[Archived] Lucas Neill

[Lathund]

I wouldn't want him back. Not because I dislike the guy, or because of the horrible treachery he committed (He raped infants IIRC. Or at least it'd seem that way from the way some people view him). No, simply because it wouldn't be value for money.

The DP bar rant was the funniest thing I've seen in a while though. Until the gem of a post containing this;

I think some people stick up for Lucas purely to be controversial and to have an argument, possibly because they are uncomfortable with the prospect of having one face to face with someone in real life, or maybe they have had a bad day (life), who knows.

Perhaps some individuals on here aren't au fait with the unwritten etiquette of queing but believe me, for those of us who do have a life away from starting arguments on this MB, hiding behind a keyboard, it is very annoying.

Perhaps someone wanted to go out on Sunday night but wasn't allowed, I don't know, but I sense a lot of repressed anger on this board.

Judging from this I can only assume that you are in fact a big supporter of Lucas, and just ridiculing those who despise him? Because that's the only conclusion I can draw from the above.

Or perhaps you're not a fait with the unwritten etiquette of internet arguments but believe me, whoever first invokes the "You have no life, you sad little keyboard warrior" argument automatically loses. Both the argument and any credibility they might've had.

[thenodrog]

I wouldn't want him back. Not because I dislike the guy, or because of the horrible treachery he committed (He raped infants IIRC. Or at least it'd seem that way from the way some people view him). No, simply because it wouldn't be value for money.

The DP bar rant was the funniest thing I've seen in a while though. Until the gem of a post containing this;

Judging from this I can only assume that you are in fact a big supporter of Lucas, and just ridiculing those who despise him? Because that's the only conclusion I can draw from the above.

Or perhaps you're not a fait with the unwritten etiquette of internet arguments but believe me, whoever first invokes the "You have no life, you sad little keyboard warrior" argument automatically loses. Both the argument and any credibility they might've had.

I take it you must struggle to 'get out' most nights too Lathund!

[FourLaneBlue]

Choosing West Ham for economic reasons was stupid IMO

Is that fair and are you sure you are not being hypocritical?

Don't you consider economic reasons when applying for jobs?

It must also have something to do with Benitez not seemingly wanting him THAT much...Rafa (if it was him involved in the negotiations) messed around with the Warnock swap deal in the summer and might not have been as welcoming as West Ham were. Besides...I expect the majority of Aussies would prefer to live in London than anywhere else in England.

I have no problems with what Neill chose to do. For Rovers he was a good, solid player for little outlay and then he moved on for a profit. Not once do I remember a game where it seemed Neill was not trying. Where he moved on to does not really concern me...and of course money had a lot to do with his choice. It usually does when we are choosing employment. I don't think there is anything too "controversial" about that or that I am trying to "have an argument". I just don't think Neill did too much wrong...we have certainly had many players who represented Rovers in far less professional ways.

That said...queue jumping in a packed pub is out of order!

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

What the hell is wrong with having a big bloody house

I didn't mean to suggest that all big houses are wrong, but in Lucas Neill's case the massive extension upset local people because it's in a green area, slap bang in the middle of a golf course.

The small picture here shows the former owners of the house John and Susan Payne in front of Torra Manor in 2003, before Lucas bought the house and the extension was built.

There were concerns about the landscape with such a big rear extension being built in the grounds of a golf course.

As far as I am aware he still has his huge house in Turton which has been extended massively.

Neill is still the registered owner of the house. The link HERE indicates that Lucas paid £925,000 for the house in May 2004 and it hasn't been sold since.

It will be worth considerably more than £925,000 now after the big extension. People are perfectly entitled to move up the property ladder, provided that other people's quality of life isn't adversely affected.

Anyway, moving on from houses to Lucas as a person, the thing which irritated me about his move to West Ham was that he was never honest about the fact that money came into it.

If Lucas had said: "I'm moving to West Ham because of the very generous salary package on offer which will improve my family's quality of life," then although Rovers fans may still have been upset at him leaving, at least they could respect him for being honest about his motives for going to Upton Park.

The thing which disappointed me was the spin that Lucas came out with when he talked about West Ham being "the club of Matin Peters, Geoff Hurst, Alan Devonshire, Billy Bonds, Bobby Moore and Trevor Brooking" and suggested that anybody who questioned his reasons for moving from Blackburn to West Ham was insulting Bobby Moore's memory.

