banned for a week from soccer

Paulegend

mods involved : Mars Bar, GavRedKing
forum: soccer
issue: week ban
complaint: harsh warnings resulted in ban

my first warning was on
4-07-2013 10:07

Mars Bar wrote:

Dear Paulegend,

You have been warned for personal abuse.

This site is for civil discussion and so we don't allow discussion to descend into name calling and petty abuse.

Please see the Boards.ie FAQ for more details.



Mars Bar

Moderator Note

Attack the post, not the poster. You were doing fine until the final sentence.

Your post:

Paulegend wrote: »

jordainius wrote: »

He didn't dive "all the time", that's a bull**** statement.

What facts? You mustn't know what the word "fact" means, look it up.


What has Andy Gray got to do with anything? Why bring him up, oh wait, you've fallen into the trap of the Strawman argument. Oh dear...

I've already called bull**** on this one. He dived once v Portsmouth, was crucified for it, and people like yourself never let it go.

Any proof?? Nope.


Yeah, because the media miss 99% of all dives....:rolleyes: Yup, silly media, never highlighting diving....

He may have had the odd one, but your assertion that he did it on a reguar basis is biased unsubstantiated garbage.



More bollocks with an off handed attempt at humour, you're making this too easy for me.


One picture?!! With no context?? No supporting video??? There's no proof of a dive there! Did your frantic searching of youtube come up with nothing?

Describe that incident. Go on, give us a factual run down of what happened there. Oh, wait, as I touched on earlier you don't really seem to fully grasp what "fact" means...


Yeah, that would make you childish.... I'll say it again, but your belief that Henry/Ljungberg dived a lot is absolute bollocks. But by all means, go ahead, post all of these videos which back your nonsense claims that you as of yet have not proven, go right ahead.

A bitter mutual rivalry, shock horror. Won't somebody please think of the children????
You like the Daily Mail do you?? As you know I already touched on Arsenal's red card record in Wenger's first 5/6 years, wasn't down to indiscipline, was down to a physical robust style of play,since Wenger moved away from that style of player to what we see today Arsenal have consistently been towards the top of the Fair Play League for the last ten years now.


Where's the hypocrisy?? They're commonly acknowledged as a team that's not particularly pleasing on the eye? And no, they were nothing like Stoke, Arsenal married attacking football with physicality, Stoke marry physicality with set piece play. Not the same, and you know it. A bit more Strawman from you there.


I never said a thing about Suarez, you'll notice I didn't quote or respond to the first part of your post. The first part of your post was valid, although you made the stupid mistake of generalising the views of some fans as though nobody wanted Suarez,and you went off on a rant against Arsenal and Arsenal fans, because as I've previously stated, you have a hatred of all things Arsenal and you will put a negative spin on all things Arsenal. Now that I think of it, pretty much all of your post was bollocks, not just the part I highlighted.


Ah, try again buddy, you haven't proven a damn thing..... All you have done is make stupid assumptions, contrary to what you baselessly think, I'd be thrilled with the signing of Suarez, and I understand why others wouldn't be happy with his arrival. He is a divisive player, anyone who can't see and understand that is just plain stupid. But yeah, go ahead and make stupid assumptions about things I had not given an opinion on like Andy Gray and Stoke and Luis Suarez to name but three things you totally made up/imagined, go ahead, keep basing your argument on baseless assumptions, on thinking you know my views on things I've never spoken a word about, and keep basing your argument on generalisations and so on, in the meantime, I'll continue picking apart what you actually say, not what I assume you think, because as I have touched upon earlier, that word you don't seem to understand the meaning of; fact, I deal with facts, not what I imagine you think...

i dont give two sh#ts about arsenal mate. you took offence to me using arsenal as an example for my "every team has skeletons in their closet" argument.

so you aknowledge that pires was a diver "He may have had the odd one" even though it was far more than the odd one, but you say that he wasnt known for it???

