Kaizero

Sporting cost me £380, I share just above 1/3rd of your pain 😩

If FC Santa Claus aren't official 's with Ümraniyespor Kulïbü already, they've missed a trick:

TIL that there's a club playing in the Peruvian Premier Division that has this as their official club crest: Might just be my new favorite absolute freak and weirdo professional football club crest, though it's got a challenger in The Italian Big Lebowskis... though these guys get some points withdrawn due to only being semi-pro in the Italian 5th tier at the moment, whereas AFC Weird Looking Pope Guy compete at the highest national level in their country

TL;DR I think we're hung up on something not even on topic, as, again, the intention with my reply to Ronaldo was only to give more examples of controversial personalities that just keep growing their fanbase after controversies that would've, if not cancelled then at least damaged, their careers. I didn't mean to imply Theo Von was the face of the far right toxic masculinity #manosphere podcaster landscape 😅🙏🏼 ---------- This'll probably come across sounding like some kind of passive aggressive retort, but I've already read it 😅 But! At least I can vouch for your recommendation, it's a great read and anyone that find themselves even just curious after looking it up, they should just skip past the "on the fence" part of deciding to make the effort, they should just read it I don't think it applies here though, as the critique isn't of them as comedians, it's of them as podcast hosts. It's essentially a new role in the media landscape, more comparable to either the host of panel debate shows or entertainment talk-shows on old-timey linear TV back in the day. I have nothing against them as comedians, I've laughed plenty at their jokes through the years. But now, when adding more context to their opinions, beliefs and views on society – the same jokes that once felt genuinely entertaining and like they were "poking fun" at things wrong with modern society, especially after the dawn of cancel culture in the past decade. It's less funny when I'm aware that they weren't really joking*, and that some of the opinions performed as jokes, appear to be their genuine opinions and views (based on the consistency of them repeating said opinions/views in other channels). *obviously I don't think that the reality is anything other than the majority of the stand-up routines, or at least a fairly big chunk of them, were written with a genuine intention for the punchlines to actually function as jokes – not personal opinions. I can understand your views about me including Theo Von in the list of five controversial public figures with massive fanbases I posted – neither did I do a deepdive to ensure I found the five publicly, overall, five people that fit the context and purpose of my reply to Ron's post 😅 I can say why I went for Von, though. I acknowledge that he's fairly left-leaning on certain topics, but his dramatic swing directly to the far right on a few other subjects are, overall, the main reason. These aren't random "quips" made once or twice that the media or general public celebrate being able to act outraged about having been said, but rather things he's repeated often as far back as I can remember knowing that Theo Von existed. Things that's been said in multiple context and on different platforms/in different formats (interviews, podcasts, stand-up, social media & public appearances). Whilst you can praise Von for his staunch stance regarding what Israel has been doing in Gaza has been nothing else than genocide, him talking down female rights and his staunch opposition to the LGBTQ community being acknowledged as existing – let alone being deserving of basic human rights. That said, I can happily agree that there are many more suitable public personalities that I could've included in Von's place if I had bothered to not just name the first ones that came to mind. In fact, I can even go as far as admitting that I 100% regret giving Von one of the (randomly chosen number) five spots I posted – as I remembered Tucker Carlson exists That said, the very fact Theo Von is a person that would give a genuine, unrepentant, child predator a lifeline by bringing him on as a co-host for one of his podcasts instead of denouncing him is unforgivable on all fronts, regardless of which part of a made-up political spectrum any person feel a connection to. The fucking vile cunt's "attempt" at a public apology wasn't saying it was wrong of him to repeatedly groom minors and pay them to have sex with him, or commit other sexual acts – it was saying that none of his "encounters" had ever been "nonconsensual" Von siding with the child molestor, regardless of whatever the fuck else he's ever done in his entire life... that, on its own, tells you everything you'd ever need to know about the kind of person Theo Von actuallly is. There's no "comedy" angle to hide behind for making the choice of publicly backing a – proven – repeat child molestor.

fwiw, my personal opinion about men my age (or younger) being fans of media personalities like Joe Rogan and his merry band of toxic masculinity preachers, is that they should all read this article with their undivided attention throughout: Joe Rogan: "Straight white men are being silenced by 'woke' culture"

The context the post was in response to the question raised concerning how people like Barton – i.e. figures that are obviously controversial and have a recorded history of either consciously, ignorantly or accidentally (repeatedly so), talk down, demean and devalue massive swaths of the population in a vicious manner that a cynic would say was a calculated effort to generate more press coverage and thus more ad revenue – yet still having massive fanbases. All five of the persons I posted have enormous fanbases regardless of them repeatedly causing outrage with their opinions, whether you agree with any of those opinions or not is wholly irrelevant when it comes to the context of the post and why I chose those five people to represent controversial figures that retain their popularity no matter what they say or do in public. Hell, they even grow their fanbase from doing so at times.

