Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
I understand the annoyance around Lee … but there is that saying about ‘a rock and a hard place.’ From the outside it can seem v black and white .. but he was juggling all sorts of pressures, including rubbing shoulders every day with staff who had livelihoods to worry about. I think he probably regrets aspects of his statement … but sustained and extreme pressure rarely brings the best performance out of anyone. Nuttall received room for a second chance .. and got us a few goals and some money as a result. Lee deserves to be part of this new dawn … I hope he stays on and brings his passion and ability to serve us for years to come.
7 users thanked author for this post.
In a meeting til 9 45. Greeted by excitement. (Wife not a football fan) “Guess what! Scunny have been sold!” Straight on the I pad to get the news.
Then thoughts of Halifax .. so … did that thing where you ease yourself in by looking at the table before you check the result ( Anyone else do it? Daft really) Now sitting with a wee dram of Bowmore. I feel ok tonight.3 users thanked author for this post.
Just discovered that if you open one and then another… they play at the same time!! Cherry Ghost and Leonard Cohen accompanying each other …NOT GOOD!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Appropriate for me at this time😏
1 user thanked author for this post.
Thanks for your help, Gurney. I’m off to get some therapy. I may be gone some time.
Ok. I pulled up my chair.
What I took from the opening para was that you would be even more dismissive than previously and not engage. It would be a waste of time.
From the second paragraph it seems that you had immediately forgotten the first paragraph…such was your desire to throw around labels like ‘barmy’ and ‘bigoted lunatics’. Then off you went … Brexit, Catholicism and Lesgeo.
A stream of incoherent bile.
Gurney … face it. You really don’t like me. All you can do is keep flailing and spewing. And hoping for the last word and to clear me out of this space. I will give you the last word for now … and will pray for you.Hi Gurney. You wrote: ‘And here we have a perfect example of the kind of defensive, patronising and insulting attitude which is the hallmark of those whose beliefs are threatened.’
I thought, given the content and tone of your previous replies … and the repeated demands for me to respond to specifics whilst continuously ignoring anything that I might challenge you with … that I was fairly restrained. I also feel obliged to point out that you flatter yourself if you think that you have come anywhere near to ‘threatening’ my beliefs.
You also said : ‘PS a reasoned and coherent faith position is a contradiction in terms. Reason requires facts and logic. Faith requires neither. It’s in the realm of the irrational, which you evidently prefer, JI.’
No. You’re getting confused again, Gurney. I approach statements about Faith exactly as I have done throughout this series of posts … rationally. You seem to be confusing irrationality with suprarationality …above, yet including the rational; encompassing a truth of scope greater than ordinary logic or reason. It’s what the Bard was driving at when he penned the famous words ‘There are more things in heaven and earth (Gurney) than are dreamt of in your philosophy.’ This is why some of the eminent thinkers I mentioned … Lennox, McGrath, C S Lewis and hosts of others … find no contradiction between their intellectual endeavours and their Christian beliefs.
Despite the finger pointing at me I have come to the conclusion that there are three pointing back at yourself. You seem to have, possibly for reasons that you have yourself outlined above, developed a compulsion towards ‘exposing’ ‘denigrating’ and ‘destroying’ the possibility of intelligent human beings holding to a worldview that is not available to your usual means of perception. Others on here seem to be content to challenge, some with more courtesy and respect than others, but then shrug and accept that we see things differently. Why not do the same, my friend. Where does this drive and energy to ‘win’ come from. You clearly aren’t going to present me with your own alternative worldview for me to critique ( albeit more politely and respectfully than you have critiqued mine) so how about wrapping this up and we move on?‘Engaging in serious discussion with people who believe in such things is rarely fruitful because when challenged, they change the topic, shift the focus, say things weren’t interpreted correctly, etc. They get defensive and feel threatened, patronise and insult.’
At least one thing we agree on, Gurney. So if we ever lock horns again don’t do it. You definitely managed to slime this thread in the end … it must incense you that someone laid out a reasoned and coherent faith position that pierced the dismissiveness and even drew one or two respectful comments. How about staying away from the gaslighting and caricaturing. A start would be to lay out your own personal vision and be willing to articulate it. I, for one, would promise not to ridicule, misrepresent or mock you.
