Three Points to End a Tough Week

[Footymad]

Sean Dyche's Clarets shoved Nigel Pearson's Watford deeper into relegation trouble following a tough week at Turf Moor. - External Link

[Supersub6]

Thanks for the report by Dave Thornley, however, if these views are all his own and nothing to do with Footymad, why does he change his name by the time we get to the bottom of the article? Dave Thornton? Just asking!

[The Bedlington Terrier]

Oh sh-it!

First things first; on the off-chance that the individual who thought that it would be a jolly jape to arrange the “White Lives Matter” fly past over the Etihad Stadium last Monday evening is reading this, I would ask; HOW DARE YOU?
How dare you seek to besmirch the name of Burnley Football Club in this way? How dare you presume in your arrogance that your views are representative of those of the club and its supporters?
You are entitled to your odious, narrow-minded and backward-looking ideology (although I would strongly recommend that you read some books on the subject), but how dare you seek to project those views onto the club – my club – and by extension onto me?
Free speech is a privilege to which we all entitled, but with that entitlement comes responsibility and such an openly provocative and prejudicial gesture is a flagrant abuse of that privilege and an abdication of those responsibilities.
I fully expect to receive some backlash, even abuse, on social media for this, and I guarantee that someone will retort with “All lives matter”.
Indeed they do. No one in their right mind would argue with that statement, all lives do matter: black lives, brown lives, white lives, gay lives, straight lives, male lives, female lives.
All lives should be subject to the same treatment under the law and have access to the same opportunities in life, irrespective of something as inconsequential as skin pigmentation, ***ual orientation or gender. If that is the hill upon which you are willing to make your stand, then you have my support.
Last Monday night was a traumatic one for the club. Even without the controversy stirred up by the fly past. Playing away to Manchester City usually becomes an exercise in damage limitation for the Clarets, and so it proved again. The 5-0 defeat had a sense of inevitability about it as Burnley’s tactical plan seemed to consist of standing back and admiring City’s precision passing game, with no thought of engaging in the contest.
Fortunately, City “declared” at five, and the last twenty minutes or so resembled a low-intensity training session as City lazily toyed with their hapless opponents.
Hapless and under-staffed; whilst the backsides of Kevin De Bruyne and Raheem Sterling rested on City’s bench; Burnley’s consisted of two goalkeepers, a bunch of untried youngsters and the ever-reliable Kevin Long.
The reason of course is that, along with injuries to Barnes, Wood, Brady and Gudmundsson; there is the contractual impasse which has seen Joe Hart, Aaron Lennon and Jeff Hendrick leave the club and Phil Bardsley hold out until after the City match, at which point he renewed.
The situation seems to have brought Sean Dyche into open conflict with Chairman Mike Garlick, raising doubts as to Dyche’s future at the club.
It is possible to look at the conflict from both sides; Dyche is employed to win football matches, and if that endeavour is undermined by a lack of players, then he cannot perform his job adequately. And if it is the Chairman himself who is undermining those efforts, no wonder he is upset.
It would be reasonable to assume that there are times when Dyche ponders over managing a club with a depth and talent in the squad, a thriving academy and a plump transfer budget. Goodness knows, he deserves no less for the work he has done at Burnley. But were he to leave in a huff, then the likelihood is that his next appointment will be at best a sideways move.
Garlick, on the other hand, is perhaps considering the adverse effects that might well follow after the lockdown and is wary of what happened to other clubs who over-extended their finances and flew too close to the sun. In the Premier League however, standing still is not an option, and he has an obligation to support his manager.
Can the two resolve their differences, find common ground and resume what has hitherto been a productive working relationship? I hope so, but I fear not. If the Burnley Chairman can properly, retrospectively evaluate the benefit of spending ten million quid to bolster the Turf Moor first team playing squad, he needs look no further than the immediate impact of Josh Brownhill. Enough said!
At least Thursday tea time’s win over Watford will have helped. Burnley were back to doing what they usually do so well; clean sheet, home win, job done. Jay Rodriguez’ deft near-post header to guide Dwight McNeill’s cross past Ben Foster was the decisive moment in a game which Burnley more or less had under control, save for a spell of Watford pressure at the start of the second half, which Burnley’s defence was able to repel.
The win sees Burnley ease past the forty point mark beyond which security of Premier League tenure is generally assured; this is always a relief, especially so in a season disrupted on an unprecedented scale and which will be played out in the eerie surroundings of empty stadia.
It was oddly disconcerting to see one’s seat in the Jimmy Mac stand obscured by a Claret tarpaulin. But at least football is being played again, and for that we should offer grateful thanks for the heroic efforts of the key workers, particularly those in the NHS, who placed themselves at risk to keep others safe.
Clarets Mad regular commentator Dave Thornley ends the reminisces and gets back to business following the English Premier League layoff. Just a gentle reminder to all of our readers that Dave’s reports and opinions are entirely his own. Unlike many other forums and message boards, freedom of expression and speech is allowed in its entirety on Clarets Mad. Since the games resumed, three points out of a possible six for the Clarets is not too shabby either! (TEC).

