Christy

Both bands have a lot of pretty good songs, but a couple that are WAY ahead of the rest imo

Jimmy Eat World - Goodbye Sky Harbour

Death Cab - 405 and We Laugh Indoors

Wolf Parade - Ill Believe in Anything

Search for:

Posts by username "Christy".

Containing the word "disgrace".

Results: 1820

A nice way to avoid the issue at hand, and a meh way of taking the piss.

In future I will say 'disappointment' and 'embarrassment' or something similar.

The point(s) remains

More like a fluffer amirite guise?

They are a disgrace, and an archaic throwback to a less enlightened time. I have nothing particularly against William and his burd but the very concept of Monarchy tilts me hard. The fact that their wedding is funded by the general public (who are supposed to be grateful for a day off work in return) is embarrassing.

It is over issues like this and the fact that we in Scotland have to stick a Consevative government because England is fucking stupid and voted for one once again underlines my point from the other thread about how I have no connection with Britishness, beyond geography.

The Queen can go suck a fuck too.

Watched Prison Break right the way up to the last four episodes of series four, by which point it had become so Goddamn unbearably terrible that I stopped. One day I will revisit it, though, so please use spoilers for any giveaways. Nice one.

One thing is for certain; no headliner has been booked as yet for the first night. Any talk of Ian Brown is incorrect or at least premature.

English people ensured that we have David Cameron as our PM. I try to avoid associating myself with them.

I am, of course, joking. In part. I have never referred to myself as British outwith filling out forms. Over the years I have spent heaps of time in Norn Arn, Wales and England and I have loved all of them for different reasons; however, I don't feel an intrinsic bond with the countries.

In this day and age (I hate that phrase but it is fitting) the idea of nationalism is pretty much outdated. People live everywhere and anywhere, people the world over support foreign fitba teams...in fact, fitba is pretty much the only scenario in which I consider nationality.

it would have been lol if he weren't playing for my team

Not online yet. Sunday will be The First Play.

Last week called etc etc

The thing is, it is not necessarily the case that referees are going onto the park with the conscious intention of aiding whichever cheek of the Old Firm arse is playing that week; more likely, the crowd's response, 'wily old pros' (read 'cheating scumbags') like Weir and Brown being in their face at any opportunity, and the fundamentally flawed (albeit somewhat understandable) unconscious belief that every decision matters more when it involves Rangers or Celtic. Because the media scrutiny will be intense, because there will be phone-ins and articles and messageboard meltdown and, in Dougie McDonald's case, a concerted attempt to punt the ref out of his job, the decisions seem to carry more significance. Nobody wants to be the official who denied Celtic the penalty that cost them the title, or who sent off the Rangers player at Tynecastle in a must-win game. The evidence bears this out, in my opinion.

It is all very well saying that Willie Collum got most of the decisions right yesterday; good! That's the least that is expected of a referee! When I was a ref I knew this; Willie Collum must know this. However, you must get the BIG decisions right, and he has now awarded five penalties and four red cards in favour of the Old Firm teams in two matches; can you hand on heart say that even 6 out of those nine decisions were justified and correct? I certainly couldn't.

He and most of the other referees in this country are predisposed towards bottling key decisions when the OF are involved, because the stakes are apparently so high in their games.

So fucking standard...Celtic fans will think that Collum favours Rangers because of this; Rangers fans will think that they deserve this because collum made such a fuckup on Sunday, and meanwhile all fans of us diddy teams won't give a fuck because yet again we are getting shafted.

It is embarrassing. I spent years defending the officials because it is an incredibly tough job. However, it is not about evening things up between Celtic and Rangers; it is about ensuring a level playing field for the WHOLE league.

This festival looks like a great thing to happen to Aberdeen and im glad to see that people are supporting it. Kudos to those all responsible for making it happen- must take a lot of work and effort.

Whether you like the line up or not - which i firmly DO - it helps put Aberdeen on the map in a big way this Summer which will have knock on effects for touring bands/ agents radars im sure. Im really glad to see all the majority of posts being positive comments.

As for Little Kicks getting preferential treatment - i can assure you it doesn't happen.

We only ever get to play if we suit musically, have been asked to play or have asked ourselves and on the rare occasion they can they'll fit us on the bill. Weve been admittedly quite lucky in our time with some slots coming our way but i dont think i have to defend that so i wont.

Fortunately for us were pretty commercial, pretty reliable, dont play Aberdeen too often and usually try to promote all our shows as much as possible to bring a crowd- so maybe for those reasons we get asked quite a lot to play but thats the path we choose to follow so ach weel.

No one is accusing The Little Kicks of getting preferential treatment.