You never answer anything, Gurney. Just one new accusation after another. You want me to be accountable to examine your perspective ..but sail blithely on when I raise specific issues to you. You’re actually the most frustrating poster of all because you’re obviously articulate and educated … but you place yourself above the etiquette of reasonable discourse. Black lesbians and lizard genes. Yep … as I said before .. such contributions just stink this board out.
The twitter stuff is interesting. If this Hardy guy is trying to save the club with no ulterior motives .. then Simon and Ian are just a phone call away. Plenty of money to buy everything back .. and still lots for fuel for the Ferrari. Anybody who does Twitter .. might you suggest it to him?
Back and charged up NI. My battery definitely is on the blink.
To answer your question ..Yes. There’s a great deal that’s ‘weird’ about the Christian faith. If ‘weird’ means mysterious and very challenging/unbelievable to purely naturalistic thinking and where reality is limited to what can be apprehended through the 5 senses. A transcendent realm which is only accessible by revelation initiated by a superior, loving and intelligent Creator .. I understand completely how that is puzzling to the point of ‘weird.’ But, like hundreds of millions both now and through the centuries, I believe .. and have experienced .. that reality.
As far as ‘the Biblical version of the Creation’ is concerned .. I went at some length previously to explain that the Bible is a library of books of different genres … which, of course, has led to the ‘cherry picking’ glee club. Nevertheless I’ll repeat that I believe all of the Bible is useful to apprehend ‘revealed’truth.. but some is by myth, some by metaphor, some by hyperbole ..and some literally. I did give a clear example of this… Jesus telling people to pluck out their eyes and cut off their arms. Weird!
So I am happy to say, again, that I don’t believe the Bible teaches a 7 day Creation process as we understand it nor that the earth is only 6000 years old. I also don’t believe that I’m ‘cherry picking’ by saying that the Bible doesn’t teach that the Universe is physically earth centric ( Though I definitely DO believe that mankind is the main point of Creation and therefore his home environment, planet earth, is central to that. ) There are many Christians who would disagree with some of these views, though far fewer than you might think .. and I can live with that. There are many Christians, perhaps even the majority in our time, who find no contradiction between the Biblical narrative and the Scientific and modern view. I referenced previously Dr John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University, who is an internationally renowned speaker on the interface of science, philosophy and religion. Also Alister McGrath who is Professor of Science and Religion at Oxford University. Maybe have a look??Surely you’re not suggesting I repent, IA. I thought your Guru Gurney said that was out of order! Or maybe its only when it comes from a Christian direction … just as my 6 paragraph diatribes are scorned but the Guru has a free pass with you. As I said … predictable..but sad!
Hi NI. No I didn’t miss it … there were so many other points made from several quarters that it’s hard to keep it straight. ( This is genuinely not a ‘dig’ … but do you find any acceptance of my explanation above? You certainly seemed angry at what you felt was misrepresentation. I do try to address questions asked and points made as far as possible .. although even that is now drawing ridicule from some.)
I’m on 1% .. will answer your Q when charged.Predictable .. but still sad.
IA wrote : ‘Of course he sees the funny side, if you can’t laugh at yourself occasionally you might aswell pack it in now. Go on JI give us another epic six paragraph diatribe, you were born to do it baby.’
Happy to oblige IA. You’re such a jolly fellow.What was that you were saying, Sidey, about people presenting their own vision and values? Does it surprise you that there are so few posters .. and all from a fairly narrow range of perspectives?
A couple of clarifications … although it’s only in the interest of truth so I dont expect more than two or three to be bothered.
IA : I said that I hadn’t expected you to engage … and you hadn’t. I didn’t say that you weren’t intelligent enough. You never do engage. If you did then you would recognise the point I made about the Bible being a library of books and genres. Then you wouldn’t have made the shallow assessment that I don’t believe in everything in the Bible. Whether you are intelligent enough, not honest enough or just too lazy I don’t know. But its a bad habit.Ni : You seem pretty miffed at being misrepresented … welcome to my world. And to that of absent friends. (As an aside, before I explain why I think you mistake me, is it only when you are affected that you get upset? How about holding it as a general principle and calling it out whoever is the target?)
I agree that you didn’t say that I dismissed Galileo, hence the ‘presumably.’ I actually don’t think that you do think that. But you DID say, and I presume it was part of your case for challenging my beliefs:
‘ Sorry JI, but the creation is a simple story to satisfy simple people…. And to think Galileo was deemed a heretic! ‘ (From that I also infer, at the risk of further outrage from you, that I am simple. Other sentiments expressed were that its all ‘nonsense’ and for the ‘unintelligent’ and ‘superstitious.’
