Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Sports, Hobbies & Interests => Topic started by: Hope on November 30, 2015, 07:31:13 PM
-
Just announced, the SPOTY 2015 shortlist
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/sports-personality/34845334
Who will you be going for?
-
I won't be going for anyone, but I would favour Adam Peaty
-
I won't be going for anyone, but I would favour Adam Peaty
Can't make my mind up: Fury or Murray.
-
Can't make my mind up: Fury or Murray.
Whilst I don't dismiss boxing, I find it something that I avoid as much as I can. To me Fury is little more than glorified bag of hot air - so he's probably the last person I would vote for.
Bearing in mind that they were effectively counted out of sport this year following serious illness/injury, I'd probably go for Max Whitlock or Lizzie Armitstead, our perhaps our Jessica.
-
Whilst I don't dismiss boxing, I find it something that I avoid as much as I can. To me Fury is little more than glorified bag of hot air - so he's probably the last person I would vote for.
Bearing in mind that they were effectively counted out of sport this year following serious illness/injury, I'd probably go for Max Whitlock or Lizzie Armitstead, our perhaps our Jessica.
Anybody who can stand up to and defeat a fearsome guy like Klitchsko, who was unbeaten for eleven years, and who saw off some of the meanest guys around, has to be some hero. More to him than hot air. Remember, they said the same about Ali, at first.
-
Anybody who can stand up to and defeat a fearsome guy like Klitchsko, who was unbeaten for eleven years, and who saw off some of the meanest guys around, has to be some hero. More to him than hot air. Remember, they said the same about Ali, at first.
There are a few people on that list who are repeat champions of the highest order (in other words championships Brits have rarely won) and I struggle to see beyond them. So Froome, Farah, Hamilton and Murray stand out for me - possibly Ennis and Rutherford, but I don't really see their achievements in quite the same category.
The rest I can't really see as being competitive.
For me it is between Froome and Hamilton. But of course this is always down to the vagaries of the public vote and on that cycling seems to have done very well in 'getting the vote out' over the years.
-
... possibly Ennis and Rutherford, but I don't really see their achievements in quite the same category.
How many of the folk you mentioned have to master more than 1 or 2 disciplines let alone 7 very diverse ones - as Ennis competes in. If anything, I'd suggest that the others don't come into the same category as she does. Sadly, I suspect that the cloud that world athletics is currently under and the fact that she is a woman will conspire to deny her the acclaim she deserves.
-
How many of the folk you mentioned have to master more than 1 or 2 disciplines let alone 7 very diverse ones - as Ennis competes in. If anything, I'd suggest that the others don't come into the same category as she does. Sadly, I suspect that the cloud that world athletics is currently under and the fact that she is a woman will conspire to deny her the acclaim she deserves.
Sure but then she is benchmarked against other athletes that likewise need to compete in all those disciplines. So although she is undoubtedly at the very top of the pile for a competition based on 7 disciplines I'm not sure she would be particularly competitive in any of them individually against athletes that specialise just in that discipline. So I'm not sure your point is really particularly relevant.
It would be a bit like saying a cricket all rounder is necessarily better than a specialist batsman or bowler simply because they are expected to do two things.
-
Sure but then she is benchmarked against other athletes that likewise need to compete in all those disciplines.
She may be benchmarked against similar athletes in athletic competition, but is she benchmarked against such athletes in this particular competition?
-
Anybody who can stand up to and defeat a fearsome guy like Klitchsko, who was unbeaten for eleven years, and who saw off some of the meanest guys around, has to be some hero. More to him than hot air. Remember, they said the same about Ali, at first.
That's a reasonable achievement, but the others are the best in the world in their field - their achievement isn't any more or less significant. Djokovich, Federer and Nadal are, arguably, the three best tennis players that have EVER been, and Murray's ahead of two of them at the same time at the end of this year's rankings, and has taken Great Britain to a Davis Cup victory on top of that, having been near the top of the world rankings consistently for four or five years now.
Against that, one good fight from Fury doesn't stack up as much, and when you couple it to the fact that the man is a complete tool to boot I can't see him winning.
Hamilton has become Britain's joint top most successful driver but a) just being the best Briton doesn't necessarily mean much, and b) how much of his success is down to Mercedes' engineering. He's outstanding, but I'm not sure that he'd beat some of the others in the same car - Alonso, Button, Ricciardo, possibly even Verstappen.
