Women Commentators? Monkey Tennis!!!!

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="Canary Poirot"]

Jas of the Barclay - you shouldn''t start thinking professional female football is a good standard - it patently is not! No professional female team I''ve seen (and I''ve seen international teams and the female FA Cup final on tv a few times) would beat a semi-professional male team, and to say otherwise is a slight to all those who have played at that level (i.e. me). The guys who play at that level are all the guys who used to run rings around people on the playground, but just lacked the strength, height or the speed (or simply the luck) required to make it as a pro. They are all fine players though. And in my opinion, right down to the Conference North/South level they would be able to beat a professional female team. A well disciplined sunday morning male team with a bit of fitness might also fare well against them, but it''d be much closer. Granted there are star players in the female game, but they''re no better than a Robbie Blake, and the overall standard of the team is pretty dreadful. This is just an example of the fact there is not in fact equality between the sexes (or even within the sexes i.e. some of us are rubbish at football, some of us are good, and some brilliant (Hucks!). To treat people equally is a different matter,no one can argue against equailty of opportunity but equality of outcome is a completely different matter. To simply engineer equality of outcome when it is not warranted (which is I think what riles Cluck and Smudger so much) is not fair. It should be earned on merit, and some of us are more predepossed to be better at some things than others. Find what you''re good at and do it!

As to the whole ''PC'' debate, personally I find pc culture depressing. 7rew your example is not a good one as I didn''t think that actually was an example of PC, because no one would take offence at someone saying "white men can''t jump". Personally I''m sure a 6 ft 8 + black guy who''s probably played basketball for years will be a much better player than I am, I''m not mad at someone making fun of my lack of aptitude at the game. A better example is when someone dares say something which is true but distasteful about say an ethnic minority because they think it may offend them, and is branded a racist. It kills debate, and now so many people are scared of being called racist they cannot say simple truths (politicians especially so), and some people yell racist even when people aren''t being racist! Hence PC kills debate on certain issues and prevents freedom of speech and expression. As others have metioned - the PC culture is not healthy, and it must be stopped. It''s like this debate, Cluck and Smudger have been attacked for being non pc throughout this whole thread, that''s the PC culture coming to the fore - they''re called names like ''old dinosaur'' etc to beat their way of thinking down - effectively to kill debate.

And oh -  I didn''t like her commentry - her voice was too high pitched!

[/quote]

Excellent post Canary Poirot... and you have firmly hit the nail on the head...

People like myself and Cluck are not sexist at all...  we just get fed up when PC brigade turn the world on it''s head although the hole planet has gone mad!!!

As I have stated above... not one person on this thread has yet said that they thought she done quite well and that she deserved the job on merit... which kind of proves a point in itself don''t you think???

Tone of voice, timing and a knowledge of the game and it''s history are all important factors when choosing a new commentator... she didn''t have any of them!!!

The BBC giving her the job was obviously a politicaly correct PR stunt that has backfired on them and made them look like a bunch of wallies...  I kind of reminds me of the way that Jobcentre Plus appoint people with a serious disability or somebody from an ethnic minority just so that they can wear their happy smiley PC badge...

Quite frankly it is pathetic!!!

You are also spot on with regards to what you say about the obvious gap in class, speed & strength of mens football in comparison to the ladies game...  I have played a few semi-pro games myself and know exactly where you are coming from on this one...  I am damn sure that even though I packed up the game several years ago and my legs are now shot to bits that no two-bob tin-pot footballer from a ladies team in Kings Lynn would get the better of me.  I am also sure that if I could wind the clock back 5 years (when I still had a little pace in my ageing legs and a reasonable level of fitness) that I could hold my own against any female international that has played for the English national side.

It is right what you say about the high numbers of good quality male players out there that do not progress through to playing in the professional ranks for one reason or another....

I myself have known a few people who played for England schoolboys (one of whom went on to turn down the chance of signing for them down the road in favour of being a football coach in the States).  I have played with and against somebody who was on Stoke City''s books recently... and my brother played against somebody who went on to play for & captain his country who also played for clubs such as PSV, Ajax and Barcalona along the way.

[7rew 0]

Some responces to posts that I have just read.Smudger: Everybody knows that Maggie Thatcher was a man in drag!Canary Poirot: My example was a bad one, however I needed a non-contensious assertion about some group or other that no one would disagree with on its merits rather than out of contraryness.Canary Boy:

• What is the probability that this planet is just the right temperature to support life and not say mars,  given that we live on it?
• What is the probability that this planet has just the right mixture of gasses
  to support life and not say venus,  given that we live on it? 
• Given that the solar system is atleast 6000 years old (smallest estimate given - by creationists) what is the probability that any planet is moving at just the right speed for the orbit that it is currently in?

