Unofficial Halesowen Town FC Forum

gingeryeltz wrote:

AVFCYELTZ wrote: Be careful what you say or your 3 George's could be deducted! (unlike Leek's 3 points, eh Raiden?)

I'm up in court next week for speeding. I need Raiden to come and represent me as my lawyer.
Then I know I'll be fine as he doesn't want anybody to get three points.

Ba da Bum. Tish.

I'm here all week, etc..

I agree that it is totally unjust that the League sees fit, under their rules of course, that the two matters are considered as one. Raiden is entitled to his views and, as has been pointed out, he is not alone.
It is very convenient to hide behind a rule book to justify what, to most other interested parties, is blatantly unfair.
I accept that no appeal or continued complaining will make one iota of difference, but I wish to support the views of those who think that the decision stinks.
I fail to see how any questioning over the decision defines Yeltz supporters as "whingers" when we are not alone in our views.

Respectfully

A pi**ed of Lutters

If I have offended anyone with earlier comments, I apologise. I can't help thinking though, that if the thrust of my point had agreed with with your line of thinking that you might have actually thought it was slightly witty? A little bit of faux outrage maybe?

As for the matter in hand, the league decision stands. It follows plenty of precedents in the way that clubs becoming defunct are handled. It may rankle, it may not be natural justice, but it is not going to change.
Whether you like, I like it or anyone else likes it is immaterial.

Personally, I do not think it is actually fair in the sense of justice being seen to be done, but this is not the point {pun intended}. The league has followed the same rules as any other league would do in the circumstances of a club folding mid-season.

As far as I'm concerned. Endex

[quote="YeltzDoc")


Ba da Bum. Tish.

I'm here all week, etc..[/quote]

Are you? Are you not away in some frozen post communist wasteland somewhere, like Stourbr*dge?

Amsterdam this week. Post Communists next week - Zagreb and Maribor.
Stourbr*dge, hopefully never.

Just a comment from a long time Leek supporter. A little bit of research will show our BIG MONEY goalscorer from Brackley is actually a former Leek player, getting 10 minutes a game at Brackley. He is back at Leek because he wants to play football, money is not an issue.

lutleyyeltz wrote:I agree that it is totally unjust that the League sees fit, under their rules of course, that the two matters are considered as one. Raiden is entitled to his views and, as has been pointed out, he is not alone.
It is very convenient to hide behind a rule book to justify what, to most other interested parties, is blatantly unfair.
I accept that no appeal or continued complaining will make one iota of difference, but I wish to support the views of those who think that the decision stinks.
I fail to see how any questioning over the decision defines Yeltz supporters as "whingers" when we are not alone in our views.

Respectfully

A pi**ed of Lutters

And if the boot was on the other foot I know exactly what you and the other "whingers" would be saying.

You said it yourself, above, the league dealt with it according to their rules. How else would you expect it to be dealt with!!!?

What a bunch of sour grapes.

But, the boot isn't on the other foot, is it?
I feel that an injustice has been done and that's it - stuff what you presume to know!

lutleyyeltz wrote:But, the boot isn't on the other foot, is it?
I feel that an injustice has been done and that's it - stuff what you presume to know!

Debating is futile...

Ignoring is the best option.

Raiden is right, debate is futile. Everybody has different views on this injustice, and that's the way it will be. Shouldn't we concentrate on things that matter e.g.: The league and the fact we are top of it, instead of fighting amongst ourselves