Jessica Ennis-Hill is outstanding, but I'm not sure I remember her having done anything in particular this year - that may be my not following athletics particularly, though, rather than a comment on her achievements. Greg Rutherford's prolonged domination of his event has been reported, so he also stands in good standing for my vote.
For me though, the stand-out has been Froome. Not only has he continued to be at the peak of his field for a prolonged period, and achieved something that is rare amongst world competitors in his event (not just British), but he's done so whilst maintaining his temper and decorum under some pretty horrendous treatment, whereas most of the others have been pretty well supported throughout their achievements.
O.
O.
-
She may be benchmarked against similar athletes in athletic competition, but is she benchmarked against such athletes in this particular competition?
Not sure what you mean.
Of course you can't directly compare Lewis Hamilton with Jessica Ennis - I suspect she would struggle to drive a F1 car and he would struggle to perform in a heptathlon. Same with Froome and Murray and any of the others.
The point is about their position within their own particular competition and then to compare with the others benchmarked against their own sport. So Hamilton is top, Froome, well he won the biggest flagship event, and for the second time in 3 years (and the intervening one he was injured) - and so on.
The suggestion that Ennis should be better because her chosen sport has 7 disciplines is pretty non-sense, as that's the sport she choses to participate in. I'm sure you can make similar claims for Froome - he has to do time trials, sprints, mountains and very long endurance stages. Murray plays on a range of different surfaces, and in both singles an doubles etc etc.
-
I think that Kevin Sinfield might be worth a bet. He has narrowed substantially lately and comes from a sport with a tightknit group of fans.
Tyson Furey has been drifting of late, presumably on the basis of the campaign against him because of his statements on homosexuality?
You would suspect that both Froome and Farah are such high odds because of the personal suspicion on drugs.
-
That's a reasonable achievement, but the others are the best in the world in their field - their achievement isn't any more or less significant. Djokovich, Federer and Nadal are, arguably, the three best tennis players that have EVER been, and Murray's ahead of two of them at the same time at the end of this year's rankings, and has taken Great Britain to a Davis Cup victory on top of that, having been near the top of the world rankings consistently for four or five years now.
Against that, one good fight from Fury doesn't stack up as much, and when you couple it to the fact that the man is a complete tool to boot I can't see him winning.
Hamilton has become Britain's joint top most successful driver but a) just being the best Briton doesn't necessarily mean much, and b) how much of his success is down to Mercedes' engineering. He's outstanding, but I'm not sure that he'd beat some of the others in the same car - Alonso, Button, Ricciardo, possibly even Verstappen.
Jessica Ennis-Hill is outstanding, but I'm not sure I remember her having done anything in particular this year - that may be my not following athletics particularly, though, rather than a comment on her achievements. Greg Rutherford's prolonged domination of his event has been reported, so he also stands in good standing for my vote.
For me though, the stand-out has been Froome. Not only has he continued to be at the peak of his field for a prolonged period, and achieved something that is rare amongst world competitors in his event (not just British), but he's done so whilst maintaining his temper and decorum under some pretty horrendous treatment, whereas most of the others have been pretty well supported throughout their achievements.
O.
O.
Good critique.
Ennis won the world championship this year.
I agree with you on Froome, but I think Murray may get it even though he is demonstrably not the best in the world at his sport (unlike many of the others). I think the feat of winning the Davis cup for the first time for Britain in 80 years is a bit like the Wimbledon triumph, although actually I don't think it is anything like as competitive in tennis.
But it gives that kind of warm jingoistic glow which I suspect will set him apart in the eyes of many voters.
-
I think that Kevin Sinfield might be worth a bet. He has narrowed substantially lately and comes from a sport with a tightknit group of fans.
Unless there is a very well planned, organised and concerted action from Rugby league fans then I don't think he stands a chance. Specifically because I think there will be vast swathes of the country who will never have even heard of him, as although he is a big name in rugby league he isn't a household name beyond that small world.
It is also much more difficult for someone in a team sport to win rather than an individual sport as it is much more difficult to separate the individual achievement from that of the team.
-
Unless there is a very well planned, organised and concerted action from Rugby league fans then I don't think he stands a chance. Specifically because I think there will be vast swathes of the country who will never have even heard of him, as although he is a big name in rugby league he isn't a household name beyond that small world.
It is also much more difficult for someone in a team sport to win rather than an individual sport as it is much more difficult to separate the individual achievement from that of the team.
