Jump to content

I never did like Steve Haywood


nicknorman

Featured Posts

53 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

Indeed. If Haywood had done just that when it became apparent that the cruiser had got to the mooring first, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

This is not a discussion. It is a diatribe, but like so many threads on this forum it seems necessary for some people to go over and over the same points, without bringing anything new to the so-called discussion. 

 

Howard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, howardang said:

This is not a discussion. It is a diatribe, but like so many threads on this forum it seems necessary for some people to go over and over the same points, without bringing anything new to the so-called discussion. 

 

Howard

Isn't that an album by napalm death? @Dyertribemight know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, howardang said:

This is not a discussion. It is a diatribe, but like so many threads on this forum it seems necessary for some people to go over and over the same points, without bringing anything new to the so-called discussion. 

 

Howard

No real surprise that the thread is still running. 

 It is such an absurd outburst by one who has written regularly criticising the exact same behaviour. There is so much relevance to the general angry behaviour seen elsewhere these days and plenty of humour within the discussion. 

4 hours ago, Dog said:

No rusty, I wasn't. And neither were any of the other contributors to the thread, probably. 

As I've said earlier, it seems that people are looking at this video and jumping to conclusions, that's all.

Thing is, with video of that quality complete with sound, anyone who watched it is in the room and can form a valid opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BWM said:

No real surprise that the thread is still running. 

 It is such an absurd outburst by one who has written regularly criticising the exact same behaviour. There is so much relevance to the general angry behaviour seen elsewhere these days and plenty of humour within the discussion. 

Thing is, with video of that quality complete with sound, anyone who watched it is in the room and can form a valid opinion. 

I would have more respect for the ongoing discussion if both sides of the argument had been given a chance to put their point of view, but all we are reading is the one sided views of the same old pundits. Lord please protect me from self opiniated "experts":rolleyes:

 

Howard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, howardang said:

I would have more respect for the ongoing discussion if both sides of the argument had been given a chance to put their point of view, but all we are reading is the one sided views of the same old pundits. Lord please protect me from self opiniated "experts":rolleyes:

 

Howard

If you have watched the video you put the otherside of the argument, assuming that is you can find any evidence in the video for a different opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, howardang said:

I would have more respect for the ongoing discussion if both sides of the argument had been given a chance to put their point of view, but all we are reading is the one sided views of the same old pundits. Lord please protect me from self opiniated "experts":rolleyes:

 

Howard

From what I've seen both sides of the 'argument' have been presented, but the argument for deliberately ramming another boat tends to be rather weak. In terms of self opinionated 'experts', does that not rather describe Haywood himself? people on here merely present opinions for free, he boasts of his 40 years experience of boating on his magazine column for which I assume that he receives payment. He presents himself as an expert then gives narrow boaters a bad name by his activities. There is already some trepidation from cruiser owners in sharing locks with narrow boats and now they can use this example of recklessness to support their case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jerra said:

If you have watched the video you put the otherside of the argument, assuming that is you can find any evidence in the video for a different opinion.

Of course I have watched the video. I have no desire to express an opinion; there have been enough of those from others, but rather I would have liked to have heard Steve Hayward's side of the incident. Failing that I see absolutely no point in going round and round the same points. Still, I supose it gives some people something to talk about!

 

Howard

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jerra said:

If you have watched the video you put the otherside of the argument, assuming that is you can find any evidence in the video for a different opinion.

 

I've watched the video and read this thread, and the evidence available in support of Mr Haywood so far is as follows:

 

1) The film is purported to be grainy and indistinct

2) The film is shot with a wide angle lense so he appears further from the mooring than he actually was

3) The bloke steering the narrow boat might not have been Mr Haywood

4) Video evidence can be very misleading

 

 

Anything else, anyone? 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Mike the Boilerman
To address some nit picking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I've watched the video and read this thread, and the evidence I've seen put forward in support of Mr Haywood so far is as follows:

 

1) The film is purported to be grainy and indistinct

2) The film is shot with a wide angle lense so he appears further from the mooring than he actually was

3) The bloke steering the narrow boat might not have been Mr Haywood

4) Video evidence can be very misleading

 

 

Anything else, anyone? 

