Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:15 pm  

I'm with you conroy. We will do our best to make sure this never happens again, it is not something we agree with.

We will also do our best to continue to support the team in the way we love doing, we hope you will join us.

Anyone with any questions, negative or positive questions, please do not hesitate to PM me, I would even be happy to meet for a chat or speak on the phone.

Please feel free to come to our next meeting which will be posted on the website.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:21 pm  

tugglesf78 wrote:

Using what happened at Bradford to some how make a point about your little group is loving disgusting.

Edit - just seen that Andy has already mentioned it.

And my point proven entirely. You see, the magic word here is CONTEXT. When you take the Bradford Fire out of the context in which it was used, then yes, its use to defend a group would be rather unsavoury.

HOWEVER, when IN CONTEXT the point that is being proven is not anything to do with the Brigantes, Ultras, but is rather about how images and words are percieved then it is perfectly acceptable.

You take the first image of the bradford fire out of context and show it to someone who hadn't seen it before (and in my case, up until 3 years ago i hadn't ever seen actual images of the fire) and say only "This is a football match", their first impressions are "football hooligans doing what hooligans do", but when you see what the outcome of that image is, then it's very easy to see that your initial impression was incorrect.

That is no different to what is occuring with the name Brigantes and Ultras, taken out of context from Rugby League then you may be right to gather the first impression that the Ultras group is a group of hooligans who are out to cause trouble, but when you slide the Ultras name in to the Rugby League sport, and see that it's a new concept and a concept that The Brigantes are trying to develop and protect, then it goes a very long way to prove that much of the critisms purely because of a preconceived impression of a word are unjustified and playing purely on stereotype.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:56 pm  

onedego wrote:

And my point proven entirely. You see, the magic word here is CONTEXT. When you take the Bradford Fire out of the context in which it was used, then yes, its use to defend a group would be rather unsavoury.

HOWEVER, when IN CONTEXT the point that is being proven is not anything to do with the Brigantes, Ultras, but is rather about how images and words are percieved then it is perfectly acceptable.

Listen mate, quit your patronizing tone.

I could not give a flying love about your perceived opinion on how the other view the group "out of context".

Boo loving hoo.

A very close friend of mine lost his father at Valley parade when he was 5 years old and i have been on training courses when in the Navy run by an ex fireman who was onsite that day. Let me tell you now that that poor nice bloke cries himself to sleep thinking of what went on.

To use that particular example, frankly boils my mickey.

I like the idea of the Brigantes in principal and have offered to donate flags in the past. I tell you what though after listening to some of you (dare i say "younger") members on this thread then i can only suggest that some older members give you some "polite" guidance on how to conduct yourself on here.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:08 pm  

onedego wrote:

And my point proven entirely. You see, the magic word here is CONTEXT. When you take the Bradford Fire out of the context in which it was used, then yes, its use to defend a group would be rather unsavoury.

HOWEVER, when IN CONTEXT the point that is being proven is not anything to do with the Brigantes, Ultras, but is rather about how images and words are percieved then it is perfectly acceptable.

You take the first image of the bradford fire out of context and show it to someone who hadn't seen it before (and in my case, up until 3 years ago i hadn't ever seen actual images of the fire) and say only "This is a football match", their first impressions are "football hooligans doing what hooligans do", but when you see what the outcome of that image is, then it's very easy to see that your initial impression was incorrect.

That is no different to what is occuring with the name Brigantes and Ultras, taken out of context from Rugby League then you may be right to gather the first impression that the Ultras group is a group of hooligans who are out to cause trouble, but when you slide the Ultras name in to the Rugby League sport, and see that it's a new concept and a concept that The Brigantes are trying to develop and protect, then it goes a very long way to prove that much of the critisms purely because of a preconceived impression of a word are unjustified and playing purely on stereotype.