Yes, I know that was what I was implying being seen as happening due to the narrowing in his odds.
-
You would suspect that both Froome and Farah are such high odds because of the personal suspicion on drugs.
Careful now - I think the mods might want to take a view on that comment.
-
Yes, I know that was what I was implying being seen as happening due to the narrowing in his odds.
I think there have only bee 2 team sport winners in the last 10 years (Flintoff in 2005, and Giggs in 2009), and I can't see Sinfield's achievement's in the broader public's eyes coming close to either of them.
-
I think there have only bee 2 team sport winners in the last 10 years (Flintoff in 2005, and Giggs in 2009), and I can't see Sinfield's achievement's in the broader public's eyes coming close to either of them.
And in part the idea that Giggs and AP MCCoy succeeded on was on the basis of concerted efforts by groups of supporters. I didn't say I thought Sinfield would win, but that he would be worth a bet given the narrowing odds. It looks to me that the bookies are aware that there is a campaign ongoing and that this could well lead to a further narrowing in future. At the very least this will give an opportunity to offlay the bet and take the effective arbitrage.
-
Careful now - I think the mods might want to take a view on that comment.
Then they would be wrong to do so. There are well documented suspicions about both athletes involving in drugs written about in the public sphere. The comment notes that and makes no comment on whether those suspicions have any validity.
-
And in part the idea that Giggs and AP MCCoy succeeded on was on the basis of concerted efforts by groups of supporters. I didn't say I thought Sinfield would win, but that he would be worth a bet given the narrowing odds. It looks to me that the bookies are aware that there is a campaign ongoing and that this could well lead to a further narrowing in future. At the very least this will give an opportunity to offlay the bet and take the effective arbitrage.
Not sure about AP McCoy but I don't think you could claim Giggs was only worthy due to a concerted effort of a group of supporters. Giggs has been, arguably the most consistently world class British sports person of his generation -= bar none.
-
Not sure about AP McCoy but I don't think you could claim Giggs was only worthy due to a concerted effort of a group of supporters. Giggs has been, arguably the most consistently world class British sports person of his generation -= bar none.
Didn't say anything about him only being worthy because of that. Indeed specifically used the word ' in part' and no use of the word worthy.
At the time Giggs was a surprise on the last part of voting to the bookies because of what they argued was a concerted campaign.
-
Jessica Ennis-Hill is outstanding, but I'm not sure I remember her having done anything in particular this year - that may be my not following athletics particularly, though, rather than a comment on her achievements.
She has had time off (2 years iirc) initially for injury but more recently to look after her child. The World title in the summer, that she won by a sizeable margin (in heptathlon terms) was her first full competition of any note since her return. She therefore regained that particular crown, one she had previously won in 2009.
I can see your argument re. Froome, but remember that the support team at Sky is pretty large.
-
Didn't say anything about him only being worthy because of that. Indeed specifically used the word ' in part' and no use of the word worthy.
At the time Giggs was a surprise on the last part of voting to the bookies because of what they argued was a concerted campaign.
I think Giggs was a kind of legacy award - people voted for him for the astonishing sustained level of achievement rather than a single great year. But I don't remember anything about a concerted campaign. I think people simply recognised he was most worthy of the bunch on offer.
-
Not sure about AP McCoy but I don't think you could claim Giggs was only worthy due to a concerted effort of a group of supporters. Giggs has been, arguably the most consistently world class British sports person of his generation -= bar none.
You could make the argument, though, that Giggs should have failed to qualify under that Trades Descriptions Act: Sports, yes, but personality? Really?
O.
-
She has had time off (2 years iirc) initially for injury but more recently to look after her child. The World title in the summer, that she won by a sizeable margin (in heptathlon terms) was her first full competition of any note since her return. She therefore regained that particular crown, one she had previously won in 2009.
That might explain the lack of commentary :) That's a fair achievement in itself, coming back from that, but it's a double-edged sword as a situation: some will be complimentary that she's come back so quick, whilst others (not me, I hasten to add) will point out the 'sexism' of being impressed that she came back quickly from 'what is, after all, a perfectly natural act'...
I can see your argument re. Froome, but remember that the support team at Sky is pretty large.
It is, but it's equivalent to that of the other top teams, and (unlike in Hamilton's case) they can't be said to be doing the work for him, they're creating the environment in which he can. I'm presuming that Jessica Ennis-Hill and Greg Rutherford have support teams of their own that are relevant to their needs: if they needed more, the funding and organisation is there to provide it.
