Darron Gibson

[Predator]

EG; I'm sure you know well that I am in no position to respond on there due to the eight-year suspension - or however long it was again - of my account.Consider yourself lucky, I have been banned outright. That was a sad day.

[paul_oshea]

Irish Times has Trapattoni's comments on the issue.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2010/0909/1224278513017.html

hmmm why would he speak like that in italian? ...

[The Fly]

Consider yourself lucky, I have been banned outright.

I was wondering why you had been so quiet recently!

Coincidentally, I had just scanned over the 'Liam Boyce' thread on OWC earlier today, and noticed your current status. Was it a summary execution or did you receive any prior correspondence?


That was a sad day.

I'm sure you won't take it too much to heart. ;)


-------------------------



Ahh well...............alone again...............:(

[geysir]

Jaysus Danny, it sounds as if you are trying to explain yourself to a virus :D

[John83]

Jaysus Danny, it sounds as if you are trying to explain yourself to a virus :D
Hey that works. I'm treating my cold with a strict regimen of negotiation, threats and bribery, and I'm sure I'm getting better.

[geysir]

:D
I was more thinking of a computer virus.

[EalingGreen]

I've just noticed that 'EalingGreen' has today on OWC decided to pick up on and respond to a post I wrote there in early 2007 in light of my post here last night on what an old English teacher of mine made of Gibson. What commitment... :rolleyes:



EG; I'm sure you know well that I am in no position to respond on there due to the eight-year suspension - or however long it was again - of my account. In light of that and the fact your post today was the first in that topic since April of 2008, I suspect you're probably just playing to the gallery, but I'll take the opportunity to respond here as I'm more than certain you'll have no problems seeing it.

I was relaying that anecdote as I found it to be a somewhat humourous, if very basic, insight into the guy's possible character or personality, especially given the thought of a former school mischief-maker potentially being lauded with the highest honour the school could bestow upon its former pupils in later life. There was nothing as acerbic as dubbing him a "scumbag" in what I said. I don't know the guy personally, after all.

To insinuate that it's an admission that Gibson is indeed some sort of "scumbag", however, especially one in the sense or context of which I perceived the original slur used against him on OWC to be meant - with sectarian connotations or a hint of underlying bigotry maybe - would be to misconstrue what I wrote entirely. So, well done; mission accomplished on completely missing the point yet again.

When I took issue with the use of the word "scumbag" to describe Gibson - I can't even remember the exact context now as my memory clearly isn't a patch on yours, but I've had a cursory read of some of the related posts around the time - I certainly didn't take it to amount to a mere evaluation of what the guy's general persona might be like. That's what I was referring to last night. I felt the label on OWC, on the other hand, cut a bit deeper than that; a lot deeper, in fact, than getting up to a bit of trouble when the opportunity presented itself in school or looking glum in a night-club. To be honest, and maybe I was wrong on how I took it, I felt he was being singled out as a "scumbag" specifically because he was a Catholic/nationalist who had decided he'd rather play for us over Northern Ireland. It's all about the context and nuance, EG.

Hypothetically-speaking, if, say, David Healy had been eligible to play for Scotland due to a Scottish parent or something and had declared for them in his youth, as Gibson did with Ireland at the age of 16 or 17, I'm not so sure he would have been victim to the same deluge of bitterness as that to which Gibson found himself being subjected. Shane Duffy fell victim to similar upon his switch to us "Beggars"/the "Darkside". Maybe I misunderstood the vitriol expressed and it had nothing to do with them being Catholics/nationalists preferring to play for Ireland - I'd have to be in very generous mood to offer the benefit of any remaining doubt there - but to accuse me of hypocrisy now, three and a half years later, is a bit rich. I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

Actually, it's all a whole lot simpler than all that.

Browsing this thread, I noticed your interesting description of DG's character etc. Knowing that you used to post on OWC and guessing that you will have contributed there on the subject of Gibson, I did a very quick Search, and the post which I quoted above was, I think, 4th or 5th on the list.

Therefore I reproduced it on OWC, since I guessed it would be of passing interest to some of the posters there.

That's basically it. Note that I did not call him a "scumbag", nor would I use that term. Nor did I (intend to, at least) imply that you thought him a scumbag.

If, having defended DG on OWC, you are a little embarrassed at having your own words from elsewhere quoted, then there you go - these things happen on the Internet. (Perhaps you aren't embarrassed, I don't know). As for having no opportunity to defend yourself, I forgot/overlooked that you were banned, I suspect because I thought a Banned Member's posting history was deleted from site and therefore wouldn't show up on the Search function?

Beyond that, all I can say is that your original post offers an interesting insight on one aspect of the Gibson saga which always puzzled me. Namely, I have seen him/his family quoted as saying that he originally only fell out with the IFA because they insisted he play for one of our under-age teams, rather than be allowed to attend a training session at Old Trafford. This was what then caused him to turn to the FAI.

On the other hand, I have also seen him/his family quoted as saying it "had always been his dream to play for Ireland etc".

Perhaps the explanation is that whilst he's no "scumbag", he is a contrary hoor?

Anyhow having, I hope, cleared that particular diversion up, fwiw, here is my take on the current Trappatoni/Ferguson disagreement whether DG should stay at OT, or find another club.

Obviously DG's worth to Trapp is diminished if he's not getting match practice at MU, so he will want him to move, whether permanently or on loan.

Ferguson's position is, I suspect, rather more subtle. That is, having been given a reasonable opportunity last season to make an impression at OT, Fergie may be disappointed/surprised that he didn't kick on further. In which case, you might have expected him to loan him out (if he thought that might help), or sell him completely, if he now considered he wasn't going to make it.

That said, with the Glazers increasing the squeeze on Fergie's transfer/wages budget, he is increasingly having to "make bricks without straw". In particular, he is ever more dependant in midfield on veterans like Giggs and Scholes, or crocks like Hargreaves and Carrick, or a number of talented, but still inexperienced imports. Therefore, if MU suffer eg two or three midfield injuries and a suspension, at a time when they have to play, say 7 games in 4 weeks, then Ferguson might be forced to turn to Gibson.

In which case, he won't want him unavailable on loan, therefore he talked the player up in pre-season, both in the Press and (presumably) face-to-face. Which may be unscrupulous, but hardly out-of -character of Ferguson (imo).

Moreover, he won't want to sell him outright, either, since his wages probably aren't excessive, he wouldn't fetch that much (£4-5m?), and whatever he did command may well not be given to Ferguson to reinvest.

