A thread for the death riders

[Disco]

Why not go find a Dr Phil, Oprah Winfrey or Maurie Povich thread somewhere on the Internet if you want to explore human behaviour?

This is a footy forum.

Or at least keep these threads out of mainstream footy stuff so that those of us who COME here after a great win to talk footy (good, bad, ugly) can do so without having to read the personal crap (specific or generic).

I honestly don't give one **** if @Waz13 thinks @globaleagle's like for yellow daisies is menial, or @47MVEagle thinks @ManEagle,s banana use fascination is awkward, or @Eagle of London feels @Disco's wearing of fishnet stockings is a turn-on.

Footy. People come here for footy. Of which we can disagree. A LOT.

Here is a summary of these threads (or comments about posters) on Silvertails:

My fishnet stockings would turn you all on.....


But seriously, people highlighting peoples tantrums is really them highlighting their disagreement wih their thoughts on the footy.....play on IMO

 

[Tragic Eagle]

I thought I was wrong once but as it turns out I was mistaken.

 

[Ryan]

My fishnet stockings would turn you all on.....


But seriously, people highlighting peoples tantrums is really them highlighting their disagreement wih their thoughts on the footy.....play on IMO

No it's not though. Here it is in simple form. Say we are discussing Morgan Harper's form, and say @Soup says he sucks. There are two ways to counter if you disagree:

1. I disagree mate, Harper has had a few flat weeks, and got bundled by Olam in the finals last year, but is slowly getting better,

OR

2. You're such a whinger, I'm sick of hearing your negativity, it's always the same crap.

One is about the subject, one is about the poster, both have the same connotation.

 

[Eaglehauser]

You may be right, but it was still an incredibly ambitious kick given the weather and the flow of the game. I can't believe he had the balls to even attempt it!

we like players with balls, it was a bees dick from coming off, saab knew it was on and bolted

 

[47MVEagle]

Why not go find a Dr Phil, Oprah Winfrey or Maurie Povich thread somewhere on the Internet if you want to explore human behaviour?

This is a footy forum.

Or at least keep these threads out of mainstream footy stuff so that those of us who COME here after a great win to talk footy (good, bad, ugly) can do so without having to read the personal crap (specific or generic).

I honestly don't give one **** if @Waz13 thinks @globaleagle's like for yellow daisies is menial, or @47MVEagle thinks @ManEagle,s banana use fascination is awkward, or @Eagle of London feels @Disco's wearing of fishnet stockings is a turn-on.

Footy. People come here for footy. Of which we can disagree. A LOT.

Here is a summary of these threads (or comments about posters) on Silvertails:

I don't GAF about anyone's banana usage & am wondering how on earth I got dragged into this.

 

[47MVEagle]

No it's not though. Here it is in simple form. Say we are discussing Morgan Harper's form, and say @Soup says he sucks. There are two ways to counter if you disagree:

1. I disagree mate, Harper has had a few flat weeks, and got bundled by Olam in the finals last year, but is slowly getting better,

OR

2. You're such a whinger, I'm sick of hearing your negativity, it's always the same crap.

One is about the subject, one is about the poster, both have the same connotation.

I don't get you mate, one minute you're all about free speech & how everyone is allowed to express themselves however they like (within site rules obviously), the next you're spending all your energy criticising posters for expressing themselves & setting parameters for what sort of free speech is allowed.

 

[47MVEagle]

No it's not though. Here it is in simple form. Say we are discussing Morgan Harper's form, and say @Soup says he sucks. There are two ways to counter if you disagree:

1. I disagree mate, Harper has had a few flat weeks, and got bundled by Olam in the finals last year, but is slowly getting better,

OR

2. You're such a whinger, I'm sick of hearing your negativity, it's always the same crap.

One is about the subject, one is about the poster, both have the same connotation.

PS - so you give @Soup a free pass for non-constructive criticism ("Harper sucks") yet expect people to disagree with him in a constructive manner?

There's a 3rd option - ignore him until he's shown up to be wrong by Harper playing well & then saying "how bout dem applez?" to him, but then that goes against your "play the ball, not the man" rule, right?

