| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? 19:04 - Nov 8 with 1205 views | wespens |
Just reading one of the threads on the other board where there seems to be a bit of gloating about our current position and the fact that some are cock a hoop that they 'predicted it' (although I think the back of that bandwagon has increased somewhat).
Am not a them v us because I enjoy both boards but my question is can I support the club, the team and the manager and not having Oyston Out tattooed across my forehead or take a condescending and actually quite unpleasant stance towards my fellow fans? |  |
| |  |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 19:13 - Nov 8 with 1192 views | stu |
Wespens the majority have the same viewpoint as you |  |
| Tangerine is the new black |
| |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 19:18 - Nov 8 with 1180 views | BertandErnie |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 19:13 - Nov 8 by stu |
Wespens the majority have the same viewpoint as you |
The problem is that both sides pro and anti are so pig headed in their views it leaves a lot of us somewhere in the middle feeling a bit uncomfortable to be honest. |  | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 19:29 - Nov 8 with 1164 views | OldSkool |
How can anyone support the Oystons, and at the same time say they support Blackpool?
It doesnt make any sense at all.
They are pulling in opposite directions.
Its like asking turkeys would they vote for xmas. [Post edited 8 Nov 2014 19:43]
| | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:17 - Nov 8 with 1131 views | catinstalbans |
I'd say that pretty much you do.
Do you genuinely believe that Oyston has done everything possible to arrest our decline since the Premier league?
If not why do you still feel they still have a positive role to play?
Best to state here. I do not believe we had an automatic right to get back to the Premier league but the decline since losing to West Ham can only be due to either incompetence or deliberate asset stripping and running down of the football club. I believe it's the latter. |  | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:20 - Nov 8 with 1120 views | Osbourne |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:17 - Nov 8 by catinstalbans |
I'd say that pretty much you do.
Do you genuinely believe that Oyston has done everything possible to arrest our decline since the Premier league?
If not why do you still feel they still have a positive role to play?
Best to state here. I do not believe we had an automatic right to get back to the Premier league but the decline since losing to West Ham can only be due to either incompetence or deliberate asset stripping and running down of the football club. I believe it's the latter. |
Not necessarily, but I think it is logical!
  | | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:27 - Nov 8 with 1112 views | The_Ghost |
It's a touchy subject right now, and some posters can only see in black and white. I can't stand the old board anymore, because its posters judge people as either pro or anti. If you don't want to air all of your concerns, or if you actually (god forbid) point out that someone is wrong about the owners family then you're supporting them. Ridiculous.
If you don't agree with the majority on certain subjects you are hounded and ridiculed by some. Debate turns into a point scoring exercise. 20's has had a lot of experience with that I see.
It's exactly what we don't need right now.
It's not all bad though, there are some great debates, but some people are too hot headed. [Post edited 8 Nov 2014 20:29]
|  | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:56 - Nov 8 with 1061 views | CashCow |
Ghost - was about to write pretty much what you said. | | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 13:13 - Nov 9 with 1012 views | TwoPhillips |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:56 - Nov 8 by CashCow |
Ghost - was about to write pretty much what you said. |
Sadly we're now at the point where the two are so intrinsically bound that sadly I think we're getting to that stage. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 14:19 - Nov 9 with 994 views | Tang67 |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 13:13 - Nov 9 by TwoPhillips |
Sadly we're now at the point where the two are so intrinsically bound that sadly I think we're getting to that stage. |
Unfortunately the debate has polarised and even moderates on both sides are becoming hardened
It's not good but people have genuinely had enough and they are not all hot heads looking for a rumble | |
| Poster formerly known as bisphamtang |
| |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 14:28 - Nov 9 with 991 views | tde74 |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 20:17 - Nov 8 by catinstalbans |
I'd say that pretty much you do.
Do you genuinely believe that Oyston has done everything possible to arrest our decline since the Premier league?
If not why do you still feel they still have a positive role to play?
Best to state here. I do not believe we had an automatic right to get back to the Premier league but the decline since losing to West Ham can only be due to either incompetence or deliberate asset stripping and running down of the football club. I believe it's the latter. |
It's either revenge or apathy, now that the money is safely extracted. I cannot think of another possibility. |  | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 14:39 - Nov 9 with 983 views | Fountain |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 14:28 - Nov 9 by tde74 |
It's either revenge or apathy, now that the money is safely extracted. I cannot think of another possibility. |
Their mo has always to spend as little as possible to remain in the league whilst extracting as much as possible. In theory spending little to survive can work. Only for so long though- you bet heads every time you know sooner or later tails will turn up and that is what is happening now. Heading to L1 with our 'tails' between our legs.
Therefore a more pertinent question would be; 'Are the Oystons Pro-BFC?'. [Post edited 9 Nov 2014 14:41]
| |
| |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 15:10 - Nov 9 with 969 views | HarryHorse |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 14:39 - Nov 9 by Fountain |
Their mo has always to spend as little as possible to remain in the league whilst extracting as much as possible. In theory spending little to survive can work. Only for so long though- you bet heads every time you know sooner or later tails will turn up and that is what is happening now. Heading to L1 with our 'tails' between our legs.