Just popping in to say that the chances of that happening are absolutely not – in any way, shape or form – zero. They've played 19 games, across those 19 games they could have accumulated a maximum of 57 points. Without any home wins in those 19 matches, their maximum possible total points is 39. Even if they had lost all their home games, their maximum possible total of points would've been 30 – which would've seen them on the same amount of points as HSV in 5th. Needless to say, the amount of different combinations for accumulating the required amount of points to be placed #1 in the 2. Bundesliga after its 18th/19th fixtures are remain fairly plentiful, not zero, even without any home wins. However! The amount of times something like that has happened in the history of the 2. Bundesliga? Now THAT'S probably zero, or at the very least extremely close to zero. Stop using language and words wrong, world!

It's where they belong - on the whole. I fully acknowledge and accept that they may make good points about certain topics every now and then, but if you look at their views and content overall, there's clear trending towards the far right, toxic masculinity, misogynism and similar. The fact so few people realize is one of the more troublesome things in modern society, in my opinion That said, I have listened to the odd Rogan piece when it's been an interview subject that interested me or a subject matter that did. But I couldn't even begin imagining consuming his content wholesale listening to each and every episode no matter the subject matter or interview objects... though the very reason I can't picture that is probably also the answer to why people don't see the big picture with these type of content creators; we all consume media in bits and pieces, so nobody ever really get the entire picture as we choose the content we're interested in and skip the rest https://www.ft.com/content/9f2be125-ba1b-4062-ab2d-4b2977db20b0 https://www.vox.com/culture/368563/theo-von-trump-interview-podcast https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/10/opinions/joe-rogan-myth-spotify-joseph/index.html https://www.teenvogue.com/story/emboldened-by-a-trump-win-misogyny-is-exploding-online https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/20/joe-rogan-theo-von-podcasts-donald-trump https://www.thedailystar.net/opinion/views/news/peterson-rogan-tate-the-cult-toxic-masculinity-3129491 https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/14/young-men-election-joe-rogan-donald-trump https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-joe-rogan-adin-ross-b2642756.html https://www.politico.eu/article/scotlands-controversial-hate-crime-law-triggered-jk-rowling-joe-rogan-elon-musk https://www.cinemablend.com/television/comedian-theo-von-defends-roseanne-barr-controversial-comments-viral https://slate.com/culture/2024/11/podcasts-politics-right-spotify-tucker-carlson-charlie-kirk-candace-owens-joe-rogan.html https://www.mediaite.com/podcasts/theo-von-praised-by-far-right-for-telling-joe-rogan-jews-control-liberal-media-why-do-they-hate-white-guys And this is just after a quick one and done google search, god knows what would show up if I actually gave the searching the same amount of effort as I did formatting this post *I've not read through all the articles, just skimmed them what felt like enough to confirm that their contents aligned with my point of view. Fully acknowledge I may have missed something during the skim read, so not accepting any "butwhataboutthisarticle?!-isms" as I'm well aware I didn't give any of the content thorough quality control, and that was a conscious choice as my mind would've rotted having to read about those people one more second than absolutely necessary.