 

[Red Pill]

No it's not though. Here it is in simple form. Say we are discussing Morgan Harper's form, and say @Soup says he sucks. There are two ways to counter if you disagree:

1. I disagree mate, Harper has had a few flat weeks, and got bundled by Olam in the finals last year, but is slowly getting better,

OR

2. You're such a whinger, I'm sick of hearing your negativity, it's always the same crap.

One is about the subject, one is about the poster, both have the same connotation.

Hey the soup monster ain’t really a good example to use. He is just a loser who gets his kicks from thinking he is some how playing with our minds masquerading as a supporter. He is likely a one of those old parra trolls. In short it would be completely pointless having any meaningful dialogue with him.

 

[Class of 96]

I was pretty disappointed no one kicked Andrew Voss in the balls at full time.

I was tossing a coin as to whether Klein or Voss first copped the kick up the cobblers. The coin landed on its edge, so they both deserved it.

 

[Disco]

No it's not though. Here it is in simple form. Say we are discussing Morgan Harper's form, and say @Soup says he sucks. There are two ways to counter if you disagree:

1. I disagree mate, Harper has had a few flat weeks, and got bundled by Olam in the finals last year, but is slowly getting better,

OR

2. You're such a whinger, I'm sick of hearing your negativity, it's always the same crap.

One is about the subject, one is about the poster, both have the same connotation.

Rational football discussion is almost always met with rational football discussion.

But it seems you are saying emotive irrational comments needs to be met with rational football discusion.

Here are some examples of posts in the match day thread from a single poster I wont name.

"We are f*ked"

"Pathetic"

"We haven't been able to defend the most basic of kicks since 1947"

"You just know that we will lose this match" (we were leading at that time)"

"What the **** you dumb f*ks"

"Game over" (we were leading at the time)

Now tell me how to rationally talk football on the above points.

And this is not to attack the above poster, we are all passionate and stress is high during a game but if people are going to hurl abuse at the team I love and give up on the so quickly then I'm happy for a bit of shade to be thrown as long as its not aggresive

 

[voicefromthehill]

Who knew a little bit of light hearted fun after a great win could create such controversy

 

[47MVEagle]

Come on, I mean, seriously?

 

[47MVEagle]

 

[Class of 96]

View attachment 20726View attachment 20727View attachment 20728

Ah, the ole Soupster living the dream.

 

[47MVEagle]

If you were on the hill at Brookie & @Soup was there shouting out all the stuff he posts here during a game, does anyone honestly think people around him would be going "oh but mate, Harper had a rough patch for a few weeks after being owned by Olam in the finals last year but he's slowly coming good" OR "STFU YA WHINGING WANKER!"?

 

[Class of 96]

If you were on the hill at Brookie & @Soup was there shouting out all the stuff he posts here during a game, does anyone honestly think people around him would be going "oh but mate, Harper had a rough patch for a few weeks after being owned by Olam in the finals last year but he's slowly coming good" OR "STFU YA WHINGING WANKER!"?

That my friend, is worthy of a poll.

 

[Class of 96]

If you were on the hill at Brookie & @Soup was there shouting out all the stuff he posts here during a game, does anyone honestly think people around him would be going "oh but mate, Harper had a rough patch for a few weeks after being owned by Olam in the finals last year but he's slowly coming good" OR "STFU YA WHINGING WANKER!"?

I’d be more concerned he was in charge of the beer tent “no beer for you”. Now that would turn it into a tragic afternoon, and a massive kerfuffle!

 

[Ryan]

I don't GAF about anyone's banana usage & am wondering how on earth I got dragged into this.

Sorry man, I just used the first 6 names that came to mind, with absolutely no malice or relatable thing intended hehe. Could have been anyone. But hey, of all the 100's of people I thought about on this forum, you were top 6 !

I also tried to use the most abstract things possible, so they weren't taken seriously haha.

 

[Ryan]

No-one could ever doubt @Soup's passion for the team, that's for sure.

 

[voicefromthehill]

No-one could ever doubt @Soup's passion for the team, that's for sure.

Just which team is the question