festa5
Well-known member
Nah. It's because he's a racist. Occam's razor and all that.
I dislike all racists, I don't really give a toss where they come from.
monkeymfc upsetting Sheff Utd fans
- Thread starter hewielewie
- Start date
I dislike all racists, I don't really give a toss where they come from.
pierrequiroule
Well-known member
I was the 'Japanese' family member he interviewed for a Sunday Times video. He's much more amenable in real life, and even if he believes some of the stuff he writes he's merely being 'creative' in order to attract an audience. If he doesn't do that then he's out of a job. I'd have enjoyed a pint with him if it wasn't sunday morning.
Big_Nothing
Well-known member
Green eyed monster about this provocative piece of sh! t? For those saying he doesn't mean the things he says. Does that make it okay? I'm not sure if it makes it worse or better.
Let's not forget he claims some of these things were said by someone who 'hacked' his account, so these are his thoughts behind what he thought was anonymity. The things he actually thinks. They weren't to be creative and stay in the job were they?
Is using minorities and hate to stay in the job acceptable?
Then he has a national audience and uses it to air inflammatory and offensive things. Journalist? Embarrassment to what's left of the 'profession'.
Let's take a look... This is the kind of bloke we want to defend, apologise for and have a pint with?
On being a bit of a paedo:
He stated in The Spectator that he considered teaching but didn't pursue it because he wouldn't be able to not "shag the kids" but no younger than year 10 (14).
Liddle posed the question “Should it really be a crime to look at child pornography?” in 2003.
As a racist:
"It could be an anomaly, of course. But it isn't. The overwhelming majority of street crime, knife crime, gun crime, robbery and crimes of sexual violence in London is carried out by young men from the African-Caribbean community. In return, we have rap music, goat curry. "
"On average a little under 10 per cent thicker than whites; 15 per cent thicker than east Asians. I thought everyone knew, too. Some argument about cultural bias of tests, but same results come up in US."
"two black savages".
Speaking about a woman whom he disagrees with:
" Stupid bitch. A year eight sociology lecture from someone who knows fck all. You could equally say that we were similar to any group which disliked a certain aspect of society, felt estranged from it but were sure we were right.
The logical extension of her argument is that the status quo is always right, which is absurd, because if that were true nothing would change. Someone kick her in the cnt."
On Auschwitz:
" I went a year or so back. Fcking outrageous that you can't smoke in Auschwitz. I had to sneak round the back of the gas chambers for a crafty snout. And the Polish guide kept lying about Polish involvement in the persecution of the Jews.
Also, I wasn't convinced by the newish Auschwitz Burger Bar and Grill which they've got when you go through the entrance, near where all those shoes are on display."
Charming.
Let's not forget he claims some of these things were said by someone who 'hacked' his account, so these are his thoughts behind what he thought was anonymity. The things he actually thinks. They weren't to be creative and stay in the job were they?
Is using minorities and hate to stay in the job acceptable?
Then he has a national audience and uses it to air inflammatory and offensive things. Journalist? Embarrassment to what's left of the 'profession'.
Let's take a look... This is the kind of bloke we want to defend, apologise for and have a pint with?
On being a bit of a paedo:
He stated in The Spectator that he considered teaching but didn't pursue it because he wouldn't be able to not "shag the kids" but no younger than year 10 (14).
Liddle posed the question “Should it really be a crime to look at child pornography?” in 2003.
As a racist:
"It could be an anomaly, of course. But it isn't. The overwhelming majority of street crime, knife crime, gun crime, robbery and crimes of sexual violence in London is carried out by young men from the African-Caribbean community. In return, we have rap music, goat curry. "
"On average a little under 10 per cent thicker than whites; 15 per cent thicker than east Asians. I thought everyone knew, too. Some argument about cultural bias of tests, but same results come up in US."
"two black savages".
Speaking about a woman whom he disagrees with:
" Stupid bitch. A year eight sociology lecture from someone who knows fck all. You could equally say that we were similar to any group which disliked a certain aspect of society, felt estranged from it but were sure we were right.
The logical extension of her argument is that the status quo is always right, which is absurd, because if that were true nothing would change. Someone kick her in the cnt."
On Auschwitz:
" I went a year or so back. Fcking outrageous that you can't smoke in Auschwitz. I had to sneak round the back of the gas chambers for a crafty snout. And the Polish guide kept lying about Polish involvement in the persecution of the Jews.
Also, I wasn't convinced by the newish Auschwitz Burger Bar and Grill which they've got when you go through the entrance, near where all those shoes are on display."
Charming.