3 proves the lack of intelligence among the masses as his "fans" deify him for being an "alpha male" getting all the supermodels he wants, being rich enough to buy whatever the fuck he wants and being one of the best poker players in the world - which is how he apparently accumulated the wealth he uses to get any supermodel he wants and buy whatever it is he wants... https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisroberts/2020/07/09/dan-bilzerian-is-a-renter "The mansions, the yachts. The parties—the models. How does Dan Bilzerian, the globe-trotting, cash-stacking, gun-toting, Instagram-boasting partying playboy do it? Or, more to the point: How does he pay for it all? He doesn’t. Dan Bilzerian charges his six-figure lifestyle to credit cards someone else have to pay off." Yet, even after the obvious became public knowledge; the man was a scam artist and a fraudster through and through - even with him now facing nine federal charges, including conspiracy to defraud the United States and wire fraud, the absolute monkey brained "fans" of his refuse to acknowledge reality The worst part about our meagre existence is the fact that people with lower IQs get more children than people with higher IQs, and that both groups prefer having children with people that have a similar IQ level to their own... meaning intelligent people are bound for extinction, and the rest of humanity is bound for a real life version of the movie Idiocracy sometime in the near future.

All say hello

For some reason I'd forgotten that the forum got an ignore function years go Cheers for reminding me, will improve my experience of the forum immensely

This post was just the final straw, he's repeatedly kept quoting my posts to make the same negatively loaded comments towards me for weeks on end. It's just old and tiresome, and the amount of times he's kept doing it makes it feel more personal than it in reality probably is. Especially when I've kept trying to respond that I just want to discuss shit, if he agrees or not with my viewpoint is perfectly fine – but the response should be to make his point about why I'm wrong about something and he's right, not to aim snide remarks at me for actually making an effort to explain my views on something in writing when making posts, even if they end up fairly long, but if the length of a post is a problem for someone all they have to do is just not read it

Why don't you, for once, try actually engage in a discussion about the subject matter at hand– instead of whining about someone trying to have one? Or if you're not interested in discussing something online, you could try just not making a comment about it? It'd save everyone some time. This site is stil, last time I checked, a discussion forum and not a social media comment section – so stop treating it like one. Looking through your last posts (went back 10 pages on your profile), none are any longer than a paragraph and 90% of them barely even a sentence long. When I see the day that you begin offering up some actual thoughts and opinions in a post instead of snide remarks and non-constructive replies to a thread, it'll be a happy day.

I feel like there's been a remarkable rise in supporters dying from sudden cardiac arrest at sporting events in the last few years RIP

To this day, nobody will ever manage to convince me that any of the "Mags popping up" on RTG aren't just their own members cosplaying as NUFC supporters because no actual real life NUFC supporter care enough about the "rivalry" to bother giving them a second of attention. They're a nothing club, they've always been a nothing club, and even though they're the nearest professional club to us geographically – that doesn't mean they're worthy of any acknowledgement. The "rivalry" is 95% one-sided, with the remaining 5% being NUFC supporters that happen to either be related to, or working a job alongside, someone that supports SAFC – with that/those individuals being the ones to constantly bring up the "rivalry" and talk about "bragging rights" If those people didn't force NUFC supporters to engage them in conversation about the supposed existence of North East Bragging Rights™ , everyone would just go about their day well aware of the fact SAFC are a nothing club that serves as table filler for whatever one of the English leagues they happen to be in at the time, and that NUFC are a well supported club that's not currently a "big" club – but a club whose existence is worth acknowledging for multiple reasons nonetheless. Personally, I despise the fact those whining cunts get acknowledged enough for people to talk about their existing any form of genuine rivalry between the clubs when it comes to footballing status, history or even general sporting prowess. That there's a rivalry between the two neighbouring towns in general I have no issue with, everyone hates their neighbours and want to own a bigger house, a better car and have a fitter wife than they do, it's just human nature. But I passionately hate that they keep getting mentioned as sporting rivals when they're a club that can't even fill their stadium when playing in the Premier League and are only known for being the home of cunty players and employing known fascists as managers. When removing all geographical context from a hypothetical discussion, nobody would think of mentioning SAFC in relation to NUFC when it comes to football. Their "obsession" with us is because they're all well aware of that fact. That said, again, I do know and acknowledge that the neighbouring city rivalry is genuine. I just think it's idiotic the way some people try taking aspects of that genuine rivalry to forcibly try applying the existence of it as a means of justifying SAFC being a club that matter, so it gets acknowledged by non-SAFC people. It's just trying to use our standing in the game to heighten their own, when the reality is that they as a club don't matter one iota to anyone else other than their own supporters, which is the reality for probably 99% of the clubs that make up the English league system outside the clubs with a massive worldwide fanbase – yet they're the only club whose supporters try to act like that's just not the case instead of just enjoying their football, which is why I hate it (I know that in ancient times city pride mattered a fair bit more and the rivalry might've been more actively acknowledged by both set of supporters, but the clubs have only played in the same division 20 seasons out of the last 50, and 10 out of the last 30. So few matches have taken place between the two clubs across the last two generations that, arguably, nobody amongst either set of supporters should give a fuck about the other. Both clubs have played the same amount of seasons in the same league as Middlesbrough, yet you don't see any Middlesbrough supporters act like there exists some form of sporting rivalry between them and any of the two other clubs, because there isn't one.

