Rafa is gone.(mod warning @ post 762)

Kess73

abouttobebanned wrote: »

Either way...it's too late now. They bet their access...they lost. Bye bye.

Yeah but who is to say that a mod cannot offer them access back?

The bet would not be broken as technically the person would have lost their access to the forum after the original bet.

If a mod offers them access again, then in my eyes it is a fresh start and fresh access, and tough ****e on whatever child wanted them out in the first place.

If people have to bet, through being unable to debate a point, why can't they just agree on the loser giving a set amount to a charity? That way something good comes of it.

abouttobebanned

Kess73 wrote: »

Yeah but who is to say that a mod cannot offer them access back?

The bet would not be broken as technically the person would have lost their access to the forum after the original bet.

If a mod offers them access again, then in my eyes it is a fresh start and fresh access, and tough ****e on whatever child wanted them out in the first place.

If people have to bet, through being unable to debate a point, why can't they just agree on the loser giving a set amount to a charity? That way something good comes of it.

Like a bookies would hand back money lost?

Pointless tbh.

Leiva

Great example this week on how wagers/bets should be laid (charity) . Well done again lads , a very good charity benifited by a great piece of banter .

Betting soccer forum access is just childish in my opionion.

eagle eye

Kess73 wrote: »

Totally agree, The betting of access is childish. It will get to the stage that anyone who has an opinion or who thinks something will happen, will be challenged with "bet your football forum access if you think you are right", and more often than not the child making the challenge does not bet their own access and wants to bet money against the other person's access.

Stupid ****e that has already cost the forum a few decent posters in the likes of Denis and Boggles.

Its very dumb to put your access on it in the first place. I think that offering bets anywhere on the forum outside of the soccer gambling thread should be banned. I've no time for welchers by the way.
Bets only lead to problems, posters honouring stupid bets which they probably didn't think through before they put them on, then money bets that aren't paid lead to bad feeling and a split in the camp where some guy doesn't pay up and a gang forms and keeps hounding him.
This is a soccer discussion forum, we can all argue our point to death and still respect each other. No need for bets on it.
And thats coming from a sports bettor.

101001

Kess73 wrote: »

If a mod offers them access again, then in my eyes it is a fresh start and fresh access, and tough ****e on whatever child wanted them out in the first place.

Ooh! Ooh! Maybe if they were allowed back they would have to wear an avatar or get some class of logo in their sig or where the rating is indicating that they were silly enough to bet their soccer access and lost... After a donation has been made to charity. Might be an interesting scoring system. We could get some fun out of betting our access and contributing to charity at the same time.... I'd bet my access that this won't happen though*

*not a genuine bet... terms and conditions apply

Headshot

jank wrote: »

Yeap!
All debts paid afaik but would like to see a receipt of some sort from ShamoBuc.

pity about Denis

go'wan Jank let him off this once

maybe get Denis to cough up some money or something

The Muppet

101001 wrote: »

Where does he mention Houllier in that article. Where does he mention he was a failure? I personally haven't forgotten Houllier

Here

Rafa Benitez was many things at Liverpool but unlike every manager since Kenny Dalglish, he was not a failure. Indeed a majority of Liverpudlians will remember him as a legend.

How did you miss that?

CR 7

davyjose wrote: »

Is that Boggles and MayorDenis gone now? These bets are fcuking stupid lads. Welshers me hole -- if you didn't bet money, it's not a bet. Unless your a five year old.

I think the witch hunt around the boggles bet is starting to have consequences that i assume is now affecting those with the pitchforks. It was always gonna come back to them. I actually couldn't care less if they didn't carry out the bets, apart from maybe joking about it for a day or two, but getting rid of long term posters here is going too far, and in the wrong direction for the forum.

~Rebel~

Villain wrote: »

You know I was reading the quotes from Rafa agian this morning and his YWNA and all that sounded like a guy who truly loved the club, however if he truly loved the cluib surely he would have agreed to go with no pay off? I mean he is already a very wealthy man he will no doubt get another job yet he took 6 million from a club he is meant to love when they are in serious debt.

