Collymore has past atrocities, and yet still gets a handsome celeb career (partly due to the atrocities). Some people feel he shouldn't have that career, maybe the same people who have lost their careers through their past atrocities ?

14 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

Are you making words up now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism 

 

1 minute ago, Sindre said:

You believe they are? That mistakes you've done in the past defines you?

Define you ? It depends who is doing the defining.

Judged ? yes certainly, all the time.

8 minutes ago, coco said:

Collymore has past atrocities, and yet still gets a handsome celeb career (partly due to the atrocities). Some people feel he shouldn't have that career, maybe the same people who have lost their careers through their past atrocities ?

We have a starter for us with a similar past. Just worse.
Does that mean one should bring the incident up at every opportunity?
If you want to define Collymore by his mistakes, then you have to do the same with Marcos Alonso don't you?

Personally i prefer to let the past be the past, accept that we are human and all make mistakes. 

Edited February 5, 20197 yr by Sindre

8 minutes ago, ForeverCarefree said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism 

 

Thanks for that link, but it doesn't apply in this case, does it?  Someone said that people are not defined by their past mistakes.  I pointed out that they are, all the time.   Not "whataboutery" at all but refuting someone's naive view of the world and the way that past misdemeanours are regarded.  The same clown who keeps on bringing up Alonso's past - now there's a classic example of whataboutery for you.

Any road up, that'll do for me.  You have a collymore view, I have a different one, nothing more to  be gained by each of us rehashing the same old bollocks over and over again, in slightly different terms.

 

2 hours ago, yorkleyblue said:

OK,  I see I'm in a minority.  Carry on, collymore is obviously more than a know-nothing wife-beating dogger, with deep and meaningful  insights and perceptiveness.

I don't agree with Collymore by the way, I just think the dressing room are used to getting there own way and as soon as it gets ugly it gets ugly, Collymore trying to centre this around Hazard I find very annoying and bold to say. 

13 minutes ago, yorkleyblue said:

The same clown who keeps on bringing up Alonso's past

Keeps on? Tell me when i have used Alonso's past against him then?

I asked coco a question. You are simply a hypocrite and a liar.

This is my view you fool.
Personally i prefer to let the past be the past, accept that we are human and all make mistakes. 

Difference being that i apply this to Stan Collymore as well.

Edited February 5, 20197 yr by Sindre

Atrocities may be a bit strong. Ethnic cleansing, genocide, gun-toting rampage are atrocities.

Deeply unpleasant character with a chequered past of misdemeanours fully illustrating what a total bellend he is, agree 100%.

I still remember the same night that Cantona went into the crowd at Palace Collymore ended up in the family section at the Bridge which also ended up in a punch up scuffle. No headlines because Cantona trumped him that night.

 

Edit: Of course none of his personal flaws take away that he may have some valid views about football in the same way he may talk bollox at times as well....pretty much like all of us on here at one time or another.

Edited February 5, 20197 yr by WhiteWall
Update

4 minutes ago, Sindre said:

Keeps on? Tell me when i have used Alonso's past against him then?

I asked coco a question. You are simply a hypocrite and a liar.

This is my view you fool.
Personally i prefer to let the past be the past, accept that we are human and all make mistakes. 

Difference being that i apply this to Stan Collymore as well.

 

Collymore is a football pundit and writer who's incentivised to cover controversy, we all know a lot of football pundits like to talk about issues that may not even be there, it's pure speculation but it doesn't stop them from making ridiculous bold libel statements. 

Like I posted earlier, you had Steve Nicol on ESPN saying Sarri is having a disaster, he's turned Chelsea into a circus and he's out of his depth, what was all that based on? Because he went into the dressing room on his own after the match and excluded his backroom staff. That's it... Literally, these people are incentivised to make mountains out of molehills and Collymore is one of the worst ones for it.

Don't forget Collymore has accused the F.A. of being racist many times, he even said Premier League Clubs are racist for not hiring Sol Campbell. Meanwhile, you get a legend like Frank Lampard, a well-respected pundit, calm head, leader who accepts his challenge in the Championship and makes a really good go of it.  Collymore won't see that though, so why should I take his word seriously on anything else? He has no credibility whatsoever and that's not even including his dodgy personal life. 

8 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

Atrocities may be a bit strong. Ethnic cleansing, genocide, gun-toting rampage are atrocities.

Deeply unpleasant character with a chequered past of misdemeanours fully illustrating what a total bellend he is, agree 100%.

I still remember the same night that Cantona went into the crowd at Palace Collymore ended up in the family section at the Bridge which also ended up in a punch up scuffle. No headlines because Cantona trumped him that night.

 

Edit: Of course none of his personal flaws take away that he may have some valid views about football in the same way he may talk bollox at times as well....pretty much like all of us on here at one time or another.

^ This. No black and white, as usual.

5 minutes ago, Slojo said:

Collymore is a football pundit and writer who's incentivised to cover controversy, we all know a lot of football pundits like to talk about issues that may not even be there, it's pure speculation but it doesn't stop them from making ridiculous bold libel statements. 

Like I posted earlier, you had Steve Nicol on ESPN saying Sarri is having a disaster, he's turned Chelsea into a circus and he's out of his depth, what was all that based on? Because he went into the dressing room on his own after the match and excluded his backroom staff. That's it... Literally, these people are incentivised to make mountains out of molehills and Collymore is one of the worst ones for it.