You seem from your response to be blissfully unaware that your choice to use the Bradford stadium fire and images of it could cause distress, upset and maybe even anger amongst others. To use images of a tragedy that resulted in the deaths of innocent people to try to put across some point about taking things out of context is crass in the extreme. The use of such images in the context in which you chose to use them will be offensive to many but does it not occur to you that fans other than Wigan supporters read these boards. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that people who were either at that fateful football game, or that have friends and relatives that were could see this thread and your post. The least you could do is to apologise for offence caused by using the images you did in the manner you did and acknowledge that it was not appropriate.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:09 pm  

I'm going to go very off topic now but I remember watching the footage of that tragic fire for the first time a few years ago, and "football hooligans doing what hooligans do" was not something that ever once crossed my mind, and I'm really baffled at how you can try and use that to "prove" your point. Infact I don't see how anyone could come to that conclusion from seeing that photo or the footage footage.

Even when taken out of context. that fire had absolutely nothing to do with hooligans or ultra's or anything like that.


Why cant you just accept that people have their pre-conceptions/stereotypes about the whole ultra thing? Rightly or wrongly people who will have those views, they don't know you at all, so they have nothing else to base their judgement on other than the stereotypical view of what happens a lot with "ultra" groups. that's just life.... and it's the same for every stereotype the world over....

with time, more people will learn about what you do, and will know and understand that you are a good group of people just supporting your club with banners and by being vocal. I really dont think getting overly defensive on an internet forum will change anyones pre-conceptions.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:31 pm  

I'm sure the Brigantes are exactly the same as all other groups of human beings. Some are nobs but the vast majority are nice.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 6:42 pm  

And I am not speaking as a member of a group. I am speaking as someone who watches this forum and see time and time again as people, or groups are slated because of something they are, or they call themselves. It's beyond banter and into what has become a deliberate attempt at insult. I am sick to the back teeth of people using stereotypes to brand other people based on absolute claptrap. It's a sign of a complete lack of intelligence when you have to use someone elses opinion as your basis for judgement.

tugglesf78 wrote:

A very close friend of mine lost his father at Valley parade when he was 5 years old

I tell you what though after listening to some of you (dare i say "younger") members on this thread

That would make me the same age as your very close friend.

And at no point did I ever say the fire was caused by Ultras, or even that an Ultras scene was present in Bradford. What I said is that when I was first shown that image 3 years ago in a fire safety awareness course in work the presenter asked me the question "What do you see when you look at this image". To which I replied, "Looks like a football match, i'd say hooligans invading a pitch". He then pressed play and showed the full extent of the fire. Now if i would've cropped that image to show just the front of that stand, and not said that it was the Bradford fire, i strongly doubt that any of you would've been any the wiser of what it was an image of, and would've drawn to the same conclusions. Is that my fault that you'd feel that guilt? The fact is, in proving my point, I put the image into context.

There are eye witness accounts from the other end of Hilsborough where they said that 'they thought it was a pitch invasion and got annoyed'...'until we saw the blood' does that make them sick and disgusting? No. Does it make them feel guilty that they thought that to start with? Yes.

Oh wait, now i've used Hilsborough as an example, i'll just have to go and stone myself wont I.

Now, I will not apologise for using the examples that I have used, in context they are harmless and they prove the point that I was making. If anyone cannot see that, then I am afraid that's their problem, and not mine. The Internet is a very powerful research tool, some should start using it to brighten their horizons.

I will not make another post on this forum. I'm through with the petty tripe that is repeatedly spouted here.

[Wigan6/Leeds1 Andy]

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 7:33 pm  

onedego wrote:

I will not make another post on this forum. I'm through with the petty tripe that is repeatedly spouted here.

Given your form on this thread, it's likely to reduce considerably now.

Re: So who... : Sat Jan 21, 2012 8:39 pm  

onedego wrote:

They were also associating themselves with Wigan Rugby Fans, for being there in the first place. So should the ENTIRE Wigan Rugby Fan base take the same critisism?

For that matter, they may also call themselves Christian, Jewish, A member of the Wigan Motorcycle Club, does that mean that those groups should take the critisism?

No?

Thought not.

My post seems to have been lost on you, I'm not going to reiterate what I said. If you can't understand that labelling yourselves as 'Ultras' is going to attract unwanted or unwarranted criticism & that certain people who just want to cause trouble will attempt to latch onto your group for just that reason - then you are a deluded person.

Re: So who... : Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:13 am  

19 pages and the circles continue at the end of day we are all Wigan fans some support the team one way some in other ways

What's the big deal

Wigan fans moaning for the sake of moaning all rather sad really