Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Some people do have their priorites the wrong way round IMO. Ricardo - bad player, drops a couple of clangers, nothing to say he's a bad human being = boo M.King - good footballer, scores against Derby/Forest, evidence to say he's a bad person = cheer
fleckneymike Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Well, quite clearly you must have different interpretations to my comments than I wanted them to be put across. And in all honesty, if people are actually going to boycott if he signs then clearly they dont love this club enough. My dig with Hughes is just a personal one, just a one-off person that I despise but would I stop following my beloved team if he signed? Of course not. Goodness me what an incredible statement. Could you list a few crimes and perhaps tell me at what stage we should stop 'loving' the club.
Larry_LCFC Posted 2 May 2011 Author Posted 2 May 2011 Goodness me what an incredible statement. Could you list a few crimes and perhaps tell me at what stage we should stop 'loving' the club. When people say LCFC for life .. they mean it. It doesnt mean LCFC for life unless a terrible crime is committed. Leicester is where im from. Leicester is my club and i shall be there standing by it through the shit and the good times. More than can be said for some on here
fleckneymike Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Yes but what im trying to say is she is trying to speak for everyone. Signing him wont alienate me. If we signed marlon i agree it dont make us look good. Starting a mass campaign though just draws shit loads more attention to it. Mutinity amongst the fans etc. Loads more negative media. This article is titled "Leicester City fans threaten a boycott if Foxes sign striker King". In actual fact about 4 fans have but that doesnt stop the media making a massive thing about it. What was the need to get an article written when the chances are he wont sign for us anyway. Just publicity that we dont really need. I think you'll find she's speaking for herself and she hopes others follow suit. The point of the article is to draw attention to the fact that we could potentially be about to sign a recidivist sex offender and some people find that quite worrying. So worrying in fact that they'd be prepared to stop watching a sport and team they love so as not to be seen endorsing this policy. As 1 in 4 women will be a victim of domestic abuse during their life, that means a fairly sizeable proportion of our support have been affected by this issue and signing a repeat offender when it comes to attacking women seems ill advised. The Mercury and this lady are drawing attention to this fact.
Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Yes but what im trying to say is she is trying to speak for everyone. Signing him wont alienate me. If we signed marlon i agree it dont make us look good. Starting a mass campaign though just draws shit loads more attention to it. Mutinity amongst the fans etc. Loads more negative media. This article is titled "Leicester City fans threaten a boycott if Foxes sign striker King". In actual fact about 4 fans have but that doesnt stop the media making a massive thing about it. What was the need to get an article written when the chances are he wont sign for us anyway. Just publicity that we dont really need. I don't think many people in the public or the media will have a problem with fans saying they don't want to attend games because they don't tolerate Marlon King playing for them. How many of us slated and took the mickey out of Coventry at the start of the season for signing him? Plenty. I know I did. But I put it down to desperation from them, they really are struggling. With the money we have there is no need to sign a player which will certainly alienate some fans, when there are younger players who are just as good in this league and aren't so controversial. And despite the fact we hate Coventry and laugh at their attendances, I don't think many of us would judge their fans for not turning up for that reason. And as someone else has said, it is everyone's own choice whether to boycott or not. I do think it's a bit OTT to campaign and try and stop other people not to go, but people will only not go because of their choice, no one elses.
ScouseFox Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Some people do have their priorites the wrong way round IMO. Ricardo - bad player, drops a couple of clangers, nothing to say he's a bad human being = boo M.King - good footballer, scores against Derby/Forest, evidence to say he's a bad person = cheer Or maybe people only think about players in a footballing capacity when watching their team on a Saturday
Larry_LCFC Posted 2 May 2011 Author Posted 2 May 2011 I think you'll find she's speaking for herself and she hopes others follow suit. The point of the article is to draw attention to the fact that we could potentially be about to sign a recidivist sex offender and some people find that quite worrying. So worrying in fact that they'd be prepared to stop watching a sport and team they love so as not to be seen endorsing this policy. As 1 in 4 women will be a victim of domestic abuse during their life, that means a fairly sizeable proportion of our support have been affected by this issue and signing a repeat offender when it comes to attacking women seems ill advised. The Mercury and this lady are drawing attention to this fact. So we sign marlon king and suddenly our whole female and child fanbase is at risk from him. **** sake and i get called the naive one?
Father Ted Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Goodness me what an incredible statement. Could you list a few crimes and perhaps tell me at what stage we should stop 'loving' the club. You should never stop loving the club...
STEVIE B Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Didn't Stan Collymore have a reputation before playing for us a few years back ? I seem to remember he had a few 'issues'.
fleckneymike Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 When people say LCFC for life .. they mean it. It doesnt mean LCFC for life unless a terrible crime is committed. Leicester is where im from. Leicester is my club and i shall be there standing by it through the shit and the good times. More than can be said for some on here I think you're confusing what 'love' actually is Larry. I support Leicester City, I do not 'love' Leicester City. Leicester City is not a person, it is not capable of reciprocating any emotion you may or may not demonstrate towards it.
Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 When people say LCFC for life .. they mean it. It doesnt mean LCFC for life unless a terrible crime is committed. Leicester is where im from. Leicester is my club and i shall be there standing by it through the shit and the good times. More than can be said for some on here That's your point of view, and like I said I would not stop going. However there is a point where LCFC stops being LCFC. For example, should we just support the team because it's based in Leicester, even if every character was like Marlon King, our home kit was red, we were owned by a fascist dictatorship which didn't let ethnic minorites in etc??? Luckily we are a long way from this, but my point is there has to be a point where you don't feel the same supporting the Club as you used to. There is a certain way LCFC makes me feel and it's not just because it's based in Leicestershire. I don't belive there is nothing that would make you stop supporting Leicester. Some people feel stronger about this issue than you do, it's not necessarily that they love the Club less.
Haydos Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 I think you're confusing what 'love' actually is Larry. I support Leicester City, I do not 'love' Leicester City. Leicester City is not a person, it is not capable of reciprocating any emotion you may or may not demonstrate towards it. That's being pedantic. You might not but there's plenty for whom it is a huge part of their whole life. Infatuation/obsession/love, whatever you want to call it, it's semantics.
Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Or maybe people only think about players in a footballing capacity when watching their team on a Saturday Well they shouldn't. My point is there are people who deserve to be booed and people who don't. People shouldn't be booed just because they are bad at their profession. People shouldn't be cheered just because they're good at it. Perhaps if they are getting paid loads and not trying, I can understand booing them. It's all about principles again.
fleckneymike Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 So we sign marlon king and suddenly our whole female and child fanbase is at risk from him. **** sake and i get called the naive one? Where did I say he posed a threat to our female fan base? The point I was making was that when so many women are a victim of violence at the hands of men, it seem strange that a club might sign a violent recidivist sex offender as it could be seen as tacit approval of Kings rehabilitation when in fact he has shown no remorse for his crime(s). Understandably some female supporters might not like the message this sends out.
Finnegan Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 No thanks. People take violence against women far too lightly. It would gall me to hear our fans cheer him. Spot on. Massively disappointed by people telling her to "bore off" and calling her a shit fan or whatever else.
Larry_LCFC Posted 2 May 2011 Author Posted 2 May 2011 I think you're confusing what 'love' actually is Larry. I support Leicester City, I do not 'love' Leicester City. Leicester City is not a person, it is not capable of reciprocating any emotion you may or may not demonstrate towards it. you really do chat some shit. Leicester as a club provokes loads of emotion - happiness, sadness, anger, dissapoinment. Leicester City is a big part of my life and if it wasnt in my life i would miss it. So dont tell me i dont love my football team.
The Doctor Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 When people say LCFC for life .. they mean it. It doesnt mean LCFC for life unless a terrible crime is committed. Leicester is where im from. Leicester is my club and i shall be there standing by it through the shit and the good times. More than can be said for some on here you and father ted can **** right off. I love leicester and no matter how shit we may be i'll still be there but i draw the line at having sub-human scum such as marlon king playing for my club, the fact that i won't be happy about him playing for us and that i won't support him does not make me less of a supporter like you seem to be suggesting. This has got nothing to do with how good a supporter a person is, just their morals & beliefs.
Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 So we sign marlon king and suddenly our whole female and child fanbase is at risk from him. **** sake and i get called the naive one? The children are at risk of being shown a bad example about life. That a person can repeatedly do bad things and be forgiven because he is good at his job. The women as has already been mentioned, might feel alienated by such an individual.
shen Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 When people say LCFC for life .. they mean it. It doesnt mean LCFC for life unless a terrible crime is committed. Leicester is where im from. Leicester is my club and i shall be there standing by it through the shit and the good times. More than can be said for some on here You should never stop loving the club... The way you two are talking about Leicester City FC sounds more like a cult and not a club. It resembles fanaticism far more than fandom. Larry_LCFC, that you even have the nerve to question people's allegiance and support of the club, when you show absolutely no compassion or solidarity towards a fellow fan is hypocritical and highly disrespectful. And Ted, that comment is just downright scary...