On your later post you made the same generalisation :
Because in the Abrahamic religions the universe is earth-centric. “Heretics” were burned at the stake for declaring that the Earth orbited the Sun.’
Then you capped it, despite my having stated clearly what I believed about the age of the earth ‘That and the fact that the age of the Earth is set at around 6-7,000 years.’
If these weren’t deemed to be relevant to ME as a professing Christian and defender of the veracity of the Bible…then what WAS your point?As for Gurney. When you ‘flail’ instead of engaging in respectful discussion and continue to take no responsibility for what you post then there’s no way to reasonably move forward.
You rest your case!! In order to do that ..you first have to make one.Yep. £3.5 million seems fair .. but before we start on Elliott and Sharp we need to remember the small matter of 1.6 million for the EFL loan and just south of £200000 for the Taxman .. as well as an imminent staff payday. Simon and Ian need £5 million and more to sort the immediate … and then as Simon said … will need another chunk to put petrol in the Ferrari so we can move forward.
8 users thanked author for this post.
To be fair I wasn’t putting my mortgage on you engaging at any depth, IA.
No apologies for ‘resurrecting’ ( sooo clever!!) this ageing thread …but I’ve not had any time until now. ‘I’ve decided to go in for a penny, in for a pound.’
I won’t answer every observation/question posed to me … but thanks to everyone who genuinely tried to follow my previous reasonings surrounding my faith, even when we didn’t see eye to eye. You know who you are. ( I don’t exclude your good self in that appreciation, Deerey, because although I found your response the bleakest and saddest of all the replies I did appreciate your searing honesty. I do hope it’s not the last word on that for you.)
To the one or two who don’t seem to think that a discussion thread entails actually thinking about or even properly reading what others have actually posted I feel a bit more frustrated, though not greatly so. You may know who you are … but probably don’t care.
One responder even felt it appropriate to cite that , presumably, my faith position meant that I somehow contested Galileo’s ‘fanciful notion’ that the sun didn’t orbit around the earth and, although I had stated quite clearly my views on the age of the earth, still dismissed me because of ‘the fact that the age of the Earth is set at around 6-7,000 years.’ Throw in a ‘nonsense’ and an ‘unintelligent and superstitious’ and there you have a closed and shut case.
Even worse was my old friend who never fails to turn up and share his superior wisdom whenever I share my defective worldview, especially on matters of faith. I did say that it was only a matter of time, Gurney. From chastising us all, or at least finding it amusing from your elevated position, that we should even presume to have such a discussion … through to referencing my ‘closed mind’ and lack of reflection on how my flawed thinking giving rise to such ‘intensely written guff’ ever came into being. I draw your attention to your statement that ‘ Of course, if you’ve been steeped in religion since birth, it must be so much more difficult to renounce your god .’ Although there is much that I’m at odds with in regard to BPG I do know that he came to faith around the age of 60. As for me ..age 24 from no Church background just after I graduated and began teaching.
But none of that will matter. You’ve demonstrated consistently that you want others to be held to account for what they post … what have you repeatedly said about ‘Gaslighting ‘ and ‘straw manning’ and ‘Jonnies’ and ‘doppelgangers’ .. yet you never take responsibility when your own assumptions and presumptions and inaccuracies are cited. With some perception you invite others to a little more humility and open mindeness rather than : ‘ if someone comes along and gives you a scientific explanation of the universe, it makes you feel silly. It puts your beliefs under serious threat, so you feel cross with them and either criticise them or ignore them. But you shouldn’t, because by interrogating your own beliefs, asking questions, reading, talking to a variety of intelligent people, you could learn something.’ I guess you deem yourself to be above such a process and therefore exempted from accountability.
Ah well. That’s off my chest ..but I don’t expect it to land anywhere productive.
In challenging one another’s views we are all surely aiming to bring others to a more healthy and accurate perception of reality. The danger is, of course, and as Gurney kind of indicated but with evident lack of self awareness , that when our deeply held notions are challenged we may well lapse into a defensive ‘flailing’ where, at its most pathological, we resort to misrepresentation, mockery, insults, name calling etc An invitation to interrogate our own beliefs and even begin again is at least a strong part of the meaning of the Biblical term ‘Repent.’ Because of its association with ‘finger wagging’ and ‘fun spoiling’ it certainly ain’t a popular word … but when, for example, I’m asked to change my view on my faith it is .. essentially .. a call to repent. A call to adopt a new reality and live out of that. I’ve actually done that .. although in the opposite direction .. once in my life .. at age 24.