Soccer today does make you wonder sometimes how much Love for clubs and fans really exists in the dressing room?

On the other hand, he dropped the extra 10 million he was entitled to, and also left gracefully with no fuss over this lack of money (which in itself is incredibly rare in the modern game).

I wouldn't expect him to just walk away with nothing, nor would I want him to. He's been fuked over by those guys time and time again, last thing I want is for him to make life easy on them. Same reason as I agree with the boycott on the club shop. The more pressure on them to sell to remove the debt the better.

fulhamfanincork

Please, Please don't take Roy away from us.

Please.

The Muppet

Park Ji Sung wrote: »

I think the witch hunt around the boggles bet is starting to have consequences that i assume is now affecting those with the pitchforks. It was always gonna come back to them. I actually couldn't care less if they didn't carry out the bets, apart from maybe joking about it for a day or two, but getting rid of long term posters here is going too far, and in the wrong direction for the forum.

I bet my access plus any amount of cash that they willl return one day.

Any takers?:D

everdead.ie

I see Sven is a life long Liverpool fan and would love the chance to take over

Columbia

Rafa's got a new job.



Waiting tables at a Spanish restaurant.

eagle eye

~Rebel~ wrote: »

On the other hand, he dropped the extra 10 million he was entitled to, and also left gracefully with no fuss over this lack of money (which in itself is incredibly rare in the modern game).

Ah come on you don't believe that do you, and you don't expect anyone to buy it either do you?
That deal will have included the removal of the clause preventing him working elsewhere. If he didn't do a settlement he couldn't work again until his contract was up.

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I wouldn't expect him to just walk away with nothing, nor would I want him to. He's been fuked over by those guys time and time again, last thing I want is for him to make life easy on them. Same reason as I agree with the boycott on the club shop. The more pressure on them to sell to remove the debt the better.

So now Liverpool fans are going to boycott the club shop? Wtf, the club is bigger than any individual.
Rafa Benitez fans are going to tear the club apart, last year it was all Rick Parry's fault, you go rid of him. Now its Gillett and Hicks, everybody gets blamed for the lack of success on the pitch except the manager.

Liverpool had/have Reina, Carragher, Mascherano, Gerrard, Torres who would be first team in almost every team in the world.
You got Johnson, Kuyt, Babel and Aquilani on top of those who were all expensive signings.
After that you have a lot of players who cost £5-7 million.

There is no excuse for what happened last year. The manager has to take the blame.

Le King

davyjose wrote: »

Is that Boggles and MayorDenis gone now? These bets are fcuking stupid lads. Welshers me hole -- if you didn't bet money, it's not a bet. Unless your a five year old.

Unfortunately that was the standard set after the Boggles-CHD bet. MayorDenis and Boggles should just come back here and post anyway. It's all a load of rubbish started by the witch hunters over Boggles. A few names in particular come to mind.

It's a pity to have lost two regular posters.

astrofool

Osu wrote: »

Unfortunately that was the standard set after the Boggles-CHD bet. MayorDenis and Boggles should just come back here and post anyway. It's all a load of rubbish started by the witch hunters over Boggles. A few names in particular come to mind.

It's a pity to have lost two regular posters.

Well, a mod fanned the flames of that one, and it's never gone out since.

TheTosh

Start up a thread to bring them back, sort of like a petition, just put a post up and that counts as your signature

redzerdrog

the bet between jank and mayordenis and the one between chd and boggles are two seperate bets and they are between the people involved. If jank wanted to let mayordenis off with mayordenis paying money or whatever that is entirely up to him but it has no affect whatsoever on the bet with chd and boggles.

K-9

Masch out in support of Rafa:

Mascherano: Benitez can replace Mourinho | BreakingNews.ie

abelard

What happened between Boggles and CHD? Where was the bet made?

8-10

K-9 wrote: »

Masch out in support of Rafa:

Mascherano: Benitez can replace Mourinho | BreakingNews.ie

Yeah but what's he saying about him in that picture?