The answer to all these questions is 1 (100% certain)  If this planet did not have the right materials to support life on it, we would not be alive in order to ask those questions.  If a planet did not go at the correct speed for its orbit (this depends on its mass as well as its speed), the laws of Newton, Kepler and Einstien would mean that it was no longer in that orbit after 6000 years (or indeed 6000 seconds), too fast and it will spiral outwards, to slow and it will spiral inwards, eventually achieving an orbit in which it is stable.I''m not saying that there is no god, or that they had no involvement in the devolpment of humanity - I don''t know.  But alot of creationist arguements lack an understanding of 2 crutial things, the size of the universe, and basic probability (especially conditional probability).  If something (say a star has an earth like planet) happens 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 (1 in a billion, billion times, which is fairly unlikely  - it is similar in magnitude to winning the lottery 2 weeks in a row, then getting 4 or more numbers the next week.), then it should happen 12,500 times in the universe - sources: #galaxies, #stars per galaxy,- gives 12,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the known universe, since our galaxy is quite small this may be an underestimate.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="macdougalls perm"]

The problem with your argument, Cluck, is that you rely very heavily on this idea of ''freedom'' without ever stopping to explain what you mean by this. It is historically evident that freedom means something different to everyone and in every different time and place. One man''s freedom is another man''s restriction - by protecting our own idea of liberty we are all too often treading on somebody elses. The trick, I would think, is to find a balance through compromise between parties whose interests seem very often to contradict each others - it is a complex problem and the main reason that simplistic solutions are inadequate. You paint such a one sided picture of the whole situation which simply isn''t realistic. The ''salad days'' that you remember from the fifties were simply a period in which your (and my) ''group'' enjoyed uncontested dominance backed up by centuries of theological, political and cultural conditioning - its not surprising that you remember it with such nostalgia. As Corporal Jones might have said of us, "they don''t like it up ''em, sir".   

And, by the way, I know you don''t care and think that this is just a load of ''leftie clap trap'', just thought I''d add my two penneth anyway. [;)] 

[/quote]

The most reasoned debate in support of political correctness that I have seen MD... it is very true that we have to try adn achieve some middle ground in matters such as these... [Y]

However, what was your view on the commentary the other night? 

Was she any good and in your opinion would you say that she probably desrved the job on merit?

Because if she did deserve the job on merit then all I can say is the BBC must of had some very poor applicants!!!

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="7rew"]Some responces to posts that I have just read.

Smudger: Everybody knows that Maggie Thatcher was a man in drag!

Canary Poirot: My example was a bad one, however I needed a non-contensious assertion about some group or other that no one would disagree with on its merits rather than out of contraryness.

Canary Boy:

• What is the probability that this planet is just the right temperature to support life and not say mars,  given that we live on it?

• What is the probability that this planet has just the right mixture of gasses to support life and not say venus,  given that we live on it? 

• Given that the solar system is atleast 6000 years old (smallest estimate given - by creationists) what is the probability that any planet is moving at just the right speed for the orbit that it is currently in?

The answer to all these questions is 1 (100% certain)  If this planet did not have the right materials to support life on it, we would not be alive in order to ask those questions.  If a planet did not go at the correct speed for its orbit (this depends on its mass as well as its speed), the laws of Newton, Kepler and Einstien would mean that it was no longer in that orbit after 6000 years (or indeed 6000 seconds), too fast and it will spiral outwards, to slow and it will spiral inwards, eventually achieving an orbit in which it is stable.

I''m not saying that there is no god, or that they had no involvement in the devolpment of humanity - I don''t know.  But alot of creationist arguements lack an understanding of 2 crutial things, the size of the universe, and basic probability (especially conditional probability).  If something (say a star has an earth like planet) happens 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 (1 in a billion, billion times, which is fairly unlikely  - it is similar in magnitude to winning the lottery 2 weeks in a row, then getting 4 or more numbers the next week.), then it should happen 12,500 times in the universe - sources: #galaxies, #stars per galaxy,- gives 12,500,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars in the known universe, since our galaxy is quite small this may be an underestimate.
[/quote]

This is a little heavy for me first thing in the morning. I think I''ll just have my eggs over easy and toast dark on the one side please.

[Cluck 0]

macdougall''s perm.......

The problem with your argument, Cluck, is that you rely very heavily on this idea of ''freedom'' without ever stopping to explain what you mean by this. It is historically evident that freedom means something different to everyone and in every different time and place. One man''s freedom is another man''s restriction - by protecting our own idea of liberty we are all too often treading on somebody elses. The trick, I would think, is to find a balance through compromise between parties whose interests seem very often to contradict each others - it is a complex problem and the main reason that simplistic solutions are inadequate. You paint such a one sided picture of the whole situation which simply isn''t realistic. The ''salad days'' that you remember from the fifties were simply a period in which your (and my) ''group'' enjoyed uncontested dominance backed up by centuries of theological, political and cultural conditioning - its not surprising that you remember it with such nostalgia. As Corporal Jones might have said of us, "they don''t like it up ''em, sir".   