People were entitled to ask questions about Neill's motives for joining a relegation battle at Upton Park in January last year, when there was a serious danger that the club would be relegated to the Championship. If justice had happened and West Ham had been deducted 3 points last season for the Carlos Tevez fiasco, then the Hammers would indeed have been relegated.

The Premier League inquiry report into the Tevez affair said: "It amounts to not only an obvious and deliberate breach of the rules, but a grave breach of trust, because in our finding the club has been responsible for dishonesty and deceit. The club's chief executive officer told a direct lie."

West Ham lied, they were guilty of dishonesty and deceit, but rather than being relegated they got away with just a paltry fine, which was nowhere near the £30m the club would have lost if they had gone down.

With West Ham having been so dishonest last season, all I want, as a Rovers fan, is a bit of honesty from Lucas Neill. If he had come clean about his motives for going, had acknowledged that money played a big part in his move, then I couldn't have questioned Neill's honesty.

Lucas said that moving to West Ham gave him a "warm glow" and boasted "I will have the last laugh", but he didn't acknowledge the financial reasons for going to Upton Park. Personally, that's the thing which irritates me.

The article below sums up my views well.

"Don't treat us like mugs Lucas"

[Hannah]

I knew he had extended his house a lot but I have to say that it hasn't impacted on the landscape that much. His house overlooks the jumbles resevoir which is where my parental unit live and we regularly walk up and around the golf course and Turton Tower - it combines well with going to the pub on the way back.

From the road looking up over the moors you can't tell at all that he has extended it and there are only about three other houses up there. There is still plenty of room for the cows and sheep to graze. It preferable he extends his house rather than builds six more in his garden which is the norm for the Turton area at the moment.

[thenodrog]

Anyway, moving on from houses to Lucas as a person, the thing which irritated me about his move to West Ham was that he was never honest about the fact that money came into it.

If Lucas had said: "I'm moving to West Ham because of the very generous salary package on offer which will improve my family's quality of life," then although Rovers fans may still have been upset at him leaving, at least they could respect him for being honest about his motives for going to Upton Park.

The thing which disappointed me was the spin that Lucas came out with when he talked about West Ham being "the club of Matin Peters, Geoff Hurst, Alan Devonshire, Billy Bonds, Bobby Moore and Trevor Brooking" and suggested that anybody who questioned his reasons for moving from Blackburn to West Ham was insulting Bobby Moore's memory.

Lucas said that moving to West Ham gave him a "warm glow" and boasted "I will have the last laugh", but he didn't acknowledge the financial reasons for going to Upton Park. Personally, that's the thing which irritates me.

All the usual new player spin for his new fanbase rather than actual reasons for his old fanbase. He's hardly going to tell the WHU hordes that he's only gone cos they offered more than anybody else is he? He'd be public enemy No 1 before a ball was even kicked. Don't forget he'd been at Millwall so he had to be doubly careful with local sensibilities.

Don't tell me that you were fooled by it all Smithy?

[Darth Paul]

I wouldn't want him back. Not because I dislike the guy, or because of the horrible treachery he committed (He raped infants IIRC. Or at least it'd seem that way from the way some people view him). No, simply because it wouldn't be value for money.

The DP bar rant was the funniest thing I've seen in a while though. Until the gem of a post containing this;

Judging from this I can only assume that you are in fact a big supporter of Lucas, and just ridiculing those who despise him? Because that's the only conclusion I can draw from the above.

Or perhaps you're not a fait with the unwritten etiquette of internet arguments but believe me, whoever first invokes the "You have no life, you sad little keyboard warrior" argument automatically loses. Both the argument and any credibility they might've had.

I am delighted that you once thought that I had some credibility...that means a lot. I must also admit that I am not au fait with the internet argument rule, being someone who does stray outdoors occasionally on warm days, of which I appreciate you may not get a lot of in your neck of the woods, but I do feel that I only made a point based on a personal observation and that the personal arguments were exacerbated by others to which I gleefully jumped on the bandwagon, being a fan of such script based duels.

I do find the basis of your conclusions a little tenuous but I believe in your right to air them, however bizarre they may be. Perhaps you should see if they offer evening classes in "Alternative conclusion drawing" in your native land? (Or perhaps you shouldn't?)