And all of that leads me to say that I totally get why there is such a spectrum of responses on the Forum whenever I take it in this direction. It’s because a Christian claims to ‘see’ something that isn’t visible. And that can be puzzling to some .. but downright frustrating to the point of anger to others.
If you’ve seen Kevin Costner’s allegorical film ‘Field of Dreams’ it’s the Brother in Law/ Financial advisor who warns the family to sell up before bankruptcy. They are absorbed in the spooky baseball game that people will eventually flock to but which brother in law in total frustration can’t see. Then he can. And his advice changes.
The realm that I ‘see’ is hidden even though its right here. It’s transcendent but not distant. Deliberately so. God wants to be pursued because he knows that in that process something happens in the depths of a human being. Then they begin to ‘see’ into a realm that mere limited reason and perception by the five natural senses can’t access. Jesus said that ‘unless a man becomes as a little child he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven.’ The perception to many is that anyone believing that has indeed become childish. Its been said on the Forum in various ways a number of times. But the intended meaning is that we approach these matters with an openness and honesty and humility which can only be called ‘Childlike.’
With such an approach we might talk more attentively to that relative or friend who claims to have a faith. Or we might send off for ‘Surprised by Joy’ by C S Lewis. Or have a listen to John Lennox or Alister McGrath. That’s what I would do if I were you.
So I’ll sign of with one encouragement … ‘Repent ..For the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!’NI .. You had a great time observing the heavens with your daughter and I’m glad about that. You didn’t say why it seems self evident to you from that experience that there can be no Creator. I know you referenced the sheer scale and size of the Cosmos .. but I’ve never claimed that the Creator I claim to know is anything other than mysterious and ‘other’ .. not understandable in terms of time and space and the purely rational markers of restricted creatures like ourselves. What we bring to the experience of our lives colours everything. Several of the early astronauts on the US programme testified to their sense of God’s presence when returning to earth and at least one came to faith after his experience. On the other hand Yuri Gagarin, a committed Communist and atheist, returned to earth and happily reported that he’d seen no sign of God.
As for ‘deep set indoctrination’ and ‘a simple story to satisfy simple people’… these ‘go to arguments’ are pretty shallow if you’ll pardon me for saying so. I trust that you’re not deliberately trying to offend. I refer you to my previous citing of, for example, Nobel Prize winning Scientists or a range of intellectual giants like John Lennox or C S Lewis who share my faith. Misguided maybe. ‘Indoctrinated and simple .. nope.
Maybe a better route for you to understand my perspective is to acknowledge that warmth of heart when your daughter thanks you for a lovely birthday .. and you have a pang of joy and gratitude that seems somehow sacred and out of place in a vast, cold and impersonal universe. Perhaps there is a direction to send that gratitude.
IA and Deerey. I’m sorry that you found my long post inaccessible. I’m not often accused of being ‘mishy mashy’ in my thinking or writing IA. I had a check back and actually thought I’d done OK. I suppose there are a number of possibilities. I really could have been ‘off form’and messed up in trying to answer. As Deerey, with some humility, suggested ..it could have been a bit too clever and required careful reading that stretched capabilities. I’ts possible that readers didn’t have a proper go and pay enough attention. Its even a possibility that someone might not be altogether honest and want the challenge and so took an opportunity to jump on the back of other comments.
From past engagement, Deerey, I know that you haven’t conned the education system. Your questions and challenges to me seem to be in good faith and as intelligent as anyone else’s. I wanted to back up what I said about where some Christians get tangled up in strange theories because they haven’t understood what the Bible is and how it is to be read. I guess a lot of the terminology and even concepts might be new … but that doesn’t mean that the post was a ‘wrong un.’ Maybe it just required a bit more careful thought. Maybe even have another look?
To the relief of some ….I’ve burned myself out.Back on topic. Where do I start responding to further questions asked and comments made about that last lengthy post? I’ll have a bash.
