**** is used to describe someone who is stupid enough to post ****e like this. Actually the correct term is stupid ****.
Roary's SH set a good example on this thread of immediately deleting a post when it was pointed out, that it was very offensive. What follows is depressing.
My mother was Danish yes. And for the record..I was not the poster of the word "mong" I was merely reacting to the shock and horror of someone reacting to the word.
At the end of the day, it’s not a law, it’s a courtesy we extend on behalf of those who are targeted by the word. Those of us with decency will avoid using it out of respect, but if people are happy being loutish pricks, I guess they can use it. I don’t see anything snowflake like about having respect for somebody.
It's not a word used in our household(We have a family member with Downs Syndrome and I/We have always associated the word,'Mong', with that particular condition). That said,and I'm neither defending nor condemning anyone here,the definition of the word has 'in my opinion' and based on looking it up on google,changed in recent years and seems to include someone who has done something stupid and is mocked for doing so. I've heard the younger generation use it on occasion nowadays and I don't think they see it in the same context as we do.Like I say,I don't like it's usage but it does seem to have a varied meaning these days?
Anyway back on track... Had a conversation with one of the squad last night in regards to huddlestone.... Apparently the first day he came in, most where shocked to see him walk in, but even more shocked at just how good he was considering his time out. He ran the show in his first session. The squad all want him in permanently and his experience and influence is being felt already
I’d love it if we signed him. I bumped into Tom in South Cave when he was last here. Thoroughly a top bloke.
Cheltenham Town are said to be set to offer a contract to midfielder Dan Crowley this summer, as per a recent report by Gloucestershire Live. He played for them as a trialist last night and they won 8-1.
Very much dependant on his wage expectations? I think it would be great to get him in.Huddlestone is an intelligent footballer and would bring on the younger members of our squad(of which there are many).He knows how to make space and use the ball with relative ease and if he can pass on those skills his presence could be invaluable...
I suspect with Tom money won't be a stumbling block, he's had a good career and is just looking to get a year or two more playing time with the view of getting into coaching. I seem to remember whilst he was with us before he took some coaching courses, so would be a good fit to get him on board.
I'd snap Huddleston up so long as we're not talking silly money. To have him on the bench to come on for the last 20 minutes. For his 'been there, done that' experience. His understanding of the club. The credibility younger players will show him. To hone his coaching skills. Where's the negatives?
I personally doubt it, from what Grant said at the weekend they're loans that will become permanents. And let's be realistic with Tom, he's not had a club for a year, he's going to be miles off match fitness. We do need a deeper midfielder but we need one with legs (e.g. Slater). Having Richie and Tom as our options there would worry me. I'm hoping the 2 midfielders are Regan & Rathbone, and then if we do sign Tom it's a bonus. But I don't see the rush as he's probably not going to be ready until a similar time that Honeyman is back
I would love to see Huddlestone back near his peak. My concern would be that he has had a year out, There was clearly a reason for his release by Derby (who were not pulling up any trees) and then no one taking a risk on him. Also, would he fit into our 'high energy' style of play? Our 23/25 squad limit doesn't really allow for a 'bonus' though. Having said that i hope he is taken on, as it would mean Grant has very closely assessed him and thinks he could still do a job for us.