I also acknowledge with great delight that thenodrog has seemingly backed my corner a little with his "I take it you must struggle to 'get out' most nights too Lathund!" comment. This is what internet messageboards are all about to me, a little riposte and counter with an unseen twist etc. Admit it you have all enjoyed it. There is certainly no intent to be personal on my part, just enjoying the banter, but I apologise if anyone has interpreted my comments differently.

To get back to the original point, and at the risk of this thread losing all direction, I felt Neill made a bad football move by leaving Rovers for West Ham. I felt that his justifications for doing so were spurious at best and would have had more respect for him if he had have adopted a Harry Enfield "Loadsamoney" impersonation upon signing for West Ham, rather than spouting the transparent rubbish about football reasons for leaving our club.

I have never booed Lucas Neill as a Rover or a Hammer. I had no problem with him being in the Knowles Arms as such apart from him showing perhaps a little lack of humility in the circumstances. I would argue that anyone would be annoyed at the nature of how he excercised his celebrity to jump the queue.

It is also clear that as someone who is fairly neutral of opinion in the whole Lucashgate story I have managed to galvanise the "fors" and "againsts" to a degree which I find a little bit depressing after all this time.

All I can say is that from personal experience, Lucas Neill, footballer - not arsed either way...Lucas Neill, the man...bit of a tit.

Edited May 9, 2008 by Darth Paul

[Iceman]

Neill aint a rover anymore.so y stil discuss the little prick.im sure he is sitting at home,watching tv and looking at the log.and thinking what possesed him to leave rovers.what a prick.

[Lathund]

I am delighted that you once thought that I had some credibility...that means a lot.

"might have had".

I do find the basis of your conclusions a little tenuous but I believe in your right to air them, however bizarre they may be. Perhaps you should see if they offer evening classes in "Alternative conclusion drawing" in your native land? (Or perhaps you shouldn't?)

I must also admit that I am not au fait with the internet argument rule, being someone who does stray outdoors occasionally on warm days, of which I appreciate you may not get a lot of in your neck of the woods, but I do feel that I only made a point based on a personal observation and that the personal arguments were exacerbated by others to which I gleefully jumped on the bandwagon, being a fan of such script based duels.

I also acknowledge with great delight that thenodrog has seemingly backed my corner a little with his "I take it you must struggle to 'get out' most nights too Lathund!" comment. This is what internet messageboards are all about to me, a little riposte and counter with an unseen twist etc. Admit it you have all enjoyed it. There is certainly no intent to be personal on my part, just enjoying the banter, but I apologise if anyone has interpreted my comments differently.

Of course noone takes it personally. What some person I know nothing about and who knows nothing about me says about a subject he knows nothing of, really is quite irrelevant.

The only reason I even bothered to reply in the first place was that I was rather curious about your intent. Arguments along the lines of what you used, i.e "You post on a messageboard and you disagree with me, hence you must have no life. Says I, another guy on an internet messageboard. But who, obviously, is only here in his spare time. You know, inbetween all the luxuries and women that come with an exciting life like mine. Whereas the rest of you are sad losers who spend every minute of your life glued in front of your computer screens in your parents' basement", usually imply one of several things;

1. The poster is roughly 14 years old

2. The poster suffers from some kind of cognitive dysfunction or mental retardation

3. The poster is in fact arguing for the other side by making arguments that have the effect of undermining the position he or she tries to give the impression of arguing for.

4. The poster is "trolling".

Now, I'd say that 4 is the most likely scenario judging from the contents of your posts. However, since you're such an awesome guy with such an interesting life I doubt you have time to learn what a term like that means, or to learn anything about the dynamics of an internet messageboard, unlike us saddos. Which rules that out. As for 1; if measuring age on a scale between -3241 and 2472 then you would in fact be roughly 14 years old. But we don't use that scale, and your profile says you're 27. And as for 2 it's not really a very nice thing to use against someone. Which leaves us with 3. See, I did go to those classes!

I'll leave you with a little mental excercise; Possible reasons I'm writing this on a Friday night. Or for that matter, what you're doing on a messageboard on a Friday night.

P.S You might want to read up a bit on Scandinavian climate. D.S

[Hasta]

Game, set and match Lathund

[bellamy11]

Is that fair and are you sure you are not being hypocritical?

Don't you consider economic reasons when applying for jobs?

Of course I do. However, I would choose a better job even if it pays less (within reason, of course).