Pure, unadulterated, filth

(I know I could just go to the site and search for it myself, but I'm a lazy cunt )

link iz pls

It came as more of a surprise that we haven't done this for years already, than the fact they've announced what all other clubs that run their youth academies at least semi-professional has been doing for eons 🤷🏼‍♂️ Even my local side, now a third tier team in the Norwegian league system, has done this since before I can remember - it's just basic logic when it comes to developing the most talented young players in your academy What the actual flying fuck have we been up to? At least this explains why we've not seen a youth player step up into our starting eleven in decades...

I'd say it's a bit more nuanced and complex rather than the straightforward statement you've made. Essentially, as a kid, he "picked" Liverpool as his soccer club - just as most kids not local to any English clubs across the world end up doing with one team or another. His interest in football wasn't a major part of his llfe until he stumbled across AFC Wimbledon, however. He's even gone as far as stating that the only crowd he's ever felt comfortable in was in the stands at Plough Lane and that the club in his heart is AFC Wimbledon. That, of course, brings us to what's been an issue for an immeasurable amount of kids that for one reason or another ended up having to "pick" a team to "support" when they were in school, maybe even without actually giving a shit about football, or even all sports, in general at the time. What happens if/when a day comes where you, as an older, wiser and more experienced human being end up actually becoming interested in football - but suddenly "your" club, picked at random during childhood, doesn't feel "right" for you at all - but another club does? What if that club is the reason you actually became actively interested in football at all? Do you stick to the cultural expectation of you to continue "supporting" a club you chose randomly without giving it a second thought when you were a child, or do you proclaim your support for a different club and face the wrath of all other football supporters that maintain the view that "changing" the club you support is tantamount to murderous treason? 🤷🏼‍♂️ John Green only speaks with genuine excitement and engagement when discussing AFC Wimbledon. Sure, he's up to date on Liverpool and can speak about the club and what's going on there - but there's no actual emotion when he speaks about them. It all just sounds like a bog standard TV pundit discussing the day's matches and the teams involved, whereas his entire being lights up when talking about AFC Wimbledon. Where is the line drawn? i'd bet good money on Green only keeping up a facade pretending to support LFC because of the implication of what football culture would think about him if he stated he didn't care about LFC and was a through and through supporter of AFC Wimbledon, rather than him genuinely being an actively engaged LFC supporter in his daily life. For those that are English by birth it's a fair bit different than for those that aren't, you're literally borned into supporting your town's local team - or the local team of one, or both, of your parents (or even grandparents) back from the time they were kids. Having grown up in Norway, I've come to realize that at least half of those that say they "support" teams like Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal or Chelsea don't actually care one iota about "their" team, it's just how it is because they made a choice when they were a kid to have a team to say they "supported" when other kids talked about the teams they "supported". The only Norwegian supporters of English teams that I've, almost always, felt came across as 100% genuine in their support of "their" club were the ones that supported teams like Newcastle or other teams that never were perennial title challengers in the PL era - most likely because they actually "chose" the team they supported for an emotional reason, or any other reason that made them feel a connection to either the geographical area where the club is based or the club itself. Personally, I think non-English persons that "chose" one of the horrid plastic clubs randomly as a kid should be given a pass if they, later in life, actually develop a genuine interest in football and through that develop a genuine connection to a different club than the one they've said they supported, when asked which club they support, just to have an answer ready for that very question - and not because they actually support or feel connected to that club. I was lucky as I essentially inherited my NUFC support from my father, who'd been a lifelong fan ever since the Norwegian version of the BBC started airing one match every saturday from the English top flight sometime in the late 50s/early 60s. I was born into an emotional connection to a "foreign" team, in addition to having a singular focus on Newcastle due to the fact there were no Norwegian teams within a seven hour drive from where I grew up that played in the Norwegian Premier Division. My local side has never been higher up in the league pyramid than the third tier (this season they've returned to said tier for the first time in over a decade, which actually has made me somewhat interested in, and excited about, my local team for the first time in my 35 years on this earth ). Others weren't as lucky as I was, though, and now they're stuck in a footballing limbo where they can't ever become genuinely interested in the sport because they're stuck with a team they have no affinity or care for, whilst knowing they'll be footballing pariahs if they ever were to say they now supported a different team - even if logic were to support the fact their "switch" was for actual attachment/emotional reasons and not because they'd gone glory hunting. An example could for instance be someone that blurted out "Chelsea" at the age of 6 because that was the only club they could think of when another kid, or a teacher/adult, asked them which club they supported - but now saying their actual team is a team like Bradford or a team of a similar, lower, standing than the team they're "meant" to support for the rest of their natural born lives It's an interesting subject, I feel. I'd genuinely be interested in hearing opinions about this from someone actually English, if any of you've bothered to read through the entirety of my long ass rant to the point you've actually reached this part of it Contextual Caveat: All that said, I genuinely believe in the deepest parts of my being that a Norwegian that changes the Norwegian team they support ordered themselves a one way ticket to the deepest part of hell because of it. So I understand the viewpoint of a natural born citizen of a country absolutely detesting anyone of their own nationality that would even just entertain a thought about switching the team they support in their home nation to another team within it. You're stuck with the best team in the vicinity of your birthplace or your favourite parent/grandparent's place of birth for your entire natural born life. However, in contrast to the English, most people of other nationalities most of the time support two teams - one local and one foreign. It's the process surrounding the foreign team someone supports I'm talking about in this post, not the luck/lack of luck regarding a person's birthplace when it comes to the standard of the available local teams.