LuckyLloyd

lol, both mayordenis and boggles were all too happy to let their emotions get the better of them and make the bet. They were not forced to make the bet at the time as there was no 'pitchfork wielding army' putting a gun to their head and saying "do this or your opinion doesn't count'. Crucially, I have no doubt that the two posters on the other side of the bet are the hounourable types who engaged in the bet honestly - i.e. if they had lost they would have disappeared off the forum. Moreover, I don't doubt for one second that denis and boggles would have called them out on it too.

I agree that people shouldn't be silly enough to wager access to the forum. It is the worst excess of pride and ego - 'this guy isn't bowing down before my arguments so I'm going to force the issue'. However, once the bet is made and agreed upon the consequences should be faced up to in full.

I think the whole thing really comes down at its root to how you perceive the link between real life and your actual persona, and forum based discussions and your screename. I have never believed that there is (or should be) a distinction between the two. On the poker forum here (now moved to irishpokerboards) the success of the whole thing was the fact that people met up with other posters in real life settings on a regular basis. Thus, when talking to someone on here (or making a bet with someone on here) you weren't just interacting with a screename. You knew what the guy posting at you looked like, you would have talked to him in real life, shook hands, etc. Thus your credibility on here had to be maintained with the same care and attention you pay your credibility in all other aspects of your life. Don't forget how successful the couple of matches we organised a year or so ago were in terms of getting people to put faces to names.

Be a dick online, you're just being a dick period. Welsh on a bet online, you are just welshing on a bet period. And by extension are just being dishonest and untrustworthy period.

Obviously there are people who see the Internet differently. And have no issues of conscience over this stuff. They think they can say and do what they want because it's just a screename. In my experience, the people who play it straight up on-line and don't attempt to hide behind created persona's are likely to be more upstanding individuals on a general level. But it takes all sorts doesn't it.

RasTa

Headshot wrote: »

pity about Denis

go'wan Jank let him off this once

maybe get Denis to cough up some money or something

Rubbish, if Denis wants out I'm sure Jank would agree to €100, same for Boggles.

LuckyLloyd

K-9 wrote: »

Masch out in support of Rafa:

Mascherano: Benitez can replace Mourinho | BreakingNews.ie

OMG LOST THE DRESSING ROOM IMO!! :rolleyes:

KittyeeTrix

I don't get why it's deemed okay that you can make a bet and then change the terms when the bet doesn't go your way.....I have an 8 year old who does that

Personally I could care less if they both returned to the SF or not, I don't interact with them at all so it doesn't bother me but say it like it is- If they return then they are no better than other posters who in the past have "welched" on bets!!!!!
SIMPLE...;)

jank

Kess73 wrote: »

If a mod offers them access again, then in my eyes it is a fresh start and fresh access, and tough ****e on whatever child wanted them out in the first place.

If people have to bet, through being unable to debate a point, why can't they just agree on the loser giving a set amount to a charity? That way something good comes of it.

Just to clarify something. I did not want Denis out. Remember, I was the person who offered to bet 100euro. Denis was the person who said he didn't have the money but would bet his forum access (presumably to get me out) and I was like whatever, OK so!

Then after I won the bet I gave him the offer to pay 100 euro to charity or his soccer access forum. He choose the later...

If people want to bitch and moan about losing members then bitch and moan at free will, not the child who won the bet fair and square. I did not force anyone into this bet and even offered an get out clause.
I cant be any fairer than that.

Anyway carry on.

redzerdrog

redzerdrog wrote: »

the bet between jank and mayordenis and the one between chd and boggles are two seperate bets and they are between the people involved. If jank wanted to let mayordenis off with mayordenis paying money or whatever that is entirely up to him but it has no affect whatsoever on the bet with chd and boggles.

I think all 3 should be let back in tbh.

There's obviously a certain few who have their own agenda and keep asking about the bet etc.

Sad really.

RasTa

rarnes1 wrote: »

I think all 3 should be let back in tbh.

There's obviously a certain few who have their own agenda and keep asking about the bet etc.

Sad really.

It's nothing to do with agendas, just read Lloyd's post he sums it up perfectly.