To Sidey : Absolutely agree with your take on previous mass extinctions and Climate variations. I don’t see how that precludes the existence of God though. What it might lead to is a bit more discussion on how much of current change is anthropomorphic/man made and how much is cyclical … but that seems to be a somewhat ‘heretical’ question. I did find the statements about ‘life finding a way’ and ‘the planet finds an equilibrium’ interesting. These almost seem to give ‘life’ and ‘the planet’ some kind of intelligence and agency. Be careful about making’ faith statements’ my friend.
Heath … a peppering of questions or challenges from you. Taken in order:
1. Q Clever fella this God. Did he create all the stars, planets, asteroids, black holes and why didn’t he make them all habitable too?
A. The Judeo Christian tradition is that He did make them. He is Creator. They are part of Creation.
And that Humanity is the crown of Creation, made in His image …with its host environment, planet earth, as the focal point.
2. In summary … you were disturbed by my statement that not all calling themselves Christians believe the same about all things. You said.. ‘Basically you can believe and do what you want and still call yourself a Christian.’ I wish it wasn’t so ( … I wish everyone was a true Christian believing and behaving exactly like me ( JOKE!!!!!! STOP IT! I’M JOKING!! )…. More seriously I definitely believe there are core beliefs and manifestations of those beliefs in behaviour which are essential to being a Christian and which I am trying to embrace. I’m not much for labels and titles … but Putin or Hitler and even some Popes involved in mass murder and millions of other examples who claim the title don’t disprove the validity of Christianity … they disprove the validity of their claim.
I should point out that this variation in belief isn’t unique to Christianity. Moslems split into sects and are hostile to each other, as do all other faith groups. Political groups are often nothing more than a spectrum of roughly affiliated cliques who fight each other as much as they do the other groups. Monty Python captured this so well when the People’s Group for the Liberation of Palestine ( or something) hated the Popular Front for the Liberation more than they did the Romans!
3. ‘We have all met Christians who go to church every Sunday but are horrible uncaring bastards for the rest of the week.’ Yep. It stinks when that happens. Maybe disproves the validity of their claim .. or that they aren’t very mature or healed yet cos its not an overnight thing. And we’ve all met non Christians who never go near a Church who are horrible uncaring bastards too. It would be interesting to compile the data on whether the average person claiming to be a Christian is more or less uncaring than those who make no claim.
4. You asked me directly.. ‘How many of the 10 commandments has Trump NOT broken?’
I’m not sure how this relates to anything I posted above, Heath…but I suspect that Trump has broken most of them. I know I have … especially when Jesus actually said that you don’t have to actually kill someone to be a murderer, just have ‘murderous’ thoughts. Now that’s a strict standard …I’d say impossible. How many would you say that you have or have not broken ? ( As an extra .. also would love to know why you invited me to answer that question if you have the time).A really long couple of posts coming your way … with no apologies… because there were quite a range of comments, challenges and questions after my last post by a range of folks and I’ve got time to answer.
At least you can’t accuse me of giving simplistic answers and certainly not of avoiding putting myself in the firing line. When I see some of the other exchanges I actually reckon I ‘deal with it’ pretty well, Heath …but who knows. My comment about ‘mockery beginning’ was more in anticipation than reaction and … with the exception of maybe a hint in one or two quarters … I actually don’t think the wide range of responses to my last lengthy post has been too bad. (Obviously there a couple of candidates who may yet post even at this late stage … one who is always ‘bullish’ regarding the ‘red rag’ of my faith .. and pretty much anything I post … and the other who is constantly disappointed/outraged that I don’t express faith like he does… so there’s time yet.)
If the point of a Forum like this is the full and free exchange of ideas, challenging the perspectives of others … and even ourselves, making others (and ourselves) think and then try to express those thoughts … ( all in a civil and respectful and honest context) then I reckon I’m making a solid contribution from time to time. I await the nomination for the end of year award!Fair question. It’s not easy to answer three or four posters coming from different angles .. and to do it justice. So need a bit of time. Just got back to Leeds around 9 30 after being with family in Scunny after the game. Hope that’s ok Heath.
(I did want to have a little public smile about you being irritated at others being irritated … or something. I suppose I could have waited)Will follow up later … but can’t hold off from pointing out the irony in your post Heath.
…. let the mockery begin!!
Deerey wrote :’Interesting point about ‘fossil fuels’. How do Christians reconcile using a fuel that they perceive to be the result of Satan putting some living forms behind rocks to deceive us? Satan’s fuel – shouldn’t more Christians be pushing for renewables? Apologies for the aside – I know how ‘going off topic’ bothers some.’