Having said all that, I could be entirely wrong!

[Crosby87]

So your conclusion is that basically Fergie might need Gibson at some point when they are playing a lot because he has no one else because the Glazed Donuts won't let him get anyone better. Not putting the thought down but that was a long thing to read for that somewhat obvious conclusion.....

[Sullivinho]

I'm sure you know well that I am in no position to respond on there due to the eight-year suspension - or however long it was again - of my account.

I have a confession to make. I laughed at that. Any chance of it being reduced for good behaviour?

Seriously though, what did you do to deserve that? You hardly seem the type that gets banned from internet forums.

[Predator]

Coincidentally, I had just scanned over the 'Liam Boyce' thread on OWC earlier today, and noticed your current status. Was it a summary execution or did you receive any prior correspondence?After having my 'warning level' increased several times by that 'fhtb' character, for stating my opinion that I didn't think Shane Ferguson would change association despite technically being able to do so under FIFA's rules, I contacted their site administrator, 'Marty' and I explained that I felt it was a bit unreasonable. 'fhtb' (I presume) had deleted my comments and claimed that 'speculation' was the reason my 'warning level' was raised. Speculation? On a football forum? Get outta town!

Anyway, I received no message back from 'Marty', but was simply refused access to the forum and received an email explaining to me that I could reclaim exactly £3.08 from the OWC admin.





I'm sure you won't take it too much to heart. ;)Indeed, although I was genuinely surprised at the blatant ostracism, censorship even, of those who differ in opinion/non-IFA fans/Ireland fans. I don't believe I broke any rules and I attempted to engage posters, but was consistently branded a troll. Many of the posters on OWC played the man and not the ball, which truly says a lot.





Ahh well...............alone again...............:(Not for long probably, they'll be gunning for you. I'm actually amazed that you weren't banned/suspended for 8 years during that time they sarcastically renamed a thread in your honour. Once again, 'fhtb' was at the centre of that.

[DannyInvincible]

I have a confession to make. I laughed at that. Any chance of it being reduced for good behaviour?

Ha, the very precise time in the format "hh:mm, dd/mm/yyyy", indicating when the suspension would cease to have effect nearly a decade down the line, amused me too. Unlikely I'd have luck on the good behaviour front though. My e-mails to the rather thick and humourless mods didn't get me very far. Maybe it's for the best...


Seriously though, what did you do to deserve that? You hardly seem the type that gets banned from internet forums.

Anyone uninterested in reading about this need not delve any further. :p

To be honest, I'm not really sure what I did. I'd set up an account on OWC under the same name as I use here back in January of 2007. Admittedly, the sole reason I went on was to try and clear up what I saw to be a few misunderstandings regarding Darron Gibson's switch to the FAI. 100 per cent of my grand total of eleven posts are now to be found in their infamous and bizarrely-titled "Football Apartheid in Ireland"[/cringe] section, so I won't try and claim that I was there to talk about the colour of David Healy's boots or how sexy Keith Gillespie was.

Around 2006 and 2007, I think the whole eligibility thing had been in the headlines for a while but was coming to a head as Gibson looked increasingly close to making his senior debut for us. I also felt compelled to defend, on OWC, Gibson's right as an Irish national in the face of what I viewed to be a heavy barrage of venom laced with sectarian undertones. Of course, my obvious intentions never went down well, but I wasn't doing anything contrary to forum rules. I was argumentative and defensive, sure, but isn't a forum all about exchanging arguments and opinions? Anyway, it's not like I was banned then or anything and I didn't post there again for quite some time for whatever reason - probably got a bit tired of banging my head off a brick wall - until last March when the switch of Shane Duffy brewed up a similar storm of bitterness and ignorance over there. I suppose I felt like defending another Derry man in the face of all this and maybe did come across as a bit eager for an argument. Still, no crime in that; there were issues and assumptions I felt needed stern addressing and encountering such willing stubbornness and ignorance on this issue is something that genuinely grates with me, after all. I'm sure that's very much apparent from my lengthy and endless number of posts on the eligibility thread here too. ;)

In March, I contributed a few posts to their "Football Apartheid in Ireland" section - once again, probably sharp, to-the-point and impassioned but certainly nothing nasty, as acknowledged on here by 'Gather round', a fan of Northern Ireland and member of OWC, albeit an unusually progressive and tolerant one :p - and, soon enough, found my IP blocked with mods claiming on there that they'd sent me an e-mail explaining the reasons behind the suspension. 'Predator' made a few fruitless attempts to argue my case on there and kept me in the loop as to the claims being made against me as I'd never received said e-mail, so I tried e-mailing them a few times instead for answers. Eventually, I got a snappy response informing me that I'd been guilty of (ab)using two accounts on the site and that under another one I was allegedly using - no idea when this was supposed to have been as they weren't all that keen to inform me of the details - I had been particularly "threatening" towards other forum members. Of course, this was all news to me and it still puzzles me as I have absolutely no recollection of ever having had this second account, never mind using it to make threats, supposedly of a physically violent nature too, which is also kind of odd given it's not really something I could imagine myself doing nor would I even know where to start with dispensing my own personal form of vigilante justice upon anonymous Northern Ireland fans who had the nerve to disagree with my opinion on an internet forum, ha. If that former mystery account had been banned previously and they firmly believed it was connected to my account, then how come my account wasn't banned along with it either before I returned to post after my hiatus or straight after making my first post since the return? If memory serves me right, I was allowed to make three or four posts in the one discussion before being suspended; couldn't be certain though. I've been trying to wonder on what basis they might have made some connection between my account and some other one anyway, even if I had used a second one, but this fails me also. I was living in Dublin for the first period I visited OWC but was living here for the most recent one, so even if I had used some account to dish out explicit abuse, it's not as if my current IP could have been shared with the IP through which I formerly accessed the forum, nor could I have used a single e-mail address to set up two simultaneous accounts as that's just not possible to do. It's just baffling to me on every level conceivable. To be honest, I think they were just p*ssed off with my tone and the line of argument I was taking.

It since transpired that they seem to have problems, variously and when they feel like it, with "single-issue" contributors, or "trolls", as well as non-Northern Ireland fans posting on the site. At least, I've seen the presence of certain users come under serious threat for these given reasons, although it's all a bit arbitrary when duties of moderation are left to characters such as 'fhtb'. The banning of 'Predator', even a good while after he had paid a fiver in the hope of securing his membership against the continuous threats of suspension directed at him, was particularly inexplicable. Likewise, I don't believe he was given any fore-warning or sent an e-mail properly explaining the rationale. He says as much above.