O.
-
She has had time off (2 years iirc) initially for injury but more recently to look after her child. The World title in the summer, that she won by a sizeable margin (in heptathlon terms) was her first full competition of any note since her return. She therefore regained that particular crown, one she had previously won in 2009.
But this isn't some kind of 'overdoing adversity' award so I really don't think the fact that she had considerable time off is relevant at all.
She won the world championship and that's all that matters - it matter not whether she'd had a full season the previous year or not. Otherwise it comes over as a bit of a 'hard luck' award - she doesn't need that as her achievement wasn't second or third where 'excuses' might be necessary, but first.
-
Hamilton has become Britain's joint top most successful driver but a) just being the best Briton doesn't necessarily mean much, and b) how much of his success is down to Mercedes' engineering. He's outstanding, but I'm not sure that he'd beat some of the others in the same car - Alonso, Button, Ricciardo, possibly even Verstappen.
Alonso is the only driver who is better than Hamilton in that list. Alonso is the best racing driver still active although Hamilton has more outright speed.
For me though, the stand-out has been Froome.
I agree.
-
Alonso is the only driver who is better than Hamilton in that list. Alonso is the best racing driver still active although Hamilton has more outright speed.
Rather depends on what you're looking for - when the car suits him, Hamilton's untouchable, but as soon as it isn't he doesn't adapt well. Alonso - and Button - can do that, and do it well. Alonso's faster than Button, but Button breaks his cars less and, it seems to me, gives better feedback to the team on what the car's doing on the track.
Hamilton's undeniably quick - as you say, on his day, probably the quickest - but it isn't always your day. It's racing, and if he manages to have enough of 'his days' in a season, he's going to win, but if you put Alonso or Button in this year's Ferrari I wonder if he'd have found the championship as easy as he did.
O.
-
But this isn't some kind of 'overdoing adversity' award so I really don't think the fact that she had considerable time off is relevant at all.
My point wasn't particularly her tme off (though that was possibly beneficial) but the fact that she came back as World No 1 without several full lead-up competitions. Doesn't that suggest that she is a Sports Personality par excellence?
-
It is, but it's equivalent to that of the other top teams, and (unlike in Hamilton's case) they can't be said to be doing the work for him, they're creating the environment in which he can. I'm presuming that Jessica Ennis-Hill and Greg Rutherford have support teams of their own that are relevant to their needs: if they needed more, the funding and organisation is there to provide it.
O.
Your comment highlights exactly why I questioned your original comment about Chris Frooms "... but he's done so whilst maintaining his temper and decorum under some pretty horrendous treatment, whereas most of the others have been pretty well supported throughout their achievements." The support element is pretty well irrelevant to any of the candidates' case.
-
Your comment highlights exactly why I questioned your original comment about Chris Frooms "... but he's done so whilst maintaining his temper and decorum under some pretty horrendous treatment, whereas most of the others have been pretty well supported throughout their achievements." The support element is pretty well irrelevant to any of the candidates' case.
I don't think so - the support team can prepare you for the sport, but what preparatory work do you do on how to handle being spat on by spectators or having urine thrown over you whilst you're competing?
Froome's support team train and condition him, mentally and physically, and that's no different in principle to Jessican Ennis-Hill or Greg Rutherford's support team training them mentally and physically for what they will be doing.
Whilst Froome will have his bicycle maintained I suspect that the athletes aren't, for instance, making their own trainers or shorts. Those are the pieces of equipment that allow them to compete, but they do the work.
Hamilton, by contrast, whilst supremely skillful, isn't competing on a level playing field because of the equipment supplied to him which actually does the work. He has to get the performance out of it, but other competitors don't have that capacity to hand to wring performance from.
O.
-
My point wasn't particularly her tme off (though that was possibly beneficial) but the fact that she came back as World No 1 without several full lead-up competitions. Doesn't that suggest that she is a Sports Personality par excellence?
Well unless it is a pretty terrible year then I'd hope that all the shortlist (or at least those with a creditable chance of winning) should be world number one, or have won something pretty remarkable (e.g. Murray and the Davis cup), so that isn't really a discriminator.
And even in athletics, surely she can't be above Mo Farah, who also won in Beijing - but in two events - and for him a 'double, double' of worlds. And he has won double the number of global titles (Olympics and Worlds) compared to any other British athlete - including Ennis.
