Onthefringes

Rinse. Repeat 🙄

That’s the crux. Point in the direction ‘told that it didn’t happen’…. And ‘saw it with their own eyes’ doesn’t always give a full picture. That’s reason for little balance between some posts. O’Donnell incident was done to death real time - the drink wasn’t thrown directly at him. Poor aim granted*, it was thrown at much maligned group who stood basically pitchside spoiling views of others. Player himself recognised that at a later date. *Thats not to condone, nor play down.

He’ll always be defined by that quote. Had built a fairly strong team on little budget last season prior to returning North. Definitely better than County the twice I seen them. Club ownership problems deepened and that little budget has decreased and the basket case looks like taking them to Conference at best.

What purpose does it serve? Going over old ground, information sometimes comes from a position of trust. Doubt I’d be the only who wouldn’t just repeat to appease others who don’t wish to seek and find for themselves. Then you set off on a tangent… the topic isn’t about me. I could discuss biology in one part, your mask just slips on the second. We see you.

Placation. No denial incidents don’t take place. Answering yes, I justifiably play them down. It’s a world away from condoning behaviours. Precursors have been stated over many threads and I fail to see the benefit of repeat. It certainly won’t change the viewpoint of those who refuse to look at the bigger picture..

You don’t agree with posting style, don’t read. It’s not difficult. If you’re not prepared to source the information which is readily available why should others share? As I’ve said, far from positive. You find it embarrassing, I’m a little ambivalent given the variables. Whataboutery isn’t a great trait either. Again, perhaps could’ve worded better, these A4 sheets were placed by a minority for use by a majority without challenge. Isn’t that right Bob?

Worded incorrectly then, ‘incidents’. Granted, far from positive, played down as I disagree on the mock outrage portrayed by some on here. Secondly, stop attempting to twist my wording to suit your opinion. Nobody suggested whatever led to the incidents justified the outcomes. Some understanding of the precursor may alter ‘perceptions rather than the belief their version is the reality. Circles.

I’d condemn them if they didn’t reply in kind to a fellow supporter (not attached to any grouping) being attacked by patrons of a public house where no one had entered that day. Unfortunate bi-product, damage witnessed by plenty from inside the pub compounding the problem. More poor application of the law and ineffective policing.

Was summarising. i’ve addressed the instances previously. My musings align with perception stance I know many others take so justifiably playing them down. Find those with little understanding of what may have instigated some of these events offering opinion and mentioning ‘reality’ repeatedly gives rise to the many instances of lack of debate you speak of. Prevalent on a wide range of subjects and deflection and avoidance isn’t exactly a new phenomenon…

Walking, talking contradiction. Apt

Where to even start on the dribbling above? It was one and one only who wasn’t in the country… As for innocent, charges have been dropped and football banning orders were rescinded yesterday as it happens. Repeated similar stance? Someone in the know? What are you on about if you’re not venting? No contacts needed, the information is there and you don’t have to scrape the surface by much to corroborate, to be factual and find informed opinion. As for your closing gambit, above point stands. Where was any claim proven to be untrue? Using the simple theories that are de rigueur of some on here the ex-copper allowed box loads of A4 paper to be admitted into the away stand and would have seen these being placed by individuals across seating without challenge. All the while denying those in our own support of doing similar.. See you when next issue arises.

Again, point proven. Definitely merit in most of your posts. Perception(s) skew the balance you claim not to see on this subject.

You can ask 10 persons in any event described and likely receive 10 different versions. Don't see many denying any of the going ons, but, the perception of some is far and away from the reality what has happened in many cases.

I concur.

Would be. Personally think any relationship will always be fraught as any indiscretion no matter the severity is jumped upon by the usual suspects who (and we know many have a hotline to Park) have the added measure of a QR code now. Society have a big challenge in uniting our support as a whole.

These discussions have been happening for over a decade! Problem is someone has the ear of those with influence in the club and those same people won’t rock the boat.

Point proved. You’re a nonsense. I ain’t buying the mistaken identity given who made the error. The images pushed by the authorities and national press were so far removed from the kid it wasn’t even close. Generational was not aimed at any with any family connection - more that the movement’s come in cycles. This ultra phenomenon is a world away from my generation, for example. The unfortunate claim was nothing to do with those wanting to be involved. Carry on that tangent, offers nothing in the debate.

How very apt. Where in your narrative does the passing of identity and personal information to Police Scotland by a club employee of a kid who was proven to be out of the country at the time of an alleged incident? Unnecessary and not isolated. Nobody anywhere has stated those involved to be a special case, not ever. Unsavoury incidents and crowd behaviours have been part and parcel of the game long before I arrived and will be long after I’ve gone. It’s generational and oft fuelled by societal problems. Most just see it for what it is and have grown to know football is a lot safer place to attend given the groups tend to face similar away from matches and it’s a revenue stream for authorities. Unfortunately, some wishing not to be involved get caught up in any event though rare. Let’s not be pretending we haven’t moved on from the dark days of 70’s to mid 80’s.

Same posters, same false narrative. For those who understand no explanation is necessary. For those who don’t no explanation will suffice.

See above. Interpretation of alleged SPFL ‘rules’ which haven’t been breached according to the legal advice of the law practice with the highest success rate in quashing football convictions - young ‘uns have met them as a group recently… Maybe for another debate, Club can preach about ‘community’ and growing the fanbase. Many (involved and not) feel it’s lip service.

Different to what you claimed earlier. That’s a fact.

Not that I’m aware of.

At least keep to the facts. Most have been back in since with no issue.

Off on a tangent. Again. Not the same events. Similar issue, latest ‘unacceptable conduct’ signage the brainchild of our CEO so box ticked as he ‘did it at Shrewsbury’. Having heard versions from both sides it looks like a certain club employee who’s had carte blanche has tied up our CEO in knots and they’re hiding behind their interpretation of a ‘SPFL ruling’. Nobody has been cited in a court of law nor subject to football banning order under current legislation. Personally think the statement they should make is deliver another food bank drive as planned tomorrow and not enter the ground rather than offer posts on social media platforms. Certainly offer different opinion to those who just point, snigger and claim it’s “woah, look at me”.

Been in the building for a while. Training facilities courtesy of his friendship with Halliday