[DannyInvincible]

On a lighter note, I think it's the shape of Gibson's eye-brows that makes him look like he has a permanent attitude:

http://images.mirror.co.uk/upl/m4/aug2008/9/8/04EECD2D-9C9F-8DF0-42085F98D7EB17F8.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gOEJuPdKNFg/SapMv8KT2TI/AAAAAAAAAFg/bGHzTHeMEF8/s320/gibson_darron.jpg

Even when he's smiling, he still looks like he could be plotting your capture and torture behind it all. Maybe he could get the ends trimmed or something.

Edit: Excuse the hasty effort, but he just wants to give you tea and biscuits really:

http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc12/poguemahone85/gibb.png

[Charlie Darwin]

The banning of 'Predator', even a good while after he had paid a fiver in the hope of securing his membership against the continuous threats of suspension directed at him, was particularly inexplicable. Likewise, I don't believe he was given any fore-warning or sent an e-mail properly explaining the rationale. He says as much above.
What's this about?

[boovidge]

you have to pay to be a full member of OWC.

[DannyInvincible]

What's this about?

They have site "members" and site "supporters", who can donate an annual fee of £5 for special treatment. It also goes towards the up-keep of the site. "Members" are your normal, every-day users, whilst those classified as "supporters" are given exclusive access to certain areas of the forum that are closed off to "members" and the public. Presumably that's where all the really juicy stuff comes out! Naturally, "supporters" probably get an easier ride, having proven their loyalty and being part of the clique and all, whilst the threshold of tolerance for anything that might stir a bit of controversy will be lower if it's coming from a common "member".

[Sullivinho]

I also felt compelled to defend, on OWC, Gibson's right as an Irish national

You did what??!!

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/8959/omfgd.gif



If memory serves me right, I was allowed to make three or four posts in the one discussion before being suspended; couldn't be certain though. I've been trying to wonder on what basis they might have made some connection between my account and some other one anyway, even if I had used a second one, but this fails me also. I was living in Dublin for the first period I visited OWC but was living here for the most recent one, so even if I had used some account to dish out explicit abuse, it's not as if my current IP could have been shared with the IP through which I formerly accessed the forum, nor could I have used a single e-mail address to set up two simultaneous accounts as that's just not possible to do. It's just baffling to me on every level conceivable. To be honest, I think they were just p*ssed off with my tone and the line of argument I was taking.I assume your tone and argument were consistent with those shown in the eligibility thread on this forum. Full marks for netiquette. In which case I imagine it was the latter which drew the mighty mod hammer upon you. A shame really. Someone might have a superior argument and the ability to express it but have a bit of integrity when reaching for the censorship button ffs.

Cheers for taking the time to explain it anyway. Who knows, someone might be along to clear things up or refute your claims ;)

[Sullivinho]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_gOEJuPdKNFg/SapMv8KT2TI/AAAAAAAAAFg/bGHzTHeMEF8/s320/gibson_darron.jpg

Tonight Matthew, I'm going to be...Jeffrey Dahmer.

[DannyInvincible]

Note that I did not call him a "scumbag", nor would I use that term. Nor did I (intend to, at least) imply that you thought him a scumbag.

There undoubtedly was an implicit suggestion in what you said. You insinuated that the description I offered on here regarding Gibson in his school-days was in some way synonymous with - whatever exact meaning you wish to invoke - the character of a "scumbag", as someone else had described him on OWC with what I felt were sectarian connotations beyond a mere personal level and relating to more than just his general character. You can't deny that. This is exactly what you said:


"Anyhow, if Gibson is not a "scumbag", do you recognise this description of him from a certain other website the other day?..."

At the least, what you were trying to do was put words in my mouth. Naturally, I felt compelled to refute the original nasty slur and its association by yourself to what I had said in post #1237 (http://foot.ie/threads/37264-Darron-Gibson?p=1398484&viewfull=1#post1398484).


If, having defended DG on OWC, you are a little embarrassed at having your own words from elsewhere quoted, then there you go - these things happen on the Internet. (Perhaps you aren't embarrassed, I don't know).

No, you're correct; I'm not embarrassed. I didn't contradict myself, after all. In fact, I've defended his right to play for us without having to put up with being dubbed a "scumbag" before in full knowledge of what my old English teacher thought of him and I would still defend him on that front now.

I admit my understanding of the minutiae surrounding the whole eligibility issue wasn't as complete or refined then as it is now, having had a glance over what else I'd written, but there's no shame in that, nor would there be much point in picking holes in unpolished arguments I've long since attempted to bolster out of better educating myself on the issues. I certainly didn't invest time trying to improve my overall comprehension of the whole thing in order to maintain the exact same position as the one with which I started nearly half a decade ago.


As for having no opportunity to defend yourself, I forgot/overlooked that you were banned, I suspect because I thought a Banned Member's posting history was deleted from site and therefore wouldn't show up on the Search function?

Technically, I was suspended for something daft and arbitrary like eight years, but it appears posting histories are not deleted in any case. Predator's posts similarly remain in spite of his recent outright banning, although, I believe a few of his last ones were deleted for being "speculative" in nature, which appears to be against forum rules as of a week and a half ago. Ultimately, the mods have the discretion to keep what they wish and censor what they wish at whim.


Beyond that, all I can say is that your original post offers an interesting insight on one aspect of the Gibson saga which always puzzled me. Namely, I have seen him/his family quoted as saying that he originally only fell out with the IFA because they insisted he play for one of our under-age teams, rather than be allowed to attend a training session at Old Trafford. This was what then caused him to turn to the FAI.

On the other hand, I have also seen him/his family quoted as saying it "had always been his dream to play for Ireland etc".

The two are not incompatible and need not contradict one another. Whether he played with and fell out with the IFA or not, there is no strict contradiction in possessing an ultimate wish to play for Ireland one day, presumably at senior level. Although he did make the switch at the age of 16 or so. Perhaps the falling out with the IFA over the trial at United simply hastened his inevitable "defection to the Darkside".


Perhaps the explanation is that whilst he's no "scumbag", he is a contrary hoor?

