B21 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 And in case any of you have forgotten, this alleged sex assault isn't the first time P Kane has behaved like a spoiled little brat piece of s*&t. You contradict yourself. If it's alleged how can it be "another" time he has behaved like a "spoiled little brat piece of s*&t"? Especially considering that ALL of the evidence presented so far points to an attempt to falsely accuse Kane? All Kane did was go to a bar with a friend (with a hired driver), have a good time and bring some girls back to his house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Perhaps I'm speaking out of turn, but I always took his avatar to be an ironic take on gun violence, what with the barrel pointing back at the person pulling the trigger. But, I've been wrong before. I had the same thought as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 All Kane did was go to a bar with a friend (with a hired driver), have a good time and bring some girls back to his house. Not trying to go off topic here, but we don't know that. If there really is No evidence, beyond a she said / he said, in this case wouldn't it be dismissed by now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskaFlyerFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Not trying to go off topic here, but we don't know that. If there really is No evidence, beyond a she said / he said, in this case wouldn't it be dismissed by now? Conversely, if there was some evidence, he would have been charged by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Not trying to go off topic here, but we don't know that. If there really is No evidence, beyond a she said / he said, in this case wouldn't it be dismissed by now? We know no DNA was found and we know the accuser's mother attempted to "plant" evidence. We know the accuser's attorney resigned because he no longer believed her story...and he has access to more information/evidence than anyone else. If that doesn't scream "innocent" then I don't know what does. Until he is proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be guilty then by definition he is innocent. Which means 1) he didn't act like a "spoiled little brat piece of s*&t" and 2) the cheer crossed a line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Conversely, if there was some evidence, he would have been charged by now. Probably, but then if there is inconclusive evidence it might not be enough to bring forth charges -- thus the reasoning for a grand jury?? And thus a likely reasoning why the case hasn't been closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Probably, but then if there is inconclusive evidence it might not be enough to bring forth charges -- thus the reasoning for a grand jury?? And thus a likely reasoning why the case hasn't been closed.If there was even the slightest chance of him being charged with rape, do you think the leahue would have him playing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swflyers28 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Just about anything goes in Philly. I thought the booing was about 2010 but that's what we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamflyers Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Hold on a second. Can opposing fans "go there" and chant the N word every time Simmonds touches the puck just to get under his skin? Don't tell me that's different. It is NOT. Neither actually hurts more than just words, but they are both offensive. I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM with fans saying whatever they want about a player's play. If a goalie lets in a goal, if you want to chant that he's a sieve, I'm all for that kind of taunting. My purchase of a ticket gives me a right to say anything I want about a player's play. But there is a line to be drawn, particularly when there is ONLY accusation and no evidence like in this case, especially when it is not about their play. I firmly disagree with the "it's Philly" defense here. Sorry. Philly can be wrong too, and they were wrong here.Well I will say that it's different, because it IS! Racism is different than below the belt taunting about a possible crime he committed. They are not even close. Simmonds can't help the color of his skin any more than anyone else. Treating someone as less of a human being based on their race or skin color or religion is not comparable to this. I get it, you think they crossed the line in their taunts. As I said, we did not join in because i have not seen enough evidence yet to think he actually did it, but sorry that I'm not offended by these chants. This is not something that Ruffles my feathers. I don't care if it were penguins, Rangers or any other rival fan base. I would shrug it off as I am with the flyers and islanders fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 @B21 I hear ya, but we also know the case hasn't been dropped also. The lack of that DNA evidence does not necessarily mean a sexual assault did not occur, legal experts say, and the evidence involved in this type of investigation typically consists of more than just DNA.. The chant "Cindy Sucks" crosses the line too nah, it doesn't in Philly . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 @Adamflyers I think there were the chants of "We say No" mixed in with the "She said No" chant with each and every PP the Flyers killed off last night also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 If there was even the slightest chance of him being charged with rape, do you think the league would have him playing? I don't know the answer to that Rad. I tend to agree with you, but then we have Sydor has pleaded guilty to a dui with his kid in the car and he is still allowed to coach professional hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ8812 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I don't know the answer to that Rad. I tend to agree with you, but then we have Sydor has pleaded guilty to a dui with his kid in the car and he is still allowed to coach professional hockey. Craig MacTavish convicted vehicular homicide while driving under the influence, spent one (!) year in jail, got out and has been apart of the league since then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doom88 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 If there