you say arsenal where an attacking team when they had the brutal force????? wow. i assure you mate. i dont know what age you are but the arsenal team you seem to recall are not the same as i do. i remember a strong physical spine to teh team with "technical" ability on the wings. the flair that came from pires and freddy was world class and added alot to the attack but arsenal as a team where more counter attack than attack. ye relied on alot of set pieces and early into wengers reign 1-0's where quiet common. maybe you just remember the invincibles side?? apart from a couple of great results it was always a tight game. jesus id say ye hold a record for the amount of draws as champs

i wish i could say id like to get back on topic but you seem to have taken this personally and gotten stroppy so im going to have to put you in your place

henry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTGfyV_mgUk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJbEIQDF0kM
we wont bring up his professionalism in world cup qualifiers though lol thats a can of worms im sure none of us want to open

freddy (but this probably isnt him no??)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfN1lJzoUZM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAybak3uD3g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1jX17zAgxU

pires(but as you say he isnt known for it:rolleyes:)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYuMHyzYK6c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1u0wh9HJ-BI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4muK9o_A2lc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHjYjV9sA9s

the of course there are the others
cesc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0z3nX3O2wRw
eboue http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnY1cRFFls8

hell i could go on forever so ill leave you with these last couple to show my point
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sscqFwUbfhA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se2h0GCMozA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNHOBdHyRfM


but wait no arsenal are not divers. pires was not known for it
"The Daily Mirror called him "The best French diver since Jacques Cousteau" and Arsenal's Robert Pires really can't complain after adding a new dimension to football's increasingly popular art of simulation."
thats how the telegraph started one paragraph on the man himself
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2421599/Despicable-divers-sink-to-new-depths.html

in fact here is a q&a where he aludes to his diving
"Among English fans, flicking your own ankle to win a foul was known as ‘doing a Pires’. Were you aware of this? What did you make of the British view of diving compared to continental Europe?"
Aidan Matthews, Isle of Wight
"[Starts to laugh] I know, I know! But 
there was a foul everytime, you know! 
I remember one time when the ref gave me a penalty against Portsmouth. Everyone thought I had dived and no-one believed me that the defender touched me a bit. If he touches me, I’m going to fall – as if I was diving into a pool – but he’s touched me, so it’s a penalty. It’s my fault, but ultimately the ref decides. [FFT: Did English football change you?] Yes, yes, yes. I had to change. At times, when players were going to hit me I had to prepare myself for the impact and try 
to withstand it... but they did hit me!"
http://fourfourtwo.com/interviews/one-on-one/309/article.aspx

pires dives end of story. well known for it and always has been.



we agree that arsenal where a tough side. i and many others believe they where the stoke of the day but you think they where an attacking side. so thats a your word over mine. all i can do is point to the red cards and over zealous challenges that where dangerous challenges.


that all the proof you want you irritating tit??

my second warning was on
23-07-2013 13:10

GavRedKing wrote:

Dear Paulegend,

You have been warned for Trolling.

This means you are posting in an intentionally provocative fashion in order to gain a reaction from other members. This is disruptive and causes stress to other members.
We don't want that here.

For more information please refer to the Boards.ie FAQ.



GavRedKing

Moderator Note

Seeming as you said this in your next post - ok ill stop the childish attack .

Stop acting the dick with your posts and its not limited to this but some of your recent posts.

Your post:

Paulegend wrote: »

AdamD wrote: »

Bernard seems quite likely with them not announcing it till after his final. After that you'd have to figure that there's a lot of money lying around. The original budget was touted at 70m, but considering these outlays:


Mannone (Sold)
Squillaci (Released)
Djourou (Loaned)
Santos (Sold)
Coquelin (Loaned)
Denilson (Mutual Termination)
Arshavin (Released)
Gervinho -
Chamakh -
Bendtner -
Park -

At a minimum I expect Gervinho and Park to be gone, Gervinho will fetch 6-8m. But we're talking 300k a week minimum off the wage budget. That's 15.5 million quid...on top of the original 70m budget, with a few player sales added on we're nearly hitting 100m.