Paul Tergat

Look, the way I see it is if people want to try and make a point there are better ways of going about debating it. If they choose to bet then thats their own prerogative and I reckon they should be held to it.

A man is only as good as his word!

~Rebel~

eagle eye wrote: »

So now Liverpool fans are going to boycott the club shop? Wtf, the club is bigger than any individual.

? This boycott has been in place for years, nothing to do with lack of success of Rafa's sacking. Naturally it's ignored or not even known about by the majority, but a lot of the liverpool people have boycotted it, as it just hands more money to the Yanks making it easier for them to stay with the leveraged debt. it's been in place since it became apparent they were buying the club with the clubs own money.

wobblyknees

Villain wrote: »

You know I was reading the quotes from Rafa agian this morning and his YWNA and all that sounded like a guy who truly loved the club, however if he truly loved the cluib surely he would have agreed to go with no pay off? I mean he is already a very wealthy man he will no doubt get another job yet he took 6 million from a club he is meant to love when they are in serious debt.

Soccer today does make you wonder sometimes how much Love for clubs and fans really exists in the dressing room?

There has been absolutely no confirmation whatsoever as to the deal struck between Rafa and the club. Apart from that, Rafa had a contract, he has been pushed to leave. It wasn't his choice in the end. He is entitled to compensation and it looks like he will take a serious hit on what he is entitled to as per his contract. The people who are taking money from the club week in week out in expenses as well as charging the club compound interest on a huge loan are the ones who have no respect for the fans. They are the ones taking from the club and also the ones who will have to pay Rafa, and rightly so.

As for Rafa 'sounding' like he truly loved the club? Do you have any idea of the countless times he met face to face with fans and people in general for a chat or otherwise? Whether it was in Liverpool, Melwood, abroad, or even on the recent train journey across europe? The times he and his wife helped out with local charities? The man was a gent, down to earth and as was quite publicly shown on stage last week, one with humility and a sense of humour as well.

wobblyknees

The Muppet wrote: »

I would't consider that Brian Reade of the Mirror's article Balanced.



What has paying to watch a game got to do with one's ability to form an opinion on a teams performance?



Did he really, 7th in the premiership, out of the CL early and not qualifing for next seasons tells a different tale. I dont think the even the Mr Al's of this world believe liverpools current squad is a "World Force" in football.




So is North korea.



Theres is a debate here that houliers squad was as good as the current squad, I think theres very little in it. Houlier won quite a bit with the team , remember the treble all be it of the plastic variety;-) so for the author to lable Houlier as a failure yet claims Rafa will be remembered as a Legend is not a balanced argument IMO.

Username speaks volumes tbh. "So is North Korea"?? Seriously, you'll have to try harder than that.

noodler

wobblyknees wrote: »

Kind of grasping at straws a bit to suggest that every one of Keanes seven goals were 'crucial'?

I didn't say all of them?

I said 6 of them.

I think he scored his second against PSV after we were 1-0 up so I decided I wouldn't count that.

Would you say the same thing about the assists I quoted?

You are so bloody selective in what you reply to.

Kess73

~Rebel~ wrote: »

? This boycott has been in place for years, nothing to do with lack of success of Rafa's sacking. Naturally it's ignored or not even known about by the majority, but a lot of the liverpool people have boycotted it, as it just hands more money to the Yanks making it easier for them to stay with the leveraged debt. it's been in place since it became apparent they were buying the club with the clubs own money.

Exactly. The boycott of club merchandise has being going for a number of years now. But the majority of fans have ignored it and make sure that they are at the local Lifestyle or Elverys to get their new top or whatever.

There is a large number of local fans that will spend no money on the club other than for their match ticket, even food or drink is not bought by them at the ground.

x in the city

Wonder where Alan is, my tasty bet looks very tasty indeed now.

x in the city

x in the city wrote: »

Wonder where Alan is, my tasty bet looks very tasty indeed now.

Enlighten us

Kess73

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

lol, both mayordenis and boggles were all too happy to let their emotions get the better of them and make the bet. They were not forced to make the bet at the time as there was no 'pitchfork wielding army' putting a gun to their head and saying "do this or your opinion doesn't count'. Crucially, I have no doubt that the two posters on the other side of the bet are the hounourable types who engaged in the bet honestly - i.e. if they had lost they would have disappeared off the forum. Moreover, I don't doubt for one second that denis and boggles would have called them out on it too.