So, no, Ennis shouldn't win - if it goes to an athlete it should be Farah - but actually I think Froome's achievements are better than either, considering the astonishing difficulty of winning the tour de france and therefore to win it twice is quite remarkable.
-
It's a pity it isn't just about charm as then certainly Fury would be a shoo-in.
http://www.thenational.scot/sport/tyson-fury-turns-his-fire-on-andy-murray.10882
-
Dear Susan,
I am glad you are listening to radio 4, if you were listening to radio 2 at the moment, it might be detrimental to your health, Tyson Fury a wonderful spokesman for Christianity.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Sane,
One person who will not be winning BBC Sports Personality 2015, what a prick.
Gonnagle.
-
Tyson Fury a wonderful spokesman for Christianity.
This Tyson Fury or another one?
"I believe a woman's best place is in the kitchen and on her back, that's my personal belief. Making me a good cup of tea, that's what I believe."
"There are only three things that need to be accomplished before the devil comes home. One of them is homosexuality being legal in countries, one of them is abortion and the other is paedophilia. Who would have thought in the 50s and 60s that those first two would be legalised?"
"The devil is very strong at the minute. Very strong. And I believe the end is near. The bible tells me the end is near. The world tells me the end is near. Just a little short few years, I reckon, away from being finished."
-
Dear Sane,
Way beyond sarcasm, which only proves that you can be world champion and still be a prick, correction, Christian prick.
Gonnagle.
-
Yes, a thoroughly nasty piece of work by the sound of it.
-
And a contender for sports personality of the year.
-
And a contender for sports personality of the year.
Yes. Because he is a powerful sports achiever. And in case you people hadn't noticed, the award is about sport, not his personal views, however unacceptable they may be.
-
Yes. Because he is a powerful sports achiever. And in case you people hadn't noticed, the award is about sport, not his personal views, however unacceptable they may be.
Yes but this is sport personality of the year and his personality is fucking shit.
-
Yes but this is sport personality of the year and his personality is fucking shit.
Sports personality, not his personality in any other respect. Yours is delightful, though, as your language exemplifies - all 80,000 odd adjectives to choose from in English, and all you can come up with is crude expletives. So perhaps you're not best qualified to judge personality!
-
Rather depends on what you're looking for - when the car suits him, Hamilton's untouchable, but as soon as it isn't he doesn't adapt well.
I disagree with that. Hamilton is pretty good at getting the best out of a crap car. He won his first World Championship in what was only the second best car on the grid.
Alonso - and Button - can do that, and do it well.
They've had a lot of practice at that this year.
Alonso's faster than Button, but Button breaks his cars less and, it seems to me, gives better feedback to the team on what the car's doing on the track.
I don't think we hear the important stuff. They only broadcast the whiney bits.
Hamilton's undeniably quick - as you say, on his day, probably the quickest - but it isn't always your day. It's racing, and if he manages to have enough of 'his days' in a season, he's going to win, but if you put Alonso or Button in this year's Ferrari I wonder if he'd have found the championship as easy as he did.
I think Alonso would have challenged for the title. Both he and Button are better than Vettel IMO, but I think perversely, it would have helped Hamilton in a way because he would still have been winning races but Rosberg might have been knocked down to third a few times.
-
Yes. Because he is a powerful sports achiever. And in case you people hadn't noticed, the award is about sport, not his personal views, however unacceptable they may be.
Then why isn't it called 'Sportsperson of the Year'?
Fury says that he doesn't care if he wins, and I believe him. I don't think there are enough votes in the world for him to feel that anyone else is quite as impressed with him as he obviously is. I genuinely hope he comes rock-bottom last, but unfortunately I suspect he won't.
I'll just have to be satisfied that he's not going to win.
O.
-
Then why isn't it called 'Sportsperson of the Year'?
Fury says that he doesn't care if he wins, and I believe him. I don't think there are enough votes in the world for him to feel that anyone else is quite as impressed with him as he obviously is. I genuinely hope he comes rock-bottom last, but unfortunately I suspect he won't.
I'll just have to be satisfied that he's not going to win.
O.
You are just playing with semantics. I think most will view the occasion as a tribute to sporting excellence, and nothing more.
If we are to judge a winner by what he says or does outside the sporting arena, than how do you justify voting for, say Hamilton, a tax exile, who "cheats" on his own country?
