Vinjay

Ronnie Clayton's doing. Though I can imagine Jack hiding Man United's plaque like that. Personally I wouldn't even allow it in the room at all.

Not sure why people liked Todd then. I'm not one to talk about someone holding grudges but that seems like something people should have gotten over quickly. I can't remember reading about this lawsuit before (though I probably have as it's in the LT online archives) which is unusual considering it involves Rovers v Man United. There was the Dahlin injury case and that wasn't related to neglectful challenges, etc. Clearly it takes a long time to deal with insurance matters hence the mention of five years for Thornley's case to be settled. Strange though that it took 3 years to file (as detailed in the link below) and he hadn't even left Man United. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/6182134.rovers-thornley-sues/ It's certainly plausible that conversation in the early 90's took place but perhaps they just got it wrong? Maybe he just wasn't as good as they thought and this injury is a convenient excuse. Didn't Man United have another young player (can't recall his name) who was injured around the same time period? Someone else who was supposedly better than Beckham, Scholes, etc it comes across as more United orchestrated narrative spin. I think Tottenham had a young player too who was built up as destined for great things and accomplished nothing.

Guess Man United are only OK with challenges deliberately intended to cripple people.

OK but in Boxing and MMA there's quite a number of fans who are just bloodthirsty. Do you owe those type of people anything? Also it's not the same people there week in and week out. Certainly many sports are escapism (something like golf has always been a bit pretentious which is probably why so many footballers partake in it) but don't really think football counts. Not for me anyway even when it wasn't a chore it was still more important than that. Obviously there's always been games where I don't have preference either way besides not being boring. I didn't care who won this fight (McGregor isn't even British not that it would have made any difference anyway) though did have a touch of sympathy for some of the backlash that Khabib received. Plus he clearly deserved to win so it's hard to really look past that isn't it? Also both fighters clearly enjoy what they do (talking about the actual MMA here not the other stuff lol) and put effort into it. I guess you could say that McGregor already has so much money that fines, lawsuits, etc over that bus incident don't matter that much. I don't know how much money Khabib has accumulated though I think it was reported it's 2 million for this fight. Right now of course it's being withheld. Perhaps the fine won't be that much and he will receive most of it but don't think they are purely money over effort. Certainly not at this point and maybe not at any point. Some people retire too late but is that really because they just want to grab another payday? Sometimes but not always and I don't think either of these 2 would take that route.

This article pretty much sums up my argument besides the author being the condemning tone. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/martin-rogers/2018/10/07/ufc-229-brawls-black-eye-khabib-nurmagomedov-conor-mcgregor/1555747002/ As I say boxing/UFC should be viewed as escapism. Fighters don't "owe" things to their fans in the same way others do. They put themselves on the line physically (well some shirk a bit but not all) isn't that enough? I guess you could say footballers do that (after all it's physical exertion) but it's hardly as dangerous is it? Would you rather have personalities in boxing/MMA or for all fighters to be like many footballers are? Boring corporate robots/puppets in most cases and even those who have some personality are often charmless scum (John Terry and numerous Man United players for instance though I will concede Cantona could be funny) who are completely devoid of humour and would stab anyone in the back. Corporations hurt far more people with their unethical behaviour than fighters do. OK some corporations are in the entertainment industry themselves but still the point is clear. Yes it's violence but boxing/MMA is often disciplined violence. Look at how many professional boxers (probably quite a lot would be my guess) found a way off the streets and into the boxing gym or wherever.

Oh come on he was an absolute egomaniac at his peak. What next he won a nobel prize award for race relations? Yes he was more humble afterwards (which a cynical person could say was because of his illness though who knows for sure) but perhaps McGregor will be as well. For goodness sake even Mike Tyson has calmed down somewhat (when his Daughter died you may have expected him to be pushed back over the edge but that didn't happen) so it's not hard to believe McGregor might. Speaking of Tyson he's exactly the type of draw I'm talking about. Had I been older at the time I would have watched all of his PPV fights because he was a lunatic and unpredictable. Not to mention one of the funniest people to ever exist. Whoever came up with "Mike Tyson mysteries" (basically Mike Tyson solving mysteries in a Scooby Doo type show) is a mad genius really. Speaking of which I should watch more episodes. I don't think McGregor is anywhere near as funny though you could argue the bus attack was Tyson level crazy. I'm not condemning Ali as you say he transcended boxing and proved the primary selling points in the "fight game" are conflict and trash talk. Some things are supposed to be escapism and for me trash talk and anti-social actions in sports like boxing/MMA should be seen as exactly that. I'm not going to be moralistic about fights in rings/cages that sell violence. OK it takes skill as well but that ranks behind grudges/trash talk and violence for many people. I don't typically watch boxing/MMA fights for the sake of violence itself (though it can add to a grudge match) but it's certainly more of a draw for me than skill or sportsmanship.

