Family Stand

[antrin]

2 minutes ago, antrin said:

His infinite responses aren’t neutral, they’re laced with malice.

 

1 minute ago, bazil85 said:

It can be demonstrable. You came in with a post designed to cause argument and lot's of your wee pals jumped in. Sad really. 

I obviously know how to read a character, then!  

 

[BuddieinEK]

2 minutes ago, antrin said:

And yet bas chose to slag off those fans (like me) with whose opinions he disagreed - those who chose not to share the same air as the bigots and those who believe giving them 2 stands is morally as well as practically and financially flawed.

in much the same way that he mis-categorises my comment above.  Projecting his own arrogance onto others, accusing people with different opinions of wilfully trying to damage the club and hell mend them!

His infinite responses aren’t neutral, they’re laced with malice.

From day 1 my opinion was that it WOULD cost us money in the short term, but that the long term loss of our next generation of supporters would cost us infinitely more.

 

A 4% drop is a massive success and way better than we could have dared hope for. The benefits will be huge going forward. 

[bazil85]

1 minute ago, antrin said:

And yet bas chose to slag off those fans (like me) with whose opinions he disagreed - those who chose not to share the same air as the bigots and those who believe giving them 2 stands is morally as well as practically and financially flawed.

in much the same way that he mis-categorises my comment above.  Projecting his own arrogance onto others, accusing people with different opinions of wilfully trying to damage the club and hell mend them!

His infinite responses aren’t neutral, they’re laced with malice.

You're entitled to your opinion on the situation. I disagree and I am defending my opinion on the matter. I don't seek to change your mind, I've just given my views and why I hold them. 

My opinion remains, people that chose not to attend these matches out of protest, were only hurting our club. Again, you don't have to agree on that. 

"You persist in being wrong, stumbling around in a fog.  Myself and others kindly try to guide you towards the light." By your own words, you don't just disagree with my opinion, you seek to change it as you think it is categorically wrong. I have not mis-categorised anything. 

But as I said to BEK, why don't we agree to disagree on the subject and focus on the positives around our club  

[bazil85]

3 minutes ago, antrin said:

 

I obviously know how to read a character, then!  

 

I am right though. You made a ridiculous claim that you're intentions here are "kindly" motivated. That's just factually wrong isn't it? 

3 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

From day 1 my opinion was that it WOULD cost us money in the short term, but that the long term loss of our next generation of supporters would cost us infinitely more.

A 4% drop is a massive success and way better than we could have dared hope for. The benefits will be huge going forward. 

I still disagree, I think we'd be better served giving them two stands. 

[BuddieinEK]

24 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

I am right though. You made a ridiculous claim that you're intentions here are "kindly" motivated. That's just factually wrong isn't it? 

I still disagree, I think we'd be better served giving them two stands. 

I wasn't talking to you Mr Moany. 

[Slarti]

 

1 hour ago, antrin said:

Fify

 

You persist in being wrong, stumbling around in a fog.  Myself and others kindly try to guide you towards the light.

Did he really say "You're welcome to point out any spelling or grammatical errors, I admit it isn't my strong point. I will admit when I have made such a mistake."?

What he should have said is "Everyone points out my spelling and grammatical errors, it's obvious that it isn't my strong point. I will never admit when I have made such a mistake and will instead redefine words to make it appear that I am correct - at least in my own head, if not in reality."

[Slarti]

50 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

I fully accept that we disagree and that despite my positive outlook aligning with that of the majority of fans who voted; the club; the club SLO's; and the vast majority of fans posting on here...

You are within your rights to focus on the negative aspects as you see them; to attack anyone who disagrees (almost everyone else in this thread), and to deflect at every opportunity. I remember when you were good at it. 

No you don't.

[Tommy]

14 hours ago, bazil85 said:

That's not remotely my thinking, don't be ridiculous. 

Why is it ridiculous  ?

You are the guy that want the club to take the bigots for every penny they can, so why not give them the 2 biggest stand instead of the 2 smallest stand to make more money for the club.

Or is it because you would need to move your seat when we play them, but you think it is ok for the fans in the family stand to do so  

[bazil85]

43 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

I wasn't talking to you Mr Moany. 

You are extremely negative, clear projection. 

28 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Why is it ridiculous  ?

You are the guy that want the club to take the bigots for every penny they can, so why not give them the 2 biggest stand instead of the 2 smallest stand to make more money for the club.

Or is it because you would need to move your seat when we play them, but you think it is ok for the fans in the family stand to do so  

I don't think we should give them the main and West stand, you've made that up. I think it is a pedantic augment.

Nope, I would move for the bigots if I was in the family stand, I just think it would be a step too far moving from our two biggest stands. 

 

I see my cowardly stalker has raised his head now as well. Hiding behind the ignore function with absolutely no capability to actually ignore. 

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

I am very much neutral on the Baz v Apparently everyone else thing on here, but here’s my take on this car crash of a thread. 

A couple of points of order first of all:-

I was in favour of revoking the two stand thing.