Taking the shear amount of money into account I'd be inclined to pay over the odds for Higuain or try a 45-50m bid for Suarez..

On a more positive thought I can't imagine we'll be here in September with only 1 more signing, the Bernard deal coming out of nowhere kinda shows how little the papers really know and with all the money and talk coming out of the club some action is pretty much guaranteed to happen. In my opinion of course.

rofl

go back to football manager mate

in this forum the poster AdamD replied to me and then i replied to him starting a debate about why i thought his post was flawed and therefore his debate. as i dont have access to the forum i cant show what was said by him or me. but in my thread i did say something along the line of im sorry ill stop being childish and give you a fair debate. then i went on to put forward my point.



after i put forward my point and submitted my post(dont know if it submitted or not) i was forwarded to a screen saying i needed permission to access the forum. then i realised i had been banned

GavRedKing wrote:

Dear Paulegend,

You have been banned from Soccer for one week for a breach of the forum charter.

Every forum on Boards.ie has a charter which lists any specific rules that forum may have and it is really important that you read this as it'll help you familiarise yourself with how that forum works. You should also understand that every forum is different and that charters are how you learn the differences.

Please see the Boards.ie FAQ for more details.

If you wish to appeal this ban you can see details on how to do so here.

GavRedKing

GavRedKing wrote:

You've been banned for picking up your 2nd yellow of the season.

i then relied to this mod to see what had happened

GavRedKing wrote:

Paulegend wrote:

why was this giving a warning?? if you seen my next post after this you would notrice i am not "trolling" i was questioning his fictional numbers. i believe that he was over estimating and therefore i was merely sayijng that it was football manager-esque type talk

even in the next post i think i made a kinda apology for being childish in my post

It was given a warning because you were being a dick and the fact you acknowledged it in the next post means very little really.

If that was the case we could all troll and say sorry and sure it would be grand then .

GavRedKing wrote:

Paulegend wrote:

if you really do believe i deserve a ban fair enough ill accept but i plead with you to reconsider as i do enjoy debating on the forums here and i always want to debate. sometimes it gets heated but i have never intended to insult someone

you were banned for an accumlation of cards, not the one post.

The SF has an accumaltion process, the more cardfs you pick up the longer your ban.

As it was your 2nd yellow it was a week long ban.

GavRedKing wrote:

[QUOTE=Paulegendok my first warning was after i called someone an irritating tit. sure it was a silly choice of words but they goaded me into it with constant swearing at my post.

this warning i can see what you mean but surely in my next post you can see that i was actually trying to debate rather than being a "dick"

i just think that an accumaltion of two very grey area warnings resulting in a weeks ban is pretty harsh

what if i apologised to the poster and gave you my word i wont be "dickish" in my approach to topics again.

is there any chance that i could even get one of the warnings rescinded so id have to stay on my best behavior??

I didnt issue the 1st yellow so cant help ya with that one.

However, I did ban you after I gave you the 2nd yellow so I'll take that on its merit.

I think you were being a dick but it took someone calling you out to formulate a proper answer and response, had you done that in the first place you wouldnt have got banned and a debate would have begun.

I'm not over turning my yellow and if you want to challenge the ban see if it will be over turned by a Cmod or Admin then you can do so here.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=1397[/QUOTE]


at the time i had only approached the second mod GavRedKing as he was the one who enforced the ban. i have since mailed Mars Bar about the first warning but since it was recieved almost 2 weeks ago i thought the statute of limitations would be gone on that or at least the mod wouldnt care about a warning given such a time ago since they have so much else going on.


im not saying that either mod didnt do what they felt was right but i do think that there is a grey area here.