That's to miss the point of what I found objectionable about the use of the word "scumbag" within the context in which it was originally used on OWC to refer to Gibson. I am of the opinion that it was loaded with politicised contempt in the context of the debate. Basically, as I said in the 2007 post from OWC you quoted:


"I felt there was something more to it than simple annoyance towards the guy for not choosing to represent Northern Ireland"

To be blunt, I feel he was being called a "scumbag" for reasons beyond merely having no intention to play for Northern Ireland, but also because he:

i) Happened to be from a Catholic/nationalist background.
ii) Switched to "the Baggars", of all possible places!

I don't think a northern-born Protestant with a Welsh parent, for example, would be dubbed a "scumbag" if they expressed an intention to represent Wales and the slur then subsequently accepted as appropriate. In the context there was a lot of hatred, bitterness and contempt behind the word "scumbag" that I just don't feel a willingness alone on some player's part to play for another team over Northern Ireland could warrant, but maybe that's just me... See the thread on Shane Lowry on this forum, for example, and you'll see a more appropriate reaction to a very similar decision made by a player whereby we lost someone who had represented us at under-age level to Australia. Rather than dub him a "scumbag", however, his wish to play for Australia was accepted as perfectly understandable given his dual nationality and he was broadly wished the best of luck.

If, however, in this instance here and now, "scumbag" was to be treated as synonymous with "contrary hoor" and free of any sectarian baggage - although, I must add, it wouldn't be my word of choice - maybe I would have less of a problem with it. After all, and for what it's worth, my own feeling is that Gibson probably is a bit of a stubborn one. But as I said, it's all about nuance and context. Consider the difference between an African-American referring to another African-America as "n*gger" and a Caucasian referring to an African-American as such. The former is considered neutral when used in a familiar sense; the latter is considered a social taboo and deeply offensive. Ultimately, I feel OWC is a forum in denial and one of complete hypocrisy.

[geysir]

Danny, you are demonstrating an unhealthy obsession with the OWC forum, you may need some time off to develop a few perspectives.
In a similar vein, you mention EG in one of your posts and in a burning bush flash he appears :)

Sometimes it's appropriate to choose not to take the offered insult and definitely not willingly drag an issue from the OWC cesspit of emotional hangups to this grand location.

[ifk101]

Moreover, he won't want to sell him outright, either, since his wages probably aren't excessive, he wouldn't fetch that much (£4-5m?) ...

£4-5 million? :bigsmile: £1 million would be a fair price tag.

[shakermaker1982]

£4-5 million? :bigsmile: £1 million would be a fair price tag.

I'd say Gibson is worth around the £3m mark. James Perch (Forest to Newcastle) went for about £1.5m and he cannot even kick a ball!

Fergie is playing 4-4-2 at the moment and his two best central midfielders are still Paul Scholes and Darren Fletcher. Gibson won't get a sniff until one of them gets injured/suspended or Fergie reverts back to 4-3-3/4-5-1. Anderson was injured again last night in a reserve game so his only real competition for promotion to the starting 11 if something does happen to Scholes/Fletcher is Carrick. Gibson will get a run out at some point, he just has to make sure he impresses when he does start.

[ifk101]

Haven't a clue who James Perch is. :D

Gibson isn't first choice at this club. It's unknown if he is capable of holding a consistent standard of play over an extended period of time. Any prospective buyer does not really know what they're getting if they wished to purchase Gibson expect that he is of Manchester United stock and that he's a good striker of the ball. I don't think a club would risk paying a transfer fee for him but if it were to happen, I couldn't see him going for more than a £1 million.

[tetsujin1979]

I'd say Gibson is worth around the £3m mark. James Perch (Forest to Newcastle) went for about £1.5m and he cannot even kick a ball!

Fergie is playing 4-4-2 at the moment and his two best central midfielders are still Paul Scholes and Darren Fletcher. Gibson won't get a sniff until one of them gets injured/suspended or Fergie reverts back to 4-3-3/4-5-1. Anderson was injured again last night in a reserve game so his only real competition for promotion to the starting 11 if something does happen to Scholes/Fletcher is Carrick. Gibson will get a run out at some point, he just has to make sure he impresses when he does start.
Carrick out for the weekend's game against Everton: http://fourfourtwo.com/news/england/62921/default.aspx

"We've had a little setback with Michael Carrick. Out for three weeks with an Achilles problem. He's seen a specialist and had an injection," Ferguson told reporters.
Gibson should at least make the bench so?

[Charlie Darwin]

Haven't a clue who James Perch is. :D

Gibson isn't first choice at this club. It's unknown if he is capable of holding a consistent standard of play over an extended period of time. Any prospective buyer does not really know what they're getting if they wished to purchase Gibson expect that he is of Manchester United stock and that he's a good striker of the ball. I don't think a club would risk paying a transfer fee for him but if it were to happen, I couldn't see him going for more than a £1 million.
Frazier Campbell went for 6 million despite having little first team experience. Gibson is an international who's scored in the Champions League - he'd easily fetch 7 or 8 million.

[boovidge]

Frazier Campbell's English and a striker though.

[shakermaker1982]

Yeah I spotted that Tets on BBC website just after I posted. They are dropping like flies up at OT. Gibson should make the squad for Everton and has a good chance of starting once Man Utd play two games a week because Fergie will want to preserve Scholes when he can.

ifk 101 I'd be amazed if Gibson only went for a million. I used James Perch as an example because he is just a bog standard Championship player. Our own Jon Walters went for nearly 3 million!

[Charlie Darwin]

Frazier Campbell's English and a striker though.
Yeah but Darron Gibson is talented.

Just look at the prices Man Utd sell their established players for. If they wanted to offload Gibson half the teams in the Premiership would be queuing up and a few on the continent.

[Predator]

What's this about?I had more money than sense at the time. You live and learn.

[paul_oshea]

you still dont have much money.

[ifk101]

- he'd easily fetch 7 or 8 million.

:shock:

Campbell went for £3.5 million with add-ons potentially pushing the total transfer fee up to £6 million (according to wikipedia :bigsmile:). As Boovidge says strikers have a high value in the transfer market so what Campbell went for does not necessarily mean that Gibson could fetch a similar price tag. If Cloud Cuckoo Land has a league, maybe Gibson could command a £7/8 million fee.


. ifk 101 I'd be amazed if Gibson only went for a million. I used James Perch as an example because he is just a bog standard Championship player. Our own Jon Walters went for nearly 3 million!

But Walters was an established player at his previous club. Stoke knew what Walters could contribute over the course of the season when they bought him. Also Walters has played a lot more competitive games than Gibson and he is still relatively young. He's a proven professional in the English game.