Yes someone mentioned that (when people claimed McGregor hadn't done anything inflammatory) but the main cameras missed it. Not on purpose but as with many things there's a story behind the story that is the story. I guess some people think Khabib should have been the "bigger man" (and that winning the fight fair and square was the best way to react) but he pointed out McGregor's insults in the post fight press conference. I'm not saying either should be up for a sportsmanship award lol but it's cage fighting not synchronised swimming for crying out loud.

Place was already on the map given it was 94/95 (as you point out). I did hear that Blackburn was the most successful lottery town for a while. Was that based on this one figure (presumably that 18 million for the first draw wasn't topped for a while) or the overall number of jackpot winners from the area in those early years? There's a few morality arguments in that article (I have no problem with gambling) but here's one on the privacy front people don't normally come up with. Maybe it's the "worst case scenario" in some ways (after all most lottery winners who have troubles usually inflict it upon themselves or have troublesome relatives) but couldn't lottery winners be seen as somewhat "easy prey" for gangsters/extortionists? I'm sure there's been instances where lottery winners have been threatened (begging letters aren't extortion) so if they wish to stay private that's their right as far as I'm concerned. I don't play lotteries (I rarely have) but people knowing you have 20 million (or whatever the typical jackpot is now wasn't there a huge one this past month?) must make anyone who is already paranoid (like me) even more paranoid. At some point there might be a kidnap/murder case with a lottery winner involved and if they were "exposed" by the media that would lead to a major moral argument. The media of course would probably say "well that's the worst case scenario and unlikely" but it's not "impossible" is it? While I make an exception for certain families (getting more into ungrateful inheritance here not lottery winners but anyhow) the majority probably don't deserve to be threatened for "hitting the jackpot" so to speak. Some of them of course are horrible people to begin with so if they end up losing their money (though in the above example it's hardly like he lost it all) they probably don't deserve sympathy. Others who lose the money are simply stupid and while it's often easy to insult a stupid person (because many people who are academically limited often engage in stupid actions) perhaps there should be some sympathy as well. After all you could argue that intelligence is simply part of "natural selection" and people aren't to blame if they don't hit the brain jackpot so to speak. I think there's a difference between lacking academic gifts and doing things which are blatantly stupid (and sometimes illegal). Of course intelligent people sometimes do illegal things as well (sometimes with big risk for little if any gain) so it's more complex than outright simple. Perhaps I should have pursued criminology because such questions (particularly psychology related) are interesting to me.

I haven't followed Wilder v Fury but there's certainly nothing fake about the Khabib/McGregor feud. When the bus attack happened I refused to get all moralistic about it considering it's a sport where people fight in cages. Grudges are what sell boxing and MMA fights for me and for many other people. Trash talk and anti-social actions aren't a bad thing in such circumstances. I have nothing against Khabib either though and there's no doubt he deserved to win that fight. It's not like he was dominated for the duration prior to the submission. Announcers seemed biased to me (sure they mentioned it before or afterwards and they did use footage of the bus attack at some point in the buildup) with no mention of McGregor's actions so others will sympathise with Khabib as well. The bus attack had "been and gone" some might say...well that's ridiculous how do you forget something like that? The main point is that the Nevada Commission are involved in this so who knows what will happen? The UFC can hardly punish Khabib (to a greater extent than McGregor) though judging by the press conference that's clearly not going to happen. I'm not sure what kind of "in house" actions the UFC usually take once the commissions are done delivering their punishments. I know enough to realise it won't be anything greater. Shameful? I'm disappointed there wasn't a bigger riot. The UFC shouldn't be bothered as it was contained relatively quickly yet still being viewed as one (and perhaps THE) of the craziest moments in the history of the promotion. Guess McGregor will be expected to beat a couple of top contenders though before he gets an immediate rematch. Not to mention if Khabib isn't stripped (and from UFC's standpoint that's obviously going to be decided on the length of any suspension) McGregor isn't going to be the no 1 contender is he? Would they consider a non-title match? I'm not sure about that as I don't watch enough UFC to guess but it seems like one way to sell the fight without giving McGregor an undeserved shot at the belt. Don't agree either with Dana White saying that Khabib/McGregor should have shaken hands afterwards. Even if things had been relatively calmer (after the fight) refusing to shake hands, congratulate, etc obviously wasn't hard to predict.

