mrmojorisin75

genuine question; where was the outrage when he was appointed boss of swindon from the same posters on here, or does it only matter now he's hit the big time?

swinden, according to that quality article

anyone have the full quotes from when di canio said he was a fascist and was misquoted?

can you expand on that? I already have earlier in the thread. Football clubs represent people and places. They inevitably take on the political identity of those places. Just because the game is a global money making machine does not change that. Barca-Real isn't the biggest game in world football because they're two very good teams. they do if the places have a political identity to speak of, what's NUFC's politics identity out of interest? i'd suggest there are a few exceptions in the game where politics and teams are inextricably linked and mixed, but it's very far from the norm especially in the UK I think Sky and the emergence of the Premier League has sanitised the game in this country, but to suggest that UK clubs don't have a political identity is a bit daft even if it is less overt than in other nations. I'd consider clubs like Man United, Liverpool, Chelsea etc. to all have a political identity. perhaps my interpretation of political identity differs from yours, i'd say it certainly does

'You're just a sad fascist bastard' we should plaster the ground with anti-racism shit, cover the sports direct signs and that

can you expand on that? I already have earlier in the thread. Football clubs represent people and places. They inevitably take on the political identity of those places. Just because the game is a global money making machine does not change that. Barca-Real isn't the biggest game in world football because they're two very good teams. they do if the places have a political identity to speak of, what's NUFC's political identity out of interest? i'd suggest there are a few exceptions in the game where politics and teams are inextricably linked and mixed, but it's very far from the norm especially in the UK

can you expand on that?

iron mike

just seen the thing about the miners

normal ops then for pardiola

I imagine it would be possible to be a fascist without being a racist. Certainly wouldn't be easy though. the origins of fascism were not based on race whatsoever Let's say we are to define fascism as a political ideology glorifying and concentrating power into the state and its authority figures. To mobilize people to accept that sort of model en masse is generally impossible without aggressive nationalism. It's very difficult to have people buy into that sort of aggressive nationalism without notions of racial supremacy, or at the very least a strong dose of xenophobia. Therefore, while racism might be an integral part of fascism, it's usually part of the model as a means to an end and it's pretty hard to separate the two completely. agreed, that's why i said technically correct

what does?

does it really matter? he can't get the results when he has his players therefore what difference is it going to make, might as well have a go in the cup where his diabolical tactics actually seem to be effective

I imagine it would be possible to be a fascist without being a racist. Certainly wouldn't be easy though. the origins of fascism were not based on race whatsoever

is phil k trying to say that decaring yourself a fascist is technically not the same as declaring yourself a nazi or a rascist? 'cause if so he's technically correct

always a great sign for your managers first day in the job

the points table suggests we're barely (2-3 points) better than villla, wigan & the mackems though, the margins are so fine that a win can change the entire outlook so you might say in this way of looking at it that we're really "better" than only 2 teams actually, as we're within a win of the others we really shouldn't be considering ourselves considerably better, if at all

tiote's going nowhere like

jesus, sounds like this might be amazing

stu, stu, stu....trollbot3000

The graphic Dave posted on the last page showed we were in the relegation zone as early as March, and I dare say some time before that too. We haven't even been in the bottom four all season, as monumentally shit as we've been. don't really understand this logic, 'cause we haven't been in the zone means we can't go in the zone? let's say worst case if we lose the next 2 games (hope we don't) we'd almost certainly be in the zone, or on equal points with the team in 18th at least with 6 games to go what the fuck does not having been in the zone so far have to do with that?

can we change the title back to sunderlol please?

di canio, jesus

hang on where's this coming from?