-
I disagree with that. Hamilton is pretty good at getting the best out of a crap car. He won his first World Championship in what was only the second best car on the grid.
Perhaps it's just that, when he's on a bad day he blames the set-up, but it does seem that he's sensitive to the set-up in a way that the other top drivers aren't.
They've had a lot of practice at that this year.
I know, and it's such a shame. It wouldn't be the sport that it is without the team competition, but I would like to see one or two races where they're all in the same chassis - makes Top Gear's F1 star in a reasonably priced car seem a little bit more significant :)
I don't think we hear the important stuff. They only broadcast the whiney bits.
I know, but I know a couple of people who work in some of the teams - not well, from university - and that's their commentary more than mine.
I think Alonso would have challenged for the title. Both he and Button are better than Vettel IMO, but I think perversely, it would have helped Hamilton in a way because he would still have been winning races but Rosberg might have been knocked down to third a few times.
Indeed. Rosberg's an excellent driver - they all are, at that level - but like Vettel he doesn't seem to be an excellent racer. I think Vettel's last season at Red Bull against Ricciardo showed how much of his 4 consecutive titles was down to him and how much to Adrian Newey and team orders...
O.
-
You are just playing with semantics. I think most will view the occasion as a tribute to sporting excellence, and nothing more.
I'm playing with semantics, yet it was you who decided the wanted to emphasise one word of the phrase rather than the entirety...?
If we are to judge a winner by what he says or does outside the sporting arena, than how do you justify voting for, say Hamilton, a tax exile, who "cheats" on his own country?
I'd say emigrating to a more favourable tax regime, whilst unfortunate, is infinitely preferable to being a colossal misogynist homophobic dick-head. If the worst you can say about Hamilton is that he's smart enough to employ good accountants then I'd say he's eligible for the award - although, as I said, I've cast my vote for Froome.
O.
-
Sports personality, not his personality in any other respect. Yours is delightful, though, as your language exemplifies - all 80,000 odd adjectives to choose from in English, and all you can come up with is crude expletives. So perhaps you're not best qualified to judge personality!
Sometimes I feel expletives are apt. I don't care if you think I'm not a judge to judge a personality. :)
-
Sports personality, not his personality in any other respect. Yours is delightful, though, as your language exemplifies - all 80,000 odd adjectives to choose from in English, and all you can come up with is crude expletives. So perhaps you're not best qualified to judge personality!
So Fury gets your vote regardless of the shit he comes out with because he's good at hitting people yet Jak's views count for nothing because he swears?
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=11274.0
-
In previous SPOTY they have always, but ALWAYS, rambled on about what good ambassadors/role models the recipient of the award was.
I look forward to Clare Balding making the same declaration about the misogynist homophobe that is Tyson Fury.
Remember all you female posters - you should either be on your back or making a cuppa.
I am according to said gentleman a wanker for signing a petition against his nomination - which I'll readily admit to.
But I do wonder does a man who buys and wears the coats he does, have any right to make such a judgement ;)
-
So Fury gets your vote regardless of the shit he comes out with because he's good at hitting people yet Jak's views count for nothing because he swears?
http://www.religionethics.co.uk/index.php?topic=11274.0
Will you kindly stop saying what you think I mean. I did not say I'd vote for him: I've never voted, and don't intend to do so now. I merely point out thr hysterical reaction to the man, which has nothing to do with sport, and it is a sporting occasion we are talking of. And, incidentally, to Outrider: the disgraceful individuals and companies who avoid British taxes are quite rightly lampooned. Why should Hamilton be given some sort special dispensation to abuse his country: just the usual pop at me, without thinking it through: that is the most disingenuous comment on the thread so far.
Rhiannon: please acknowledge your error in ascribing to me something I did not say.
-
And, incidentally, to Outrider: the disgraceful individuals and companies who avoid British taxes are quite rightly lampooned. Why should Hamilton be given some sort special dispensation to abuse his country: just the usual pop at me, without thinking it through: that is the most disingenuous comment on the thread so far.
Really? Isn't this about their sporting achievement, not their outside activities?
Incidentally, seeing as you don't like people reinterpreting your words for you, I didn't say Hamilton should get a free ride for his tax affairs.
As to why we shouldn't treat him like we treat companies that shuffle tax obligations to light regimes, mainly because he actually goes and lives there, these companies are making their money here with infrastructure that is here.
And as to having a pop at you, get over yourself. I don't play the man, I play the (lack of) argument.