My belief was that it may have a small, short term financial impact, but wider, longer term gains and that there was a possibility it might not financially impact us at all. 

I fully respect the views of people who are offended by the behaviour and songs of Celtic and Rangers fans, whilst admitting that I myself am not I.e I do not feel personally offended by them. I don’t really pay any attention to them.
 

A FACT is that based on the first outing of the new model, we do not appear to have been materially financially impacted when compared directly against the corresponding fixture. 
 

As for Baz’s claims, from my reading he is not denying the above “fact”, but instead is giving an opinion that we could have made EVEN MORE money had we given them two stands. He clearly states this as an opinion. Others, including myself, believe that this is not the case and that the uplift in home fans at the game was down to the removal of the two stands thing.  Neither of these opinions can be proven or disproved.  So we simply HAVE to agree to disagree. Continuing to reiterate these opinions is completely pointless not to mention f**king boring. 
 

Where I think Baz is wrong it to criticise people who choose not to attend these games. That said I would expect that anyone who does so on the basis of the bigotry, wouldn’t attend ANY game against those two, regardless of how many stands they have. I fully respect the decision of those who didn’t attend simply because the two stands thing was the last straw, but I have no idea what sort of numbers those people would represent. 
 

Finally @BuddieinEK I do think you are being disingenuous when you deny that your rationale for raising this was just to have a go at Baz. At the very least you took great delight in it. 

Here endeth my tuppence. 

 

 

 

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

4 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

I am very much neutral on the Baz v Apparently everyone else thing on here, but here’s my take on this car crash of a thread. 

A couple of points of order first of all:-

I was in favour of revoking the two stand thing.

My belief was that it may have a small, short term financial impact, but wider, longer term gains and that there was a possibility it might not financially impact us at all. 

I fully respect the views of people who are offended by the behaviour and songs of Celtic and Rangers fans, whilst admitting that I myself am not I.e I do not feel personally offended by them. I don’t really pay any attention to them.
 

A FACT is that based on the first outing of the new model, we do not appear to have been materially financially impacted when compared directly against the corresponding fixture. 
 

As for Baz’s claims, from my reading he is not denying the above “fact”, but instead is giving an opinion that we could have made EVEN MORE money had we given them two stands. He clearly states this as an opinion. Others, including myself, believe that this is not the case and that the uplift in home fans at the game was down to the removal of the two stands thing.  Neither of these opinions can be proven or disproved.  So we simply HAVE to agree to disagree. Continuing to reiterate these opinions is completely pointless not to mention f**king boring. 
 

Where I think Baz is wrong it to criticise people who choose not to attend these games. That said I would expect that anyone who does so on the basis of the bigotry, wouldn’t attend ANY game against those two, regardless of how many stands they have. I fully respect the decision of those who didn’t attend simply because the two stands thing was the last straw, but I have no idea what sort of numbers those people would represent. 
 

Finally @BuddieinEK I do think you are being disingenuous when you deny that your rationale for raising this was just to have a go at Baz. At the very least you took great delight in it. 

Here endeth my tuppence. 

 

 

 

Sorry one additional thing I should have said above is that (IMO) the fact we haven’t materially lost money through the new stance, is justification enough for the decision. I don’t really care if we could have have made more. 

[Tommy]

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

You are extremely negative, clear projection. 

I don't think we should give them the main and West stand, you've made that up. I think it is a pedantic augment.

Nope, I would move for the bigots if I was in the family stand, I just think it would be a step too far moving from our two biggest stands. 

 

I see my cowardly stalker has raised his head now as well. Hiding behind the ignore function with absolutely no capability to actually ignore. 

You are coming over as convincing as Truss bye bye speech was 5 mins ago     

Last word to you if you want    

[BuddieinEK]

23 minutes ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

Sorry one additional thing I should have said above is that (IMO) the fact we haven’t materially lost money through the new stance, is justification enough for the decision. I don’t really care if we could have have made more. 

I concur.

Re your thoughts that "Finally @BuddieinEK I do think you are being disingenuous when you deny that your rationale for raising this was just to have a go at Baz."

Not being disingenuous as I didn't raise the issue "just to have a go" at the one I will mention not.

"At the very least you took great delight in it."

Correct. Not going to deny that. Nail. Head.

I read the report.

I wanted to share it.

I looked for an appropriate thread rather than start a new one.

I read back to see if this thread was the most appropriate one.

A dig seemed most appropriate in the grand scheme of things, but it was a secondary consideration and I wasn't overlay (sic) concerned if it was ignored or responded to. He was and remains no more than an afterthought.

"Here endeth my tuppence."

Worth a shilling at least 😜

 

[bazil85]

20 minutes ago, Tommy said:

You are coming over as convincing as Truss bye bye speech was 5 mins ago     

Last word to you if you want    

Thanks 

[bazil85]

14 minutes ago, BuddieinEK said:

I concur.