And, by the way, I know you don''t care and think that this is just a load of ''leftie clap trap'', just thought I''d add my two penneth anyway. [;)] 

 

Trying to explain "freedom" to someone who has no personal knowledge of it themselves is rather like trying to describe the colour blue to a blind man.....it''s impossible. Freedom of thought however is available to all of us if we care to seek it out....and simply involves following our own instincts and thoughts without causing harm to anyone in doing so.

I''m afraid I''m not quite as old as you assume either mac...and it was during the 1960''s that I was a still a youngster. You mention nostalgia....but what is nostalgia other than treasured moments or situations that we have allowed progress to destroy?  Being in business I have seen vast changes in technology and procedure....but my work place has remained simple and friendly. No-one told me to do it and staff have seldom left or complained over the years. It''s been a family...but so bad has it become recently that I am finally selling up this summer rather than bow down to the unelected EU rule makers. Forty seven jobs will be lost.

My point is that in every walk of life there are those seeking change for the sake of it.  Bureaucrats bringing in new and pointless laws that logic itself readily deals with.  Employment laws are forced upon businesses that undermine the personal relationship between management and the factory floor...and health and safety regulations  so bizarre they are often hilarious.

"New" doesn''t always mean "better"....more "speed" doesn''t always mean more "efficient"...and politically correct attitudes forced on individuals seldom bring harmony. This is why I will always fight my corner on being told what to do in any sphere of life....and ensure that the values I was brought up with prevail. You''re right that I don''t care what others say or think on the matter....and that''s what makes me different to those of you who bow down to unnecessary change without looking back to ask "why".

So why the problem with the female commentator on the BBC?  Pure change for the sake of it to appease those who demand their "human rights". In this case it''s women...in other cases it may be a religeous or racial group. I really don''t give a toss who it is...because as the old saying goes..."if it ain''t broke don''t fix it". In 2007 there are far too many things being "fixed" when they would be far better left alone.

I don''t expect you or anyone else to understand this thinking...because in order to be able to do so you have to have a mind of your own and not one conditioned by those who have programmed you to think in that particular way. Subversion from pre-school age is now beginning to bear fruit for the "lefties"...only they/you won''t be able see it. That''s where the free-thinker comes in....because we can understand what you others are unable to comprehend.

[lappinitup 629]

For once I have to agree with you cluck.

But why blue ? Why not green or yellow?

 

 

 

[7rew 0]

Cluck, it isn''t "Change for the sake of it", it is the technically different "not staying the same for the sake of it".

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

[quote user="Smudger"][quote user="Konstantin Pobedonostsev"]

I said I wouldn''t comment on this ''debate'' again and I am not but I do wish to assure Cluck and Smudger that most of us all know that you are vain wind-up merchants who crave stringing people along and nothing more. You enjoy spouting off ridiculously prejudiced and extreme views on every topic just to ''make a name'' for yourselves and become ''celebrities'' of the site. Tragic.

I don''t actually believe that you two genuinely think the things that you post! You just love stirring up reaction and stroking your egos with how many times other posters quote you or mention your names. The problem with this is that you lose any weight or credibility when you post and I just glaze over your attention-seeking contributions ... it''s a shame really.  

[/quote]

Smudger "... these PC beliefs will eventually lead to our downfall..." 

[/quote]

Cluck: "Remember how the Nazi''s children were taught that the Russians and Jews were sub-human? Proof if it were needed as to how a monstrous "myth" can become mainstream thinking if caught young enough."

 

You two have utterly lost it now!

Keep on reeling ''em in boys you''ve got 9 pages of posts now ... well done.

To call me PC is farsical! I just think people should speak and write with intelligence and sensitivity rather than bigotry. If you want to talk about the Nazis Cluck then perhaps you need to consider that it was the irrational, venomous and unbased beliefs of Himmler, Hitler, Goering and Goebbels that were used to brainwash their people ... I certainly wouldn''t say that some of the unreasoned ''opinions'' that you have spouted in this thread are rational, fair and based in fact. It is damaging, hurtful and naive to type the things you have here.That''s why I don''t believe that you two boys actually truly think the things you have said ... because if you do then you deserve sympathy and pity.

So tell me ... are you two celebrities enough now to appear in the jungle in Get me out of here in Ant and Dec''s new series? Will you make it to 12 pages of posts? Come on ... don''t disappoint us now.   

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

Cluck "[I] feel that folk like yourself and your fellow PC banner wavers are simple victims of the modern education system... a quick look at the world you are creating today compared to the world I have already experienced,  proves firmly that my generation had a fundamentally more stable and pleasant society to live in  ... It will all come back to haunt you one day I''m sure....but hopefully I won''t be around by that time to witness it.... you can carry on messing society up for your children to inherit.....for which I am sure they will come to "thank" you one day............."