I think there has only been one comment suggesting that the 'higher profile' Aberdeen bands will get favoured, but the fact remains that they should get favoured. These bands tend to be good and have a national profile, all of which is good for the festival.

No need to justify yourselves imo.

The problem with putting on live artists of te singer/songwriter sort is that so many are really bad. And most artists are not really interested in being background music so to speak - they want to perform (quite rightly), and so you will be alienating plenty of customers who have no interest in hearing another forgettable guy with a guitar. JJ is great, but imo he is in the minority.

But yeah, as mentioned, Kilau already has the mellow indie music side covered, so a licensed cafe-bar with good DJs would surely be the path to take.

There are bands who will walk onto the bill purely because of members and contacts, whether they are 'good' or not is down to personal opinion.

A showcase will just lead to bitching and accusations of bias, better just to choose bands they want to put on and be done with it.

There will be bitching and accusations of bias with or without the showcases. However, as mentioned before, at least the showcases will allow some bands to impress and get booked.

There are some bands who deserve to play this festival and more who don't. The criteria, I presume, will be profile of the band and their quality. These bands will be booked outright, or so I would expect. The city's best bands with a strong profile would be a good addition to the bill, and Jamesy, Ross and Hen are in a better position to judge than most. However, there is a level playing field for plenty of other bands to impress via the showcases. Presumably the judges will be reputable and will have no agenda, beyond trying to make their project (ie. the festival) a success.

I doubt that 'length of time a band has existed' will be given much credence in terms of criteria; what they have achieved probably will.

This seems very fair and reasonable, imo. I see it as a freeroll for bands; what's the worst that could happen? You get rejected? Big deal, so will most of the prospective acts. The upside is far greater than the down.

If a band has already been confirmed for the festival, why would they play the "audition" (I use that term loosely, just can't think of a better one)?

The people involved in booking the bands thus far have been Jamesy, Ross and Hen; these three guys are probably the most prominent music promoters in Aberdeen. They have their collective finger on the pulse and are in a good position to judge which bands warrant a place at the festival. I suspect that a limited number of spots will be allocated to the best bands in the city (in terms of profile and actual quality, in their opinion), and then they will award the remaining slots to the most impressive applicants, based on their performance at the showcase. This is how most, if not all, festivals determine their local/smaller acts lineup, and seems very fair and reasonable.

BTW this is my take on it, and might be miles away from the truth!

Plus the Drummonds Thistle FC squad are apparently being recruited to help on the day. Think Hells Angels at the Rollings Stones gig...

I am just out of shot

It has been going on for years; however, the Dougie McDonald incident proved it beyond reasonable doubt imo.

I am sure we won't agree on it; however, your rebuttal seems to be little beyond 'you would say that, you're a Dons fan'. But then I would expect that, you are a Celtic fan.

FWIW I had a fair bit of time for Celtic in the MoN days. I thought they played good football and were honest and well-run. My view since then has changed beyond belief.

I exaggerated when I said you are the most tunnel visioned fan I've ever heard - that's obviously not the case.

All of your points above and previously just sound like an embittered football fan bit with not much reason behind it. This stuff evens itself out - not exactly I'm sure but decisions go both ways. All the time. I've seen / been to many games where I've felt a sense of real injustice because of seemingly ridiculous decisions against Celtic. I've also laughed off more than I care to remember because we won the game. This is the crucial part of it and I've already made this point - we win far more games than we don't so loads and loads of dubious/wrong decisions against Celtic just get forgotten. I've read umpteen conspiracy theories by paranoid Celtic fans that detail every point won or lost because of incorrect refereeing decisions given against us and it sometimes paints the picture that Rangers won the title based on that because of Rangers bias but it's bollocks because they conveniently forget to mention the ones in our favour.

There is human error involved in refereeing an that's why some decisions are wrong. It is fuck all to do with bias, for or against Celtic, the old firm or Aberdeen. I've seen that frame by frame pish of the challenge and it proves nowt. The contact could be so minimal that it was between frames or the Aberdeen fan that made it could have deleted the relevant frame or there may not have been contact, but it was still a penalty because Considine impeded Hooper and prevented the goal scoring opportunity. Even if we used a video replay it still looks like Considine clipped his foot. You can't call bias if it takes a frame by frame analysis before it looks like there might not have been contact!

We will have to agree to disagree on the Considine incident. IYAM, the awarding of the penalty is (although incorrect) understandable. The red card is not; Hooper was not denied a clear goalscoring opportunity.

I might sound like an embittered football fan, but that doesnt mean that my points are invalid. Simply, this stuff does not even itself out; if that is the case, then most SPL teams are in for some gargantuan luck headed our way. It is the same in most major leagues; the big teams get more crucial decisions because, frankly, there will be MAJOR scrutiny of the officials in the media and by the bigwigs if they dont.