As a multi-millionaire professional footballer he had the opportunity to go to a club where he had a higher (though not brilliant) chance of medals. I can't put myself in his situation so I can't know for sure, but I'd like to think I'd've chosen Liverpool.

I think Lucas sabotaged his last chance at performing at the very top level and competing for the biggest prizes in the game. IMO he was stupid for doing this. I can, however, understand why he did it. As I said before, he may well not give a ###### when he hangs up his boots, and just enjoy the money he has accrewed. No problem with that either, it's his life.

Which choice do you think you would have made?

[Damage]

footballers are c u n t s and you lot are jealous!!!

Just get over it you moaning sods!

if you don't like it ................ don't go and don't pay for sky!

simple as

[American]

Of course I do. However, I would choose a better job even if it pays less (within reason, of course).

As a multi-millionaire professional footballer he had the opportunity to go to a club where he had a higher (though not brilliant) chance of medals. I can't put myself in his situation so I can't know for sure, but I'd like to think I'd've chosen Liverpool.

I think Lucas sabotaged his last chance at performing at the very top level and competing for the biggest prizes in the game. IMO he was stupid for doing this. I can, however, understand why he did it. As I said before, he may well not give a ###### when he hangs up his boots, and just enjoy the money he has accrewed. No problem with that either, it's his life.

Which choice do you think you would have made?

The funny thing is that people say that Bentley shouldn't go to Liverpool or one of the other big 4 because he'll just sit on the bench. Liverpool worked out really well for Bellers, as well.

(Oh, and if your quote is from the series premiere, he says "..... or candy." Because he doesn't realize there are a bunch of kids listening to him. - Just re-watched the episode the other day.)

(Edit is for a misspelling.)

Edited May 10, 2008 by American

[Darth Paul]

Game, set and match Lathund

Or possibly hook, line and sinker?

Regardless, Lathund if you feel that point 4 is the most likely reason for my posts, I will draw you to the original response by thenodrog to my first post, where self esteem and accusations of stupidity etc were brought into play. Where do you draw the line between what is and isn't fair play etc. I think it is fairly obvious that you have picked a side a will stick to it regardless of what you actually think, so there is probably little point continuing this conversation. However... )

As for my intent I will say that I enjoy debates of this level and will take my hat off to some people on this board who have a level of wit and turn of the English language that makes it enjoyable.

To sum up, I was in the pub, Neill acted in an unsavoury manor, a friend and I in a lighthearted response sang a couple of half arsed chants which could barely be heard above the band, more for our amusement than anyone elses, I nor anyone else around me pulled Lucas on the situation of queue jumping because in the circumstances of a heaving pub, several hours into hundreds of people drinking it would have possibly taken things in a direction it didn't need to go.

I thought about posting on here about it the following day, but wasn't that arsed, but then someone else mentioned his presence there so I thought I would elaborate.

Cue insults, hypocrisy and points scoring...(all around).

To be honest I have been visiting this board for 8 years and been a member for 6 and have never posted so much as on this thread now, or had this level of interaction with other members, as my post history will testify. I trust that given the level of response and lack of moderation that this is a good thing, but if you don't like outsiders coming on and promoting debates of this type just say so...However I would suggest that as some of you have gone to so much efforts in your posts as I have that you have actually enjoyed the direction this thread has gone in during the last 48 hours or so, regardless of wether you agree with what is being said?

Edited May 10, 2008 by Darth Paul

[Lathund]

Or possibly hook, line and sinker?

Yes, because I am, of course, being 100% serious in this thread. I mean it's been 50 pages since he left, how one can be serious in a thread like this is beyond me.

[thenodrog]

I'll leave you with a little mental excercise; Possible reasons I'm writing this on a Friday night. Or for that matter, what you're doing on a messageboard on a Friday night.

Good point Lathund. Darth Paul you really should be out trying to organise people to stand in a long line whilst you explain to them your odd but commendable queue based system of getting drinks in the Knowles Arms when there has never ever been one before. "After you my good man"....... "No not at all Sir, after you I noticed that you were here a smidgeon before I") . I cannot imagine Vinny would be impressed at the slow beer sales caused by your queue of punters all the way back to Brownhill roundaout.

Sorry for that but my heads a little woolly this morning from my one night a year out I'm afraid.