Don't forget Collymore has accused the F.A. of being racist many times, he even said Premier League Clubs are racist for not hiring Sol Campbell. Meanwhile, you get a legend like Frank Lampard, a well-respected pundit, calm head, leader who accepts his challenge in the Championship and makes a really good go of it.  Collymore won't see that though, so why should I take his word seriously on anything else?

You don't have to take him seriously.
I don't take his view on football seriously either but that is not the point here either.

And i am not surprised yorkley keeps on liking posts but can't seem to defend his own lies.
How long is he allowed to do this coco?

I used to be very black & white and still am to a certain extent but as I get older, I try to be a bit more open in my views and be a tad more lenient.

What I mean is, if I didn't like someone because of their views or an action, then that would be it - they were marked and I would always have that dislike of them. Now of course, it all boils down to how loathesome they are or what action they did as to how lenient I am nowadays. Not gonna be forgiving someone like Hitler!

BUT, these days radio, TV and Social Media are full of folk who I'm not that fond of but I will try and take what they say on board IF I think they are making sense. Many of these are on TalkSport or Sky and I'll name just a few that I wouldn't have given time of day in the past and even now they can be complete w**kers, but I will say fair enough, good point if I feel it's warranted and Collymore would be one of them:

Jamie Carragher

Gary Neville

Adrian Durham

Piers Morgan

Simon Jordan

Jeremy Clarkson

As someone else has said, all of these people have to be opinionated and they're not a group you would want to spend an evening with but sometimes they do have valid points and Simon Jordan in particular, used to despise him at Palace (and envious of his poncy hair), but I find myself agreeing with most of what he says these days.  

1 minute ago, Sindre said:

You don't have to take him seriously.
I don't take his view on football seriously either but that is not the point here either.

And i am not surprised yorkley keeps on liking posts but can't seem to defend his own lies.
How long is he allowed to do this coco?

Well like I said in the first page, I know it's an ad hominem and you can use that against many people who you don't agree with. Maybe it is convenient that we hold Collymore's past against him, but with the amount of utter tripe that he posts and slanders people with I think it's very fair to bring up who he is, the man himself. 

This guy is a total w**ker, he still has a very good lucrative career that not many other people would have if they did what he did, he gets abused by people online? Yeah, we've heard it all before, particularly from him. I know many people in the spotlight that get all sorts of abuse and they take it on the chin or just ignore it, Collymore uses it as a shield of self-pity then he goes out and viciously accuses people and organisations of horrendous claims over nothing. 

He's written quite a lot of articles about Sol, and he was also one of the expert lip readers over the Sterling incident. So that for me diminishes a lot of his credibility, who he is, what he's done and he still does. I don't take that pillock seriously, obviously, if he says the sky is blue that doesn't make him wrong, like someone said a broken clock is right twice a day, but what did he say that's strongly accurate about our dressing room exactly? I mean to say Hazard needs to leave Chelsea to rid the dressing room of its toxic behaviour on pure speculation is a farce, to say the least. 

It's popular to jump on Hazard's back right now, and Collymore has conveniently done that like the social justice self-righteous bandwagoner that he is. I think that's actually one of the main points here, I don't think Yorkley is dismissing Stan purely because of an ad hominem, he's dismissing Collymore because he's Collymore, the twat who is still a twat who likes to be the centre of attention and controversy. 

Okay fair enough, you know its ad hominem and everyone can chose to do whatever they want clearly.

41 minutes ago, Sindre said:

You don't have to take him seriously.
I don't take his view on football seriously either but that is not the point here either.

And i am not surprised yorkley keeps on liking posts but can't seem to defend his own lies.
How long is he allowed to do this coco?

Allowed to do what ? if he lied call him out, then leave it there, as you said earlier.................>

1 hour ago, Sindre said:

let the past be the past, accept that we are human and all make mistakes. 

 

6 minutes ago, coco said:

Allowed to do what ??

Lie. Current yorkleyblue is a lying.

 

3 minutes ago, Sindre said:

Lie. Current yorkleyblue is a lying.

 

https://www.theshedend.com/guidelines/

If I was Collymore I’d forget about trying to be a journalist and stick to what he’s good at.  ie fornicating with strangers in lay-bys 

 

Edited February 5, 20197 yr by Ewell CFC

3 hours ago, ForeverCarefree said:

If people resort to racial taunts when he's on a wind up about football then those people deserve to be called out. 

 

I didn't say they didn't deserve to be called on racism, but collymore often uses sectarian taunts to ellicit that respond for example, he knows what he's doing. He has no intention in an open and honest debate on anything, he instantly resorts to racism claims once his argument has been shown to be baseless.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/antonio-conte-needs-sell-eden-7726251

Collymore seems to have an obsession about selling our players.

Whilst we're on the topic of that c**t Collymore, thought i'd drop this gem in here for you all to enjoy. This is why Chelsea fans will always be the best:

 

That call and the 4-2 FA Cup game are probably the reasons he's got it in fir CFC!!

4 hours ago, Ewell CFC said:

If I was Collymore I’d forget about trying to be a journalist and stick to what he’s good at.  ie fornicating with strangers in lay-bys 

 

But he’s not good at that, he keeps getting caught!