Are you really going to make a stand?

[ChezGiven]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

[Heron]

To be fair the Leazes Corner is predominantly young lads, so to expect us up their to not have cringeworthy and unintellectual moments is a bit daft. At the end of the day, younger generations/those with a little immaturity left in us will probably have found that banner amusing. I did I must admit. However, the very fact that this is the only banner being talked about in any real light suggests that it has been the most counter-productive/productive.

 

On the Cockney thing, so what? Innacurate stereotypes are made all the time - All Black Asians are Paki's? All Scousers are thieves? All Scottish people like Haggis?

 

To me it appears - (although I may be incorrect, but I highly doubt it) - that the only ones complaining are the ones who won't make an effort to change anything themselves. So it's quite cheeky to ridicule those who are, despite how immature there actions may be.

[David Icke - Son of God]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

 

In whose eyes? I'll be the first to admit it's hardly the most imaginative terrace banter ever. It's vulgar and offensive. Unfortunately the pseudo intellectuals on here don't do either of those, for fear it outs them as the uncouth, gibbering gimps that they actually are.

 

The only place that seems to still be debating the validity of the banner is here and, to be completely honest mate, I had you down as a borderline spastic anyway.

 

Also, in what way did it have an impact?

[ChezGiven]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

 

In whose eyes? I'll be the first to admit it's hardly the most imaginative terrace banter ever. It's vulgar and offensive. Unfortunately the pseudo intellectuals on here don't do either of those, for fear it outs them as the uncouth, gibbering gimps that they actually are.

 

The only place that seems to still be debating the validity of the banner is here and, to be completely honest mate, I had you down as a borderline spastic anyway.

 

Also, in what way did it have an impact?

 

It didnt have an impact, i thought thats what you were arguing in the context of the stewards policy. No one noticed it.

 

Funny that but plenty of media outlets noticed the 'not welcome @ st james park'". Why? Because like proper football banter, it was funny, slightly clever and entertaining.

 

I only commented because it seemed a bit contradictory. Anyway, i research and develop genetic treatments for cancer for a very healthy living, am more borderline genius tbh. Your last sentence shows i lost you in less than 3 sentences of basic argument.

 

Draw your own conclusions on our relative intelligence.

[Mowen]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

 

In whose eyes? I'll be the first to admit it's hardly the most imaginative terrace banter ever. It's vulgar and offensive. Unfortunately the pseudo intellectuals on here don't do either of those, for fear it outs them as the uncouth, gibbering gimps that they actually are.

 

The only place that seems to still be debating the validity of the banner is here and, to be completely honest mate, I had you down as a borderline spastic anyway.

 

Also, in what way did it have an impact?

 

It didnt have an impact, i thought thats what you were arguing in the context of the stewards policy. No one noticed it.

 

Funny that but plenty of media outlets noticed the 'not welcome @ st james park'". Why? Because like proper football banter, it was funny, slightly clever and entertaining.

 

I only commented because it seemed a bit contradictory. Anyway, i research and develop genetic treatments for cancer for a very healthy living, am more borderline genius tbh. Your last sentence shows i lost you in less than 3 sentences of basic argument.

 

Draw your own conclusions on our relative intelligence.

 

[cp40]

i thought this thread was open letter to a stadium builder about the Gallowgate.

[Frazzle]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

 

In whose eyes? I'll be the first to admit it's hardly the most imaginative terrace banter ever. It's vulgar and offensive. Unfortunately the pseudo intellectuals on here don't do either of those, for fear it outs them as the uncouth, gibbering gimps that they actually are.

 

The only place that seems to still be debating the validity of the banner is here and, to be completely honest mate, I had you down as a borderline spastic anyway.

 

Also, in what way did it have an impact?

 

It didnt have an impact, i thought thats what you were arguing in the context of the stewards policy. No one noticed it.

 

Funny that but plenty of media outlets noticed the 'not welcome @ st james park'". Why? Because like proper football banter, it was funny, slightly clever and entertaining.

 

I only commented because it seemed a bit contradictory. Anyway, i research and develop genetic treatments for cancer for a very healthy living, am more borderline genius tbh. Your last sentence shows i lost you in less than 3 sentences of basic argument.

 

Draw your own conclusions on our relative intelligence.