O.
-
Really? Isn't this about their sporting achievement, not their outside activities?
Incidentally, seeing as you don't like people reinterpreting your words for you, I didn't say Hamilton should get a free ride for his tax affairs.
As to why we shouldn't treat him like we treat companies that shuffle tax obligations to light regimes, mainly because he actually goes and lives there, these companies are making their money here with infrastructure that is here.
And as to having a pop at you, get over yourself. I don't play the man, I play the (lack of) argument.
O.
Re-read your post. You contradict yourself in what is surely your lamest post for some time. Keep trying, and remember, I am not voting for Fury, Hamilton, or anyone: I am simply saying that this is a sporting occasion, not an analysis of someone's personal views. Have you managed to understand that yet?
-
Re-read your post.
"I'd say emigrating to a more favourable tax regime, whilst unfortunate, is infinitely preferable to being a colossal misogynist homophobic dick-head."
Yep, done that.
You contradict yourself in what is surely your lamest post for some time.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but you really should be basing it on the reality of the situation. If you think that's in some way endorsing Hamilton's tax-avoiding actions then I suggest you learn to read better.
Keep trying, and remember, I am not voting for Fury, Hamilton, or anyone: I am simply saying that this is a sporting occasion, not an analysis of someone's personal views.
I'm not aware I've alleged you were voting, but you are advocating and supporting the idea that Fury's attitude is irrelevant because this is about sporting achievements, yet you brought up Lewis Hamilton's tax status.
Have you managed to understand that yet?
You don't think Hamilton's tax status or Fury's rampant misogyny and homophobia should come into the equation, I get that. What I don't get is that you think they're somehow comparable or equivalent, regardless of whether you think they're relevant to SPOTY.
O.
-
"I'd say emigrating to a more favourable tax regime, whilst unfortunate, is infinitely preferable to being a colossal misogynist homophobic dick-head."
Yep, done that.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but you really should be basing it on the reality of the situation. If you think that's in some way endorsing Hamilton's tax-avoiding actions then I suggest you learn to read better.
I'm not aware I've alleged you were voting, but you are advocating and supporting the idea that Fury's attitude is irrelevant because this is about sporting achievements, yet you brought up Lewis Hamilton's tax status.
You don't think Hamilton's tax status or Fury's rampant misogyny and homophobia should come into the equation, I get that. What I don't get is that you think they're somehow comparable or equivalent, regardless of whether you think they're relevant to SPOTY.
O.
I merely brought up Hamilton's situation in response to the comments made about Fury; pointing out that Fury is not the only one who is not lily-white. The rest of your post is the usual pedantic drivel.
-
I merely brought up Hamilton's situation in response to the comments made about Fury; pointing out that Fury is not the only one who is not lily-white. The rest of your post is the usual pedantic drivel.
If you think that objecting to describing paying tax in the country you live in rather than the country of your birth as equivalent to Fury's homophobia and misogyny is 'pedantry' then I think you misunderstand what pedantry is.
O.
-
If you think that objecting to describing paying tax in the country you live in rather than the country of your birth as equivalent to Fury's homophobia and misogyny is 'pedantry' then I think you misunderstand what pedantry is.
O.
I do not misunderstand anything: I am perfectly aware that the whole tenor of your posting is aimed at contradicting anything I say; and you have no real interest in the ins and outs of the BBC Sports Personality programme. It's all so very obvious, and immature!
-
I do not misunderstand anything: I am perfectly aware that the whole tenor of your posting is aimed at contradicting anything I say; and you have no real interest in the ins and outs of the BBC Sports Personality programme. It's all so very obvious, and immature!
So now you're coupling your persecution complex with the sort of arrogance that leads you to think it's all about you.
Unlike you, I've voted, which suggests that I'm not the one arguing about an issue I don't care about.
Once again reality threatens to slap you on the arse on the way out...
O.
-
So now you're coupling your persecution complex with the sort of arrogance that leads you to think it's all about you.
Unlike you, I've voted, which suggests that I'm not the one arguing about an issue I don't care about.
Once again reality threatens to slap you on the arse on the way out...
O.
I think I'll opt out of posting to you for now, since your lapse into the use of expletives is distasteful to me - and of course,merely personifies your own desperation!
-
Andy Murray - worthy winner.
Kevin Sinfield and Jess Ennis-Hill - worthy runner up and 3rd respectively.