razorblunt wrote: » Future employer? This lad is going to play for Aston Villa don't ya know! I'm getting the impression it's the Dad who feels victimised in this rather than the son and he's acting as a proxy.
andekwarhola wrote: » Didn't somebody else in the thread say the kid is with Waterford United now?
Arcade_Tryer wrote: » Google is your friend. And you ought google before composing an argument based on conjecture about a real event. Psychologist and psychiatrist are not the first words that come to mind.
diomed wrote: » Parents should not be allowed attend football matches. I was up a ladder painting the front of my house years ago on a Saturday morning. There was a childrens match going on across the road. The abuse from the parents was terrible. Only one man was shouting encouragement.
razorblunt wrote: » The lad has made a statement on twitter,maintains they were trying to expose the bullying aspects.
muttnjeff wrote: What if the boy was dropped because the adults-parents and managers-didnt get on??? Human nature being what it is-hard to pick someone for a team if the dad is a pri*k-especially in a club as good as that where they would have a large pool to pick from---just saying like.....
jackwigan wrote: » Can we as a society agree to ban the term "snowflake"? Makes me twitch a little every time I read it.
muttnjeff wrote: » What if the boy was dropped because the adults-parents and managers-didnt get on??? Human nature being what it is-hard to pick someone for a team if the dad is a pri*k-especially in a club as good as that where they would have a large pool to pick from---just saying like.....;)
Hector Bellend wrote: » How does a case like this get to court?
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: » Well where else would you have a claim be heard? I don't understand this comment and others like them. The whole point of courts is that they are accessible to the public in order that disputes may be tried. What are people suggesting? Seriously
Hector Bellend wrote: » What I meant by the original comment was that this case is clearly verging on the frivolous , how can a case so frivolous make it this far?
overshoot wrote: » er just incase people think senior level... he is playing for the u19s... and after 5 games this year he has one start where he was subbed off and one bench appearance (unused)... oh and waterford are bottom of the southern section. Still a decent player but if he isnt starting for a struggling u19s team its hard to see him ever been good enough to make premier LOI, let alone get a full time england contract.
languagenerd wrote: » But even if that was the case, it's not something that should be before the courts. It's a volunteer-run kid's football team. Not everybody gets to play. Especially if there's a large pool as you say, at every match, there will be kids who don't get to play. No-one is legally entitled to a spot on the team. Can you imagine the precedent this would have set if he'd won the case?! Teams and clubs would fold.
Deleted User wrote: » jackwigan wrote: » Can we as a society agree to ban the term "snowflake"? Makes me twitch a little every time I read it. "Snowflake" is a sneering and unhelpful term. It almost makes me side with the kid and his dad.
cursai wrote: » If i get kicked from a call of duty server can i claim PTSD?
The Highwayman wrote: » Wow well that sounds pathetic. If someone called the terrorist in London who drove his car at people some nasty names would you side with them too?
Samaris wrote: » Terrorist =/ snowflake. The two situations are incomparable. The terrorist in your hypothetical off his own bat drove a car at people for the cause of ISIS/whoever and being a terrorist. A "snowflake" is "someone I don't like because I think they're either whiny or entitled". It is a subjective analysis - he is a snowflake because you say so. A terrorist is a terrorist because of his own actions breaking laws that define terrorism. Actually, I have some sympathy for the teenager. Sure, he's 18 now, and hopefully will come up against life's lessons in a more helpful way than this. He didn't have much of a chance with his parents acting the fool over it. And this has been going on between the ages of 13-18. Four-five years of this nonsense. It's an awful lesson to teach a young teenager, much less reinforce it over several years. If he ends up a "snowflake", it's mostly down to his parents.
Galwayguy35 wrote: » Well unless he is very lucky he's going to find that as the years go on life will throw some sh1tty situations at him that make not being picked for a soccer game seem kinda minor.
Murrisk wrote: The bullying stuff... it seems unlikely that the son was followed around to different games and jeered. But having said that, bullying is hard to prove!