[Charlie Darwin]

:shock:

Campbell went for £3.5 million with add-ons potentially pushing the total transfer fee up to £6 million (according to wikipedia :bigsmile:). As Boovidge says strikers have a high value in the transfer market so what Campbell went for does not necessarily mean that Gibson could fetch a similar price tag. If Cloud Cuckoo Land has a league, maybe Gibson could command a £7/8 million fee.
Fair enough, I went with the higher value for Campbell but he could still command most of it.

Just look at the prices United have sold players for recently: http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/manchester-united-transfers.html

Tosic: played about 5 games, made no impression, 7 million
Richardson: irregular for a couple of years, 5.5 million
Foster: cup games (same as Gibson) and an unimpressive run in the first team: 5.5 million

Gibson hasn't set the world on fire but he's done more than any of those players. Even accounting for English player tax, 7 million is hardly an extortionate price to pay for a player with 10+ left in the tank.

edit: on an unrelated note, just take a look at Ferguson's buys and sells before the 05/06 season - shifted a load of deadwood and brought in Van der Sar, Park, Vidic, Evra and Foster for a net spend of 1 million.

[geysir]

you still dont have much money.
It's the lack of sense I would be more concerned about.

[EalingGreen]

There undoubtedly was an implicit suggestion in what you said. You insinuated that the description I offered on here regarding Gibson in his school-days was in some way synonymous with - whatever exact meaning you wish to invoke - the character of a "scumbag", as someone else had described him on OWC with what I felt were sectarian connotations beyond a mere personal level and relating to more than just his general character. You can't deny that. This is exactly what you said:


"Anyhow, if Gibson is not a "scumbag", do you recognise this description of him from a certain other website the other day?..."
I have never asserted or (intentionally) used the term "scumbag" for DG.
If it pleases you, I will rephrase to make it crystal clear what I was attempting to say, as follows:
"Anyhow, although Gibson is not a 'scumbag', do you recognise this description of him from a certain other website the other day?"

I have also amended the post on OWC to a verbatim reproduction of your original observation on DG from here, without further comment by me.


At the least, what you were trying to do was put words in my mouth. Naturally, I felt compelled to refute the original nasty slur and its association by yourself to what I had said in post #1237 (http://foot.ie/threads/37264-Darron-Gibson?p=1398484&viewfull=1#post1398484).
I was NOT putting/attempting to put words in your mouth. I will accept that you felt the "scumbag" remark could be interpreted as being ascribed to you; then again, it could just as easily be interpreted otherwise.
I suspect you are being sensitive about this because having defended DG on a point of principle etc, it doesn't look so good for your case if he appears to be a bit of an arsehole* in practice.

* - I was actually going to use the phrase "feet of clay", but from the way he pings in the odd long shot, in between ambling around the centre circle in slow motion, I suspect "feet of lead" might be more apt...


Technically, I was suspended for something daft and arbitrary like eight years, but it appears posting histories are not deleted in any case. Predator's posts similarly remain in spite of his recent outright banning, although, I believe a few of his last ones were deleted for being "speculative" in nature, which appears to be against forum rules as of a week and a half ago. Ultimately, the mods have the discretion to keep what they wish and censor what they wish at whim.I have no idea about your ban/suspension, or Predator's.
However, I will make the following contextual observation
Now that this Eligibility dispute is finally settled, the eventual outcome has had an incendiary effect in NI football, with eg Coaches finding that under-age teams are being strained along IFA/FAI lines (or Unionist/Nationalist, even Prod/Taig, if you prefer). I personally find this absolutely deplorable, and an entirely predictable consequence of the FAI pushing a policy which even Brian Kerr now describes as "unfair, seedy and predatory".
In the OWC context, this has led to a situation whereby everytime a 7 year old score a hat-trick in a Primary school kickaround, there is specualtion as to whether he is fully committed to the IFA, or might lean towards the FAI etc.
Worse, it has provoked the more extreme posters on both sides of the debate (NOT you or "Predator" btw) to post some pretty incendiary remarks, leading to edits/deletions/warnings by the Mods. (I myself fell foul of this unwittingly)
If nothing else, some of the players referred to may have relatives etc who will read it, and the Press has been long-known to browse the site for juicy bits of dirt to dish. As a result, a policy has had to be implemented banning any speculation of the "Is he a Prod or RC" variety.


The two are not incompatible and need not contradict one another. Whether he played with and fell out with the IFA or not, there is no strict contradiction in possessing an ultimate wish to play for Ireland one day, presumably at senior level. Although he did make the switch at the age of 16 or so. Perhaps the falling out with the IFA over the trial at United simply hastened his "defection to the Dark Side"The two "need not" be contradictory; however, that does not preclude the possibility that they may be contradictory.
Anyhow, whether you accept it or not, you know fine well the point I was trying to make i.e. at one point DG asserted that his switch was personal (an argument with a coach), at another he said it was a matter of principle ("always wanted to play for ROI").
If it really was the latter, why did he ever agree to play for NI in the first place? After all, there had been several other Derry youngsters who'd played for the ROI before him and seeing as he was on MU's books, he would certainly have been of interest to them.
Unless, of course, he was content to use the IFA to further his career, in tandem with MU etc, until circumstances forced him to reveal his true intentions and he left us in the lurch (but only after having occupied a place in our team that other kids would die for).
Either way, it stinks (imo) both in what it says about the individual concerned, but also the way it politicises football in NI, at a time when many good people, of all backgrounds, are working so damned hard to keep politics out of the game.


That's to miss the point of what I found objectionable about the use of the word "scumbag" within the context in which it was originally used on OWC to refer to Gibson. I am of the opinion that it was loaded with politicised contempt in the context of the debate. Basically, as I said in the 2007 post from OWC you quoted:


"I felt there was something more to it than simple annoyance towards the guy for not choosing to represent Northern Ireland"

To be blunt, I feel he was being called a "scumbag" for reasons beyond merely having no intention to play for Northern Ireland, but also because he:

i) Happened to be from a Catholic/nationalist background.
ii) Switched to "the Baggars", of all possible places!