Big_Nothing
Well-known member
So fcuk.
Quicksilvera
Well-known member
The guy is just awful and shouldn’t be given a platform.
The Card Cheat
Well-known member
Mark Benton too. Universally liked.
muniz
Well-known member
they should get rid of parachute payments,
make relegation wage deduction clauses mandatory in all new contracts from the premier league by a certain percentage. if everyone has to do it then it wont be an issue, if a player is too big to take the reduction they will want a transfer under a relegation anyways, unless they are complete flops and wont get the wage anywhere else. but players like that would want relegation buyout clauses.
but give a £40m+ promotion bonus. So clubs can level up on promotion with extra funds, but are setup in a way that if relegated that they should be no need for a parachute payment.
giving 40m would mean if they come straight down it saves around the same money for that team in 2 years of payments, if stay up longer it will save another 15m of parachute payments.
This money can be shared around the rest of the championship.
Maybe you could make an allowance for club owners to be able to donate a set amount of money on promotion to the club, so it is declared as a donation and the club is saddled with zero loans from the gift to allow owners who want to heavily invest to do so not at a cost of their club, with the donation counting towards their FFP allowance revenue.
make relegation wage deduction clauses mandatory in all new contracts from the premier league by a certain percentage. if everyone has to do it then it wont be an issue, if a player is too big to take the reduction they will want a transfer under a relegation anyways, unless they are complete flops and wont get the wage anywhere else. but players like that would want relegation buyout clauses.
but give a £40m+ promotion bonus. So clubs can level up on promotion with extra funds, but are setup in a way that if relegated that they should be no need for a parachute payment.
giving 40m would mean if they come straight down it saves around the same money for that team in 2 years of payments, if stay up longer it will save another 15m of parachute payments.
This money can be shared around the rest of the championship.
Maybe you could make an allowance for club owners to be able to donate a set amount of money on promotion to the club, so it is declared as a donation and the club is saddled with zero loans from the gift to allow owners who want to heavily invest to do so not at a cost of their club, with the donation counting towards their FFP allowance revenue.
Cardiffdaffs
Well-known member
Who?
The fact that Sheff U borrowed againt next years parachute payment is incredible and am aghast that the EPL allowed them to do that. If they don’t go up that them done
Brian Marwood
Well-known member
How do the EPL stop the football equivalent of a pay day lender?
Cardiffdaffs
Well-known member
They can’t stop the lender but they can regulate how a club finances themselves with the money they are due to receive in the future.
The_Lizards_Jumpers
Well-known member
Does a thread have to be about one thing, or stick to the original subject ? Perhaps we've all been doing message boards wrong for the last 20 odd years.
People are quite rightly pointing out that the odious, bigoted Liddle will write anything if he thinks it will upset people and cause controversy.
muniz
Well-known member
we've all been there havent we guys
Big_Nothing
Well-known member
Are you asking if the thread is about Sheffield United or Rod Liddle or actually weirdly trying to stick up for a scumbag? It's hard to tell.
Rofesleg
Well-known member
Odd thing to say. Even in jest (which I hope it was).
Big_Nothing
Well-known member
Think it was completely tongue in cheek at how people have even tried to suggest its within the realms of acceptability. I smirked anyway.
The Card Cheat
Well-known member
Who!?
One of England's finest and much loved comic actors...Star of Early doors, Catterick, Waterloo Road, Shakespeare and Hathaway Private investigators and of course the video to advertise our season tickets!
Attachments
The idea of parachute payments was originally intended to stop clubs going bust when they went from PL wage bill and revenue to Championship revenue. It could be fixed by putting in some sort of restrictions on parachute payments only being able to be used on PL contracts. If a team yo-yos and the players get a wage increase then the increased part counts as PL wage when they go down. Any PL signings the portion of the contract above the average championship salary counts. Any future payments for players signed in the PL above the average Championship fee can be counted. Parachute payments can't be used for salaries or fees of any players signed after relegation.
That way they are doing what they are intended for which is protecting against players going bust without allowing the clubs to use it to gamble to massively over-spend to get back in the PL. When it works there is no punishment so it's worth the gamble. The EFL need to be able to prevent promotion for teams that aren't sticking to the rules. The 3 year FFP cycle gives them too easy an opportunity to avoid punishments.
That way they are doing what they are intended for which is protecting against players going bust without allowing the clubs to use it to gamble to massively over-spend to get back in the PL. When it works there is no punishment so it's worth the gamble. The EFL need to be able to prevent promotion for teams that aren't sticking to the rules. The 3 year FFP cycle gives them too easy an opportunity to avoid punishments.
