So Espaniacelt you preferred listening to part of the British National Anthem and watching the queen, instead of a full programme about Sean Fallon and what he achieved. Overall I liked the programme but I thought that angle was an outrageous insult to the vast number of Celtic fans particularly from Sean Fallon's home country. We hear all the time that we should keep politics out of football, yet on last night' tribute show Fine Gael ( the main party in Government ) was clearly mentioned and lauded. Inappropriate I would think.
sh, where in my post did I say I "preferred listening to part of the British National Anthem ..." to anything? I don't know what else or how much more detail about Sean Fallon could/should have been covered, that you believe was missing - I know little more about him other than his Celtic connection - but in a relatively short 25min (approx) programme I liked what was said about him. We could probably all take a leaf out of Sean's book in his parting words whereby he said something along the lines that in this life we should be kind and helpful to everyone and anyone and simply avoid those with whom we don't get along. He was obviously a remarkably good human being and for me, the programme brought that out. As for the bits you found so distasteful, I paid little attention to them as, in my view, they were not the main thrust of the programme though they provided a little background and I noted that his father was very much associated with other things you probably find even more distasteful - having served in the British Army and being very much involved with the British Legion and organizing 'poppy day' which I believe, was also very briefly mentioned by Sean's sister. Sean Fallon got very emotional at one point when he said that he knew his father would be delighted by his move to Celtic (or similar) and I saw nothing wrong with providing information about his father to whom he was obviously very lovingly attached. I chose not to get annoyed by such references to the British monarchy or whatever and I was interested in Mr Fallon's background but I appreciate that you obviously choose otherwise and of course that is your prerogative.
stupid me Espaniacelt I thought it was the Huns who worshipped the queen but it seeems that maybe some Celts abroad have a wee spot too. I don't think you Would sing much about that love if you return to Celtic Park. You are quite right it was only a short 25 mins programme and everything was covered very quickly. The shear massiveness of the achievements of 1967 and his input of player selection and been the link between Stein and the players wasn't Really covered but in the time bounds of the programme the nonsense of the monarchy which didnt happen to over 25 years since his retirement . The advertising and promotion of a political party was nauseating. Espaniacelt there would be uproar if a programme was made of another Celt, footage showed of bloodySunday and a link between prince Charles and The regiment involved and furthermore promotion of Sinn Fein. I think both are equally wrong.
I don't know who or what you are getting at in the first two sentences I have marked in bold sh - can you explain this for me please? Your other comments about the programme may be valid but I don't think it set out to cover specific achievements - more to give a general picture of the man and his background. Like it or not, the truth of the matter is that Sean's father appears to have spent a large part of his life involved in things British but it was a different time and as the programme pointed out, many young men joined the British army to escape poverty - a situation of which most armies throughout the world took and still take, advantage. I certainly am in no position to judge the actions of these young men but I do take issue with members of governments or establishments which take advantage of their situations and send them off to fight and die in their wars whilst they sit in the background shedding nothing but crocodile tears. It's been the same throughout history of course - I believe even in your own native land, in the so-called Battle of the Boyne, the opposing protagonists, James and William were related by marriage (James being William's father-in-law) and unlike the poor unfortunate dead, the defeated James was free to go off and lick his wounded pride - a terrible fate indeed. Apologies for this little off-topic rant. Anyway, I take your point about keeping politics out of it and that if Sean Fallon's father or indeed he himself, had been steadfast Irish republicans, the question arises as to whether or not such prominence would have been given to those connections and/or contacts and if it had, what sort of outcry might have ensued as a result. Unfortunately, however the Establishment of the day calls the tune and that is no different the world over - it was always thus, just as history is generally written by the victors.
As you said a short programme about the life of a Celtic Legend. More time spent about the monarchy and the Britishness than any other two aspects of his life. The fact that You chose to ignore that , had me feeling you were comfortable with her presence in The very short programme we had about our legend. Forgive me for saying that bringing the combatants of 1690 together in 2013 Would seem to have little merit. I realise you do post some rubbish too, Just like the rest of us and I use to have high regards for your posts, one Sensible poster amongst a sea of nonsense. Don't make me realise that you are the same as the rest
Sorry sh but I am neither particularly comfortable nor uncomfortable about anything in the programme. I did enjoy the tribute paid to Sean Fallon very much and I beg to differ in respect of your assertion that more time was spent on the british monarchy or britishness than the other aspects of Sean's life. In my view, in the short time allotted, the programme appears to have tried to give a pen picture of the man and a bit of background to and about, him and his family and nothing much else. The fact that this involved Sean's father's links to the british army etc is just that - a fact, in his family's life. Do you think that no mention of this connection should have been made at all? My reference to the events of 1690 was merely (though probably rather clumsy and a bit off topic for which I admitted and apologized) to point to the fact that nothing has changed in respect of how the Establishment/people in power or behind it, use, abuse and manage to control or certainly attempt to control, everyone and everything for their own selfish ends - forgive me for saying so but you appear to have misundertsood this and and taken it out of context. I will, however, also admit to having consumed more red wine than is probably advisable when posting on here but I think, that even when completely abstinent, I would still stand over anything I've said so far! I'm sorry if I have spoiled your image of me as a normally sensible poster but I hope not - though if it is the case then perhaps you will be so kind as to not judge me too harshly in this instance given that up to now you seem to think my posts have been ok.
