killing aspect of the words anything particularly disturbing.

Perhaps I should have done.

There's a simple solution, just change the offending lyrics for something more agreeable. Easily done. 

It's a very popular and catchy song, and it needn't be banned if this is done.

It's a piece of art, just as Every Breath you Take is a piece of art about obsession and jealousy over a former partner.

There's nobody directing people to sing it; they're choosing to sing it for their own reasons and nobody has any right to tell them not to.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,717]

What exactly does this thread have to do with Norwich? 

 

 

... Sorry, sorry had this said to me a few times recently so thought it was about time I said it 😉

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It's a piece of art, just as Every Breath you Take is a piece of art about obsession and jealousy over a former partner.

There's nobody directing people to sing it; they're choosing to sing it for their own reasons and nobody has any right to tell them not to.

Why quote me? That wasn't my point.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

2 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I read that as Delia and wondered if she’d performed on the pitch again. 

 

1 minute ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

What exactly does this thread have to do with Norwich? 

 

 

... Sorry, sorry had this said to me a few times recently so thought it was about time I said it 😉

Looks like it might have been an honest mistake by Til in this instance, CC, if Midland's comment is anything to go by. 😉

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

Just now, BroadstairsR said:

Why quote me? That wasn't my point.

You suggested changing the lyrics; my point in response is there shouldn't be a requirement to appease anybody at all.

[Branston Pickle 3,657]

The song is nothing if not obvious, I find it hard for anyone not to know. But it is also just a song, not an instruction manual for people to kill each other.  This sort of ban gets on the way of things where there really is an issue that needs looking at. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

Just now, Branston Pickle said:

The song is nothing if not obvious, I find it hard for anyone not to know. But it is also just a song, not an instruction manual for people to kill each other.  This sort of ban gets on the way of things where there really is an issue that needs looking at. 

I completely agree with that, but I'd go further and say it serves to alienate people from progressive ideals in the extent of its pettiness.

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

2 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You suggested changing the lyrics; my point in response is there shouldn't be a requirement to appease anybody at all.

Except you, by cheering , no matter what happens on the pitch. ...double standards? 😇

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

1 minute ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

You suggested changing the lyrics; my point in response is there shouldn't be a requirement to appease anybody at all.

No you didn't. You only said that nobody had the right to direct anybody not to sing it.

All I said was tweak the offending lyrics. That's not so difficult and infringes nobody's right to sing the song.

 

[Capt. Pants 4,234]

I will be relieved when we finally have some football to talk about!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

2 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

No you didn't. You only said that nobody had the right to direct anybody not to sing it.

All I said was tweak the offending lyrics. That's not so difficult and infringes nobody's right to sing the song.

 

My response was directed to you in response to your implication that there was some merit in the principle of forcing fans singing it to change their behaviour. That's why I replied to you. I'm not interested in whether or not you agree with me replying to you.

[TIL 1010 4,746]

14 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

What exactly does this thread have to do with Norwich? 

 

 

... Sorry, sorry had this said to me a few times recently so thought it was about time I said it 😉

Those of us who go to home and away games hear it sung by Stoke fans twice a season.

[wcorkcanary 4,334]

2 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

My response was directed to you in response to your implication that there was some merit in the principle of forcing fans singing it to change their behaviour. That's why I replied to you. I'm not interested in whether or not you agree with me replying to you.

Its Friday!!

[cambridgeshire canary 6,717]

13 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

The song is nothing if not obvious, I find it hard for anyone not to know. But it is also just a song, not an instruction manual for people to kill each other.  This sort of ban gets on the way of things where there really is an issue that needs looking at. 

Reminds me of how every single year at Christmas there's a debate about whether its appropriate for 'fairytale of new York' to be played on the radio and if the song should be banned from the airwaves for having a homophobic slur in it.

Every.single.year

Edited February 3, 2023 by cambridgeshire canary

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

10 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

My response was directed to you in response to your implication that there was some merit in the principle of forcing fans singing it to change their behaviour. That's why I replied to you. I'm not interested in whether or not you agree with me replying to you.

Nobodies "forcing" anybody to do anything. They can still sing the old lyrics if they like.

Others might prefer to "change their behaviour" because they find it more agreeable. The Welsh Rugby Union clearly would. Hardly an insignificant institution who might put it back on their choir's repertoire if they did.

Naff lyrics throughout in any case. Only the chorus has kept this particular song 'alive' all these years.

Edited February 3, 2023 by BroadstairsR

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

30 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

The song is nothing if not obvious, I find it hard for anyone not to know. But it is also just a song, not an instruction manual for people to kill each other.  This sort of ban gets on the way of things where there really is an issue that needs looking at. 