I don't think a northern-born Protestant with a Welsh parent, for example, would be dubbed a "scumbag" if they expressed an intention to represent Wales and the slur then subsequently accepted as appropriate. In the context there was a lot of hatred, bitterness and contempt behind the word "scumbag" that I just don't feel a willingness alone on some player's part to play for another team over Northern Ireland could warrant, but maybe that's just me... See the thread on Shane Lowry on this forum, for example, and you'll see a more appropriate reaction to a very similar decision made by a player whereby we lost someone who had represented us at under-age level to Australia. Rather than dub him a "scumbag", however, his wish to play for Australia was accepted as perfectly understandable given his dual nationality and he was broadly wished the best of luck.

If, however, in this instance here and now, "scumbag" was to be treated as synonymous with "contrary hoor" and free of any sectarian baggage - although, I must add, it wouldn't be my word of choice - maybe I would have less of a problem with it. After all, and for what it's worth, my own feeling is that Gibson probably is a bit of a stubborn one. But as I said, it's all about nuance and context. Consider the difference between an African-American referring to another African-America as "n*gger" and a Caucasian referring to an African-American as such. The former is considered neutral when used in a familiar sense; the latter is considered a social taboo and deeply offensive. Ultimately, I feel OWC is a forum in denial and one of complete hypocrisy.Spare us the amateur sociology lesson.

A member amongst several thousand of a football website used an offensive term in a thread containing hundreds of posts over the course of 100 pages+

OK, the Mods might have cracked down on it etc, but you only need eg go onto any Spurs website, type in "Sol Campbell" (or even a mere "Judas") and see what you get - I guarantee that "scumbag" is positively mild by comparison with the rest of what's there.

Therefore I suggest you stop obsessing with the symptoms and start addressing the disease, which is that with football in NI always having wrestled with problems deriving from general society, at a time when both society and NI football were making encouraging progress to treat the disease, the action of the FAI in insisting on implementing their fortuitously-acquired right to pick NI-born players has only served to pour poison back into the wound.

Shame on them and all who would defend them.

P.S. As I type this, the 1 o'clock headlines are concentrating on that ****headed "Pastor" out in the US who wants to burn Korans. Under US Law, his Constitutional Right to Freedom of Speech and Conscience permits him to do so, but does anyone other than a complete bigot/moron feel he should enforce that right?

P.P.S. Before you get off on one, that last P.S. (above) is NOT to be read as calling you "a complete bigot/moron"...

[paul_oshea]

It's the lack of sense I would be more concerned about.

Geysir, thats exactly what I was referring to. tut tut.

[paul_oshea]

I have never asserted or (intentionally) used the term "scumbag" for DG.
If it pleases you, I will rephrase to make it crystal clear what I was attempting to say, as follows:
"Anyhow, although Gibson is not a 'scumbag', do you recognise this description of him from a certain other website the other day?"

I have also amended the post on OWC to a verbatim reproduction of your original observation on DG from here, without further comment by me.

I was NOT putting/attempting to put words in your mouth. I will accept that you felt the "scumbag" remark could be interpreted as being ascribed to you; then again, it could just as easily be interpreted otherwise.
I suspect you are being sensitive about this because having defended DG on a point of principle etc, it doesn't look so good for your case if he appears to be a bit of an arsehole* in practice.

* - I was actually going to use the phrase "feet of clay", but from the way he pings in the odd long shot, in between ambling around the centre circle in slow motion, I suspect "feet of lead" might be more apt...

I have no idea about your ban/suspension, or Predator's.
However, I will make the following contextual observation
Now that this Eligibility dispute is finally settled, the eventual outcome has had an incendiary effect in NI football, with eg Coaches finding that under-age teams are being strained along IFA/FAI lines (or Unionist/Nationalist, even Prod/Taig, if you prefer). I personally find this absolutely deplorable, and an entirely predictable consequence of the FAI pushing a policy which even Brian Kerr now describes as "unfair, seedy and predatory".
In the OWC context, this has led to a situation whereby everytime a 7 year old score a hat-trick in a Primary school kickaround, there is specualtion as to whether he is fully committed to the IFA, or might lean towards the FAI etc.
Worse, it has provoked the more extreme posters on both sides of the debate (NOT you or "Predator" btw) to post some pretty incendiary remarks, leading to edits/deletions/warnings by the Mods. (I myself fell foul of this unwittingly)
If nothing else, some of the players referred to may have relatives etc who will read it, and the Press has been long-known to browse the site for juicy bits of dirt to dish. As a result, a policy has had to be implemented banning any speculation of the "Is he a Prod or RC" variety.

The two "need not" be contradictory; however, that does not preclude the possibility that they may be contradictory.
Anyhow, whether you accept it or not, you know fine well the point I was trying to make i.e. at one point DG asserted that his switch was personal (an argument with a coach), at another he said it was a matter of principle ("always wanted to play for ROI").
If it really was the latter, why did he ever agree to play for NI in the first place? After all, there had been several other Derry youngsters who'd played for the ROI before him and seeing as he was on MU's books, he would certainly have been of interest to them.
Unless, of course, he was content to use the IFA to further his career, in tandem with MU etc, until circumstances forced him to reveal his true intentions and he left us in the lurch (but only after having occupied a place in our team that other kids would die for).
Either way, it stinks (imo) both in what it says about the individual concerned, but also the way it politicises football in NI, at a time when many good people, of all backgrounds, are working so damned hard to keep politics out of the game.

Spare us the amateur sociology lesson.

A member amongst several thousand of a football website used an offensive term in a thread containing hundreds of posts over the course of 100 pages+

OK, the Mods might have cracked down on it etc, but you only need eg go onto any Spurs website, type in "Sol Campbell" (or even a mere "Judas") and see what you get - I guarantee that "scumbag" is positively mild by comparison with the rest of what's there.

Therefore I suggest you stop obsessing with the symptoms and start addressing the disease, which is that with football in NI always having wrestled with problems deriving from general society, at a time when both society and NI football were making encouraging progress to treat the disease, the action of the FAI in insisting on implementing their fortuitously-acquired right to pick NI-born players has only served to pour poison back into the wound.

Shame on them and all who would defend them.

P.S. As I type this, the 1 o'clock headlines are concentrating on that ****headed "Pastor" out in the US who wants to burn Korans. Under US Law, his Constitutional Right to Freedom of Speech and Conscience permits him to do so, but does anyone other than a complete bigot/moron feel he should enforce that right?

P.P.S. Before you get off on one, that last P.S. (above) is NOT to be read as calling you "a complete bigot/moron"...

