This Idiot

Arguments will be moved here. Obey the first and second rules.

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

User avatar
DL5
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

This Idiot

Post by DL5 » Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:48 am

Is one of the tools who was kicked out of Billingham Town for scrapping.

He also had a piss on the terraces at Spenny on Friday night.

Everyone knows your face now boy, stop being a dick every time

Image
.

User avatar
davidcorks 40yard OG
Posts: 1120
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2012 4:44 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by davidcorks 40yard OG » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:06 am

Little young chap wanker get him banned from every game


Edit ... ch@v is now swear filtered ? young chap wtf?
Image

User avatar
Free_Transfer
Posts: 1066
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 8:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Hartlepool

Re: This Idiot

Post by Free_Transfer » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:13 am

I thought the bell ends who had a fight at Billy got banned??

User avatar
Santino
Posts: 1464
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 12:44 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Santino » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:18 am

Never met him but he looks like a soft, chavvy scrote.

number_one
Posts: 1777
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 8:56 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by number_one » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:21 am

Am really surprised, are you sure this is the right lad? I just expected to see some kind of stereotype in the picture.

User avatar
Lawman3
Posts: 993
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:47 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Lawman3 » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:36 am

There were a few pissed up morons near me on friday. Half the time they weren't watching the match, but occasionally decided to hurl abuse at the spenny keeper. Their idea of "banter" was to shout that they hoped he would die of aids, and how they wanted to dig up his grandmother and fuck her corpse. All shouted with bulging eyes and spittle frothing around their mouths.
Never argue with an idiot: The best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot.

User avatar
fozzovmurton
Posts: 1465
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 3:33 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Murton, Co. Durham
Contact:

Re: This Idiot

Post by fozzovmurton » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:47 am

Lawman3 wrote:There were a few pissed up morons near me on friday. Half the time they weren't watching the match, but occasionally decided to hurl abuse at the spenny keeper. Their idea of "banter" was to shout that they hoped he would die of aids, and how they wanted to dig up his grandmother and fuck her corpse. All shouted with bulging eyes and spittle frothing around their mouths.
Theres no need for banter like that, if I was on the receiving end of that kind of abuse I would knock heads off, I like seeing a bit banter flying, but there is no need for it to turn vicious and nasty, theres a line not to cross, harmless banter is fine and can be funny, being nasty is just uncalled for
Image
442 Football Crazy Admin

If you need an avatar or signature I recommend Ron Carr of RCarr Designs

Jazz Maverick
Posts: 4285
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: London

Re: This Idiot

Post by Jazz Maverick » Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:52 am

Another fine example of what a shallow gene pool does to people

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 6016
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by loan_star » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:15 pm

Jazz Maverick wrote:Another fine example of what a shallow gene pool does to people
Spot on. Theres quite a few Darlo fans that fail to engage their brains before opening their mouths or smashing ground advertising boards.

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:49 pm

You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.

User avatar
Hilly
Posts: 6251
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:07 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Hilly » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:51 pm

mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!

User avatar
DL5
Posts: 4621
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by DL5 » Mon Feb 18, 2013 12:54 pm

Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!
Correct.
.

Fatty eats roadkill
Posts: 3600
Joined: Thu May 12, 2011 7:31 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: On top of a 29 year old big chested woman

Re: This Idiot

Post by Fatty eats roadkill » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:28 pm

Why didn't you nick him then?
Waiting for Raj to shaft them!

DTID
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 4:54 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by DTID » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:35 pm

mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
I saw him pissing up the wall behind the goal too. Shocking given how many families were near him at the time. He should be banned from all home and away games.


Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Last edited by DTID on Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:35 pm

Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!
No he can't. He SAYS he saw him, but I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?

User avatar
Hilly
Posts: 6251
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:07 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Hilly » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:41 pm

mobi wrote:
Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!
No he can't. He SAYS he saw him, but I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?
So 2 people have now come out and said they saw the same bloke, how many more will it take....3? 4?