Re your thoughts that "Finally @BuddieinEK I do think you are being disingenuous when you deny that your rationale for raising this was just to have a go at Baz."

Not being disingenuous as I didn't raise the issue "just to have a go" at the one I will mention not.

"At the very least you took great delight in it."

Correct. Not going to deny that. Nail. Head.

I read the report.

I wanted to share it.

I looked for an appropriate thread rather than start a new one.

I read back to see if this thread was the most appropriate one.

A dig seemed most appropriate in the grand scheme of things, but it was a secondary consideration and I wasn't overlay (sic) concerned if it was ignored or responded to. He was and remains no more than an afterthought.

"Here endeth my tuppence."

Worth a shilling at least 😜

 

yer a*** it was how you started the post & as usual you were clearly gagging for an argument. 

I believed Liz Truss more, when she said she was a fighter not a quitter yesterday.  🤣

[BuddieinEK]

42 minutes ago, Tommy said:

You are coming over as convincing as Truss bye bye speech was 5 mins ago     

Last word to you if you want    

He's now amusing himself by stealing your patter and passing it off as his own. 😂😂😂

[antrin]

3 hours ago, bazil85 said:

I am right though. You made a ridiculous claim that you're intentions here are "kindly" motivated. That's just factually wrong isn't it? 

No.

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, antrin said:

No.

I don't think you are being honest. You have always been a very arrogant poster on here.

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, BuddieinEK said:

He's now amusing himself by stealing your patter and passing it off as his own. 😂😂😂

Need a straw? 

[Callum Gilhooley]

6 hours ago, bazil85 said:

I didn't say the club was losing money in that circumstance, I said they were being needlessly bitter. As in, if they were using that to protest against not having empty seats. 

I always take it with a pinch of salt when someone asks me to show where I have admitted error. I have done in the past, but most who have asked this in the past, can't show the same. The irony. 

You are the one who brought it up out of desperate need to engage with me. Remember you failed in your attempt to stop?

I accepted the vote, it doesn't mean I have changed my opinion on it. Fans voted to stop giving two stands and that rightfully has been respected. Good effort but you are again wrong in your claim. Also, you are one of the most negative fans ever to contribute to BAWA, right in the St Moan HOF. 

I bet you're fun at parties.

You're welcome to point out any spelling or grammatical errors, I admit it isn't my strong point. I will admit when I have made such a mistake. I personally think it's a wee bit sad to get a semi over spelling/ grammar errors on a fan forum. Petty point scoring even? 🤷‍♂️

I know exactly why I get negative feedback. 

- People being unable to let go of long dead arguments, that practically salivate now when I post

- People who just can't accept different held opinions. 

I have highlighted in your post where you either prove my point or make utterly ridiculous, unfounded and frankly moon howling claims. 

 

 

Yes you did , here it’s here !!, 🤷‍♂️

[bazil85]

31 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

Yes you did , here it’s here !!, 🤷‍♂️

The point is empty seats versus money in the clubs pocket. As in empty seats or an extra stand for the bigot brothers. This is literally the main point being discussed regarding my views. 🤣

Good effort though. 

[Callum Gilhooley]

28 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

The point is empty seats versus money in the clubs pocket. As in empty seats or an extra stand for the bigot brothers. This is literally the main point being discussed regarding my views. 🤣

Good effort though. 

I posed a very specific instance of Season Ticket holders who chose not to attend Scum matches - you said they would be leaving Empty seats and depriving the club of money . “Money in the clubs pockets” you clearly called it, as I pointed out .

This simply is not true. Season tickets holders who don’t attend these games do not cost the club money .

I would say Good effort on your part but , it wasn’t . It was more drivel and attempts to backtrack and admit you were wrong .

 

[faraway saint]

7 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

 

I would say Good effort on your part but , it wasn’t . It was more drivel and attempts to backtrack and admit you were wrong .

 

You forgot deflection. 

[bazil85]

9 minutes ago, Callum Gilhooley said:

I posed a very specific instance of Season Ticket holders who chose not to attend Scum matches - you said they would be leaving Empty seats and depriving the club of money . “Money in the clubs pockets” you clearly called it, as I pointed out .

This simply is not true. Season tickets holders who don’t attend these games do not cost the club money .

I would say Good effort on your part but , it wasn’t . It was more drivel and attempts to backtrack and admit you were wrong .

 

You've misunderstood, it was a new sentence and the point tied it into the subject being discussed. I can understand to an extent you misunderstanding (although, really it was clear what was being discussed), but telling me what I meant when I'm telling you what I actually meant is ridiculous. 

I have been completely consistent, accept you misunderstood and move on. 👍

[faraway saint]

6 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

You've misunderstood, it was a new sentence and the point tied it into the subject being discussed. I can understand to an extent you misunderstanding (although, really it was clear what was being discussed), but telling me what I meant when I'm telling you what I actually meant is ridiculous. 

I have been completely consistent, accept you misunderstood and move on. 👍

FFS Bazil, gie it up, its beyond embarrassing.