At the end of this all I could glean, was, its all the FAI's fault. Why can football supporters, of all persuasions, never look inwards rather than outwards? Or is it just society as a whole? "my kid would never do that, it must have been his/hers/their kid"

[geysir]

Geysir, thats exactly what I was referring to. tut tut.

It was so, then obviously my sense levels must hover around my finance levels, at times.

But at least by now, you should be well used to being misunderstood :)

[EalingGreen]

They have site "members" and site "supporters", who can donate an annual fee of £5 for special treatment. It also goes towards the up-keep of the site. "Members" are your normal, every-day users, whilst those classified as "supporters" are given exclusive access to certain areas of the forum that are closed off to "members" and the public. Presumably that's where all the really juicy stuff comes out! Naturally, "supporters" probably get an easier ride, having proven their loyalty and being part of the clique and all, whilst the threshold of tolerance for anything that might stir a bit of controversy will be lower if it's coming from a common "member".I can understand your not being well-disposed to that site, but I feel that that misrepresents the actual situation.

As I understand it, with OWC having reached 5-6,000 members, up to half of whom were active to one degree or another, the site started crashing at busy times, especially around matches.

Therefore it was necessary to purchase extra bandwith, so a one-off charge of £5 was introduced for regular posters to pay for this.

However, it was felt unfair to charge eg long-term Members whose activity was primarily to browse, rather than post. Therefore as a "Rule of Thumb", any Member who reaches 100 posts soon after joining will generally receive "hints" to cough up a fiver from those other who already have.

Subsequently, as demand for Bandwidth continued to grow, the Supporter's Charge became Annual. However, in compensation certain Sections were reserved for Supporters-only.

Rather amusingly, those who decline to pay their fiver and become Supporters (open to all, btw) frequently infer an almost "masonic" motive behind this(!). However, as a long-standing Supporter myself, the only practical privilege or benefit which follows from that elevated status is access to the "Away Travel" Section, whereby Supporters may post any good travel bargains they spot, or arrange to travel to away games together, without Members/non-Members getting the chance to rush in and fill flights and hotels etc.

That's it, really. Beyond that, all I would say is that don't believe the other rumour that Marty (site owner) is a direct descendent of Jesus Chris through the ancient Merovingian line and that he keeps the Holy Grail in a locker at Great Victoria Station, either. He's a Manchester City fan ffs...

[EalingGreen]

£4-5 million? :bigsmile: £1 million would be a fair price tag.I deliberately erred on the high side, for fear of being accused of having another dig at the guy.

[EalingGreen]

At the end of this all I could glean, was, its all the FAI's fault. Why can football supporters, of all persuasions, never look inwards rather than outwards? Or is it just society as a whole? "my kid would never do that, it must have been his/hers/their kid"You could glean it, but only if you insist on doing so.

Let me make my position crystal clear. Over the decades, there have been many contributors to the strained relationships within football in NI, not least the local establishment (IFA, IL etc) itself. However, by not intervening, the FAI could not be said to have been one of those contributors.

In any case, somehow or other the game never quite "burst into flames", even at the very darkest period of The Troubles.

Rather, as tensions within NI generally have reduced, so have they within NI football, such that we have been making encouraging progress towards bringing people together in sport.

Then, just as that progress was being demonstrated (eg Football For All), but before the old "bonfire" could be dismantled completely, along come the FAI and throw a match into the middle of it, resulting in the present combustion.

I totally abhor the effect that this is having on the sport I love. Worse still, I deeply resent being characterised as being the bigot in all this (not by you, btw), for expressing my opposition to the consequential situation, whereby the ROI may become the (de facto) "Nationalist" football team in Ireland, and the NI team will be pushed ever closer towards being the (de facto) "Unionist" football team in Ireland.

For if that happens, it will make it less likely that we will witness eg the total unadulterated joy from last Friday evening in Maribor, when Stephen Craigan, Chris Baird and Warren Feeney rushed over as one after the final whistle, to salute the Green and White Army for being their 12th man.

[ifk101]

For if that happens, it will make it less likely that we will witness eg the total unadulterated joy from last Friday evening in Maribor, when Stephen Craigan, Chris Baird and Warren Feeney rushed over as one after the final whistle, to salute the Green and White Army for being their 12th man.

Why single out those three players? :confused:

[SkStu]

Fair enough, I went with the higher value for Campbell but he could still command most of it.

Just look at the prices United have sold players for recently: http://www.transferleague.co.uk/premiership-transfers/manchester-united-transfers.html

Tosic: played about 5 games, made no impression, 7 million
Richardson: irregular for a couple of years, 5.5 million
Foster: cup games (same as Gibson) and an unimpressive run in the first team: 5.5 million

Gibson hasn't set the world on fire but he's done more than any of those players. Even accounting for English player tax, 7 million is hardly an extortionate price to pay for a player with 10+ left in the tank.

edit: on an unrelated note, just take a look at Ferguson's buys and sells before the 05/06 season - shifted a load of deadwood and brought in Van der Sar, Park, Vidic, Evra and Foster for a net spend of 1 million.

i would expect Gibson to fetch 2-3m sterling. In much the same way as the other promising Man U youths that were shipped out to the likes of West Brom before fading into mediocrity.

on the bolded part - undoubtedly a great set of summer signings from Fergie but when you look at some of the absolute crap that he has bought in the meantime for outrageous fee's (Tosic and Bebe spring to mind) you get to wondering if he really is all that astute in the transfer market.

[ifk101]

on the bolded part - undoubtedly a great set of summer signings from Fergie but when you look at some of the absolute crap that he has bought in the meantime for outrageous fee's (Tosic and Bebe spring to mind) you get to wondering if he really is all that astute in the transfer market.

Massimo Taibi springs to my mind. Wikipedia tells me that Ferguson paid £4.4 million for this chap - that's £1.1 million for each game the lad played.

[Charlie Darwin]

i would expect Gibson to fetch 2-3m sterling. In much the same way as the other promising Man U youths that were shipped out to the likes of West Brom before fading into mediocrity.

on the bolded part - undoubtedly a great set of summer signings from Fergie but when you look at some of the absolute crap that he has bought in the meantime for outrageous fee's (Tosic and Bebe spring to mind) you get to wondering if he really is all that astute in the transfer market.
He made a 2 million profit on Tosic according to that site. Probably all wiped out by not completing the Ljajic transfer though.