was even the slightest chance of him being charged with rape, do you think the leahue would have him playing?Yeah, because he's innocent until proven guilty. The union would have a field day with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJgoal Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Yeah, because he's innocent until proven guilty. The union would have a field day with that.They didn't touch Voynov's suspension, which was handed down the day following his arrest - well before trial. He ended up missing all last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlaskaFlyerFan Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 They didn't touch Voynov's suspension, which was handed down the day following his arrest - well before trial. He ended up missing all last season. The difference is Voynov was arrested and charged with the crime almost immediately. Kane has not been arrested nor charged. EDIT: Also, I believe Voynov was suspended WITH pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeDDS Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Well I will say that it's different, because it IS! Racism is different than below the belt taunting about a possible crime he committed. They are not even close. Simmonds can't help the color of his skin any more than anyone else. Treating someone as less of a human being based on their race or skin color or religion is not comparable to this. I get it, you think they crossed the line in their taunts. As I said, we did not join in because i have not seen enough evidence yet to think he actually did it, but sorry that I'm not offended by these chants. This is not something that Ruffles my feathers. I don't care if it were penguins, Rangers or any other rival fan base. I would shrug it off as I am with the flyers and islanders fans.OK, I'll back off a little on the racism thing, as far as it being the same thing. But in some ways, how you are justifying this behavior MAKES them the same. What you are saying is that because it is Philly, and because the purpose for doing it is to get inside of an opposing player's head, that somehow justifies taunting him with accusations that he perpetrated a sexual assault, even in the absence of ANY evidence corroborating that accusation. The whole justification of "because we want to get inside his head" doesn't make uncorroborated accusations of sexual assault any more justified than using racial slurs "because we want to get inside of his head." My best friend in the world is black. (Actually, two of my three best friends are black.) I am white. I'm obviously not racist. If I taunt Simmonds with the N word at a game just to get in his head, is that OK? I'm obviously not doing it because I'm really racist. I'm just doing it to get inside his head. Maybe if I'm in Philly too that makes it OK? I dunno, but if we have somehow come to a point where using a racial slur like the N word is somehow worse than making a public accusation of sexual assault in the absence of evidence, that is truly sad. Understand, I'm NOT in any way trying to legitimize racism. Rather, I'm trying to DE-legitimize wrongfully accusing someone of a perpetrating a sexual assault in the absence of evidence. That is a freaking serious accusation. If someone publicly accused you of molesting little boys to get you off your game in order to try to take your job, I have a feeling you might think that was a pretty serious thing. Is that "better" than someone calling a black man the N word? What if it is in Philly? Do you really think that most black men would be more offended by calling them the N word vs. publicly accusing them of molesting little boys or raping women in the absence of evidence? They are both wrong, and "trying to get inside someone's head to get them off their game" is not a legitimate justification for either one. In this aspect, they are the same. Neither behavior is justifiable. The N word may never be justifiable, but in the absence of evidence, public accusation of perpetrating a sexual assault isn't either. Ever. Shameful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Well I will say that it's different, because it IS! Racism is different than below the belt taunting about a possible crime he committed. They are not even close. Simmonds can't help the color of his skin any more than anyone else. Treating someone as less of a human being based on their race or skin color or religion is not comparable to this. I get it, you think they crossed the line in their taunts. As I said, we did not join in because i have not seen enough evidence yet to think he actually did it, but sorry that I'm not offended by these chants. This is not something that Ruffles my feathers. I don't care if it were penguins, Rangers or any other rival fan base. I would shrug it off as I am with the flyers and islanders fans. That's very debatable. Would you rather be called a rapist or a racist? I have a hard time with either. Depending on one's situation I guess one could be seem as "worse" than the other but at the end of the day "not even close" isn't really accurate i/m/o. All rapists cause actual physical and mental harm. Not so with all racists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheesesteak Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Hold on a second. Can opposing fans "go there" and chant the N word every time Simmonds touches the puck just to get under his skin? Don't tell me that's different. It is NOT. REALLY? You see NO difference? Ignorance is bliss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarsippius Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I understand that it wasn't the classiest chant ever, but some of the arguments presented here against it make no sense. It kinda pales in comparison the F*** Penn State chant I heard ringing from the Temple student section in the first and fourth quarters of that game. Which is more offensive if you're there with a kid? Or are we just worried about the delicate sensibilities of the player?I just don't get the comparison of dropping a N bomb to what was chanted at Kane. The former makes you a racist, it doesn't make the object of the chant a racist.At any rate Jameis Winston will be in Philly with the Bucs in November, I'm sure "she said no" will be making another appearance. Unless somebody throws a