Jim Goodwin Liability

[pozbaird]

I'm amazed folk (who call themselves st. Mirren supporters) fail to even admit the first yellow card Goodwin received wasn't even a foul!

But that would mean actually knowing what you are on about,

... and I'm amazed that you come on here telling us that your opinion that it wasn't even a foul is fact, that we don't know what we're talking about, that we're blaming Goodwin for the world's ills, and that we're fanboys if we don't agree with you, so you go and start a self-indulgent thread where such fanboys aren't welcome and only lauding Goodwin as a hero is allowed.

There's a word I'm searching for here. Oh, got it.... Tosser.

[Magic Monkey]

For me, this all stems back to Derek Adams. We all took the piss out of the rat-faced prick for his 'ghost' comments, but let's face it, he's done Jim up like a kipper.

It was him that first pointed out that Jim went "unpunished" for misdemeanours throughout games. The hysteria has escalated from there. Since then, we've had Dundee United making cunts of themselves with the video evidence bullshit and fans everywhere say they hate Goodwin. Jealous bastards.

Overall, this is part and parcel of the fact that we are a higher-profile club than we were eight years ago. While the top six continues to elude us, we are an established and consistent SPL side. With that comes greater scrutiny, and if you have a so-called bad guy in your midst, as a higher-profile club, then the media and opposing fans will get stuck into him.

If we were yo-yo-ing again, if we'd never won a cup, if Jim had never lifted a trophy, then folk wouldn't give a shit and they wouldn't be sniping.

We should all get behind Jim and the club because nobody else is f**king going to.

Come on you Saints.

[JM1]

I think you've quoted the wrong post.

Either that or you've managed to "read" my post with your eyes shut.

It was in relation to your "no pain nor immediate injury was suffered by Sutton" comment, which is completely irrelevant to the bookable offense by Goodwin.

It doesn't matter whether there was no pain nor immediate injury. It's the same as if he took a swing at Sutton & missed. The intent (as far as the linesman was correctly concerned) was there.

[Desperately Seeking Susans]

We are not playing in the 70 or 80s era but in today's sanitised interpretation of the rule-book. Whether JC is innocent or not the end result is that he was sent off adding another to his tally. I'll leave it to Tommy Craig's wisdom.

[Lord Pityme]

... and I'm amazed that you come on here telling us that your opinion that it wasn't even a foul is fact, that we don't know what we're talking about, that we're blaming Goodwin for the world's ills, and that we're fanboys if we don't agree with you, so you go and start a self-indulgent thread where such fanboys aren't welcome and only lauding Goodwin as a hero is allowed.

There's a word I'm searching for here. Oh, got it.... Tosser.

How grown up of you!

So here's the thing will you meet up and say that to my face?

Simple question, and happy to oblige you at your convenience.

Edit: obviously the mods aren't interested in telling their mates off, this i accept.

Edited August 12, 2014 by Lord Pityme

[Lord Pityme]

Seek help, mate.

Another one that can't argue goodwin's first card wasn't even a foul.

Yeah we see your argument sliding into personal insult.

[pozbaird]

How grown up of you!

So here's the thing will you meet up and say that to my face?

Simple question, and happy to oblige you at your convenience.

Edit: obviously the mods aren't interested in telling their mates off, this i accept.

What, 4pm behind the school shed?

Gie's a fcuking break son.

[Lord Pityme]

What, 4pm behind the school shed?

Gie's a fcuking break son.

There you go again!

This isn't the first time you've resulted to personally abusing me on this forum, and as adults (at least I am) that don't even know each other i'm struggling to think why you believe that is acceptable behaviour?

If you wouldn't say that to my face, why do you think its ok to do it on here? I'd genuinely like to know.

You really bring attention to yourself by personally insulting someone you don't know. And yet why did i think you would ever be man enough to back it up?

[insaintee]

Guys, if Jim Goodwin does come on here, you're not setting a very good example for him

[HSS]

Ill defend any St Mirren player that is wronged.

In this instance i wont defend Goodwin as the pictures(videos) are clear that he aimed a foreman at Sutton therefore bringing it all on himself.

Im not going to be a hypocrite and defend Goodwin for something i would be expecting a scott brown, lee mcculloch or manu pascale etc to be punished for

No wonder he get sent off.

I remember George Best getting sent off for throwing mud at a Ref,trust Goody to take it to a new level.

Edited August 12, 2014 by HSS

[pozbaird]

There you go again!