You don''t know how old I am Cluck! I could very well be older than you!

I can assure you that not all older people are as clearly archaic, stuffy, reactionary, backward-looking, irrational and grumpy as you. Some of our world''s most intelligent liberal thinkers, scholars, authors, politicans and experts are no doubt from what you label ''your generation''. Some of your views never have been widely accepted by people in your generation and still are not... a lot of people ''your age'' would be furious that you pretend to speak for all of them.

Age is no excuse for bigotry - keep your mind open.

[yellow hammer 0]

 

My point is that in every walk of life there are those seeking change for the sake of it.  Bureaucrats bringing in new and pointless laws that logic itself readily deals with.  Employment laws are forced upon businesses that undermine the personal relationship between management and the factory floor...and health and safety regulations  so bizarre they are often hilarious.

Change, Cluck, is inevitable. If we want progress then we have to accept change. How do you travel between Dorset and Norfolk? You will notice that the means of transport have changed radically even in your own lifetime. Consider any small part of your life and you will find that if you compare it to an earlier time then it will have changed in some way. Yes you are right that change is not always for the better and we often feel more comfortable in the things that we know and beleive in from way back, but the key to success and happiness is our ability to adapt to change.

So why the problem with the female commentator on the BBC?  Pure change for the sake of it to appease those who demand their "human rights". In this case it''s women...in other cases it may be a religeous or racial group. I really don''t give a toss who it is...because as the old saying goes..."if it ain''t broke don''t fix it". In 2007 there are far too many things being "fixed" when they would be far better left alone.

So this particular woman football commentator may not have been up to the mark, but then there are excellent women fottball correspondents in the newspapers. Do you suggest they should not be allowed to do this job merely on the basis that in ''your day'' women were supposed to be housewives or whatever it was in the halcyon days of the 1960s? Perhaps this explains the source of your animosity toward Delia.

I don''t expect you or anyone else to understand this thinking...because in order to be able to do so you have to have a mind of your own and not one conditioned by those who have programmed you to think in that particular way. Subversion from pre-school age is now beginning to bear fruit for the "lefties"...only they/you won''t be able see it. That''s where the free-thinker comes in....because we can understand what you others are unable to comprehend.

On the contrary, Cluck, you are not a free-thinker, you have a closed mind that has been conditioned and programmed by your past experiences. It seems you are unable to adapt to change and want to remain in your comfort zone rather than face up to the challenges of the new.

"New" doesn''t always mean "better"....more "speed" doesn''t always mean more "efficient"...and politically correct attitudes forced on individuals seldom bring harmony. This is why I will always fight my corner on being told what to do in any sphere of life....and ensure that the values I was brought up with prevail. You''re right that I don''t care what others say or think on the matter....and that''s what makes me different to those of you who bow down to unnecessary change without looking back to ask "why".

You can change only those things over which you have direct control. Since we don''t have direct control on most of the things that affect us, the best we can do is to adapt to change; and if you''re really smart you''ll figure out how to benefit from change - rather than fear it as you seem to do.

 

[macdougalls perm 0]

Smudger,

I actually didn''t enjoy her commentating, but this I think was due to her inexperience rather than because she is a woman per se. Many other football commentators irritate me as badly ( if not worse) than her and I indeed do often turn the sound down anyway. I''m sure other people feel the same way but there are never threads on here about how banal the rubbish spewed out by ITV commentators is, for instance.

And Cluck,

I fully agree that a lot of stuff that is promoted purely in the name of political correctness is farcical and counter productive - that, however, shouldn''t be allowed to justify blanket opposition to any attempt to rectify unjust situations - of which there are many genuine ones - women being allowed equal access to employment opportunities being only one of those. I also strongly agree that the idea of progress and an ''inevitable change for the better'' type attitude has been used to justify all sorts of bulls**t during the last couple of hundred years (the break up of community values in favour of a rampant individualism being one - which, incidentally, I think has more to do with the social problems that you point to, than the predominance of lone female parenting).

So, I agree with you broadly, but I would still argue that your line of thinking is no ''free-er'' than mine. Its just the product of a different school of thought! [:)][;)]

[Baldyboy 0]

smudger, why does it have to be expenses paid? anyway the ladies said anytime just name it and you can come here to marham and take up the challenge, so are you up for it or not? some time this summer would be good.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]smudger, why does it have to be expenses paid? anyway the ladies said anytime just name it and you can come here to marham and take up the challenge, so are you up for it or not? some time this summer would be good.[/quote]

Like I said... I am up for it if expenses are paid...

I am just in the process of setting up a new business that costs money...

You bring your ladies to Norwich and you may be on...  I am not wasting my time and my money proving an inevitable point to those too stupid to clarly see what is obvious...

