Player of the match

glynnak

glynnak

Roofer
It appears that the term "man of the match" is no longer acceptable in our politically correct inclusive society so we now have "player of the match".

My question is: If you have a man (sorry player) sent off do you go down to ten men or ten players?

I always thought 10 Players was a packet of fags (oops cant say fags either, sorry)
 
glynnak said:
It appears that the term "man of the match" is no longer acceptable in our politically correct inclusive society so we now have "player of the match".

My question is: If you have a man (sorry player) sent off do you go down to ten men or ten players?

I always thought 10 Players was a packet of fags (oops cant say fags either, sorry)
Click to expand...
This country has gone mad
 
There isn't any such thing...just another buzz phrase to describe people disagreeing with each other.
When did that not exist?
 
Are you saying we have devolved into a society where people get angry over the terms batsman or batter?
I don't like the terms 'reach out' or 'wellbeing' but I don't go puce when I hear them.
 
More a case of being resigned at the absurd situation of people wanting to change things for no apparent reason and then getting up tight about people calling them out for their absurdity

And by not pointing these things out, with or without going puce you are tacitly empowering these people to carry on with their crack pot changes to everyone’s lives.
 
I should add that I use the term motm and if I was watching men’s cricket I’d user batsman. I’m just not going to get upset about the term someone else uses.
Would you still use ‘chairman’ if it was a woman in the role? The term ‘Chair’ felt clunky at the time but seems natural now.

Treat it with a sense of humour like the OP did, no need to start laying blame on the ‘Wokerati’ and coming across like a male version of Cruella Braverman.
 
Do you really care?
Do you complain about every Americanisation of our language?

I do say shedule (in my head) every time someone who isn’t a yank says skedule.
 
hackneyfox said:
Language evolves, are you really that upset about it?
Are you still using the word thou?
Click to expand...
Of course language evolves, but there's also always been different vocab etc for different parts of the world.
In a similar vein, there's a difference between someone thinking that something's fucking ridiculous, and them being puce-faced with anger and upset. You might react that way, but please don't assume that everyone else does. It's very presumptuous.
So you'd be happy if we all just call it soccer?
 
hackneyfox said:
I should add that I use the term motm and if I was watching men’s cricket I’d user batsman. I’m just not going to get upset about the term someone else uses.
Would you still use ‘chairman’ if it was a woman in the role? The term ‘Chair’ felt clunky at the time but seems natural now.

Treat it with a sense of humour like the OP did, no need to start laying blame on the ‘Wokerati’ and coming across like a male version of Cruella Braverman.
Click to expand...
I think one can safely conclude that when even TMS use the term batter for men's cricket, that is what is now deemed by some cunts somewhere to be what we should all be using.
I don't give a shit if it's used for womens cricket because someone doesn't want to clunkily adopt the centuries-old convention, but that is a different thing.
 
TopFox said:
Of course language evolves, but there's also always been different vocab etc for different parts of the world.
In a similar vein, there's a difference between someone thinking that something's fucking ridiculous, and them being puce-faced with anger and upset. You might react that way, but please don't assume that everyone else does. It's very presumptuous.
So you'd be happy if we all just call it soccer?
Click to expand...
You can call it whatever you want, I’m not bothered.
Did you have meltdowns during the 70s when it was regularly called soccer?
 
TopFox said:
I think one can safely conclude that when even TMS use the term batter for men's cricket, that is what is now deemed by some cunts somewhere to be what we should all be using.
I don't give a shit if it's used for womens cricket because someone doesn't want to clunkily adopt the centuries-old convention, but that is a different thing.
Click to expand...
Do TMS have power over you?
Have they threatened your family if you don’t use the same terms as them?

Amazing how you all run around calling kids snowflakes and here you are having your own little snowflake meltdowns.
 
hackneyfox said:
Do TMS have power over you?
Have they threatened your family if you don’t use the same terms as them?

Amazing how you all run around calling kids snowflakes and here you are having your own little snowflake meltdowns.
Click to expand...
That is the usual old over-claiming argument, used every time that anyone dares to express disagreement with the latest insidious incremental 'correction' to what's always worked perfectly well, and which all add in a small way to how someone feels comfortable, reassured and at home doing something as simple as listening to the cricket, for example. Constantly having to update one's understanding of the current correct vocabulary for stuff is not something I want to have to bother with – 'people of colour' will soon be updated, I'd bet, and a few extra letters added to the LGBT%#*etcetcetc list!
And next up on this thread will probably be some cunt claiming that the objectors naturally must still want slavery and bear-bating to continue because they resent any changes to anything.
And after that, some arsehole will introduce whataboutery in a post, just as soon as they possibly can ;)
 
TopFox said:
That is the usual old over-claiming argument, used every time that anyone dares to express disagreement with the latest insidious incremental 'correction' to what's always worked perfectly well, and which all add in a small way to how someone feels comfortable, reassured and at home doing something as simple as listening to the cricket, for example. Constantly having to update one's understanding of the current correct vocabulary for stuff is not something I want to have to bother with – 'people of colour' will soon be updated, I'd bet, and a few extra letters added to the LGBT%#*etcetcetc list!
And next up on this thread will probably be some cunt claiming that the objectors naturally must still want slavery and bear-bating to continue because they resent any changes to anything.
And after that, some arsehole will introduce whataboutery in a post, just as soon as they possibly can ;)
Click to expand...
All worked perfectly well?
Perhaps that isn’t the case if you’re female in a male dominated world or ‘people of colour’ (I also struggle to keep up with that) in a white dominated world or LGBT (I also struggle with the ever lengthening acronym) in a straight world.
I don’t see what’s wrong with trying to be a bit more inclusive and if that means using the term batter then so be it, just don’t understand why so many get so angry about a change in language.
It wasn’t that long ago that the majority of people were using other terms than black, Asian and now person of colour and didn’t see anything wrong in it because that’s what we’ve always done and it all worked perfectly well.
No I’m not claiming that you did.
I struggle with the constant changing of terminology I just accept that is what happens over time and by the sound of it I’m somewhat older than you. Stop getting so triggered ( is the new term) over things that really aren’t that important, there’s a lot more to get angry over at the moment. co* being in the same division as us for a start.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top