Deerey’s question is, as he says, off the main topic. But I thank him for it and can’t resist at least a brief(ish) acknowledgment.
This is a development from Gurney’s previous puzzlement: ‘ Incidentally, as a practising Christian you might take issue with the expression ‘fossil fuels’. Fossils are usually over 10,000 years old, considerably older than the bible suggests for the age of the earth. How on earth does a practising Christian (Catholic sic) reconcile that?’
I think the kernel of the question ..( if Deerey would indulge me for starting with a question he didnt directly ask).. may have already been touched upon in several other threads. This centres on the notion that no intelligent or educated person could surely be an advocate of whatever it is that ‘Christians’ are supposed to believe, especially in matters of Science which surely has to be seen as at odds with their worldview. I certainly remember giving a detailed and lengthy
response to IAs assertion that belief in ‘Fairy Tales’ will die out as people get more educated and intelligent in their thinking. I listed any number of historic and contemporary figures who describe or described themselves as Christians, including a range of modern Scientists and Nobel Prize Winners. I would dig it out and post it again if requested.
An easily read Article is accessible on PDF simply by Googling ‘A Christian physicist examines the Age of the Earth’ by Dr Steven Ball.More specifically to Deerey and Gurney’s actual questions I would first say that not all Christians believe the same about all things. Thats why there have been Synods and Councils and schisms and new denominations throughout history. Quite creative in some cases but,tragically, all too often pathological and deadly. A certain poster on this Forum has very different views and approaches to me and yet we read the same Bible.
My view on fossils, Gurney, irrespective of what Catholics may or may not assert, is that they reflect the reality that God probably created the Earth several Billion years ago. I find no contradiction between my faith and trust in the Bible .. although I recognise that many Christians find it difficult to distinguish between the different styles of writing in the 66 Books of the Bible. Some are History, some are Poetry, some are Prophecy, some are Apocalyptic etc. Sometimes statements are to be taken absolutely literally and some may be Hyperbole, Rhetoric, Mataphor etc If every Christian were to take literally and obey every single statement of Jesus then there would be Churches full of people with no right arms and with eyes plucked out! Thats just one crude example.
From that, Deerey, you can see that I don’t need to find an explanation for fossils centring on a Satanic scam to plant fossils and fool everyone. Personally I’ve not come across that one in the circles in which I move but I’m sure that it’s one of several explanations given.To throw out another provocation ..and possibly to be more ‘on topic’ .. as a Christian I do believe that not only is God the Author of all Creation but also that He sustains it and will one day remake it. Hence, whilst I have care and concern for the environment and feel that we are to steward Creation wisely, I dont have any deep Climate anxiety. Just as He made the cycle that gives us life giving freshwater rainfall and Osmosis and Transpiration to see vegetation grow, so He gave us just the right amount of radiated heat and Sunlight…. just the right atmospheric conditions for life … and BOOM .. deposited coal and oil and natural gas as energy sources along with wind, sunlight and water along with huge potential in the structure of atoms for energy release by ‘splitting’, fusion or even more. Our job is moderation in all things and wisdom in any transitions.
OOps. What did I say about brief?
Gurney … not playing until you explain why you think Feminists only advocate for Christians. (No apology needed. Just an acknowledgment that you lost your way. Otherwise I can’t trust that you engage in good faith).
ps still had no response to ‘what I’ve been doing all my life’ on racial issues. And feel free to explain the Catholic jibe to Sidey since he spotted it too.
Your proposed thread sounds really interesting … and no challenge for me as I’m already outed 😆
Re Afghanistan date …I’d probably have Uncle Joe in both years anyway 😜
Re Green New Deal ..It’s not just the date of the legislation that is relevant. The Keystone Pipeline was scuppered on day one of the new administration. It’s true that broader context plays in .. and boy are we paying for it.An energy independent/surplus USA might actually alleviate rather than contribute to the problem.Sordid stuff. A proud history, community asset and employer potentially tanked by someone in charge without the character to steer the vessel safely. I actually have a flicker of empathy for anyone who gets out of their depths even if they chose to swim there. If I were on Peter Swann’s team I would move heaven and earth to make whatever financial compromises are possible on the sale that could give the club a future. It may not be a legal obligation. It may not be good business. But it would be more honourable than the pain that looms on the horizon. And it would be a decent decision.
-
AuthorPosts