If you coach this ladies team with your limeted knowledge of the game then I truly fear for just how c**p they must be...

Any man that has played for a top Sunday team or at semi-pro level would know that an inept ladies team trying to compete with me is just a no-brainer!!!! 

[Cluck 0]

[quote user="Konstantin Pobedonostsev"]

Cluck "[I] feel that folk like yourself and your fellow PC banner wavers are simple victims of the modern education system... a quick look at the world you are creating today compared to the world I have already experienced,  proves firmly that my generation had a fundamentally more stable and pleasant society to live in  ... It will all come back to haunt you one day I''m sure....but hopefully I won''t be around by that time to witness it.... you can carry on messing society up for your children to inherit.....for which I am sure they will come to "thank" you one day............."

You don''t know how old I am Cluck! I could very well be older than you!

I can assure you that not all older people are as clearly archaic, stuffy, reactionary, backward-looking, irrational and grumpy as you. Some of our world''s most intelligent liberal thinkers, scholars, authors, politicans and experts are no doubt from what you label ''your generation''. Some of your views never have been widely accepted by people in your generation and still are not... a lot of people ''your age'' would be furious that you pretend to speak for all of them.

Age is no excuse for bigotry - keep your mind open.

[/quote]

Like I''ve said....I''m not interested in how I am perceived by my fellow man.... and unlike you I do not try to speak for others.  I have my own principles as an idividual and I live my life as I choose.  No-one gets hurt and if I don''t like something I leave it alone. It is infact the true bigot such as yourself who try to force others to accept the "modern" way without consideration for an "alternative" because that is the majority view...and so therefore it must be the "right" one.

The big difference between us is that I am not trying to "change" anyone or anything...I just want to be allowed to make my individual choices without interference. Meanwhile you and your ilk feel the need to progress at great cost to society with no consideration as to how others ,may be affected.   Progress for progress''s sake has got us where we are in the world right now and if you think it''s a change for the better you are obviously either blind or brainwashed.

My mind is wide open thank you.....but I only accept into it what I consider to be better than what is there already....not purely what someone else deems to be the case. That happily is your problem...not mine. I''ve not gleaned my life experience from school books and university lectures based on deliberately channelled principles....I''ve been out there into the world and ultimately come to my own conclusions... That I feel makes me a free-thinking individual.....not a "clone" of the current generation who are mere parrots for the system.

 

[Smudger 0]

Good post again MD  [Y]

How about a few of the other PC Banner Wavers on here answering the question of whether Jacqui Oatley deserved the chance of commentating last week on merit?

Remember what we are asking... did you like the tone & pitch of her ''squeaky annoying'' voice?  was her timing spot on? and did you think that she had a good knowledge of the game and it''s history?

or was she given the job purely because she was a blonde bimbo with a nice pair of hooters and that it seemed like it would be a great politically correct PR stunt for the BBC & the MOTD team???

I reckon that if you asked her that she would even struggle to explain the offside rule to you!!!

[Cantiaci Canary 557]

[quote user="Cluck "][quote user="Konstantin Pobedonostsev"]

Cluck "[I] feel that folk like yourself and your fellow PC banner wavers are simple victims of the modern education system... a quick look at the world you are creating today compared to the world I have already experienced,  proves firmly that my generation had a fundamentally more stable and pleasant society to live in  ... It will all come back to haunt you one day I''m sure....but hopefully I won''t be around by that time to witness it.... you can carry on messing society up for your children to inherit.....for which I am sure they will come to "thank" you one day............."

You don''t know how old I am Cluck! I could very well be older than you!

I can assure you that not all older people are as clearly archaic, stuffy, reactionary, backward-looking, irrational and grumpy as you. Some of our world''s most intelligent liberal thinkers, scholars, authors, politicans and experts are no doubt from what you label ''your generation''. Some of your views never have been widely accepted by people in your generation and still are not... a lot of people ''your age'' would be furious that you pretend to speak for all of them.

Age is no excuse for bigotry - keep your mind open.

[/quote]

Like I''ve said....I''m not interested in how I am perceived by my fellow man.... and unlike you I do not try to speak for others.  I have my own principles as an idividual and I live my life as I choose.  No-one gets hurt and if I don''t like something I leave it alone. It is infact the true bigot such as yourself who try to force others to accept the "modern" way without consideration for an "alternative" because that is the majority view...and so therefore it must be the "right" one.

The big difference between us is that I am not trying to "change" anyone or anything...I just want to be allowed to make my individual choices without interference. Meanwhile you and your ilk feel the need to progress at great cost to society with no consideration as to how others ,may be affected.   Progress for progress''s sake has got us where we are in the world right now and if you think it''s a change for the better you are obviously either blind or brainwashed.