This isn't the first time you've resulted to personally abusing me on this forum, and as adults (at least I am) that don't even know each other i'm struggling to think why you believe that is acceptable behaviour?

If you wouldn't say that to my face, why do you think its ok to do it on here? I'd genuinely like to know.

You really bring attention to yourself by personally insulting someone you don't know. And yet why did i think you would ever be man enough to back it up?

I most certainly haven't insulted you before. You must be thinking of a previous shite alias you operated under.

I'm deeply hurt by the accusation I would insult a Lord of the realm.

Mods! Action! I demand action!

[FTOF]

It was in relation to your "no pain nor immediate injury was suffered by Sutton" comment, which is completely irrelevant to the bookable offense by Goodwin.

It doesn't matter whether there was no pain nor immediate injury. It's the same as if he took a swing at Sutton & missed. The intent (as far as the linesman was correctly concerned) was there.

FFS.

I agreed that the intent was there.

My point was, which you obviously missed or chose to ignore, was that, although it was a booking, it was not a "serious assault" as others were claiming.

If it was carried out with any force at all, Sutton would not have reacted the way he did.Indeed, Sutton deserves a lot of credit for not rolling about like a big Jessie, when minimal contact was made.

The irony is that, one of our former players tried to boot f**k out of two police officers and was welcomed back to the club with more warmth than Goodwin was after pushing his forearm against the back of another player.

[Lord Pityme]

I most certainly haven't insulted you before. You must be thinking of a previous shite alias you operated under.

I'm deeply hurt by the accusation I would insult a Lord of the realm.

Mods! Action! I demand action!

Here's an idea if you can't post reasoned responses.

Just don't comment on my posts!

[Ally]

Whether his first foul should have been a booking is irrelevant. Incidentally I've only seen it once, at the game, and my reaction was that it was a needlessly excessive challenge in an area of the park where it didn't need to be made. I thought that it was a foul and a booking.

That's by the by however, because once you know you're on a booking you should know to be on your best behaviour, PARTICULARLY if you rightly or wrongly feel you're a marked man.

Sadly it seems Goodwin isn't clever enough to understand that and neither do some of our fans. Anyone trying to defend the 2nd booking is clearly so blinkered that they would argue black is white. It's not just the fans who are saying it was daft it's coming directly from the club captain for chr1st sake! Should Stephen Thompson be 'ashamed' of himself too!?!?

The difference between Goodwin and Shuggy (and actually McGinn), is that they can still commit the same fouls (indeed more so) but they are far more subtle in the way they do it and dont come flying in which could be perceived as endangering opponents.

Those saying it's a contact sport, aber would never have lasted 5 mins etc... Well you're probably right. The game has changed, read the rule book if you don't believe me, and if you're incapable of understanding that then go and watch video reruns of games from he 70s and 80s. The game and the rules in which it's played IS different, whether you think it should be or not is again irrelevant...

[Kendo]

Jim is a legend. Only one of 4 Saint Mirren captains to lift major cup. The only captain to lift the league cup, a player that is recognised and booed by opposition fans in every ground in Scotland. A player who regularly features on the telly most weeks, a player who gives 100% in every game, a player who turned down Hibs to stay with us. Least we forget a legend

[pozbaird]

Jim is a legend. Only one of 4 Saint Mirren captains to lift major cup. The only captain to lift the league cup, a player that is recognised and booed by opposition fans in every ground in Scotland. A player who regularly features on the telly most weeks, a player who gives 100% in every game, a player who turned down Hibs to stay with us. Least we forget a legend

He is indeed a legend... a cup winning captain, who always speaks well when representing the club on telly or radio, and seems to be a right nice guy when you meet him too.

[JM1]

FFS.

I agreed that the intent was there.

My point was, which you obviously missed or chose to ignore, was that, although it was a booking, it was not a "serious assault" as others were claiming.

If it was carried out with any force at all, Sutton would not have reacted the way he did.Indeed, Sutton deserves a lot of credit for not rolling about like a big Jessie, when minimal contact was made.

The irony is that, one of our former players tried to boot f**k out of two police officers and was welcomed back to the club with more warmth than Goodwin was after pushing his forearm against the back of another player.

So this passive aggressive post-a-thon from yourself has come around from something I never said.

Thanks for explaining.

[JM1]

Whether his first foul should have been a booking is irrelevant. Incidentally I've only seen it once, at the game, and my reaction was that it was a needlessly excessive challenge in an area of the park where it didn't need to be made. I thought that it was a foul and a booking.