We are patronised, told to be patient and it will even out without seeing any evidence to suggest that this is true. We have had two red cards in crucial games vs Celtic this season that have been incorrectly awarded. At best, the officials are incompetent. But having seen us brutalised by poor officating in the big games this season, I am not so sure. Perhaps it is unconscious, but since Lennon and his board's disgraceful handling of the Dougie McDonald situation and the huge fallout thereafter, officials have been absolutely shitting themselves and the decisions have gone for both Rangers and Celtic at the expense of (amongst others) Aberdeen.

I am thoroughly sick of it, and I am not the only one.

Complete and utter shit.

Being vegetarian for 4 years then vegan for two my arse didn't smell any worse than before or after I was veg*n.

xx

Notsureifserious.jpg

But if you are, you are not really the best person to judge the potency of your own parps. Independent adjudication required.

I bet you didn't stop reading there did you?

You are the most tunnel-visioned football fan I've ever heard from.

I know you are (or were, not sure if it runs out or whatever) qualified referee, but that doesn't mean that your red tinted specs don't blur your vision. You love a rant against the old firm when it goes against Aberdeen. There was contact by Considine, and it was a goalscoring opportunity. You'd have been absolutely screaming for the decision if it was at the other end.

Did you ever stop to think that the seven penalties were for seven fouls in the box? I'm not going to argue that they were because I'll be honest, I haven't seen them all. But the two yesterday would be given more times than not. The first was a definite penalty and the second was a bit dubious, but still a foul. Stokes took a dive - I'll give you that. And I wish he hadn't because I don't like players diving. But he was kicked by Young in the box and he went down. If Stokes had kicked Young in the box and he'd gone down, you'd have wanted a penalty.

The referee was not biased yesterday. I'm absolutely adamant of that.

By the way I honestly didn't see the foul on Vernon in the run up - must have taken my eye off the telly for a couple of seconds or something. If that's the case, then that's harsh on Aberdeen. You're only about the second Aberdeen fan I've heard mention it though, which suggests to me that it may not have been a foul (because otherwise every Aberdeen fan would be going mental about that fact), but I didn't see it so nae sure.

But decisions go against Celtic all the time as well. I've been watching Celtic for years and years, and I have been absolutely furious at the end of plenty of matches because of decisions going against us. I haven't counted them up to see if we get more or less, but we definitely get them both ways a lot of the time. It's called human error. But, the fact is that Celtic spend more time in their opponent's box than vice versa so we are more likely to get more penalty decisions (one way or the other) than our opponents, same goes for offside decisions, goals chopped off etc. And likewise, Aberdeen are a team in the bottom half of the table, so are probably defending more than a team at the top end of the table, so red cards for last ditch tackles are more likely.

I have, however, calmed down in my old age. If a decision goes against Celtic these days, I'm normally over it by about 3 minutes after the final whistle, because football doesn't matter enough to ruin my day/week anymore.

Actually that is almost all untrue. I love a rant about the Old Firm because (and as a blinkered Old Firm fan you might find this tough to believe)

Both halves of the Old Firm have been by favoured the the establishment, the media and the officials for as long as I can remember

However, if you actually care to look back at my posts you will see that most of my anti-Old Firm ranting has had NOTHING to do with Aberdeen at all. I highlighted the despicable conduct on display in the shameful OF match a couple of months back, and the sickening behaviour of Rangers fans in Europe around the same time. The fact that I am a Dons fan is 100% irrelevant; I see an injustice and I highlight it. I am not the only one; believe it or not, most fans of non-OF teams are repulsed by your tit-for-tat bullshit, your harrassment of the refs, your bleating in the media and your (actually mainly Rangers') repeated bringing of Scottish football into disrepute on a European level. I will give you this though; you are well-versed in deflecting the actual facts.

WRT the Considine incident - no, Considine did not make contact with Hooper. Google search for images of the incident and this becomes clear. Somebody has done a frame-by-frame analysis from two separate angles and no contact was made. Hooper took the ball away, Considine over-reached, Hooper 'read' the challenge and went down. FWIW I don't think Hooper dived, but he was not touched by Considine. You could argue for a penalty due to the fact that Consi's challenge got nowhere near the ball and it prevented Hooper from attempting to reach it.

Your constant claims of 'you would be screaming for a penalty if it happened at the other end' are laughable. Of course I would. Like most football fans, I scream for handball if our shot hits a defender's body. I would scream until blue in the face, and it have no bearing on whether or not the incident warranted a penalty. So for God's sake, give up that non-argument.