I mean, from a purely neutral standpoint... looking at what's shaping up to be a four horse race for the two direct promotion spots in the Champo, out of the four involved teams I'd actually prefer to see Sunderland be one of the two promoted (alongside Leeds). Simply because the alternatives are another season of complete and utter turgid boredom clogging up two relegation spots in Burnley and Sheffield United. If the other two teams come up we're at least going to witness crazy fucked up shenanigans all around as they both start off the season proclaiming that they'll challenge for a top half finish, only to end up imploding into absolute chaos after a couple of weeks as we all get to watch the dumpster fire burn itself into ashes as they disappear back down to the existence as league-fillers in the Championship. Now, I know that the teams in both scenarios I've mentioned would get relegated as I see things. The difference would be in how they get flushed back down again, as Burnley and Sheffield United at least maintain a sense of being honorable, dignified, footballing institutions (at least more so than the other two) - meaning they'd accept their fate and start preparing for another season chasing promotion as the elevator between the PL and Champo keeps going up and down. The other two, on the other hand... And, for what it's worth, at least there's some entertainment in witnessing a dumpster fire in slow motion happening before your very eyes

Not the right thread for an off-topic post, but I'm on a slippery slope mentally these days. A few years back you let me send you a long PM rant that helped me through a tough time, and whilst we've bantered back and forth about this probability bullshit and some other things recently, I'd be really thankful if I - if a time comes where I manage to turn my internal turmoil into a long ass PM rant - could send that to you. It involves some of the same elements as a few years ago, so you're likely the only person on here (maybe even in my life in general) that's heard my internal thoughts, emotions and struggles with what I went through back then. Anyway;

On a more topical note, however, it's actually quite coincidental that this actual match has two teams that both are in the midst of a club record breaking run. # of wins in a row for us, # of matches in a row without losing for them. One of those runs will come to an end at the final whistle on Saturday, but the odds of ourselves and Bournemouth being two clubs in the midst of the runs we're on currently would have had massive odds before it happened, let alone the freak coincidence of both clubs meeting at the zenith of their potentially record breaking runs. Fuck all of the probability and maths talk for a second, I genuinely find the fact that this match is happening with both teams having the opportunity to set a new club record if they keep their current run going through this match fascinating as fuck.

Literally one of the few things that still keeps me going these days, as sad a thing as that is to say

I, for one, will from now on refer to all NUFC - AFCB match-ups as “The Maths/Probability Derby”