I agree that people shouldn't be silly enough to wager access to the forum. It is the worst excess of pride and ego - 'this guy isn't bowing down before my arguments so I'm going to force the issue'. However, once the bet is made and agreed upon the consequences should be faced up to in full.

I think the whole thing really comes down at its root to how you perceive the link between real life and your actual persona, and forum based discussions and your screename. I have never believed that there is (or should be) a distinction between the two. On the poker forum here (now moved to irishpokerboards) the success of the whole thing was the fact that people met up with other posters in real life settings on a regular basis. Thus, when talking to someone on here (or making a bet with someone on here) you weren't just interacting with a screename. You knew what the guy posting at you looked like, you would have talked to him in real life, shook hands, etc. Thus your credibility on here had to be maintained with the same care and attention you pay your credibility in all other aspects of your life. Don't forget how successful the couple of matches we organised a year or so ago were in terms of getting people to put faces to names.

Be a dick online, you're just being a dick period. Welsh on a bet online, you are just welshing on a bet period. And by extension are just being dishonest and untrustworthy period.

Obviously there are people who see the Internet differently. And have no issues of conscience over this stuff. They think they can say and do what they want because it's just a screename. In my experience, the people who play it straight up on-line and don't attempt to hide behind created persona's are likely to be more upstanding individuals on a general level. But it takes all sorts doesn't it.

I agree with some of what you have said there, but I just don't see the point in posters betting to basically prove their point. The minute I see Forum access being banded about as a payment for a wager, at times it just stinks of hubris and a way to get rid of a poster to me.

I really do see it as school yard stuff, and the fact is that some of the bets made on here over the last 12 months were just for cash which did not go to charity, the two posters I named earlier were not in such bets though, which opens a different can of worms, but that bit is the problem of Boards.ie if they allow betting for personal profit on the forum.


Even the Yaya Toure thread had Rasta (post 40)popping up out of nowhere with a forum access or €100 challenge to god knows whom, without any arguement with anyone else over the subject, after a link was put in the thread saying Liverpool were one of the clubs meant to be talking to Yaya. Just seems to be becoming the done thing with a number on here now to just jump in with the cash or access bet.

GLaDOS

Kess73 wrote: »

Even the Yaya Toure thread had Rasta (post 40)popping up out of nowhere with a forum access or €100 challenge to god knows whom, without any arguement with anyone else over the subject, after a link was put in the thread saying Liverpool were one of the clubs meant to be talking to Yaya. Just seems to be becoming the done thing with a number on here now to just jump in with the cash or access bet.

I suspect he was taking the piss in fairness

noodler

Kess73 wrote: »

I really do see it as school yard stuff, and the fact is that some of the bets made on here over the last 12 months were just for cash which did not go to charity,

So?

Come on now, the charity bit was a very nice touch but lets not say you can't make a cash bet unless the proceeds go to charity in the future.

Kess73

noodler wrote: »

So?

Come on now, the charity bit was a very nice touch but lets not say you can't make a cash bet unless the proceeds go to charity in the future.

I could be wrong, but cash bets solely for the profit of one of those making the bet could get Boards into trouble as it would be the website hosting the bet and I would imagine it is not licenced to do so, regardless of the fact that Boards.ie would not be making any direct profit from the bet.

It that is correct, then the betting could affect all that use the forum if it caused trouble for Boards. Maybe if people have to do that, they should do it through the pm function.

But as I said earlier, I could be wrong on this and maybe I am, as no mod has ever advised that people don't bet for profit on a public chat forum.

noodler

Kess73 wrote: »

I could be wrong, but cash bets solely for the profit of one of those making the bet could get Boards into trouble as it would be the website hosting the bet and I would imagine it is not licenced to do so, regardless of the fact that Boards.ie would not be making any direct profit from the bet.

