#boycottspurs

[Sheikh_of_Araby]

A few good points against on here, a few ridonculously silly ones... Protests put off potential buyers? Nonsensical. A) Everybody in the footballing world knows why Newcastle fans are unhappy. B) If someone buying the club is put off by the fans being unhappy when an owner sells all the players, replaces with cheap tat and creams the profits, then WE DON'T WANT THEM. They wouldn't be an upgrade on Ashley, would they? A protest serves a double purpose of drawing attention to the situation and putting off arses who would buy the club to do exactly the same thing.

We are pretty much safe, nowt to play for, and are playing like it. If you're still going, then you can't have it both ways and moan about the situation. Tottenham is a perfect game to stay away from.

That is going to be the ****ed up thing. You have the two sides; the 'loyalist' and 'boycotters'. The latter moan about Ashley and are prepared to do something. They will continue to moan. The former moan about Ashley, won't do anything, yet will continue to moan about Ashley. You can't have it both ways. Without ruffling too many feathers, attending the Spurs game is effectively saying that you accept Ashley, his way of running the club, the players he signs, coaches he appoints and the 'ambition' of the club.

 

[General Lee Speaking]

That is going to be the ****ed up thing. You have the two sides; the 'loyalist' and 'boycotters'. The latter moan about Ashley and are prepared to do something. They will continue to moan. The former moan about Ashley, won't do anything, yet will continue to moan about Ashley. You can't have it both ways. Without ruffling too many feathers, attending the Spurs game is effectively saying that you accept Ashley, his way of running the club, the players he signs, coaches he appoints and the 'ambition' of the club.

No it isn't.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

To be honest though many of us did say this would be the end result getting rid of Pardew. So whilst people may not have wanted Carver, it was brought about by people fighting hard to get Pardew out, to the point where he decided he'd had enough. In some kind of utopia Pardew walks and a De Boer or someone of that ilk walks in. In the real world this **** happens. Sadly as a group of fans, we are reaping what we have sown either through misplaced aggression or not enough foresight, or a combination of the 2.

Some will say "Ah but the point is it shouldn't be managed like this". For me? No the point is we should be smart enough to realise it is!

I personally think he would have gone anyway; the Palace job came up and I think he would have accepted it no matter what was going on with us because of his history with them, closer to his home etc. The situation at the time just made it easier for him to walk away.

 

[Magnet]

That is going to be the ****ed up thing. You have the two sides; the 'loyalist' and 'boycotters'. The latter moan about Ashley and are prepared to do something. They will continue to moan. The former moan about Ashley, won't do anything, yet will continue to moan about Ashley. You can't have it both ways. Without ruffling too many feathers, attending the Spurs game is effectively saying that you accept Ashley, his way of running the club, the players he signs, coaches he appoints and the 'ambition' of the club.

Like G Lee I disagree.

No-one has convinced me by any of the arguments advanced that a one off boycott will have any effect on whether Cashley decides to sell the Club or not.

Cashley, without my ever having met him, gives me the strong impression that to sell the Club someone has to offer him a bucketful of money to buy him out. The size of that bucket will be dictated by Cashley and not the Buyer and not the fans.

Cashley has repeatedly shown in the past that whatever the fans think he will do what he wants and will not be put off by abuse, banners etc. The amount that he is owed, said to be £129M, will be of no relevance as to what Cashley will want for the Club. Even if you add a figure of about £120M making a figure of about £250M which seems to be a figure kicked around as a selling figure that amount IMHO will be no where near what Cashley will want for the Club.

The Sky money is ridiculously high for each Club in the PL now. It will be jumping to even more obscene heights next year. Currently Cashley can make between £20M (wink, wink) to £50M each year for a relatively minimal risk. Next year or the year after he will be able to make between £50M to £80M for the same minimal risk. For someone who gives a very strong impression of loving making money regardless of the effect on others it is going to take a huge amount for him to sell. Due to Sky that figure is going significantly up. So long as Cashley keeps us in the PL he is going to be rolling in it. I don't believe that there are many if any consortiums out there with the amount of money it will take to prise Cashley's fingers from around this Club. Cashley is not going to go because fans complain, in whatever form, because he can make so much money now out of the Club thanks primarily to Sky and not the fans attending matches.

I do have other reasons why I will not boycott but those who do advocate a boycott please tell me what real effect it's going to have given the above points all of which I believe are likely to be accepted as being roughly as accurate and correct.

 

[General Lee Speaking]

Like G Lee I disagree.

No-one has convinced me by any of the arguments advanced that a one off boycott will have any effect on whether Cashley decides to sell the Club or not.

Cashley, without my ever having met him, gives me the strong impression that to sell the Club someone has to offer him a bucketful of money to buy him out. The size of that bucket will be dictated by Cashley and not the Buyer and not the fans.

Cashley has repeatedly shown in the past that whatever the fans think he will do what he wants and will not be put off by abuse, banners etc. The amount that he is owed, said to be £129M, will be of no relevance as to what Cashley will want for the Club. Even if you add a figure of about £120M making a figure of about £250M which seems to be a figure kicked around as a selling figure that amount IMHO will be no where near what Cashley will want for the Club.

The Sky money is ridiculously high for each Club in the PL now. It will be jumping to even more obscene heights next year. Currently Cashley can make between £20M (wink, wink) to £50M each year for a relatively minimal risk. Next year or the year after he will be able to make between £50M to £80M for the same minimal risk. For someone who gives a very strong impression of loving making money regardless of the effect on others it is going to take a huge amount for him to sell. Due to Sky that figure is going significantly up. So long as Cashley keeps us in the PL he is going to be rolling in it. I don't believe that there are many if any consortiums out there with the amount of money it will take to prise Cashley's fingers from around this Club. Cashley is not going to go because fans complain, in whatever form, because he can make so much money now out of the Club thanks primarily to Sky and not the fans attending matches.

I do have other reasons why I will not boycott but those who do advocate a boycott please tell me what real effect it's going to have given the above points all of which I believe are likely to be accepted as being roughly as accurate and correct.

Arranged 'boycoutts', protests, etc. are for those fans who are too arrogant or too stupid to not realise that they do not have a say in the running of their club under this regime. "What can WE do?" They ask. Turn up and positively support, or don't go at all IMO. Mike Ashley will do what he wants no matter what a few thousand fans think or do as has been proven time and time again.

 

[Albert's Chip Shop]

I've made my point fellas and won't get drawn into trading any insults on what is naturally a devisive topic.

Outside of the Spurs game I can see the other home games having scenes like this... Equally embarassing for Ashley.

You must log in or register to see media

 

[Albert's Chip Shop]

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Frank_Pingel_Legend]

That is going to be the ****ed up thing. You have the two sides; the 'loyalist' and 'boycotters'. The latter moan about Ashley and are prepared to do something. They will continue to moan. The former moan about Ashley, won't do anything, yet will continue to moan about Ashley. You can't have it both ways. Without ruffling too many feathers, attending the Spurs game is effectively saying that you accept Ashley, his way of running the club, the players he signs, coaches he appoints and the 'ambition' of the club.

Agreed. The battle lines are drawn. If they want to throw in their lot with Ashley, then so be it.

To boycott is an act of refusal. Don't worry about effectiveness. JUST DO IT.

 

[Heed]

I Will Be Going.
I have my reasons and I don't need to justify them to anyone ****er.

Ashley, couldn't drive me away, so there is no f****** chance that a bunch of naive fans will do what that **** has failed to do.

If there's one thing that pisses me off most it's people who take a self righteous stance and thrust it on others.
I've never heard so much ****e as the 'battle lines are drawn', what a load of utter bollocks.
If you don't want to go, then don't go, who the **** cares - not Ashley that's for certain.

I trust anyone boycotting the game, won't be watching it on TV, or it's not much of a statement is it.
A bit two faced if you ask me.....

Being clear, I'm not in any so called Ashley camp, I will moan if I want to, as is my right, the same as anyone else, but I will do it at the ground not on some Internet forum, in the pub **** faced or whatever.

 

[Agent Bruce.]

I'm not going to this game. I just can't be arsed and I think the one game boycott is a decent idea.
Ashley will be loving how the fans are devided on this though as it is more publicity.
**** him.

 

[Frank_Pingel_Legend]

The French collaborators, mild and extreme, during WWII had plenty of reasons for their stance. After all, it guaranteed an easier life and what difference would it make to anything what they did? And everyone agreed the Nazis would win anyway.

Except, of course, many ended up with their heads shaven and dragged through the streets to be humiliated.

Anyone who sides with the enemy will stay there.

 

[Magnet]

The French collaborators, mild and extreme, during WWII had plenty of reasons for their stance. After all, it guaranteed an easier life and what difference would it make to anything what they did? And everyone agreed the Nazis would win anyway.

Except, of course, many ended up with their heads shaven and dragged through the streets to be humiliated.

Anyone who sides with the enemy will stay there.

Have to say what utter garbage.

Trying to equate ownership and supporting a football team to "a battle" and WWII and the battle for freedom suggests a distorted view as to what is important and what is not. There is no proper or real comparison between these issues.

I take football as seriously as most avid fans and I usually do not speak to family and friends for a couple of days or so especially after a bad defeat ot a big defeat but I do not take the game out of perspective (my family may disagree) but it does those supporting a boycott no favours at all to denigrate those fans who do not wish to do so. And to suggest a comparison to French collaborators is simply ludicrous.

To say boycott as an act of refusal regardless of effect is also ludicrous. I don't intend to cut my nose off to spite my face.

If you wish to boycott feel free to do so but try and retain some level of commonsense if you are trying to persuade others to your view. As far as I am concerned neither you nor anyone else so far has advanced an argument which suggests it will achieve any effect on the ownership either to leave or to change his ways. And until they do I will continue going and if I wish to do so to complain about how the Club is run. One thing it will not signify is that I agree or accept that Cashley is running the Club correctly.

 

[General Lee Speaking]

The French collaborators, mild and extreme, during WWII had plenty of reasons for their stance. After all, it guaranteed an easier life and what difference would it make to anything what they did? And everyone agreed the Nazis would win anyway.

Except, of course, many ended up with their heads shaven and dragged through the streets to be humiliated.

Anyone who sides with the enemy will stay there.

What a load of ****e.

 

[E.T. Fairfax]

the only way ashley would take any notice will be if you get gates of about 30K max. constantly, then for that to gradually reduce over time! That wont happen! 1 game with about 5K empty seats is gonna achieve owt!!!

 

[Heed]

The French collaborators, mild and extreme, during WWII had plenty of reasons for their stance. After all, it guaranteed an easier life and what difference would it make to anything what they did? And everyone agreed the Nazis would win anyway.

Except, of course, many ended up with their heads shaven and dragged through the streets to be humiliated.

Anyone who sides with the enemy will stay there.

It's when I read utter crap like this, that I realise why fans of clubs laugh at us and think we're thick as pig ****e.

 

[TheJudeanPeoplesFront]

Like G Lee I disagree.

No-one has convinced me by any of the arguments advanced that a one off boycott will have any effect on whether Cashley decides to sell the Club or not.

Cashley, without my ever having met him, gives me the strong impression that to sell the Club someone has to offer him a bucketful of money to buy him out. The size of that bucket will be dictated by Cashley and not the Buyer and not the fans.

Cashley has repeatedly shown in the past that whatever the fans think he will do what he wants and will not be put off by abuse, banners etc. The amount that he is owed, said to be £129M, will be of no relevance as to what Cashley will want for the Club. Even if you add a figure of about £120M making a figure of about £250M which seems to be a figure kicked around as a selling figure that amount IMHO will be no where near what Cashley will want for the Club.

The Sky money is ridiculously high for each Club in the PL now. It will be jumping to even more obscene heights next year. Currently Cashley can make between £20M (wink, wink) to £50M each year for a relatively minimal risk. Next year or the year after he will be able to make between £50M to £80M for the same minimal risk. For someone who gives a very strong impression of loving making money regardless of the effect on others it is going to take a huge amount for him to sell. Due to Sky that figure is going significantly up. So long as Cashley keeps us in the PL he is going to be rolling in it. I don't believe that there are many if any consortiums out there with the amount of money it will take to prise Cashley's fingers from around this Club. Cashley is not going to go because fans complain, in whatever form, because he can make so much money now out of the Club thanks primarily to Sky and not the fans attending matches.

I do have other reasons why I will not boycott but those who do advocate a boycott please tell me what real effect it's going to have given the above points all of which I believe are likely to be accepted as being roughly as accurate and correct.

It isn't up to anybody to convince you of anything. The facts are laid before you, the position is laid before you, the options are very straightforward and the decision is easy based on your own inclinations.

I'm personally sick of the attitude "well nothing we do matters at the end of the day". Well then why bother breathing?

It may not effect anything. However, you going to the game DEFINITELY isn't effecting anything, is it? I think a non-violent protest which causes no inconvenience to anybody is a perfectly viable option, and well worth doing as a point of collective expression of dissatisfaction, if nothing else. We're basically safe, the team aren't even trying anymore, so where's the sense in "we have to go to the game to support them" as an argument?

If you go, good for you, however I think a point should, indeed MUST, be made and we have every right to do so. Being a naysaying pessimist all the time achieves precisely nothing, which is what, at worst, not going to the Spurs game in protest would achieve.

 

[TheJudeanPeoplesFront]

It's when I read utter crap like this, that I realise why fans of clubs laugh at us and think we're thick as pig ****e.

Howay man, I don't think the thread needs descend into this Heed.

 

[Sheikh_of_Araby]

It isn't up to anybody to convince you of anything. The facts are laid before you, the position is laid before you, the options are very straightforward and the decision is easy based on your own inclinations.

I'm personally sick of the attitude "well nothing we do matters at the end of the day". Well then why bother breathing?

It may not effect anything. However, you going to the game DEFINITELY isn't effecting anything, is it? I think a non-violent protest which causes no inconvenience to anybody is a perfectly viable option, and well worth doing as a point of collective expression of dissatisfaction, if nothing else. We're basically safe, the team aren't even trying anymore, so where's the sense in "we have to go to the game to support them" as an argument?