Therefore a more pertinent question would be; 'Are the Oystons Pro-BFC?'. [Post edited 9 Nov 2014 14:41]
|
I think if you are Pro BFC you have to at least have an opinion on the owners-it's why I don't have much truck with comments that revolve solely around "concentrating on the football" - as others have said where we are is intrinsically linked to the owner's policies and to choose to ignore those is to bury your head in the sand imo . On the other hand if anyone is still in favour of the owners lets hear the rationale - that's actually better in my view than refusing to take a view one way or the other . | | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 17:26 - Nov 9 with 946 views | straightatthewall |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 15:10 - Nov 9 by HarryHorse |
I think if you are Pro BFC you have to at least have an opinion on the owners-it's why I don't have much truck with comments that revolve solely around "concentrating on the football" - as others have said where we are is intrinsically linked to the owner's policies and to choose to ignore those is to bury your head in the sand imo . On the other hand if anyone is still in favour of the owners lets hear the rationale - that's actually better in my view than refusing to take a view one way or the other . |
Well the club is being decimated BECAUSE of the Oystons.
I love the club and I can't stand to see it torn to pieces. Ergo, I must be anti-Oyston and so, you would think, should anyone else who is pro-Blackpool. |  |
| We got Bogdanovic, Oyston got very rich |
| |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 17:56 - Nov 9 with 926 views | The_Ghost |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 17:26 - Nov 9 by straightatthewall |
Well the club is being decimated BECAUSE of the Oystons.
I love the club and I can't stand to see it torn to pieces. Ergo, I must be anti-Oyston and so, you would think, should anyone else who is pro-Blackpool. |
That there sounds like a defeatist attitude Straighters, therefore I brand you with the mark of the shameful apologist.
Now, go and tar and feather yourself. | | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 10:01 - Nov 10 with 886 views | brassedoff |
I find some Blackpool fans judgement a bit weird at the moment - some are aggressive towards players, managers and the most disappointing other fans (haven't bothered with the other board since it deteriorated in to a 'hang 'em high judge and jury forum) when we all know who the real villain is. As the banner says 'love Blackpool, hate Oyston' .. Simples!! | |
| |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 22:29 - Nov 10 with 842 views | Parasitestogo |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 10:01 - Nov 10 by brassedoff |
I find some Blackpool fans judgement a bit weird at the moment - some are aggressive towards players, managers and the most disappointing other fans (haven't bothered with the other board since it deteriorated in to a 'hang 'em high judge and jury forum) when we all know who the real villain is. As the banner says 'love Blackpool, hate Oyston' .. Simples!! |
The debate what debate? there is no longer one.What we have are now proven facts but we have a few simpletons still trying to argue about it.Most of them are now on here making themselves look like basket cases.Some are worse than that as they know what is going on but still defend the oystons like brr. You have to worry about people like bho it does seem he spouts his garbage not because of an agenda but that he has become quiet unwell.And of course there are people like allez who moved from the proper site because everyone thinks he is just an out and out muppet. | | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 22:40 - Nov 10 with 825 views | Wizaard |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 22:29 - Nov 10 by Parasitestogo |
The debate what debate? there is no longer one.What we have are now proven facts but we have a few simpletons still trying to argue about it.Most of them are now on here making themselves look like basket cases.Some are worse than that as they know what is going on but still defend the oystons like brr. You have to worry about people like bho it does seem he spouts his garbage not because of an agenda but that he has become quiet unwell.And of course there are people like allez who moved from the proper site because everyone thinks he is just an out and out muppet. |
In all seriousness I haven't seen anyone defending the Oystons.
Just because you haven't called for a lynching doesn't make you pro - Oyston. Can you provide me with a link to anything BRR has said that is pro Oyston specifically?
Just read Robbie's posts back beyond Riga's sacking. The chairman's support for him was appalling apparently. Nothing pro, by the way. [Post edited 10 Nov 2014 22:46]
|  | | |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 23:08 - Nov 10 with 797 views | HarryHorse |
| If you're pro BFC do you have to be anti O? on 22:40 - Nov 10 by Wizaard |
In all seriousness I haven't seen anyone defending the Oystons.
Just because you haven't called for a lynching doesn't make you pro - Oyston. Can you provide me with a link to anything BRR has said that is pro Oyston specifically?
Just read Robbie's posts back beyond Riga's sacking. The chairman's support for him was appalling apparently. Nothing pro, by the way. [Post edited 10 Nov 2014 22:46]
|
Well , we had BHOK and his Iraq thread which was essentially saying "better the devil you know" . That's Pro Oyston in my view . There are other threads of his supporting KO's policies (safeguarding the future of the club apparently !!)
There are also several more posters who seem unable or unwilling to consider KO's role in leading us to our present situation which I alluded to higher up the thread , that strikes me as naïve at best . It may not be actively Pro Oyston but it isn't anti either (and no-one is calling for lynchings thankfully) . To be , or appear to be neutral about the current owners I find quite extraordinary
[Post edited 10 Nov 2014 23:15]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.