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:45 pm

Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:
Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!
No he can't. He SAYS he saw him, but I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?
So 2 people have now come out and said they saw the same bloke, how many more will it take....3? 4?
The numbers are irrelevant, it is the principle. You don't post pictures on a message board and make accusations about people. This is not a court, he cannot defend himself. The moderators should remove this thread.

As I said before, I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?

User avatar
Hilly
Posts: 6251
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:07 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Hilly » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:48 pm

mobi wrote:
Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:
Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!
No he can't. He SAYS he saw him, but I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?
So 2 people have now come out and said they saw the same bloke, how many more will it take....3? 4?
The numbers are irrelevant, it is the principle. You don't post pictures on a message board and make accusations about people. This is not a court, he cannot defend himself. The moderators should remove this thread.

As I said before, I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?
It would be alright if it was true.

DTID
Posts: 849
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 4:54 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by DTID » Mon Feb 18, 2013 1:49 pm

mobi wrote:
Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:
Hilly wrote:
mobi wrote:You can't post a picture of someone and make claims about their behaviour on a public forum like this. Just consider the possibility that it wasn't him who pissed on the terraces and was thrown out. Now everyone who reads this thread will think it was, and we assume he must be guilty because he "looks the type". Not acceptable.
He can if he saw the bloke both times, which it sounds as though he did!
No he can't. He SAYS he saw him, but I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?
So 2 people have now come out and said they saw the same bloke, how many more will it take....3? 4?
The numbers are irrelevant, it is the principle. You don't post pictures on a message board and make accusations about people. This is not a court, he cannot defend himself. The moderators should remove this thread.

As I said before, I could post a picture of you and make the same claims, would that be alright?
No, what SHOULD happen is for people to identify him and then it be passed to the club for action to be taken. I.e. his photo to be passed around all the stewards to ensure he's never allowed to another one of our games again.

Mobi, this lad wouldn't need to defend himself if he wasn't such a moron.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2

m62exile
Posts: 2135
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by m62exile » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:07 pm

Chuckling a bit at this one like and to be fair mobi is right. Whether the lad has done it or not, if by some unlikely coincidence he has a law degree I'm sure he'd be accusing both this site and you of slandering him. He'd then be asking for your proof to support your accusations.

I wouldn't be losing too much sleep though, I reckon you'll be alright.

Jazz Maverick
Posts: 4285
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: London

Re: This Idiot

Post by Jazz Maverick » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:10 pm

m62exile wrote:Chuckling a bit at this one like and to be fair mobi is right. Whether the lad has done it or not, if by some unlikely coincidence he has a law degree I'm sure he'd be accusing both this site and you of slandering him. He'd then be asking for your proof to support your accusations.

I wouldn't be losing too much sleep though, I reckon you'll be alright.
Exactly.

mobi is just doing his tired old know-it-all routine.

Im pretty sure that due to his profession DL5 is aware of the risks, rules, and legalities regarding posting the picture.

User avatar
Big Tim
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 12:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Big Tim » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:19 pm

As far as I'm aware, the people who were banned are only banned from HP.

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:38 pm

Hilly wrote:It would be alright if it was true.
So I take it that means it wouldn't be alright if it wasn't true? How do we establish if it is true? You only have someone's word for it.

Saying that it must be true "because someone said so and he looks like a scrote anyway", really isn't much of an argument. We don't want to start going down this road, forums get closed down due to this stuff.

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:43 pm

Jazz Maverick wrote:
m62exile wrote:Chuckling a bit at this one like and to be fair mobi is right. Whether the lad has done it or not, if by some unlikely coincidence he has a law degree I'm sure he'd be accusing both this site and you of slandering him. He'd then be asking for your proof to support your accusations.

I wouldn't be losing too much sleep though, I reckon you'll be alright.
Exactly.

mobi is just doing his tired old know-it-all routine.