If you go, good for you, however I think a point should, indeed MUST, be made and we have every right to do so. Being a naysaying pessimist all the time achieves precisely nothing, which is what, at worst, not going to the Spurs game in protest would achieve.

Doing nothing achieves nothing. Doing something may not achieve anything but at least people are trying. I am done trying to justify why I'm staying away. I'm also not going to try and persuade anyone. Like you said, the facts are there. It's up to individuals to decide what they want to do. It's absolutely bollocks that nothing can be done and no guarantee that doing something won't work. Each to their own.

 

[Magnet]

It isn't up to anybody to convince you of anything. The facts are laid before you, the position is laid before you, the options are very straightforward and the decision is easy based on your own inclinations.

I'm personally sick of the attitude "well nothing we do matters at the end of the day". Well then why bother breathing?

It may not effect anything. However, you going to the game DEFINITELY isn't effecting anything, is it? I think a non-violent protest which causes no inconvenience to anybody is a perfectly viable option, and well worth doing as a point of collective expression of dissatisfaction, if nothing else. We're basically safe, the team aren't even trying anymore, so where's the sense in "we have to go to the game to support them" as an argument?

If you go, good for you, however I think a point should, indeed MUST, be made and we have every right to do so. Being a naysaying pessimist all the time achieves precisely nothing, which is what, at worst, not going to the Spurs game in protest would achieve.

Not sure of the point you are trying to make with the "why bother breathing" comment. What we do always matters. I simply take the view in relation to the topic of this thread that boycotting the Spurs game will not change anything and, therefore, I will go to the game. I have not said I would not support or participate in some form of protest where I do believe it will have an effect.

I have also said I have no problem whatsoever with others who perhaps do believe that a boycott will have an effect boycotting if they wish to do so.

As an aside I have boycotted in the past going back to John Hall's fight to gain control. The reason I boycotted is that I believed that boycott would have an effect and it did. So I'm not against boycotting if I believe it will achieve a purpose.

Also I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make in your last para. I'm not a "naysaying pessimist" if that's what you are suggesting. Also, as I've said, I have no problem with others boycotting if that's what they want to do. I won't criticise them and try and take the moral high ground as some pro-boycott advocates are doing.

I do not buy any goods from the Club shop nor from Sports Direct, as I have no intention of lining Cashley's pocket where I can get what I want elsewhere. If someone is able to suggest a form of protest that has a reasonable chance of being effective then I am more than happy to look at that and then decide if I would be involved. Probably would provided it wasn't illegal. To suggest I and others have to join in a protest for which I see serves no purpose and that will IMO have no effect is overly arrogant on the part of those criticising me for not joining in the protest.

The reason I say if someone else thinks of an effective means of protesting is simply because I haven't been able to.

 

[TheJudeanPeoplesFront]

Not sure of the point you are trying to make with the "why bother breathing" comment. What we do always matters. I simply take the view in relation to the topic of this thread that boycotting the Spurs game will not change anything and, therefore, I will go to the game. I have not said I would not support or participate in some form of protest where I do believe it will have an effect.

I have also said I have no problem whatsoever with others who perhaps do believe that a boycott will have an effect boycotting if they wish to do so.

As an aside I have boycotted in the past going back to John Hall's fight to gain control. The reason I boycotted is that I believed that boycott would have an effect and it did. So I'm not against boycotting if I believe it will achieve a purpose.

Also I'm not sure of the point you are trying to make in your last para. I'm not a "naysaying pessimist" if that's what you are suggesting. Also, as I've said, I have no problem with others boycotting if that's what they want to do. I won't criticise them and try and take the moral high ground as some pro-boycott advocates are doing.

I do not buy any goods from the Club shop nor from Sports Direct, as I have no intention of lining Cashley's pocket where I can get what I want elsewhere. If someone is able to suggest a form of protest that has a reasonable chance of being effective then I am more than happy to look at that and then decide if I would be involved. Probably would provided it wasn't illegal. To suggest I and others have to join in a protest for which I see serves no purpose and that will IMO have no effect is overly arrogant on the part of those criticising me for not joining in the protest.

In effect you're saying you're lazy... "Someone else do everything and I might think about joining the bandwagon"

Nothing ANYBODY will ever come up with will 100% make a difference. By going to the game, you 100% percent ARE NOT making a difference. In fact you're purposefully and intentionally making an excuse to not even attempt to make a difference (in a desperate attempt to not be seen as a "scab"). That is the quintessence of naysaying pessimism on the topic.

You're not a scab if you go to the game, you're just content enough with the situation to do **** all about it. Honestly, everybody has their limit, your time will come. Will we be in such a decent position to make such an expression at the moment you decide you've had enough? Doubtful.