[The Bedlington Terrier]

Thanks for the report by Dave Thornley, however, if these views are all his own and nothing to do with Footymad, why does he change his name by the time we get to the bottom of the article? Dave Thornton? Just asking!

My excuse is three of my grandkids are whizzing around the house and it's bloody hard to concentrate. Thanks for the proof reading!

[Supersub6]

My excuse is three of my grandkids are whizzing around the house and it's bloody hard to concentrate. Thanks for the proof reading!

Excuse accepted! BT --In my business I produced 2 different catalogues every month for almost 20 years and they were all proof read by myself. There are still a lot of things that I see that just stand out, sad isn't it? lol

[1959_60]

Great article as usual Dave!

And I agree with all of it.

[sinkov]

Just an observation, but there seems to be a neat little lefty trick in play here, which they also used quite advantageously in the recent Brexit debate. In that debate they appropriated the word Europe and used it to mean the European Union. Amazingly it worked, numerous people actually seemed to believe that we were actually leaving Europe, they seemed genuinely distraught about it, maybe they imagined we would become detached and float out into the middle of the Atlantic. Anyone who preferred to be governed by our own elected representatives in Westminster instead of by a corrupt, un-elected bureaucracy in Brussels was stigmatised as anti-European, while being nothing of the sort. And it worked, it was a very effective strategy, even if totally dishonest.

And now a similar dishonest strategy is being employed again. That black lives matter goes without saying, for every normal, decent, civilised person anyway, there is simply no dispute about it. But an extreme left, racist, Marxist organisation has appropriated the slogan to garner support for and to further their own political agenda. They want to dismantle capitalism, abolish the police, close prisons and eradicate the concept of the nuclear family (that's two parents and their children to me and you). These people are fruitcakes, they claim our borders are enforced by extreme violence, that climate change is racism, that Covid 19 is racist, they even criticise the Suffragettes saying they were working to advance White Power.

Their aim is to stir up racial tension and division in a country that has gone a long way towards eradicating it in the last 20/30 years, they trample all over Martin Luther King's dream "that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." BLM are not interested in judging character, they are interested only in the colour of your skin, and if it's white, better get on your knees.

Like conflating the EU with Europe, conflating the fact that black lives matter with BLM, an extreme left, racist organisation, is also a neat trick, and also seems to have worked, so far. But given the fact that so many people who you would otherwise think of as sensible and intelligent have fallen for it, it's a bloody dangerous one.

[1959_60]

I don't accept much of that Mon Ami, but if you are referring to BLM UK (founded 2016) then I would have to agree with you.

I think that we all agree that everyone in our country (and in every country actually) should be treated exactly the sam.

But at the moment they are not. And it's not just black people who are not being treated equally, although they are a good example.

Without doubt there is a very real north/south divide in England, and it has been going on for so long that we simply accept it up here.

Women are generally paid less than men for doing the same job, even though there has been talk about putting this right for decades.

We live in a very unequal society, always have and always will. That is why we simply accept stuff and are expected to put up with it and "know our place"

Change will come, but it comes too slowly for some. Would women even have the vote if it hadn't been for the action of the Suffragettes?

Would gay people be accepted in society as well as they are now (still not fully) if it hadn't been for the movements in the 70's 80's and 90's?

Many people genuinely feel threatened when in the company of certain types of people (gay, black, people wearing certain kinds of clothes, tattoos, pins etc).....but in reality, these people have much more to fear from people like "us".

Change IS coming but I reckon it will take a generation to get somewhere near to becoming an equal society.

[sinkov]

"Would women even have the vote if it hadn't been for the action of the Suffragettes?"

Yes, there is even a good argument to be made that the militancy and inclination to violence of the Suffragettes fired up opposition to them and actually delayed women being granted full voting rights.

Incidentally my grandad fought in the 1st World War, but as he wasn't a property owner he didn't have the vote. It wasn't until the Representation of the People Act 1918 that men who weren't property owners were allowed to vote. It doesn't seem fair does it, but I doubt the snowflakes and woke media who have been banging on about women's rights and the Suffragettes nonstop this last couple of years are even aware that men at that time were being treated even more shabbily than women were.

[sinkov]

"But at the moment they are not. And it's not just black people who are not being treated equally, although they are a good example."

In what respect are black people not being treated equally 59 ?