My mind is wide open thank you.....but I only accept into it what I consider to be better than what is there already....not purely what someone else deems to be the case. That happily is your problem...not mine. I''ve not gleaned my life experience from school books and university lectures based on deliberately channelled principles....I''ve been out there into the world and ultimately come to my own conclusions... That I feel makes me a free-thinking individual.....not a "clone" of the current generation who are mere parrots for the system.

 

[/quote]

 

Okay Cluck ... sorry if I have caused any offence. Clearly we are coming at these issues from polar opposite approaches and no common ground can be found. I don''t think that all people should think the same way I do so I am happy to leave it there. You are freely entitled to your views. If I have come across as too severe then apologies ... this is quite a fiery and sensitive topic.

Let''s get back to talking about the footie! 

OTBC

[jetstream 0]

Smudger - the word ''bottler'' springs to mind.

Cluck - I despair.

You "do not try to speak for others"?

If you don''t like something you "leave it alone"?

You are "not trying to "change" anyone or anything"?

So what have your thousands of posts about the Club/Delia all been about then???

And the absolute classic "My mind is wide open thank you"

Hang on, I''ve just got to go and stitch my sides back together.

[Mello Yello 2,294]

"I just go with the flow".............I think?[8-)]

 

[ricardo 7,395]

[quote user="Canary Boy"][quote user="Hairy Canary"]

Not this old flannel again!

 

Evolution is backed up by mountains of evidence in Cosmology, Geology, the fossil record and more recently through DNA and genetics. It is even observable at microscopic levels within our lifetimes, Seen the news about the “new” hospital super-bug today? Any knowledgeable person would consider this evidence amounts to fact.

 

What annoys me is the unquestioning faith of the religious, who deny evidence because it does not fit in with their dogma. Creationist claptrap.

[/quote]

Quick...duck, here comes another one called Hairy Canary. Scientists have not yet found life on any of the planets of our solar system except the earth...all the available evidence indicates that the other planets are barren. Our planet is the wonder of the universe, and unique. It is at just the right distance from the sun for human life, and it moves at just the right speed to be held in orbit. The atmosphere is made up of just the right proportion of gases to sustain life. Light from the sun, carbon dioxide from the air, and water and minerals from the soil combine to produce food for us. Do you think it all come about as a result of some uncontrolled explosion in space? Let me ask you, have you ever dropped an egg?
[/quote]

Would that be the egg that came before the chicken or the one that came after.

There are mountains of evidence about to support the idea of evolution but only one source to support creationism.

Obviously you believe in the 6000 year old world created by the big guy in the sky in seven days.

Please yourself.

[shyster 0]

"On the contrary, Cluck, you are not a free-thinker, you have a closed mind that has been conditioned and programmed by your past experiences. It seems you are unable to adapt to change and want to remain in your comfort zone rather than face up to the challenges of the new."

 

Do those "new challenges" that you speak of include having to feel guilt for the Crusades & Colonialism by any chance? Because that''s what the typical Leftist argument usually boils down too - atrocities they may well''ve been, but they''re centuries old and I''d suggest that it''s people like yourself whom should move on with their thinking - your kind of lateral thinking is the reason why this country is in pretty poor shape - a condition that has been created by years of so-called progress via acceptance & adaption to change.

Only if you ever decide to remove those red blinkers will you realise that your concept of success, hence ultimate happiness is somewhat difficult to embrace.

[shyster 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

Good post again MD  [Y]

How about a few of the other PC Banner Wavers on here answering the question of whether Jacqui Oatley deserved the chance of commentating last week on merit?

Remember what we are asking... did you like the tone & pitch of her ''squeaky annoying'' voice?  was her timing spot on? and did you think that she had a good knowledge of the game and it''s history?

or was she given the job purely because she was a blonde bimbo with a nice pair of hooters and that it seemed like it would be a great politically correct PR stunt for the BBC & the MOTD team???

I reckon that if you asked her that she would even struggle to explain the offside rule to you!!!

[/quote]

 

Did you know that lady footballers with big hooters are caught offside more times than Huckerby?

[YankeeCanary 0]

[quote user="shyster"][quote user="Smudger"]

Good post again MD  [Y]

How about a few of the other PC Banner Wavers on here answering the question of whether Jacqui Oatley deserved the chance of commentating last week on merit?

Remember what we are asking... did you like the tone & pitch of her ''squeaky annoying'' voice?  was her timing spot on? and did you think that she had a good knowledge of the game and it''s history?

or was she given the job purely because she was a blonde bimbo with a nice pair of hooters and that it seemed like it would be a great politically correct PR stunt for the BBC & the MOTD team???

I reckon that if you asked her that she would even struggle to explain the offside rule to you!!!

[/quote]

 

Did you know that lady footballers with big hooters are caught offside more times than Huckerby?

[/quote]

And if you apply forceful blows with flint against rock you may be able to shape something that resembles a wheel.