Does this mean that Will Grigg was actually on fire.

And that Onel actually runs down the wing specifically for me? 

And that Stiepermann and Zimmermann actually used to hold hands?

Edited February 3, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[Google Bot 3,275]

32 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

But it is also just a song, not an instruction manual for people to kill each other.

Precisely, everyone knows that the instructions are on the record when you play it backwards... dumbos!

 

[Mello Yello 2,293]

You've just gotta larf.....avin' yer....I also eagerly await with bated breathe to see and hear what's next....

Isn't life gettin' to be even more muckin' farvellous?.....

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

21 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Nobodies "forcing" anybody to do anything. They can still sing the old lyrics if they like.

Others might prefer to "change their behaviour" because they find it more agreeable. The Welsh Rugby Union clearly would. Hardly an insignificant institution who might put it back on their choir's repertoire if they did.

Naff lyrics throughout in any case. Only the chorus has kept this particular song 'alive' all these years.

Interesting point.

As Corkyo has pointed out, the club would very much like fans to be supportive of the players of the pitch in a game whatever they happen to think about other things, although they don't force people to do so, because they think it will help get better performances out of the players when we're struggling. A lot of fans don't like the suggestion that they might be letting the club down if they start booing and jeering every time the ball is passed back and resent the idea that they should pay any consideration to the views of the club on this.

Doesn't this therefore support the idea that the Welsh Rugby Union trying to foist its view of what fans are doing on them is a sign of a disconnect in Welsh Rugby?

 

[BroadstairsR 2,164]

3 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Interesting point.

As Corkyo has pointed out, the club would very much like fans to be supportive of the players of the pitch in a game whatever they happen to think about other things, although they don't force people to do so, because they think it will help get better performances out of the players when we're struggling. A lot of fans don't like the suggestion that they might be letting the club down if they start booing and jeering every time the ball is passed back and resent the idea that they should pay any consideration to the views of the club on this.

Doesn't this therefore support the idea that the Welsh Rugby Union trying to foist its view of what fans are doing on them is a sign of a disconnect in Welsh Rugby?

 

No! The fans can still sing whatever they want whenever they want.

[Herman 9,764]

They're not banning it just simply not having it in their repertoire anymore. 

I put this firmly in the "they're banning Christmas" folder of outrage. 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Herman

[shefcanary 2,407]

51 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Those of us who go to home and away games hear it sung by Stoke fans twice a season.

Hope fully not at all for a few seasons!

OTBC

[shefcanary 2,407]

And there's good old Norwich with the oldest terrace anthem in the business from the 19th century, with a song written especially for football. Then you have all these other tinpot teams purloining "pop" records from the 1960's onwards that just don't quite fit what they are watching.  🙂 

The true originals!

OTBC

NMTD

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

I did mention this on another thread. They used the words of the song as an implication that it might in some way make a man be violent towards a woman.

Til remembers when the Barclay used to sing about Harry Roberts. It had nothing to do with football but was a dig at Bobbies who used to walk around the Barclay End during games. Virtually all of the Barclay choir did not want anyone to kill a Bobby. It was just a signal that one was walking behind the goal or something. Blimey, they even used to sing Alloutte filthy version which had nothing to do with football either.

Its all about context. Delilah is a great song. A great singalong song. It was sung by a Welshman originally and written by Mason and Reed who who were prolific songwriters in the 60s. Beggar me, the word slave is in the song as well and nobody notices it. How about Young Girl, She was only 16, Don't stand so close to me? None of those songs suggest anything should happen. In fact I assume Sting was reciting from memory as a school teacher.

 

[Monty13 2,234]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Yes, I saw this and hadn't previously seen the killing aspect of the words anything particularly disturbing.

Perhaps I should have done.

There's a simple solution, just change the offending lyrics for something more agreeable. Easily done. 

It's a very popular and catchy song, and it needn't be banned if this is done.

Or let art be art?

I’m not sure why we feel the need to censor everything remotely thought provoking, controversial and uncomfortable.

It’s not like the lyrics glorify the act, he’s regretting his actions and knows he will be punished.

[Naturalcynic 631]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

Yes, I saw this and hadn't previously seen the killing aspect of the words anything particularly disturbing.

Perhaps I should have done.

There's a simple solution, just change the offending lyrics for something more agreeable. Easily done. 

It's a very popular and catchy song, and it needn't be banned if this is done.

Change the offending lyrics?  How about changing them to the Stoke City version.  No suggestions of violence there.  Although perhaps the perennially offended wouldn’t approve of what she was holding in her hand!