Red Card Thusc Coach

[Unregistered]

The difference is that I don't come here to demean or slander an individual. Once my DD is safely out of OR soccer I'll put my name on these posts and meet F2F with any poster on any topic. Until then I owe it to her not to turn the negativity that oozes from this blog against her in any way!

Knowing your style, this rule only applies only to you. Anyone else who doesn't identify themselves are cowards, is that how it works.

And if you think your previous post calling someone a coward and bad role model was not demeaning or slander, you need to check yourself. You are just as negative and demeaning as the other poster (more really) and hide behind the fact you can't revel yourself because of your daughter . . . but other who are demeaning (in your opinion) are cowards.

Whatever you need to convince yourself that you aren't being a hypocrite . . . but as you aren't shy to state your opinion and call posters names as an unregistered, neither am I and the posts show you are being a hypocrite. Stop calling posters out and calling them names for something you are not willing to do.

This board never ceases to amaze me.

[SodiumFan[2]]

Anyone else who doesn't identify themselves are cowards, is that how it works.

Yes, that is how it works. Coward.

[Unregistered]

Yes, that is how it works. Coward.

That's what I figured . . . double standard. Typical THUSC attitude.

[Unregistered]

That's what I figured . . . double standard. Typical THUSC attitude.

Step back.... breath... and read that post again. The person you replied to is not posting anonymously as you are.

[Unregistered]

Step back.... breath... and read that post again. The person you replied to is not posting anonymously as you are.

Sodiumfan is identifying themselves?

Also, if you step back, read the progression of the thread, Sodiumfan was responding to a quote where I asked if the poster who had a reason not to post their identity is OK but everyone who doesn't is a coward. Sodium took that quote, said yes.

If they meant they identified themselves (as a screen name sodium fan?) and that gives them the right to say coward, they should have expressed that. Instead they answered the question I was asking which is it OK for the other poster to apply a double standard.

[Unregistered]

I'm not sure who you are or how much you actually know about MJ's behavior but to imply in any way that there is a comparison is total bovine excrement.

He was guilty of inappropriately expressing his frustration with referee's for a very short period in a very long career. The other bitch's about some of his language with his players a few times is petty and irrelevant to his being a good coach or role model. Last I check Priests aren't usually good coaches!

Unless you have the integrity to put your name on the previous comment you are a coward who is a WORSE role model than what you are accusing MJ of being. He has corrected his behavior but you still beat this dead horse without mercy and without purpose other than to try to get others to agree with your point. You need help and should see a professional about the psychological issues in your life that prompt you to continue your vendetta!

You are correct you do not know who I am. You seem to have assigned every other post you don't like to me, Well Surprise...This was my first post (probably last as well with your warm welcome).

I am not beating any dead horse, I am just commenting on the fact that two major discussions on this forum are about coaches not living up to the consumers expectations. If that is true (as it seems to be) and they are still around, it is only because we collectively have tolerated their behavior. (another fine point here, I stated that what should not be tolerated was behavior, I did not say anything personal about the individuals).

So as my parting comment I will generously quote you back

You need help and should see a professional about the psychological issues in your life that prompt you to continue your vendetta!

[Unregistered]

Sodiumfan is identifying themselves?

Also, if you step back, read the progression of the thread, Sodiumfan was responding to a quote where I asked if the poster who had a reason not to post their identity is OK but everyone who doesn't is a coward. Sodium took that quote, said yes.

If they meant they identified themselves (as a screen name sodium fan?) and that gives them the right to say coward, they should have expressed that. Instead they answered the question I was asking which is it OK for the other poster to apply a double standard.

Christ you are dense. Seriously. Down right stupid. It is a far cry from being anonymous. No one posts with their real god damned name you mouthbreathing moron.

[Unregistered]

Christ you are dense. Seriously. Down right stupid. It is a far cry from being anonymous. No one posts with their real god damned name you mouthbreathing moron.

Amen.... truth hurts!

[SodiumFan[2]]

Christ you are dense. Seriously. Down right stupid. It is a far cry from being anonymous. No one posts with their real god damned name you mouthbreathing moron.

HA HA HA HA!! You nailed it brother! (or sister!)

[Unregistered]

Some need more help than others

Knowing your style, this rule only applies only to you. Anyone else who doesn't identify themselves are cowards, is that how it works.

And if you think your previous post calling someone a coward and bad role model was not demeaning or slander, you need to check yourself. You are just as negative and demeaning as the other poster (more really) and hide behind the fact you can't revel yourself because of your daughter . . . but other who are demeaning (in your opinion) are cowards.

Whatever you need to convince yourself that you aren't being a hypocrite . . . but as you aren't shy to state your opinion and call posters names as an unregistered, neither am I and the posts show you are being a hypocrite. Stop calling posters out and calling them names for something you are not willing to do.

This board never ceases to amaze me.

Is telling someone that they need help name calling?

[Unregistered]

Yes let's look

MJ has a long history of poor performance and behavior. The previous poster is correct. His history at other clubs has been negative as well.

Look at him now. Look at the cards his team is accumulating right now. He sets the standard for their behavior.

An intelligent and responsible parent would keep their child off his team.

Can you provide examples of the poor behavior of either MJ or his players AFTER the spate of Dismissals?

[Unregistered]

Look up the meaning of Vendetta.

You are correct you do not know who I am. You seem to have assigned every other post you don't like to me, Well Surprise...This was my first post (probably last as well with your warm welcome).

I am not beating any dead horse, I am just commenting on the fact that two major discussions on this forum are about coaches not living up to the consumers expectations. If that is true (as it seems to be) and they are still around, it is only because we collectively have tolerated their behavior. (another fine point here, I stated that what should not be tolerated was behavior, I did not say anything personal about the individuals).

So as my parting comment I will generously quote you back

Since you "say" you are not one of the ones who relish in attacking MJ I'm sorry that I made that assumption. Your other observation about clubs tolerating less than ideal behavior for a winning coach has some merit but in MJ's case that was not the issue.

The difference between asking that the attacks stop and carrying out a vendetta are at opposite ends of the spectrum of personal behavior. The negative attacks that are the core of the Oregon threads are symptom of the posters personality where they derive more satisfaction in tearing something/someone down rather than building something up.

The fact that they come here anonymously to attack people by name yet hide their own identity makes them cowards. The same can not be said of a person trying to defend a person and or club unless they too engage in negativity and childish name calling.

My personal posts regarding the attacks on MJ are my observations on the behavior of the posters and their motivations for continuing the barrage of negativity. If anyone considers being called out for that behavior as name calling then I have to question their grasp of the rules of debate and discussion.