It that is correct, then the betting could affect all that use the forum if it caused trouble for Boards. Maybe if people have to do that, they should do it through the pm function.

But as I said earlier, I could be wrong on this and maybe I am, as no mod has ever advised that people don't bet for profit on a public chat forum.

Oh sorry, didn't realise you were looking at it from that aspect.

Paulegend

is this thread anything to do with Rafa anymore??:)

Mr.Nice Guy

I think these bets are a form of one-upmanship that start off fairly light-hearted but end up with rather more serious consequences. I think in future if people want to do these things then they should bet soccer access for 3 months or something like that. Permanent access is too far and I think people now realise this.

I take the point about people wanting to be honourable and uphold their word, but I think it would be a classy gesture if the people who won these bets were to consider lessening the ramifications of them. At the end of the day it involves those individuals alone.

I think the atmosphere around this place has been very positive the last year or so and it would be a shame if an air of negativity was to permeate it as a result of these bets. There's a World Cup soon, which should be a great event, and I think these contributors ought to be part of the atmosphere. I would like to see the two posters who left invited back and a fresh start made from there. It might lead to greater humility around these parts.

Ush1

I say **** them.

As said earlier, nobody put a gun to their heads. If they've got the brass to make the bet they should have the balls to honour it.

As Tony Montana said, "If a man ain't got his word, he's a cock-a-roach".

Kess73

noodler wrote: »

Oh sorry, didn't realise you were looking at it from that aspect.

TBH I was looking at it from a few aspects.


I generally feel that the betting here is a bad thing as I do think a lot of it is rooted in trying to bully a point across through making a bet, it may not be like that in every case but I feel that it along with hubris has been so in many of the bets.


The cash for profit aspect is the point I made last, and personally if it is illegal, I don't want to be forced to find another forum to chat in if this one was forced to close due to the possibly illegal actions of a small number. That's why I put the suggestion about using PMs in the post.

Even something like a cap of the bet size for the bets for charity might be a good move or a limit of how long the access is lost for.

Le King

Ush1 wrote: »

As Tony Montana said, "If a man ain't got his word, he's a cock-a-roach".

Yes, let's abide by the writers of Scarface.

Although I agree with the line!

LuckyLloyd

Kess73 wrote: »

I could be wrong, but cash bets solely for the profit of one of those making the bet could get Boards into trouble as it would be the website hosting the bet and I would imagine it is not licenced to do so, regardless of the fact that Boards.ie would not be making any direct profit from the bet.

It that is correct, then the betting could affect all that use the forum if it caused trouble for Boards. Maybe if people have to do that, they should do it through the pm function.

But as I said earlier, I could be wrong on this and maybe I am, as no mod has ever advised that people don't bet for profit on a public chat forum.

There is no problem with people arranging bets for profit using a discussion forum. It happens on hundreds of discussion forums exactly like this every day of the week.

As I said above, I do not think access bets are a good idea. BUT, if someone wants to make them they are entitled to. What they should not be entitled to do is just say 'lol Internet' when they happen to lose said bet.

To be fair to mayordenis and boggles, thus far they seem to have honoured their end of the bets. Fair play to them for doing so.

everdead.ie

So names since rafas departure have been
Kenny
hodgson
Sven
Redknapp (hopefully not)
van Gael

these are the names which the press have linked with the job and I think due to financial restrictions it's likely to be one of the first three redknapp I think can be bought from spurs for about 8m

Van Gael I can't see happening he'd be very expensive

Mr Alan

x in the city wrote: »

Wonder where Alan is, my tasty bet looks very tasty indeed a now.

Certainly not as comfortable about it as i was, still think he'll be staying though

thebullkf

everdead.ie wrote: »

So names since rafas departure have been
Kenny
hodgson
Sven
Redknapp (hopefully not)
van Gael

these are the names which the press have linked with the job and I think due to financial restrictions it's likely to be one of the first three redknapp I think can be bought from spurs for about 8m

Van Gael I can't see happening he'd be very expensive

thank godwe're back on track.....all this betting talk is a load of sh1te.


i'd love

otmar
hiddink
van gaal


would

like


any of the above^