 

 

 

 

 

Err, wasn't that you in post #200

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I've watched the video and read this thread, and the evidence I've seen put forward in support of Mr Haywood so far is as follows:

 

1) The film is purported to be grainy and indistinct

2) The film is shot with a wide angle lense so he appears further from the mooring than he actually was

3) The bloke steering the narrow boat might not have been Mr Haywood

4) Video evidence can be very misleading

 

 

Anything else, anyone? 

 

 

 

 

 

5) Don’t forget Dmr met him and thought him a nice chap. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, howardang said:

This is not a discussion. It is a diatribe, but like so many threads on this forum it seems necessary for some people to go over and over the same points, without bringing anything new to the so-called discussion. 

 

Howard

Not too unlike the brexit thread. That's on almost 1000 pages and I'd wager the last 200 pages contain the same arguments as the 200 pages before them.

 

The brexit thread truly is a dead horse that has been flogged well beyond what is reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Goliath said:

5) Don’t forget Dmr met him and thought him a nice chap. 

 

 

Yup, hes not my friend, I have met him just once, on the Thames, where there was a potential conflict between boaters and fishermen both wanting to use the same mooring spot. He handled it all well and appeared to be a tolerant person who understood and was interested in the views of other river users. Maybe he is a horrible person but I can only state my own experiences.

In general on this forum I try to stick to stating my own experiences, and if repeating other peoples ideas or opinions or what I have read try to put them in "quotations".

How many of the posters on here who are condemning him have actually met him????

 

..............Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Goliath said:

5) Don’t forget Dmr met him and thought him a nice chap. 

 

 

 

Don't forget one of the traits of the psychopath is they come across as thoroughly likeable people, because they incisively suss you out in the blink of an eye and construct a personality specifically to appeal to you, which meets all your unrecognised (by you) wants and needs, in order to begin manipulating you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Yes it was me. Does that make it an invalid point?

 

 

Not necessarily an invalid point but I believe it is out of place in your post where you say it is evidence you have seen put forward when in fact it is "evidence" you have put  put forward yourself. So in this context I do believe it is important to identify who initially made the statement. 

"

I've watched the video and read this thread, and the evidence I've seen put forward in support of Mr Haywood so far is as follows:

 

1) The film is purported to be grainy and indistinct

2) The film is shot with a wide angle lense so he appears further from the mooring than he actually was

3) The bloke steering the narrow boat might not have been Mr Haywood

4) Video evidence can be very misleading

 

 

Anything else, anyone? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, reg said:

Not necessarily an invalid point but I believe it is out of place in your post where you say it is evidence you have seen put forward when in fact it is "evidence" you have put  put forward yourself. So in this context I do believe it is important to identify who initially made the statement. 

"

I've watched the video and read this thread, and the evidence I've seen put forward in support of Mr Haywood so far is as follows:

 

1) The film is purported to be grainy and indistinct

2) The film is shot with a wide angle lense so he appears further from the mooring than he actually was

3) The bloke steering the narrow boat might not have been Mr Haywood

4) Video evidence can be very misleading

 

 

Anything else, anyone? 

 

 

There. I've edited my post to take account of your point. :)

 

 

 

 

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I'm tempted now to have a bash at editing that video so Steve never gets to ram the hire boat... 

:giggles:

 

 

 

 

And someone on the Internet will believe it to be the one true source of all that is true about this incident and will defend until death their point of view and will make tee shirts with slogans to support their view and may even do all of this without any regard to grammar or syntax whatsoever an may even use extensive use of UPPERCASE. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Don't forget one of the traits of the psychopath is they come across as thoroughly likeable people, because they incisively suss you out in the blink of an eye and construct a personality specifically to appeal to you, which meets all your unrecognised (by you) wants and needs, in order to begin manipulating you.

 

 

 

I don't recognise this behaviour, it's never occurred to me that I should (or need to) suss someone out.

 

Are you sure it's not "confidence men" that you are thinking about.  You know, like the guy who sold you Tower Bridge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.