[EalingGreen]

Why single out those three players? :confused:Those three were in a mini-group who were going nearly as mental as the fans at the final whistle. Both Craigan and Feeney are known for being Rangers fans, so we may assume which background they're from; ditto Chris Baird, since he is a former GAA player from Rasharkin.
All three are equally committed when playing for NI, but only one received a phone call from Brian Kerr asking him to play for ROI.

Seeing as how much this Eligibility row has inflamed tensions in NI football, and considering the atmosphere in flashpoints like Rasharkin generally, it would take any future Chris Baird to have balls of steel to turn out for NI in preference to ROI, even if he wanted to. (I certainly wouldn't blame him for choosing the ROI).

As someone pointed out the other day, when Nationalist politicians champion the right of NI-born players to represent the ROI, they invariably point towards the Good Friday Agreement etc.

Yet the whole point of the GFA was that it should help find a way for the two communities in NI to live together.

Meanwhile, the "seedy, unfair and predatory" policy of the FAI [(c) Brian Kerr] is making it easier for them to live apart - and in the field of "sport" at that.

Then again, who is in charge of the FAI these days? The John Delaney who posters on this site roundly praise for nobly sticking up for Irish football when it comes to Eligibility etc?

Or is it the John Delaney who everywhere else is roundly abused on this site for shafting Irish football in pursuit of his own self-interest?

Whichever it is, I hope the greasy b a s t a r d bankrupts you...

P.S. Before anyone jumps in at that last comment and labels me/it "bitter" etc, yep, it sure is.

[Stuttgart88]

Brian Kerr wouldn't have an axe to grind against the FAI at all.

[youngirish]

Those three were in a mini-group who were going nearly as mental as the fans at the final whistle. Both Craigan and Feeney are known for being Rangers fans, so we may assume which background they're from; ditto Chris Baird, since he is a former GAA player from Rasharkin.
All three are equally committed when playing for NI, but only one received a phone call from Brian Kerr asking him to play for ROI.

Seeing as how much this Eligibility row has inflamed tensions in NI football, and considering the atmosphere in flashpoints like Rasharkin generally, it would take any future Chris Baird to have balls of steel to turn out for NI in preference to ROI, even if he wanted to. (I certainly wouldn't blame him for choosing the ROI).

As someone pointed out the other day, when Nationalist politicians champion the right of NI-born players to represent the ROI, they invariably point towards the Good Friday Agreement etc.

Yet the whole point of the GFA was that it should help find a way for the two communities in NI to live together.

Meanwhile, the "seedy, unfair and predatory" policy of the FAI [(c) Brian Kerr] is making it easier for them to live apart - and in the field of "sport" at that.

Then again, who is in charge of the FAI these days? The John Delaney who posters on this site roundly praise for nobly sticking up for Irish football when it comes to Eligibility etc?

Or is it the John Delaney who everywhere else is roundly abused on this site for shafting Irish football in pursuit of his own self-interest?

Whichever it is, I hope the greasy b a s t a r d bankrupts you...

P.S. Before anyone jumps in at that last comment and labels me/it "bitter" etc, yep, it sure is.

EG as always I think you're missing the bigger picture. Yes you could state that the recent controversy over the elligibility issues is widening the gulf between the two main political/religious groups on this island Nationalist/Unionist, Protestant/Catholic. However I like to see it as it really is a stepping stone for when we inevitably will all come together to play in the one Ireland team when even the most diehard unionist footballers realise the advantages of representing a strong, dare I say it 'united' Ireland team as opposed to the disinitegrating, obsolete, fatally weakened provincial team that was Northern Ireland. Let's hold hands EG and step into this brave new world together. There's no need to be afraid anymore.

[co. down green]

Seeing as how much this Eligibility row has inflamed tensions in NI football.

lol :) All i see is some fans who support the north getting flustered about the fact that Irish citizens have a choice when deciding their international side.

Many football fans and players here have little interest in the Windsor Park team.

[Paddy Garcia]

P.S. As I type this, the 1 o'clock headlines are concentrating on that ****headed "Pastor" out in the US who wants to burn Korans. Under US Law, his Constitutional Right to Freedom of Speech and Conscience permits him to do so, but does anyone other than a complete bigot/moron feel he should enforce that right?


I think one of your compatriots got his pastorship from that church!

[DannyInvincible]

EG as always I think you're missing the bigger picture. Yes you could state that the recent controversy over the elligibility issues is widening the gulf between the two main political/religious groups on this island Nationalist/Unionist, Protestant/Catholic. However I like to see it as it really is a stepping stone for when we inevitably will all come together to play in the one Ireland team when even the most diehard unionist footballers realise the advantages of representing a strong, dare I say it 'united' Ireland team as opposed to the disinitegrating, obsolete, fatally weakened provincial team that was Northern Ireland. Let's hold hands EG and step into this brave new world together. There's no need to be afraid anymore.

Hold on there a sec 'til I get hysterical! But I thought we were the ones with the insatiable appetite for football apartheid in Ireland?!... :soldier:

No doubt, when asked to explain their reluctance in supporting any united island team - and maybe EG can clarify or enlighten me otherwise if I'm mistaken - NI fans will revert to arguments about how supporting such an entity would offer something not at all representative of their identity; national, cultural or otherwise. Essentially, they say it would mean nothing to them. Of course, when it comes to nationalists seeking to play for Ireland, that's when NI fans care a lot less for the principle of protecting national identities and any coincident or associated rights. In fact, it's, in rather patronising and insulting fashion, openly disputed as to whether nationalists even have a valid or legitimate Irish identity. I suppose it's dismissed as what you might call a notional identity. Who, then, I must ask, is it that really wants football apartheid in Ireland? Slight hypocrisy there, me thinks...


Danny, you are demonstrating an unhealthy obsession with the OWC forum, you may need some time off to develop a few perspectives.

Never fear; Lent is only six months away. :p

[geysir]

After having my 'warning level' increased several times by that 'fhtb' character, for stating my opinion that I didn't think Shane Ferguson would change association despite technically being able to do so under FIFA's rules, I contacted their site administrator, 'Marty' and I explained that I felt it was a bit unreasonable. 'fhtb' (I presume) had deleted my comments and claimed that 'speculation' was the reason my 'warning level' was raised. Speculation? On a football forum? Get outta town!

Anyway, I received no message back from 'Marty', but was simply refused access to the forum and received an email explaining to me that I could reclaim exactly £3.08 from the OWC admin.

http://www.themercury.com.au/images/uploadedfiles/editorial/pictures/2010/01/08/Cartoon.jpg