[lucky green trainers 0]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Canary Boy"][quote user="Hairy Canary"]

Not this old flannel again!

 

Evolution is backed up by mountains of evidence in Cosmology, Geology, the fossil record and more recently through DNA and genetics. It is even observable at microscopic levels within our lifetimes, Seen the news about the “new” hospital super-bug today? Any knowledgeable person would consider this evidence amounts to fact.

 

What annoys me is the unquestioning faith of the religious, who deny evidence because it does not fit in with their dogma. Creationist claptrap.

[/quote]Quick...duck, here comes another one called Hairy Canary. Scientists have not yet found life on any of the planets of our solar system except the earth...all the available evidence indicates that the other planets are barren. Our planet is the wonder of the universe, and unique. It is at just the right distance from the sun for human life, and it moves at just the right speed to be held in orbit. The atmosphere is made up of just the right proportion of gases to sustain life. Light from the sun, carbon dioxide from the air, and water and minerals from the soil combine to produce food for us. Do you think it all come about as a result of some uncontrolled explosion in space? Let me ask you, have you ever dropped an egg?[/quote]

Would that be the egg that came before the chicken or the one that came after.

There are mountains of evidence about to support the idea of evolution but only one source to support creationism.

Obviously you believe in the 6000 year old world created by the big guy in the sky in seven days.

Please yourself.

[/quote]its patently clear that human beings are genetically engineered - resulting as a hybrid of great ape and an extra terrestial species.what else explains our rapid rate of evolution???

[Beermachine 0]

This topic has been a rather interesting / disturbing read.

Having not heard the commentary I cannot comment on it, but I do find it strange that people seem so quick to judge something on a one off experience. You have to assume that it would take time to adjust to the peculiarity of hearing a female voice commenting on the beutiful game on TV, and once that inbuild prejudice is beaten then a fair assessment of her abilities as a commentator could be made. Giving the "experiment" 5 minutes doesn''t really seem fair to me at all. Concerning the comments of whether she merited it, well, did Lineker merit his position based on his verbal and analytical ability (the key job requirement for his position) or was it based on the fact he was popular and used to captain England. How about Motty? Ability at doing the job, don''t make me laugh. If you went through life raging about all the things that fly in the face of logic and are not based on ability when they should be your going to be one very angry individual. Having lurked here for a long time I have not seen this though, and can only surmise that the difference being that she is a women infringing on a supposed man only domain, which draws some rather disturbing conclusions.....

Concerning the discussion of PC, yes in many cases it has gone too far with political groups jumping on the bandwagon making mountains out of molehills just to increase their own person fame, wealth, power etc. Despite this, in no-way was the 50''s / 60''s some kind of haven of free thinking, were prejudice, sexism, racism etc did not exist. For anyone to claim that it was and that it did not influence them in some way must have lived their whole life in a bubble. I can''t be bothered to pull statistics, mainly because it pretty obvious, but I bet there were far less female company directors, managers, politicians etc than there are now, let along blacks. Is the reason for this that in the 2000''s there are more opportunities for women in society to gain the kind of freedom that money provides and that they have always wanted it but not had the chance, or has the brain chemistry of females in the last 50 years or so mutated into some super dominant "take over the world" feminist, where before they were content to be the homebody? Hmm, I wonder. The only conclusion I can draw is that the meaning of freedom is to be able to tell blacks to go back to swinging in the trees, woman to get back to their kitchen where they belong etc, which is a "freedom" I am happy society no longer tolerates.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="jetstream"]Smudger - the word ''bottler'' springs to mind. Cluck - I despair. You "do not try to speak for others"? If you don''t like something you "leave it alone"? You are "not trying to "change" anyone or anything"? So what have your thousands of posts about the Club/Delia all been about then??? And the absolute classic "My mind is wide open thank you" Hang on, I''ve just got to go and stitch my sides back together.[/quote]

I am no bottler...

They through down the challenge so they either do it on my terms or not at all... simple as!!!

To say imply anything else is similar to the child in the playground.... you know the ones... the ones that square up for a fight as long as it is on their territory and they have their little gang with them.

Like I said...  I am open to the challenge but I am not the one who made it (I have better things to do with my valuable time).

The offer is still there for them to try and prove their point if that is what they want to do... but I will not be travelling any further than the City boundaries in order to take them up on their offer...  I am not waisting more than an hour of my valauble time and any more than a couple of £''s in order to prove my side of the debate

Aftrer all my side of the debate is a personal opinion on the state of the ladies game verses that of the male''s game...

If they want to make the point personal then there are plenty of fields in Norwich that we could still arange this spectacular to be staged on!!!

[Baldyboy 0]

Smudger you are a prat! what the hell gives you the right to comment on my coaching ability? have you got any qualifications? doubt it, i have . ok maybe we can arrange the said challenge to take place at half time in a game next season at carrow road? or will you expect expenses to appear, and a star dressing room.? bring your coaching certificate with you on the day to.

