Football Clips & Pics!

Luisão taking a picture of the tits title.

10169446_835105156503327_1135878753082142816_n.jpg


1794686_835563023124207_4190526684029299264_n.jpg
 
*a footballing legend, by almost all footy fans

it's nobody else's business other than the related individuals what he did in his personal life.
 
yes i know, but anyway...that´s horrible and also footballers are rolemodels for many... not just 18+ people watch.. so living a life does affect how people look at the players..

i have big respect for Scholes for example...he is a legend in every aspect.
 
Kanouté said:
*a footballing legend, by almost all footy fans

it's nobody else's business other than the related individuals what he did in his personal life.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. Both positive and negative actions have a far more wide-sweeping effect/consequences than simply "the related individuals". Giggs will most likely have to answer for his actions, as will Woodward, Ferguson, and the Glazers. Giggs' previous actions -- just as much as his current ones -- affect the public's perception of the club. Kobe Bryant is fortunate that his past is for the most part kept under wraps, but there are still media outlets (e.g., ESPN) that discuss his rape case and whether or not that detracts from his ability to be considered a Hall of Fame player.
 
Steve-O21 said:
I wholeheartedly disagree with this statement. Both positive and negative actions have a far more wide-sweeping effect/consequences than simply "the related individuals". Giggs will most likely have to answer for his actions, as will Woodward, Ferguson, and the Glazers. Giggs' previous actions -- just as much as his current ones -- affect the public's perception of the club. Kobe Bryant is fortunate that his past is for the most part kept under wraps, but there are still media outlets (e.g., ESPN) that discuss his rape case and whether or not that detracts from his ability to be considered a Hall of Fame player.
Click to expand...
That's a very "American" point of view (No disrespect). Kobe is a hall of fame player because he played at a hall of fame level. Period. Even if he is/was a rapist. Same thing with O.J. Simpson. One of the best RB of all time. Probably a fucking murderer, but still deserving to be in Canton.

I see this all the time on the NFL, when players are cut, take huge fines, "get counsel" for off the field issues that are nowhere related to the game. Let the justice/society deal with those issues.

If he is a good individual or not it has nothing to do with the game. John Terry seems like a fucking douchebag, but he is one of the best leaders in today's game.

Giggs public image should be discussed, but his football skills and now coaching skills should be judged only for what happened on the pitch.
 
andy18cruz said:
That's a very "American" point of view (No disrespect). Kobe is a hall of fame player because he played at a hall of fame level. Period. Even if he is/was a rapist. Same thing with O.J. Simpson. One of the best RB of all time. Probably a fucking murderer, but still deserving to be in Canton.

I see this all the time on the NFL, when players are cut, take huge fines, "get counsel" for off the field issues that are nowhere related to the game. Let the justice/society deal with those issues.

If he is a good individual or not it has nothing to do with the game. John Terry seems like a fucking douchebag, but he is one of the best leaders in today's game.

Giggs public image should be discussed, but his football skills and now coaching skills should be judged only for what happened on the pitch.
Click to expand...

I think the truth lies somewhere between your two POVs. Fact is that even if a player is/was known as a great athlete he might have made some serious errors off the pitch. Let me give you an easy and polarizing example:

What if (hypothetically) a well known and greatly talented footballer in the 50s would have had a past as a member of the Nazi regime and maybe even ordered some of the most cruel crimes in history? Would you be able to separate this two things?

I certainly can't as the player who's on field is the same person that is living off field. I know that some professional athletes came from the streets and committed crimes before getting famous, but that doesn't mean we can (or should) ignore this. And if they act criminally or -to speak correct in terms of moral- wrongly as it's the case with Giggs, while being professional athletes, it makes things worse, at least to me. We don't have to argue about the talent that Giggs or Kobe or OJ had or have and what they did to develop the sports they were into and that we liked to see or do, but it shouldn't be forgotten that they're also existing as non-professional, private persons, that can commit ordinary crimes.
 
Personally, I tend to agree with the "somewhere in the middle" point of view.

With that said, I truly despise the media for digging deep into personal lives and making such information publicly accessible.
Things like this spread like wildfire because of the media and it's none of their business.

Personally, I'd prefer that I didn't know anything about Giggs' personal life...
 
Last edited:
S-NipE said:
I think the truth lies somewhere between your two POVs. Fact is that even if a player is/was known as a great athlete he might have made some serious errors off the pitch. Let me give you an easy and polarizing example:

What if (hypothetically) a well known and greatly talented footballer in the 50s would have had a past as a member of the Nazi regime and maybe even ordered some of the most cruel crimes in history? Would you be able to separate this two things?