ScouseFox Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Well they shouldn't. My point is there are people who deserve to be booed and people who don't. People shouldn't be booed just because they are bad at their profession. People shouldn't be cheered just because they're good at it. Perhaps if they are getting paid loads and not trying, I can understand booing them. It's all about principles again. Hmmm. All I was saying was, in the heat of the moment, if Ricardo drops a clanger, then Marlon King scores a winner in the play off final, which would you cheer? Ricardo because he's not a criminal? And you'd boo King's play off winner because a few years ago he committed some crimes? Now I don't know you, but I'd wager you'd cheer pretty loudly for the latter, and not so much for the first istance. Yes everyone's got morals saying supporting and cheering a guy convicted of numerous offences is a bit wrong, but come 3pm on a Saturday, when he's playing for YOUR team, most would forget them, rightly or wrongly in your eyes.
Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Hmmm. All I was saying was, in the heat of the moment, if Ricardo drops a clanger, then Marlon King scores a winner in the play off final, which would you cheer? Ricardo because he's not a criminal? And you'd boo King's play off winner because a few years ago he committed some crimes? Now I don't know you, but I'd wager you'd cheer pretty loudly for the latter, and not so much for the first istance. Yes everyone's got morals saying supporting and cheering a guy convicted of numerous offences is a bit wrong, but come 3pm on a Saturday, when he's playing for YOUR team, most would forget them, rightly or wrongly in your eyes. In the original comment I was merely pointing out that some Leicester fans boo a playrr for having a mare (booing is not the heat of the moment like cheering a goal, it's a pre-meditated way of showing anger), yet are fully in support of us having a woman-beater as long as he plays well and scores goals. I didn't mean literally cheer because at this point he's not playing for us.
Larry_LCFC Posted 2 May 2011 Author Posted 2 May 2011 The way you two are talking about Leicester City FC sounds more like a cult and not a club. It resembles fanaticism far more than fandom. Larry_LCFC, that you even have the nerve to question people's allegiance and support of the club, when you show absolutely no compassion or solidarity towards a fellow fan is hypocritical and highly disrespectful. And Ted, that comment is just downright scary... Hes one player fgs. What about every other player in the team? What about the club? Saying your not going to watch them ever again if he signs is silly whether its based on principles or not. What about the bigger picture. Leicester City does not revolve around Marlon sodding King. Say he signs and stays for just one season. Does that mean you can never watch them again based on the fact that he once played for us? He committed some terrible crimes. He was punished and he has done nothing since he left prison. Believe me i dont want him anywhere near the club but he would be nothing but a small fish in a big pond as far as im concerned.
Father Ted Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 The way you two are talking about Leicester City FC sounds more like a cult and not a club. It resembles fanaticism far more than fandom. Larry_LCFC, that you even have the nerve to question people's allegiance and support of the club, when you show absolutely no compassion or solidarity towards a fellow fan is hypocritical and highly disrespectful. And Ted, that comment is just downright scary... Why is it scary? Im not going to suddenly go and support man utd if we got relegated or we signed marlon king or if the club does a wimbledon or a Boston. Ive supported them all of my life and I will never change.
fleckneymike Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 you really do chat some shit. Leicester as a club provokes loads of emotion - happiness, sadness, anger, dissapoinment. Leicester City is a big part of my life and if it wasnt in my life i would miss it. So dont tell me i dont love my football team. I'm not telling you that you 'don't love' Leicester City, I'm saying that your definition of love requires re appraisal. Any way we've clearly digressed from the issue at hand. Marlon King is a recidivist, violent, sex offender and his potential signing clearly is a cause of concern for a vocal section of our support. If you consider for a second how strongly you feel towards the club, then consider something which would call into question those emotions can you not see how potentially damaging King's signing could be?
Kitchandro Posted 2 May 2011 Posted 2 May 2011 Hes one player fgs. What about every other player in the team? What about the club? Saying your not going to watch them ever again if he signs is silly whether its based on principles or not. What about the bigger picture. Leicester City does not revolve around Marlon sodding King. Say he signs and stays for just one season. Does that mean you can never watch them again based on the fact that he once played for us? He committed some terrible crimes. He was punished and he has done nothing since he left prison. Believe me i dont want him anywhere near the club but he would be nothing but a small fish in a big pond as far as im concerned. TBF, I doubt they actually meant that they'd be boycotting the Club for ever. I think they just meant whilst King was playing for us. It seems odd to me (if it is true, it's only rumours) that a Club so desperate to uphold a 'family Club' image, would sign somebody like Marlon King. Fans can be banned for life for pitch invasions you know....
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.