His playing career (at least) was pretty impeccable though wasn't it?

Perhaps I don't have much of an opinion?

Probably would get more replies under different circumstances.

Wow. If the forum crashes I'll know where the traffic came from.

Very good point about national/international businesses as well.

Shouldn't there be a clean slate with West Ham for obvious reasons? The only club that sees that stadium as a bogey ground is themselves.

"Blackburn Rovers have been contacted for comment". Not really much to comment about is there somehow doubt this will get as many responses as Dack's legal problems.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/16895372.uncle-jacks-pub-renamed-your-chance-to-run-the-jack-walker/?ref=mr&lp=5

What do people think of this article? Should point out that it wasn't "written by a Muslim" as another site claims. Mentions Halal restaurants once but also developments like the Cathedral Quarter (which is mostly good) it's not about integration, mosques etc unless you're on a site that has a racist agenda. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/16893786.opinion-blackburn-is-far-better-than-it-was-15-years-ago/?ref=mr&lp=6

I'm sure if Northchoke were doing their corporate hospitality people would be all over it saying how disgraceful the Walker Family are. ?. I thought Dyche was great and clubs like West Ham should be lining up for his services over those useless foreigners like Pellegrini? ? Now because they are supposedly exhausted by a few European games in September they are as good as relegated? Granted Europe or not it might be hard to match last season but thought they had such strong foundations? Kinda like how John Williams couldn't be relegat...erm...anyway...

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/10996665.Local_historians_bid_to_protect_commemorative_blue_plaques_in_Blackburn/

Venkys haven't exactly brought boredom to the club have they? So I'm not sure why people would say it's not interesting unless they feel it's related to what they see on the field. Start of this season included fans have left Ewood in past year pleased more often than not. Personally I find football to be stressful and mentally exhausting though I certainly don't see Rovers as boring. There are some boring elements but it's not like WBA/Stoke who were both boring clubs albeit less so since being dragged into relegation battles. Maybe a little bit occasionally in the later years of the WFIT regime but of course attendance was higher then. Obviously many would return primarily on the basis of EPL promotion.

...and I've been on (and often off) for 13 and half years. Can't really call it a game though I kinda wish it was. There would also be a case for suing Dack (as Chelsea did with Mutu but look how much they paid for him) but would the club wish to go to similar lengths? Would it even be worth it? Lot of time spent in court and if Dack's sale fee dropped how much would he be liable for in terms of present personal wealth and future earnings? Some of Chelsea's case was based upon loss of sale fees, etc as well. An open ended question but one to speculate on perhaps.

More on Bruce's situation with some people on twitter commenting on how he's lost his parents in past year. I'm sure you have heard since he mentions it more than Bruce Wayne. Well what's that got to do with anything football management related? If Steve Kean's parents had died while he was manager (far as I can recall they didn't because Kean probably would have exploited it) would anyone have stopped calling for him to be fired? Of course not. So when Bruce is bullying people at press conferences, etc we are supposed to get that's he one of the most selfish, smug, arrogant pricks in football? We are supposed to get blatant disrespect for this football club over Savage, Rhodes, etc and he moaned about Allardyce didn't he someone who's similarly arrogant and cares about nothing but himself. Granted he's not as incompetent as some Villa fans seem to be claiming but Villa fans moaning is nothing new. There's always someone at the club they moan about perhaps the only time I can recall is the first few years Lerner was there. Needless to say that changed. Maybe their regular moaning has had some basis behind it but it does seem more extensive than most clubs.

The only person likely to get any kind of boos/abuse tomorrow will be Bruce. Provided the game does not go well from Villa's perspective of course.