I certainly can't as the player who's on field is the same person that is living off field. I know that some professional athletes came from the streets and committed crimes before getting famous, but that doesn't mean we can (or should) ignore this. And if they act criminally or -to speak correct in terms of moral- wrongly as it's the case with Giggs, while being professional athletes, it makes things worse, at least to me. We don't have to argue about the talent that Giggs or Kobe or OJ had or have and what they did to develop the sports they were into and that we liked to see or do, but it shouldn't be forgotten that they're also existing as non-professional, private persons, that can commit ordinary crimes.
Click to expand...

You and I made the same point: Actions cannot be compartmentalized nor strictly private. They can affect not only the individual making a certain decision or committing a certain action, but potentially those who might stand to gain or to lose from them. I only bring up the example of Kobe to demonstrate that for as talented of a professional athlete as he is, he continues to come under scrutiny. I agree with andy that he is a Hall of Famer, -- I'm not questioning his talent, nor O.J.'s, etc -- but there will be H.O.F. voters and media outlets who will question his merit because of what he's done outside of the game. They will have to determine if his actions outside of basketball detract from his career by somehow bringing the game into disrepute.

However, Kobe will be in the H.O.F; Giggs is now the interim manager. I'm okay with those decisions because I also believe in grace and forgiveness...but, I'm more arguing for those tough conversations to be had: [United board memebers discussing their managerial opening] "Does hiring Ryan Giggs as our manager hurt our standing as a family club and what steps do we need to take in order to make sure that Ryan understands the level of professionalism we strive for as an organization?" I would much rather a conversation like that take place and Giggs is then hired than United simply hiring Giggs because he is/was a club legend as a player. He is the manager of Manchester United Football Club and his actions past and present should come under scrutiny because he is making decisions that will affect not only the success of the organization, but also the public's perception of it. His judgment then is of paramount importance.
 
S-NipE said:
I think the truth lies somewhere between your two POVs. Fact is that even if a player is/was known as a great athlete he might have made some serious errors off the pitch. Let me give you an easy and polarizing example:

What if (hypothetically) a well known and greatly talented footballer in the 50s would have had a past as a member of the Nazi regime and maybe even ordered some of the most cruel crimes in history? Would you be able to separate this two things?

I certainly can't as the player who's on field is the same person that is living off field. I know that some professional athletes came from the streets and committed crimes before getting famous, but that doesn't mean we can (or should) ignore this. And if they act criminally or -to speak correct in terms of moral- wrongly as it's the case with Giggs, while being professional athletes, it makes things worse, at least to me. We don't have to argue about the talent that Giggs or Kobe or OJ had or have and what they did to develop the sports they were into and that we liked to see or do, but it shouldn't be forgotten that they're also existing as non-professional, private persons, that can commit ordinary crimes.
Click to expand...

The thing for me is that are different areas in which a person should be judged upon. Moral behaviour is something to do with society, and only that. Any consequences beyond that are wrong. That's my point of view. A strict one, I know. E.g., some random person is affiliated with a neo-nazi party, should be fired from his job because of that? Shouldn't be promoted or win a prize solely on that fact? I don't think so.

Other thing completely different is any crime or legal issue that a player may have. They should be prosecuted for that. But that does not remove what they accomplished and does not blemish their résumé. They may be deemed as an horrible person and even became social pariah, but as an athlete they should be judged solely on that. That's just my view.

Being say that, because a player is great that does not mean that his actions should go "unpunished" and he should not be scrutinized. Because of his actions or character he may not be fit for a leadership roles (coach, club director, etc.). I’m fine with that.

Ex: just imagine that, let's say, Götze commits some crime that it's morally outrageous. Should he be banned from the German NT, despite being one of the best players and clearly deserving of a spot on the team? (This off course forgetting about the eventual distraction factor)

And btw, Messi just was convicted on tax evasion, should he be contenting for the Ballon d'Our?

The point I'm trying to make is that we should separate the player from the person. Nothing more. Their job is to play, not to be role models.
 
andy18cruz said:
Ex: just imagine that, let's say, Götze commits some crime that it's morally outrageous. Should he be banned from the German NT, despite being one of the best players and clearly deserving of a spot on the team? (This off course forgetting about the eventual distraction factor)
Click to expand...
Clearly yes. I like Götze very much, but society has rules and those are valid for unknown humans as well as for (sport) stars and famous persons.
andy18cruz said:
And btw, Messi just was convicted on tax evasion, should he be contenting for the Ballon d'Our?
Click to expand...
To be honest: I think this might be an excuse as I doubt that Messi manages his money on his own and doesn't have anyone doing this job for him. If it's proven that he did it all on his own he shouldn't be contenting for that price in my opinion.
 
S-NipE said:
Clearly yes. I like Götze very much, but society has rules and those are valid for unknown humans as well as for (sport) stars and famous persons.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that he shouldn't go to jail. I'm saying after he did time on jail or when he is on trial. Should he be allowed to do his job? Ban him only on moral grounds?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom