Koke Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Do you think people are going a bit OTT here? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770
lildave3 Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Yes. Yes I do. I personally see nothing wrong with it.
Koke Posted 3 March 2008 Author Posted 3 March 2008 Not a very sensible thing to do by Cahill but they are going way over the top. The way I read his celebration was "Look Sean, you done ****ed up but you still my brother".
Staf Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 He did nothing wrong pathetic how is it offensive if most people didnt know what it meant
Alexikokopops Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Do you think people are going a bit OTT here?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1770 It's the Daily Mail, what do you expect?
Head Honcho Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 I don't personally see anything wrong with it but Everton shouldn't really be condoning it!
Micky Ruddle Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Soon ban celebrations now. Something to make the headlines i guess.
Samilktray Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Disgusting over reaction. Note wrong with a bit of individuality
Floating Fox Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 It's the Daily Mail, what do you expect? I think its more of a no news day
sdb Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 It's the Daily Mail, what do you expect? exactly. Cahill isn't English either so is basically an illegal alien murdering our children in their minds.
Chandler Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Just how big is the collective moral blind spot of posters on this thread? Or are you lot too thick to interpret correctly Tim Cahill's gesture? OK let me spell out the dumb Aucker's intention for you... He was suggesting that his sadistic thug of a brother was deserving not just of a sibling's sympathy but the goodwill of the general public also. In Tim's eyes, Cahill major is not the perpetrator of an outrage that left an innocent bystander half blind but a VICTIM of a miscarriage of justice. Allow me to put you right on this matter. Cahill major is a victim of a miscarriage of justice only in so far as his sentence is less than half of what it should have been. Not content with gratuitously trying to kick someone half to death the scumbag then fled to his native Australia to escape arrest. If fcukwit Cahill really believes that blood is thicker than piss he can affirm that privately by visiting the barbarian in prison (and by making a contribution out of his own annual seven figure wadge to his victim's rehab and resettlement) but not by using his semi celebrity status to convince the amoral gullible public that his brother is something less than guilty.
Samilktray Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Ahh the latest Chandler argument provoking post. Gotta love um.
Head Honcho Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Just how big is the collective moral blind spot of posters on this thread? Or are you lot too thick to interpret correctly Tim Cahill's gesture? OK let me spell out the dumb Aucker's intention for you...He was suggesting that his sadistic thug of a brother was deserving not just of a sibling's sympathy but the goodwill of the general public also. In Tim's eyes, Cahill major is not the perpetrator of an outrage that left an innocent bystander half blind but a VICTIM of a miscarriage of justice. Allow me to put you right on this matter. Cahill major is a victim of a miscarriage of justice only in so far as his sentence is less than half of what it should have been. Not content with gratuitously trying to kick someone half to death the scumbag then fled to his native Australia to escape arrest. If fcukwit Cahill really believes that blood is thicker than piss he can affirm that privately by visiting the barbarian in prison (and by making a contribution out of his own annual seven figure wadge to his victim's rehab and resettlement) but not by using his semi celebrity status to convince the amoral gullible public that his brother is something less than guilty. You can't argue with any of that I suppose!
lildave3 Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Ahh the latest Chandler argument provoking post. Gotta love the guy's imagination. Well you don't, but you know.
Chandler Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Gotta love the guy's imagination. Well you don't, but you know. Tell me, my amoral thicko friend, EXACTLY what facts that I have relayed are figments of my imagination. And while you're at it you can also tell me where my sentiments are inappropriately expressed. If you are successful in either or both your quests one might be forced to conclude that either you or a close family member have been lags...
lildave3 Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Tell me, my amoral thicko friend, EXACTLY what facts that I have relayed are figments of my imagination. And while you're at it you can also tell me where my sentiments are inappropriately expressed.If you are successful in either or both your quests one might be forced to conclude that either you or a close family member have been lags... The guy loves his brother. And is prepared to stand by him no matter what. I see no problem with that whatsoever.
Samilktray Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 Facts and opinions. Thin line, some one in here needs to realize.
Chandler Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 The guy loves his brother. And is prepared to stand by him no matter what. I see no problem with that whatsoever. As I said, Cahill minor can offer private support to undeserving, cowardly Cahill major - there's no need to advertise it and bring more trauma to the victim and his family. And why do I get the feeling that if his big bro was a paedo Tim would be a little more circumspect in his 'support?'
Samilktray Posted 3 March 2008 Posted 3 March 2008 As I said, Cahill minor can offer private support to undeserving, cowardly Cahill major - there's no need to advertise it and bring more trauma to the victim and his family.And why do I get the feeling that if his big bro was a paedo Tim would be a little more circumspect in his 'support?' At the end of the day hes showing support to his brother, regardless of whether his brother will have seen his celebration. If you were in his position im sure you'd show your support to a family member, its a way of life standing by those we care for no matter what the circumstances.
Chandler Posted 4 March 2008 Posted 4 March 2008 At the end of the day hes showing support to his brother, regardless of whether his brother will have seen his celebration.If you were in his position im sure you'd show your support to a family member, its a way of life standing by those we care for no matter what the circumstances. You're not the brightest 'Samilktray' but I get the feeling the moral penny might have dropped - at least it seems to have for everybody else....
Bert Posted 4 March 2008 Posted 4 March 2008 The guy loves his brother. And is prepared to stand by him no matter what. I see no problem with that whatsoever. Exactly. He knows his bro has done wrong, but it's still his brother and he will stand by him no matter what, it doesn't mean he backs what his brother had done. His celebration purely showed that he still holds him close to his heart.
SOCCERROO FOX Posted 4 March 2008 Posted 4 March 2008 It's his brother ffs He can dedicate a goal to him if he wants. Super, Super Tim, Super Timmy Cahill. By the way a good goal to by the star
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.