# in my relation to my first warning i sent this to mars bar
hi Mars Bar im just wondering if there is anyway you could overturn this warning as i have no been banned for a week. another mod felt i was trolling when in a topic. ive tried talking to them about it but they seem sure about their decision. so before i appeal it i was just thinking i could maybe ask you to rethink the warning i got in the above post??


now i know the last sentence was stupid. but i do think i was goaded into it. i got worked up because of the other posters language and constant swearing. i know that is no excuse but it is a reason.

the poster questioned my lack of proof and swore constantly at me about my lack of proof. then when i gave him the proof i felt like i was suddenly less worked up and then let the last sentence slip out as he was being quiet pedantic and very very insulting.

anyway i am not questioning why you gave me the warning as i do understand why it was given. all im asking is that you re-read his post and my response and think if there is any way that i might have said that by merely defensive frustration as oppose to attacking another poster

# in relation to my second warning
i do think that the mod was making the right call but it was never my intention to be a "troll" or a "wum" or what ever other phrases are used. i didnt agree with the posters opinion and i wanted to draw him into a debat on the topic. i didnt attack the poster or even insult him personally. what i did say may be considered annoying but if youve read thoses forums every poster is annoying and often post random off topic things.


as i said i dont have a gripe with either mod but i think that these two incidents are very harsh and i would love to just continue my debates on the forum

i just plead that you can at least over turn one of the warnings to allow me to go back to the forum. if one of teh warnings where over turned i would have to be on my best behaviour. where as if i took the week off i would start without any warnings when i go back to the forum. this way i would have to be good. i do over react to some posters in response to them but i am trying to work on my approach. please consider my case.



thank you for your attention
Paul

Paulegend

#update

[/QUOTE]

Hi,

You deserved the yellow I gave you and it's not going to be revoked for you to avoid a ban.
If you've got a problem with a warning any mod has given you then you can go to the dispute resolution forum and try and overturn it there.

Mars Bar[/QUOTE]

ok mars bar thanks[/QUOTE]

Beasty

Paulegend wrote: »

.
im not saying that either mod didnt do what they felt was right but i do think that there is a grey area here.

Are you disputing either yellow? If so, which one?

Thanks

Paulegend

Beasty wrote: »

Are you disputing either yellow? If so, which one?

Thanks

well i guess im disputing both as i think they are a little harsh. each of the warnings on their own are harsh but together its a bitter pill to swallow. i was merely hoping that i could get at least one of them rescinded so i could get on with posting

Beasty

First yellow

Paulegend wrote: »

.
that all the proof you want you irritating tit??

Personal abuse/attacking the poster - upheld

Second yellow

Paulegend wrote: »

rofl

go back to football manager mate

Your next post in the thread

Paulegend wrote: »

ok ill stop the childish attack and instead give you an honest debate on this

So you are admitting in-thread to making a childish attack

Mod comment in the yellow card message:

Stop acting the dick with your posts and its not limited to this but some of your recent posts.

There are other posts I could mention, but I'll stick to this one (you will need to log-out to see it) in the Man United thread where you basically admit to baiting other users. I can see no basis on which to overturn that card either

Hence both cards upheld - there is no grey here a 1 week ban follows automatically for 2 yellows in a single season, so the ban is upheld also

You may ask an Admin to review this decision should you wish

Paulegend

i cant say im happy with your decision but fair enough

i just find myself a little hard done by and think if i was more friendly with mods in that forum like other posters i wouldnt have got such harsh warnings.

in the first warning i was retaliating to some abusive(albeit not personal) comments. yet i was warned but because the other poster was a "friendly" their swearing and abusive posts are not deemed an attack.

in the second warning in my second post i gave a full display of a debate so i felt that everything was ok

as for the "admitting to baiting" in the united forum im sure you where probably pointed there by an irritated mod but if you read that forum i was actually admitting to meaning what i said even if i did say i was fishing and not baiting. i was fishing but everything i said i meant and i said it striaght out.


in conclusion my point is that im not friends with the mods and dont agree with them so im being dealt with differently

Beasty

This thread only deals with your cards and resultant ban. If you have a problem with anyone else's post report it (although I realise you cannot do so while banned) amnd let the mods deal with it.

Can we mark this dispute resolved?

Paulegend

well its not resolved but i guess youve made your decision. thanks for taking the time anyway