Man of the match award.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seasider1887 said:
Watching the Accrington Stanley v Leeds United match. The commentators started discussing the the potential man of the match. Then one corrected the other and stated it’s not man of the match but player of the match. It wasn’t a mixed sex match so why is man no longer acceptable to say? I don’t get it.
Click to expand...
I said exactly the same. In fact he corrected himself. The commentators and pundits must be under instructions
 
Seasider1887 said:
Watching the Accrington Stanley v Leeds United match. The commentators started discussing the the potential man of the match. Then one corrected the other and stated it’s not man of the match but player of the match. It wasn’t a mixed sex match so why is man no longer acceptable to say? I don’t get it.
Click to expand...
It is irrelevant and nothing to get stressed about.
 
Seasider1887 said:
Watching the Accrington Stanley v Leeds United match. The commentators started discussing the the potential man of the match. Then one corrected the other and stated it’s not man of the match but player of the match. It wasn’t a mixed sex match so why is man no longer acceptable to say? I don’t get it.
Click to expand...
Whether its man of the match or player of the match. Also, whether it's in the Stanley v Leeds game or any Blackpool game - Marv would win it, according to some of our fans.
 
Seasider1887 said:
Watching the Accrington Stanley v Leeds United match. The commentators started discussing the the potential man of the match. Then one corrected the other and stated it’s not man of the match but player of the match. It wasn’t a mixed sex match so why is man no longer acceptable to say? I don’t get it.
Click to expand...
You can't call men men incase some men aren't identifying as men on that occasion.

You might also offend women watching the mens game if its man of the match, as women cant be men, unless they can in which case its all irrelevant.

I think we should step carefully... don't assume they are people, persons or players, that's offensive.

Thing of the match.
 
Seasider1887 said:
We are subliminally under attack from the WOKE left wing nut jobs. Can’t you understand what is at work here? Evil forces that brainwash the young so eventually we will become so weak and defenceless. It’s already happened in the states.
Click to expand...
Woke is always in the eye of the beholder bud.

Women wanting the vote would have been woke of their time. Wilberforce was certainly woke at his time standing up in Parliament and demanding an end to slavery. Throw in the Chartists too who would have been classed as lwnj by the aristocracy.
Even the age of consent was 12 at one stage here in England until some aristocratic ‘wokies’ challenged it.

You look back now and wonder how there was people ever in favour of slavery or limiting voting rights or allowing sex with children.
 
Chunkylad said:
Woke is always in the eye of the beholder bud.

Women wanting the vote would have been woke of their time. Wilberforce was certainly woke at his time standing up in Parliament and demanding an end to slavery. Throw in the Chartists too who would have been classed as lwnj by the aristocracy.
Even the age of consent was 12 at one stage here in England until some aristocratic ‘wokies’ challenged it.

You look back now and wonder how there was people ever in favour of slavery or limiting voting rights or allowing sex with children.
Click to expand...
Bit of an extreme example. Did you know slavery in this Country and Scotland was white on white with the main exporting point Bristol to Ireland long before we imported Africans. And in Africa Blacks owned black slaves? The BLM and left like to frame everything to suit their agenda.
 
Seasider1887 said:
Bit of an extreme example. Did you know slavery in this Country and Scotland was white on white with the main exporting point Bristol to Ireland long before we imported Africans. And in Africa Blacks owned black slaves? The BLM and left like to frame everything to suit their agenda.
Click to expand...

Slavery hasn’t been the sole property of any race or creed. Barbary pirates were at it too via Bristol and often white slaves as well as black. You can quote Romans, Egyptians, Persians etc etc etc slavery went on for too long and was not limited by colour.

The slave trade that BLM talk of is when it went truly ‘industrial’. Ships designed specifically to fit the largest numbers of slaves within etc

Point I made extreme or not, is that our society / civilisation has evolved over millennia. What you feel is woke now will be looked on in the future in disbelief - “how could people not accept x” at that time?

Gay rights is maybe more interesting to you? It wasn’t long ago that being homosexual was illegal. Few would today believe that should be the law. If you surveyed the UK population in 50s or 60s I imagine the number wanting it legalised would have been significantly less than now.
 
Ooooh, watching the cricket and the commentator said "That decision won't trouble the man in red!!!!!"
😱 surely he should have said person😱
 
My grandsons all play at various age levels from u8 to u16 and all have player of the match. In 5 years time it’ll be normal, but I’m a man and too old to be bothered.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top