WRT the second bolded passage (and I don't even know why I'm bothering to answer this part); yes I considered that. And no, I don't agree with it. I have seen the incidents, and not all should have ben penalties. Likewise, of our three red cards, two were poor decisions. Both involved Considine.

The Derek Young incident was not, and never will be, a penalty (as I explained earlier). If I were a Celtic fan I would have screamed for a penalty (because that's what football fans do), and then I would have felt very emabarrassed by Stokes when I saw a replay.

If you think I am the most tunnel-visioned football fan you know, you evidently don't go to Celtic Park very often. Some of your fans genuinely don't believe that you get favoured, because, wait for it, Rangers get favoured too! That is how propesterous your belief is; 'if we are favoured, how come Rangers always get the decisions too?!'. Try supporting another team, try seeing how many ludicrous decisions get awarded against you when playing Rangers or Celtic; try being a referee who argued for years that the officials are not biased but simply cannot any longer because the evidence is so overwhelming. The Old Firm get more signifcant, game-changing and fundamentally incorrect decisions awarded to them than any other team, and that is because the officials and the SFA/SPL are shit-scared of them.

Just remember (like REALLY bear it in mind) that Vegans stink like no other people in the world. Do not think that you can drop out a silent parp while in the company of others. They will know that it is you, because nothing honks like a Vegan trump.

Bollocks. Lennon does not have the refs in his back pooch. After the last old firm game, he was the only one who got retrospective punishment. If anything, he's pissed off the SFA even more, when he should have kept it shut and got on with his original ban.

I'm not a total "fanboy" anymore when it comes to watching Celtic and call it like it is. We got beat fair and square in the CIS cup final v Rangers who outplayed us, got their tactics right, and kept their discipline (unlike the previous game).

Dons fans can be the most paranoid in the league in my experience. Do you honestly look at the decisions yesterday and think Collum called them wrong, and that he called them wrong through some sort of "old firm bias"?? Honestly?

If Vernon had gone clean through on goal and Mulgrew had tripped him, I have absolutely no doubt it would have been a penalty and a red card. And Celtic fans would have crucified Mulgrew for it, not the ref. The second penalty was a foul, but a very a soft one. I'm quite surprised it was given because the game was already over. I've seen as many decisions go against Celtic as against Aberdeen in the games I've watched over the past few years. Most of the time the ones against Celtic get glossed over because we've still won the match. One example was a few seasons back when we won 5-1 at Pittodrie. McGeady got booked for getting hoofed off the ball, and a stone wall penalty was turned away at 5-1 up (maybe it was 4-1 - it was game over anyway). It happens both ways, but Dons fans just fail to see all the decisions in their favour because they've lost the game anyway.

Stopped reading there.

Celtic have had SEVEN penalties vs Aberdeen this season, and the Dons have had three red cards in the same fixtures. Celtic, of course, do spend more time in our penalty area, but these figures are absolutely ludicrous. Considine did not make contact with Hooper yesterday - this much is clear, yes? Hooper did not have clear control of the ball - can we also agree on this? These are the facts and as such, a penalty and red card seem ridiculous. Last time we played Celtic at Pittodrie, the exact same situation happened, although in that instance it was a clear penalty. The red card (90 seconds into the game, not that that matters) was laughable. And this does not take into account the clear foul on Vernon in the buildup a mere few seconds before the penalty, that seems to have been conveniently ignored by most.

Celtic's second penalty yesterday was not just 'soft', it was also wrong. Stokes stood there, awaiting the slightest bit of contact from a player whose momentum was taking him towards the ball. Contact inside the box != penalty. An absolute farce of a decision.

The standard line from OF fans is 'but what about the penalty he gave against us in the last Old Firm game?' or woteva. You conveniently ignore the other 34 games in the season in which you get everything. Fucking everything.

I am aware of AFC's shortcomings, and I am aware that 11 vs 11 we would have probably lost yesterday. This does not address the issue at hand, though; we have not been dealt with fairly by the officials in our matches vs the Old Firm this season.

I've never seen Kick-Ass, so I'll grant you a deferral of my judgement until I do, but I fucking hate Nick Cage.

I think Nickelbag are bland, american stadium rock trash. That said, I find them completely unobjectionable and if I were in a pub or the like and they came on the jukebox I'd laugh at whomever had bland enough taste in music to go out of their way to listen to them, but I don't find them particularly worthy of scorn.

There's a stoater of a video on youtube of Chad Kroeger being pelted in the head with a rock during a gig and walking off. Classic stuff.

So yeah, the hate is for Nicholas Cage. Infact - look up the facebok group 'Intense Nicolas Cage Face' on facebook, tis worth a chuckle IMHO.

xx

Greatest thing on the internet. Ever.

YouTube - Nicolas Cage Losing His Shit