I can't believe there's 36 pages about some Leeds fans getting offended! Quite how much offence could be caused by Clarke's comments about McGuire I don't know. It seems to me it would be quite low on the list of most offensive comments, and I imagine McGuire was able to shrug it off without a care but some Leeds fans seem to be unable to do that. I don't think anything bad will happen to Danny McGuire, the Leeds club or anyone else because of the comments.
At the end of the day, nothing bad happens when you're offended. Who cares if you're offended? It's not going to cause you any harm. Five year olds would say 'sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt'. However, it appears rugby league fans aren't quite as mature!

you do realise that your reaction is the same reaction that in Leeds fans that has been mocked by the Wigan fans?

i dont believe that should be the case, where people are offensive they should be challenged on it.

Come again?

your reaction to what i have said and how it would have been better left unsaid is the same reaction as Leeds fans have had to Phil Clarkes comments which has been mocked by Wigan fans, to the extent of proposing to wear Phil Clarke masks at the game on saturday (something i hope they are better than)

You put what happened to Mike Greg into the McGuire context - seriously do you not see why that completely misses the point? Perhaps keeping them separate might have been a sensible thing to do - do you not think?



And I didn't say that either.

Im not sure why when you personally have shown such huge disrespect to other people (i.e Mcguire) you think that you should have some sacred cow that isnt even allowed to be mentioned. It is very hypocritical of you. But if you really are offended then I do apologise. It was never my intention to offend youno, you just dont understand the difference between Correlation and Causality.

Why rise to it? In the case of Clarke's comments, nothing you can do will ever be able to erase those comments now they've been made. People will be offended all the time, it's part of living in a democracy, but what offends one person is perfectly fine to someone else.
I'm sure you've laughed at a joke that someone else has found offensive before. Perhaps you've even made a joke that has offended someone? Doesn't that make you (or anyone else) just as bad as Phil Clarke?
At the end of the day I can't see why it's worth wasting even so much as a breath about something that's offended you. It doesn't make a shred of difference and is easily ignored.
McGuire had a right to be offended (as does everyone else), but I don't see why there's a sudden uproar on his behalf or why it's taken so seriously.

The reason some Wigan fans suggest wearing Phil Clarke masks on Saturday is not because they support Clarke's statement, but because the reaction from some Leeds fans has been so over the top, creating a huge mountain out of a molehill, that some fans can't help but see the funny side.

I'm glad somebody gets it. I was the first to suggest it and you've pretty much hit the nail on the head. Watching Smokey knit fog about it is the icing on the cake.

If your principle of why it isnt offensive to say about Mcguire cant then be applied to other people then you dont have a principle, just the definition of a hypocritical standpoint.

yes you did
what in the 'whole thing' do 'you need to read to appreciate the context and meaning' that isnt in the smaller quote?

And guess what I haven't said that either!



So I didn't say "the context was changed in Clarkes full quote" - thanks for clearing that up.

What's it like at the bottom of that hole? Have you reached those Chilean miners?

i dont disagree, im havent called for Clarke to be sacked, hung drawn and quartered or anything else. Simply called him tasteless and classless.
not in a professional capacity and certainly not at the expense of someone who had just suffered serious injury no. If i did i would expect to be challenged onit
Because if it is left unchecked it escalates. I have no doubt because of these comments by Clarke and the defence of them, that the next person to suffer serious injury will have the same accusation levelled at them, and the same defence of it will be given and so on and so forth. I believe thats an atmosphere we dont need in the game and it is up to us as fans to keep it out.
Mcguire's injury isnt funny, neither were Clarkes comments. As we can see people certainly wouldnt find the same principle funny when applied to other people. Clarke deserved to be challenged on what he said, and i havent really seen anything massively over the top in what has been said about him. And can you not see how wearing Clarke masks would quite easily be construed as supporting Clarke? and that doesnt even begin to address some of the comments from wigan fans on this board who felt emboldenned by Clarkes comments and went even further.

no, of course you didnt,because that was what i said.

if [iyou need to read the whole thing to appreciate the context and meaning[/i then by definition the context is different between the smaller quote you responded to and the full quote [iyou need to read to appreciate the context and meaning. [/i and as such when we move from reading the smaller quote to the full quote the context must to change otherwise we dont [ineed to read the whole thing to appreciate the context and meaning[/i because the smaller quote is fine. So what is the difference?

and if there isnt one you have to accept that there is no difference to the statement i put which Cronus found so offensive but which you said wasnt analogous because it was a different context and Clarkes statement which we already knew, just like we already knew that the word perhaps was pretty much irrelevent, but watching you spend 5hours and 6 pages defending a position you dont really believe was quite fun

OK, how about this one then, since you like ridiculous comparisons...

1)A well respected man is bitten by an insect while working abroad. He contracts a debilitating disease and dies a slow death.

2) A horrible chav attempts to steal an old lady's handbag in the street. Whilst running away from the scene he trips over a curb and gets a compound break of his ankle.

From the nonsense you have posted you are suggesting that both people deserve the same amount of sympathy?

What can I say Pie People....

The trusty bog brush of Truth and Decency, as brandished by Smokey, has just administered the most public ass reaming ever seen on any of these Boards.

Nuff said I think.