 

The debate about the 'impact' of the banner was whether it sparked the removal of banners or not.  A few lads have pointed out, it blatantly didn't as other banners were being confiscated prior the showing of the 'Fat Cockney Rapist' banner.

 

If you didn't come into the debate like a bull in china shop crying about how the banner reflects badly on you then you may have noticed this.  No-one is saying the banner will change anything or influence Ashley, other banners may have been picked up on by the media but they didn't change anything.  Ashley knows the fans and media are both against him now anyway and he hasn't altered his reckless behaviour.

 

The banners are to show Ashley what we think of him and the 'Fat Cockney Rapist' one was perfect for doing this.  People who aren't intellectually challenged will realise that 'rapist' has more than one meaning and so is hardly a bad banner (if the banner was 'we hope Ashley dies' or whatever, then you may have a point), if the media or anyone else wants to cry about it then let them.

[Tooj]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

 

In whose eyes? I'll be the first to admit it's hardly the most imaginative terrace banter ever. It's vulgar and offensive. Unfortunately the pseudo intellectuals on here don't do either of those, for fear it outs them as the uncouth, gibbering gimps that they actually are.

 

The only place that seems to still be debating the validity of the banner is here and, to be completely honest mate, I had you down as a borderline spastic anyway.

 

Also, in what way did it have an impact?

 

It didnt have an impact, i thought thats what you were arguing in the context of the stewards policy. No one noticed it.

 

Funny that but plenty of media outlets noticed the 'not welcome @ st james park'". Why? Because like proper football banter, it was funny, slightly clever and entertaining.

 

I only commented because it seemed a bit contradictory. Anyway, i research and develop genetic treatments for cancer for a very healthy living, am more borderline genius tbh. Your last sentence shows i lost you in less than 3 sentences of basic argument.

 

Draw your own conclusions on our relative intelligence.

 

He's right like.

[ChezGiven]

I find it hard to believe that a bunch of lads sat around in a room with a banner and came up with 'fat cockney rapist' as their message of protest.

 

They did though and now they are all arguing that it didnt have any impact on anything.

 

So what did it achieve then? Oh thats right, by association it made me look intellectually challenged.

 

Cheers lads.

 

In whose eyes? I'll be the first to admit it's hardly the most imaginative terrace banter ever. It's vulgar and offensive. Unfortunately the pseudo intellectuals on here don't do either of those, for fear it outs them as the uncouth, gibbering gimps that they actually are.

 

The only place that seems to still be debating the validity of the banner is here and, to be completely honest mate, I had you down as a borderline spastic anyway.

 

Also, in what way did it have an impact?

 

It didnt have an impact, i thought thats what you were arguing in the context of the stewards policy. No one noticed it.

 

Funny that but plenty of media outlets noticed the 'not welcome @ st james park'". Why? Because like proper football banter, it was funny, slightly clever and entertaining.

 

I only commented because it seemed a bit contradictory. Anyway, i research and develop genetic treatments for cancer for a very healthy living, am more borderline genius tbh. Your last sentence shows i lost you in less than 3 sentences of basic argument.

 

Draw your own conclusions on our relative intelligence.

 

The debate about the 'impact' of the banner was whether it sparked the removal of banners or not.  A few lads have pointed out, it blatantly didn't as other banners were being confiscated prior the showing of the 'Fat Cockney Rapist' banner.

 

If you didn't come into the debate like a bull in china shop crying about how the banner reflects badly on you then you may have noticed this.  No-one is saying the banner will change anything or influence Ashley, other banners may have been picked up on by the media but they didn't change anything.  Ashley knows the fans and media are both against him now anyway and he hasn't altered his reckless behaviour.

 

The banners are to show Ashley what we think of him and the 'Fat Cockney Rapist' one was perfect for doing this.  People who aren't intellectually challenged will realise that 'rapist' has more than one meaning and so is hardly a bad banner (if the banner was 'we hope Ashley dies' or whatever, then you may have a point), if the media or anyone else wants to cry about it then let them.

 

I disagree that anyone of intelligence would consider the word rapist appropriate for a banner protesting against the board of a football club.

 

However, maybe you are right about coming into the debate like a bull in a china shop, whatever the fuck that means.

 

At the end of the day, am not that arsed about what people put on a daft banner, just dont pretend this one wasnt anything other than cringeworthy.