I'm pretty sure that due to his profession DL5 is aware of the risks, rules, and legalities regarding posting the picture.
Say someone has a go a the lad in the picture, beats him up because they've seen this picture and heard about him. Think that isn't a problem? I'm sure you are well aware that there are a lot of thick people who read this forum, the type of people who don't think about the consequences of their actions.

Its not a risk to DL5 posting this, its a risk to the forum.

Quakerz
Posts: 20959
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Quakerz » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:50 pm

People are convicted in courts on the word of others, on the identification of others.

DL5 knows it is this lad, end of.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11642
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Spyman » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:52 pm

mobi wrote:
Jazz Maverick wrote:
m62exile wrote:Chuckling a bit at this one like and to be fair mobi is right. Whether the lad has done it or not, if by some unlikely coincidence he has a law degree I'm sure he'd be accusing both this site and you of slandering him. He'd then be asking for your proof to support your accusations.

I wouldn't be losing too much sleep though, I reckon you'll be alright.
Exactly.

mobi is just doing his tired old know-it-all routine.

I'm pretty sure that due to his profession DL5 is aware of the risks, rules, and legalities regarding posting the picture.
Say someone has a go a the lad in the picture, beats him up because they've seen this picture and heard about him. Think that isn't a problem? I'm sure you are well aware that there are a lot of thick people who read this forum, the type of people who don't think about the consequences of their actions.

Its not a risk to DL5 posting this, its a risk to the forum.
Indeed there are mobi, indeed there are.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 2:56 pm

Quakerz wrote:People are convicted in courts on the word of others, on the identification of others.

DL5 knows it is this lad, end of.
Yes, but you also get to hear from witnesses who may contradict the word of others. People who saw something different altogether.

You'd be a idiot to convict someone having only heard from the prosecution wouldn't you? I though you were smarter than that?

Jazz Maverick
Posts: 4285
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 8:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: London

Re: This Idiot

Post by Jazz Maverick » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:01 pm

mobi wrote:
Quakerz wrote:People are convicted in courts on the word of others, on the identification of others.

DL5 knows it is this lad, end of.
Yes, but you also get to hear from witnesses who may contradict the word of others. People who saw something different altogether.

You'd be a idiot to convict someone having only heard from the prosecution wouldn't you? I though you were smarter than that?
No-ones convicting anyone or prosecuting anyone though mobi.

DL5 has posted a picture of someone he has seen doing this nonsense. If some idiot decides to attack him and commit GBH/ABH because of a picture on a internet site, its on their shoulders, no-one elses.

mobi
Posts: 1480
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 1:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by mobi » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:05 pm

Jazz Maverick wrote:
mobi wrote:
Quakerz wrote:People are convicted in courts on the word of others, on the identification of others.

DL5 knows it is this lad, end of.
Yes, but you also get to hear from witnesses who may contradict the word of others. People who saw something different altogether.

You'd be a idiot to convict someone having only heard from the prosecution wouldn't you? I though you were smarter than that?
No-ones convicting anyone or prosecuting anyone though mobi.

DL5 has posted a picture of someone he has seen doing this nonsense. If some idiot decides to attack him and commit GBH/ABH because of a picture on a internet site, its on their shoulders, no-one elses.
The person who attacked him would be convicted, but they'd close the forum. You know I am right, even though it hurts.

Quakerz
Posts: 20959
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: This Idiot

Post by Quakerz » Mon Feb 18, 2013 3:07 pm

mobi wrote:
Quakerz wrote:People are convicted in courts on the word of others, on the identification of others.

DL5 knows it is this lad, end of.
Yes, but you also get to hear from witnesses who may contradict the word of others. People who saw something different altogether.

You'd be a idiot to convict someone having only heard from the prosecution wouldn't you? I though you were smarter than that?
I'm smart enough to know that DL5 witnessed both incidents, that he knows who the lad is, and is fully aware of the consequences of making false allegations.

I don't care if there are witnesses that say this lad wasn't kicked out of Billingham, because if he was arrested then there will be records.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

Post Reply