[jetstream 0]

Smudger

I hope your new business venture doesn''t involve you having to write any letters, emails or generally converse with customers.

You ''throw'' down a challenge and ''waste'' an opportunity. Here''s another tip - half your potential customers are women. Try treating them as equals and you might sell them something or get them to employ your services.

By the way, my wife says she''s happy to meet you anywhere, anytime, inside the ring road to explain the offside rule to you.

[Smudger 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]Smudger you are a prat! what the hell gives you the right to comment on my coaching ability? have you got any qualifications? doubt it, i have . ok maybe we can arrange the said challenge to take place at half time in a game next season at carrow road? or will you expect expenses to appear, and a star dressing room.? bring your coaching certificate with you on the day to.[/quote]

My mate has coaching certificates too... but he would openly admit that I know how to coach a football team better than he does (especially when it comes to tactics, spotting talent and putting a winning team on the pitch)...  We have both successfully coached youth football teams and adult Sunday League footballers several yars ago now.

You may have a coaching certificate but you clearly don''t have a clue... any fool can get a coaching certificate... Peter Grant and Nigel Worthington have plenty of them!!!

and as you have lost the arguement I see that the petty insults are clearly slowly creeping in now too...

Try and arrange it at Carrow Road if you like... they don''t have to give me a ticket to the game (because I would just give them the ticket back anyhow)... if the Carrow Road chiefs are open to putting on such a spectacle then I would be only too pleased to put a few months of training in (to get myself up to some kind of level of fitness) in order to show ladies football up for the clear sham that it is.

Like I said anywhere in Norwich and a few mnonths notice and bring it on!!!

[Cluck 0]

jetstream.......Smudger - the word ''bottler'' springs to mind. Cluck - I despair. You "do not try to speak for others"? If you don''t like something you "leave it alone"? You are "not trying to "change" anyone or anything"? So what have your thousands of posts about the Club/Delia all been about then??? And the absolute classic "My mind is wide open thank you" Hang on, I''ve just got to go and stitch my sides back together.

I''m all for heated debate...but you have obviously been unable to comprehend that my opinion of Delia Smith is based on how it affects me as a club supporter. Contrary to many on here...I am blissfully aware that whatever I personally think or say on this forum amounts to zero in the bigger picture. It is opinion...as opposed to yours which amounts to little more than juvenile packing. Haven''t you learnt yet that it''s water off a ducks back?

Surely it is the bigot who wants to dominate proceedings and impress his/her "way" on others....not the person who simply refuses to give way to ridicule and pressure to follow the flock.  This I feel is evidence that I have an open mind...whereas you having nothing to add other than what you have learnt parrot fashion.

Come back to me again when you''ve grown up by all means...but in the interim I suggest you don''t bother trying to be witty/clever/insufferable when you are quite clearly out of your depth. I don''t often resort to individual asides....but in your case wetstream I''ll make an exception.

With regards to the usual catcalls regarding the "inevitability of progress"..... this may well be true, but only a fool throws the life raft overboard before the ship starts sinking. That in my view is what you are all too busy doing today...and when the ship eventually does sink you''ll all go down with it.  Happily I won''t!

Bon Voyage.........

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Smudger"]

[quote user="jetstream"]Smudger - the word ''bottler'' springs to mind. Cluck - I despair. You "do not try to speak for others"? If you don''t like something you "leave it alone"? You are "not trying to "change" anyone or anything"? So what have your thousands of posts about the Club/Delia all been about then??? And the absolute classic "My mind is wide open thank you" Hang on, I''ve just got to go and stitch my sides back together.[/quote]

I am no bottler...

They through down the challenge so they either do it on my terms or not at all... simple as!!!

To say imply anything else is similar to the child in the playground.... you know the ones... the ones that square up for a fight as long as it is on their territory and they have their little gang with them.

Like I said...  I am open to the challenge but I am not the one who made it (I have better things to do with my valuable time).

The offer is still there for them to try and prove their point if that is what they want to do... but I will not be travelling any further than the City boundaries in order to take them up on their offer...  I am not waisting more than an hour of my valauble time and any more than a couple of £''s in order to prove my side of the debate

Aftrer all my side of the debate is a personal opinion on the state of the ladies game verses that of the male''s game...

If they want to make the point personal then there are plenty of fields in Norwich that we could still arange this spectacular to be staged on!!!

[/quote]

Smudgers scared.. simple as.... I for one wont be taking you seriosly anymore!

if someone issues you a challenge which you know your going to win, then why not do it??? why look for an excuse? surely the satisfaction of seeing the look on so many peoples faces (plus money for charity) is a motivator for getting up your backside and doing it...

 jas :)