That's by the by however, because once you know you're on a booking you should know to be on your best behaviour, PARTICULARLY if you rightly or wrongly feel you're a marked man.

Sadly it seems Goodwin isn't clever enough to understand that and neither do some of our fans. Anyone trying to defend the 2nd booking is clearly so blinkered that they would argue black is white. It's not just the fans who are saying it was daft it's coming directly from the club captain for chr1st sake! Should Stephen Thompson be 'ashamed' of himself too!?!?

The difference between Goodwin and Shuggy (and actually McGinn), is that they can still commit the same fouls (indeed more so) but they are far more subtle in the way they do it and dont come flying in which could be perceived as endangering opponents.

Those saying it's a contact sport, aber would never have lasted 5 mins etc... Well you're probably right. The game has changed, read the rule book if you don't believe me, and if you're incapable of understanding that then go and watch video reruns of games from he 70s and 80s. The game and the rules in which it's played IS different, whether you think it should be or not is again irrelevant...

Belter of a post.

[FTOF]

So this passive aggressive post-a-thon from yourself has come around from something I never said.

Thanks for explaining.

I doubt you'd understand it if I did explain something to you, as you can't even seem to be able to understand my original post.

I haven't accused you of saying anything. I merely commented that I thought your interpretation of some other posters comments wasn't accurate.

Edited August 12, 2014 by FTOF

[stlucifer]

I'm amazed folk (who call themselves st. Mirren supporters) fail to even admit the first yellow card Goodwin received wasn't even a foul!

But that would mean actually knowing what you are on about, which isn't as easy apparently as blaming Goodwin for all the worlds problems.

Maybe we should insist any of our players who are shown a card doing their job should be sacked?

Surely thats black & white enough for everyone?

What you seem to ignore, either by design or a lack of logic, is that Jim Goodwin WAS booked for the first incident. Jim Goodwin KNEW he had been booked for the first incident. So, whether the first card was justified or not, in your or Jim's eyes, is niether here nor there in the context of what happened next.

For a professional, and experienced footballer to raise his arm and move it toward another player when he knew he was in danger of being caught is, at the very least, inexplicable. At worst. Stupid.

No amount of remonstrating changes this fact.

[saint in exile]

So which of these did Goody actually do?

Where was the intent fir violent conduct?

He took a swing at Sutton's napper, thus attempting to strike an opponent. He was rightly booked. If he had made real contact, it would have a straight red for violent conduct. Away and read the rule book, you f*cking moron. Now there's some personal abuse for you.

[Lord Pityme]

He took a swing at Sutton's napper, thus attempting to strike an opponent. He was rightly booked. If he had made real contact, it would have a straight red for violent conduct. Away and read the rule book, you f*cking moron. Now there's some personal abuse for you.

So sad, and says so much about you as an individual.

[Lord Pityme]

What you seem to ignore, either by design or a lack of logic, is that Jim Goodwin WAS booked for the first incident. Jim Goodwin KNEW he had been booked for the first incident. So, whether the first card was justified or not, in your or Jim's eyes, is niether here nor there in the context of what happened next.

For a professional, and experienced footballer to raise his arm and move it toward another player when he knew he was in danger of being caught is, at the very least, inexplicable. At worst. Stupid.

No amount of remonstrating changes this fact.

And your point is?

The majority (90%) think he is a legend. I'll go with that.

[RickMcD]

And your point is?

The majority (90%) think he is a legend. I'll go with that.

Give it a rest. Jim is a great guy and has been a great servant but he has to catch a grip. Your 90% majority means nothing. I didn't vote because I don't want to knock him as I'm sure a lot haven't but your inability to see how Jim loses the plot and loses us points simply proves you haven't changed. Unlike your identity.

[Lord Pityme]

Give it a rest. Jim is a great guy and has been a great servant but he has to catch a grip. Your 90% majority means nothing. I didn't vote because I don't want to knock him as I'm sure a lot haven't but your inability to see how Jim loses the plot and loses us points simply proves you haven't changed. Unlike your identity.

The 90% isn't mine!

Its the majority's opinion, most don't post on threads and you can see why when other supposed saints fans think its clever to throw vile insults just because they don't agree.

Yeah theres a few need to catch a hold of themselves.

But if you can find any post by me that suggests JG doesn't go in hard, puts it about, and gets punished for it! Then please copy and paste it on here.

Like the over exaggeration of what happened on saturday, people that should know better get caught up in trying to goad fellow saints fans .

Why? God only knows