[T4E]

This is possibly one of the worst arguments this messageboard has ever seen. I think I've read every word of it, and I'm still not really sure what its about.

[thenodrog]

Obvious .... it's about keeping people away from the bar in busy pubs and getting them to form orderly queues. How about one of those tickety thingys that they have in supermarket butchers counters? That'd put the likes of Lucas Neill firmly in his place I'm sure.

Edited May 10, 2008 by thenodrog

[Darth Paul]

This is possibly one of the worst arguments this messageboard has ever seen. I think I've read every word of it, and I'm still not really sure what its about.

Yet you saw fit to post which sums it all up really...thanks.

[T4E]

If summing it up in one line was possible, why have you felt the need to waffle on about very little for the last few pages?

[Darth Paul]

Oh the irony...if you don't get it by now you never will...it is no wonder that a lot of board members I know visit but never post. I am sorry for trying to break into your little cartel, and for defending an unprovoked attack on my character.

Read my first post, I merely stated something that I had experienced and somehow touched a few raw nerves, then had the nerve of my own to defend myself in an articulate way.

Mental note, if I ever see, or hear anything about anything even vaguely Rovers related I will keep it to myself and I urge all others who aren't established board memebers to do the same for fear of retribution.

I suggest the matter is now closed. If I am bored I am sure everyone else is.

Edited May 10, 2008 by Darth Paul

[T4E]

Little cartel? Established board members? What are you talking about? Gordy had a pop at you (most of us have experienced that) and you've had verbal diaorrhoea ever since.

My post a few entries up wasn't aimed at you specifically, yet you're the only one that felt the need to "defend yourself". There I go, summing it all up again

[herbergeehh]

You've got to hand it to the man though, not every decent Premiership player get a 78 page thread when they sign for someone.

Edited May 11, 2008 by herbergeehh

[colin]

Just to take this off on another direction...

I better not talk about the impact on the 'Green Belt' otherwise Colin will get into one of his stroppy moods and ask me for a precise explanation of Planning Policy Guidance on the 'Green Belt' .

Smithy, Turton is NOTin the green belt.

- a field in which Colin is clearly an expert in and nobody else is allowed to have an opinion on

I was only trying to stop you making a fool of yourself, looks like I failed.

Edited May 12, 2008 by colin

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Just to take this off on another direction...

Apologies for continuing to take this in another direction, but just to respond to Colin's comments.....

Smithy, Turton is NOT in the green belt.

And yet Colin, Mr Adam Scott, Director of Regeneration, Housing and Neighbourhoods, Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council, said in his report into an extension at Torra Manor, Chapeltown Road, Turton (the house owned by Lucas Neill) , that the development was a: "rear extension and associated landscaping works involving changing use of Green Belt land to residential".

Paragraph 2.1 of Mr Scott's report said: "The application site is located within the Green Belt, and therefore the appropriateness of the development in such an area must be considered along with the design and scale of the development."

Paragraph 5.3 of the report said: "The application site is within a remote rural area surrounded on all sides by the Turton Golf Course, and as such, PPS7 "Sustainable Development in Rural Areas" and PPG2 "Green Belts" must be considered."

A link to this report is HERE

The map below shows the designated areas of Green Belt in Lancashire. Turton Golf Course is located just inside the boundary of Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council.

Mark Hughes and the Green Belt....

Our Rovers manager has unfortunately been unsuccessful in a planning row with Man United's Michael Carrick. Hughes was upset at plans to bulldoze the house directly opposite him and in its place build a £4m mansion for the United midfielder.

Pictured below is Hughes's luxury seven-bedroom mansion in Oak Road, Macclesfield, which he has owned for 15 years since he was a Man United player, but which he is now putting up for sale for £6m.

A letter on behalf of Hughes to Macclesfield Council complained about the size and scale of Carrick's new three storey mansion opposite, which the letter said "represents inappropriate development in the Green Belt."

The letter said: "The proposed replacement dwelling would be materially larger than the existing dwelling and would have a noticeably greater impact on the open and spacious character of this Green Belt setting. On this basis, it constitutes inappropriate development in the Green Belt, which by definition, is harmful."

Despite Hughes's objections to Carrick's new mansion, the proposal was passed and the work is due to be completed soon.

A link to this story is below:

Hughes sells £6m mansion after losing planning row with Michael Carrick

Edited May 12, 2008 by Anti Euro Smiths Fan