banana on the field, because that would not be more offensive wtf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamflyers Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 OK, I'll back off a little on the racism thing, as far as it being the same thing. But in some ways, how you are justifying this behavior MAKES them the same. What you are saying is that because it is Philly, and because the purpose for doing it is to get inside of an opposing player's head, that somehow justifies taunting him with accusations that he perpetrated a sexual assault, even in the absence of ANY evidence corroborating that accusation. The whole justification of "because we want to get inside his head" doesn't make uncorroborated accusations of sexual assault any more justified than using racial slurs "because we want to get inside of his head." My best friend in the world is black. (Actually, two of my three best friends are black.) I am white. I'm obviously not racist. If I taunt Simmonds with the N word at a game just to get in his head, is that OK? I'm obviously not doing it because I'm really racist. I'm just doing it to get inside his head. Maybe if I'm in Philly too that makes it OK? I dunno, but if we have somehow come to a point where using a racial slur like the N word is somehow worse than making a public accusation of sexual assault in the absence of evidence, that is truly sad. Understand, I'm NOT in any way trying to legitimize racism. Rather, I'm trying to DE-legitimize wrongfully accusing someone of a perpetrating a sexual assault in the absence of evidence. That is a freaking serious accusation. If someone publicly accused you of molesting little boys to get you off your game in order to try to take your job, I have a feeling you might think that was a pretty serious thing. Is that "better" than someone calling a black man the N word? What if it is in Philly? Do you really think that most black men would be more offended by calling them the N word vs. publicly accusing them of molesting little boys or raping women in the absence of evidence? They are both wrong, and "trying to get inside someone's head to get them off their game" is not a legitimate justification for either one. In this aspect, they are the same. Neither behavior is justifiable. The N word may never be justifiable, but in the absence of evidence, public accusation of perpetrating a sexual assault isn't either. Ever. Shameful.Spike, you are overthinking my original post. If I fully agreed with the chant, I would have joined in. I refrained because I didn't really agree with it because I don't believe he did it. I did boo the crap out of him each time he touched the puck, but that is related to the heart break he caused me back in 2010. The only thing I am really defending is my choice not to be overly offended by the chant, because I have learned that there are far worse things in life. Was the chant juvenile, below the belt, a little bit across the line? Sure Is it the worst thing I have ever heard out of Flyers fans or out of fans at an opposing teams arena? Sorry, not it wasn't. We live in ultra sensitive times where you have to be careful what you say at all times. I'm sorry if I'm just a little tired of it and I don't express the appropriate amount of outrage anytime someone's feelings might get hurt. You're never going to convince me that this is even in the same ball park as racism. I see the point that you are trying to make, but I just don't agree with it. We are way too far apart on this point to find common ground it appears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamflyers Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 That's very debatable. Would you rather be called a rapist or a racist? I have a hard time with either. Depending on one's situation I guess one could be seem as "worse" than the other but at the end of the day "not even close" isn't really accurate i/m/o. All rapists cause actual physical and mental harm. Not so with all racists.As I said to Spike, you won't convince me calling someone the N word and making light of a possible crime that someone committed are even close. If the evidence shows that he didn't do it, then he will be exonerated and guess what, some people will continue to rag on him about it because they know it probably pisses him off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegionOfDoom Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Being a Nigerian is a wonderful thing!Being an ignorant Nigerian is not!Don't be ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Perhaps I'm speaking out of turn, but I always took his avatar to be an ironic take on gun violence, what with the barrel pointing back at the person pulling the trigger. But, I've been wrong before. you are NOT wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakanekimiwa Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Backinenkimwa or whatever you call yourself, your attempt at being noble and righteous and sensitive to children is nice, but you have a death machine as your profile picture. Kinda wrecks where you're trying to go with this. And in case any of you have forgotten, this alleged sex assault isn't the first time P Kane has behaved like a spoiled little brat piece of s*&t. You could just copy and paste my name, would be quicker ... or just do 'Bak' like most.. doesn't matter to me flyoverever. I'm not trying to be 'noble and righteous and sensitive' it's just what I believe. Going to a game is a public event. There's a lot of fans that act as if they're in their own living room and all forms of decorum are thrown out. Sure, you've paid your ticket and you're entitle to act as you will. But realize that my NOT participating in this chant does not affect you whatsoever. You're participating in it quite possibly puts others in uncomfortable situations. Have respect. I'm not saying we should ban all possibly offensive chants here. There's a lot that see nothing wrong with the chant, but for me... here is a guy who was 'accused' only(at this time). So put down the pitchfork and burning stake and leave the guy alone. That's just my opinion. We'd all like to think we're civilized here.. so act like it. Or don't... but then don't complain when Philly sports fans are listed as some of the worst in the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.