Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Just to say if you have the opportunity you may want to listen to the R5L debate at 9am this morning on what makes a sporting legend. Is it pure ability? Personality? Their actual sport? Is it affected by their past misdemeanours? Is it simple bias? How many Man U fans voted for Giggs last night or is it recognition of a model professional in the mould of Sir Bobby Charlton? Should be interesting given some debates we often get involved with on this forum regarding the use of the word legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SO16_Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Think it's a joke TBH. What, apart from being older than most and playing for Man Utd, has Giggs done this year, that he hasn't most other years? A lifetime achievement award or something similar, maybe, but not this. IMO Mark Cavendish should have won - what an achievement he did this year winning 6 stages of the TDF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TijuanaTim Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Interesting topic - wrong forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Think it's a joke TBH. What, apart from being older than most and playing for Man Utd, has Giggs done this year, that he hasn't most other years? A lifetime achievement award or something similar, maybe, but not this. IMO Mark Cavendish should have won - what an achievement he did this year winning 6 stages of the TDF. I don't disagree with Cavendish's sporting and pure physical achievement and also Jessica Ennis' for that matter who had to retrain for the long jump from scratch because of her ankle injury and both would have been worthy winners. The problem is they are in what would be classed minorty or lesser sports in terms of media coverage other than the Olympics and in a public vote were always going to lose out to the Man U fanbase and petrol heads ignorant to actual sporting achievement. That said it is 'Sports Personality' in this instance and the phone in today goes another level to the term legend and the focuses on the unravelling of Tiger Woods because of his infidelity. Does that make his sporting achievements any the less? Closer to home whatabout our own legends. Ted Bates is unchallenged and so is Channon IMO but the rest? It will be good to listen to the debate abd whether it can actually be quantified. Personally, I think you have to be the whole package from being a sporting great in your own field and how you conduct yourself both on and off it during and after your career just like Sir Bobby Charlton and maybe even Ryan Giggs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Interesting topic - wrong forum. Hence why I am trying to give it a Saints angle as I am suspended from the lounge etc for challenging a poster with regards 'popular music'. A bit sad really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I don't disagree with Cavendish's sporting and pure physical achievement and also Jessica Ennis' for that matter who had to retrain for the long jump from scratch because of her ankle injury and both would have been worthy winners. The problem is they are in what would be classed minorty or lesser sports in terms of media coverage other than the Olympics and in a public vote were always going to lose out to the Man U fanbase and petrol heads ignorant to actual sporting achievement. That said it is 'Sports Personality' in this instance and the phone in today goes another level to the term legend and the focuses on the unravelling of Tiger Woods because of his infidelity. Does that make his sporting achievements any the less? Closer to home whatabout our own legends. Ted Bates is unchallenged and so is Channon IMO but the rest? It will be good to listen to the debate abd whether it can actually be quantified. Personally, I think you have to be the whole package from being a sporting great in your own field and how you conduct yourself both on and off it during and after your career just like Sir Bobby Charlton and maybe even Ryan Giggs. Agree with Bates and Channon. Probably add Terry Paine to the list also. And yes LeTissier too, he showed loyalty and scored some great goals, and if it wasnt for him we would not have survived in the top flight for as long as we did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chorlton Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I don't disagree with Cavendish's sporting and pure physical achievement and also Jessica Ennis' for that matter who had to retrain for the long jump from scratch because of her ankle injury and both would have been worthy winners. The problem is they are in what would be classed minorty or lesser sports in terms of media coverage other than the Olympics and in a public vote were always going to lose out to the Man U fanbase and petrol heads ignorant to actual sporting achievement. That said it is 'Sports Personality' in this instance and the phone in today goes another level to the term legend and the focuses on the unravelling of Tiger Woods because of his infidelity. Does that make his sporting achievements any the less? Closer to home whatabout our own legends. Ted Bates is unchallenged and so is Channon IMO but the rest? It will be good to listen to the debate abd whether it can actually be quantified. Personally, I think you have to be the whole package from being a sporting great in your own field and how you conduct yourself both on and off it during and after your career just like Sir Bobby Charlton and maybe even Ryan Giggs. Interesting points and I agree to a large extent, though for Saints fans, I think you have to add the name of Le Tiss. he IS a legend to us and many other fans. But as for conduct off the pitch, wasn't there an incident involving Sir Bobby Charlton and ticket touting at some point? It is ringing a vague bell somewhere. I am not denying he is a legend, but perhaps it shows that legends can make mistakes and be forgiven? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Interesting points and I agree to a large extent, though for Saints fans, I think you have to add the name of Le Tiss. he IS a legend to us and many other fans. But as for conduct off the pitch, wasn't there an incident involving Sir Bobby Charlton and ticket touting at some point? It is ringing a vague bell somewhere. I am not denying he is a legend, but perhaps it shows that legends can make mistakes and be forgiven? Now you mention the Sir Bobby Charlton incident you may be right as i have some vague recollection about it but then that goes to prove how a distant perception in this instance can overlook minor issues. No doubt had he been a director of Saints we would be well aware of any irregularity and maybe local bias can have a positive and a negative impact. I think legends can make mistakes and be forgiven especially minor off the field incidents but admitting to cheating whilst actually playing no matter how minor in some peoples eyes is simply wrong in mine and is insulting to your fans, your profession and your team mates. Still one man's meat is another man's poison and comes back to the essence of the debate. What makes a sporting legend and can it be actually quantified. Elsewhere it has been alluded on the MLT in Dubai thread that MLT lost a contract because of his admission and today we hear Tiger has lost a sponsor because of his infidelity and we can only assume family values are important to that sponsor and we can only make assumptions as to why MLT lost his contract that he allegedly spoke about that night in Dubai. If I could bottle what makes a sporting legend it would have to be where there are no dissenting arguments against the label and complete agreement. In our local world it would for me be Bates unequivocally, then Channon and I can appreciate why Paine should be on the list although his playing days were very much during my infancy and so difficult for me to relate whereas Bates' influence has permeated through the club through more than 1 generation. Elsewhere it would be the likes of Redgrave, Coe, Bolt, Lance Armstrong, Ali, Giggs, Gower, Willis, Vivian Richards, Pele, Moore, Brooking to name just a few that spring to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St_Tel49 Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 (edited) Think it's a joke TBH. What, apart from being older than most and playing for Man Utd, has Giggs done this year, that he hasn't most other years? A lifetime achievement award or something similar, maybe, but not this. IMO Mark Cavendish should have won - what an achievement he did this year winning 6 stages of the TDF. Giggs is a credit to himself, his team and the sport he plays. The fact that he is still performing to a very high standard at the age of 35 is, imho, far more worthy of winning the sports personality award than someone whose -one year only- achievement is inextricably linked with the machinery he sits in. Perhaps if he wins several F1 titles in succession then possibly. Having said that the BBC's advance publicity should be making clearer just what a standard the contenders - such in the minor sports -such as Cavendish (cycling is a minority sport in this country) - have achieved. Tony McCoy was not even in the top 10 but year after year wins the Jump Jockeys title. Certainly he is given good horses to ride, but so are the best of his rivals but he still keeps winning. The whole sports personality thing is based on such short term, populist things as to be a waste of time Edited 14 December, 2009 by St_Tel49 clarification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Think it's a joke TBH. What, apart from being older than most and playing for Man Utd, has Giggs done this year, that he hasn't most other years? A lifetime achievement award or something similar, maybe, but not this. IMO Mark Cavendish should have won - what an achievement he did this year winning 6 stages of the TDF. Totally agree re Cavendish this year.....Ryan definitely in the Life time achievement award. Even Button for this year would have been more appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I think legends can make mistakes and be forgiven especially minor off the field incidents but admitting to cheating whilst actually playing no matter how minor in some peoples eyes is simply wrong in mine and is insulting to your fans, your profession and your team mates. Still one man's meat is another man's poison and comes back to the essence of the debate. What makes a sporting legend and can it be actually quantified. Elsewhere it has been alluded on the MLT in Dubai thread that MLT lost a contract because of his admission and today we hear Tiger has lost a sponsor because of his infidelity and we can only assume family values are important to that sponsor and we can only make assumptions as to why MLT lost his contract that he allegedly spoke about that night in Dubai As if we couldnt guess where all this was leading. Mods - Wrong forum for this thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Just to say if you have the opportunity you may want to listen to the R5L debate at 9am this morning on what makes a sporting legend. Is it pure ability? Personality? Their actual sport? Is it affected by their past misdemeanours? Is it simple bias? How many Man U fans voted for Giggs last night or is it recognition of a model professional in the mould of Sir Bobby Charlton? Should be interesting given some debates we often get involved with on this forum regarding the use of the word legend. This is a fair question topic(IMHO) and if you put it in context of Sport/Saints LEGENDS are (I submit) players who, either from long-service, or great achievement have left an indelible page in a (club/sports) history. In some cases, the achievement is not based on mathematics / time period. Paine (most apps.) Channon (most goals) and MLT (for goal-scoring achievements beyond the call of duty, or expectation) are obvious and undisputed examples. However, a third category exists for others who are " fans favourites ". Ron Davies is not " best " in any of those categories but nevertheless few who saw him play would deny his place as a club legend. The effect certain individuals have over a shorter period also gives ground for the " legend " category; such as Marian Pahars who (despite) an all too short career destroyed by injury) -scored some of the most important goals in those two seasons that kept us up in the Prem. in the " Great Escape period." Secondly, it depends on the sport. The Tiger Woods "saga" is not unusual in one way, (as it offends the American view of " public people's morality " - not one I totally disagree with, incidentally). For his age, TW is without question one of the best golfers ever to tee-off in a tournament, and although, (as a husband and father) I deplore his reported misconduct - it is essentially a matter between him and his wife. However, the "image" that golf gives itself is not the same as with football - where such " indiscretions" as adultery (incl.some England players) does not affect their popularity, or sponsorships, but in some ways - even enhances it. Such behaviour is apparantly, expected and generally tolerated in pop-stars,politicians and film-stars - but not sporting legends. Like it or not, whatever the outcome of the Tiger Woods "affair(s)" ...HIS legendary sporting status may never be surpassed. His career will be (if it has not been already,) destroyed by an intrusive media, who will hypocritically discredit anyone, in order to sell newspapers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 As if we couldnt guess where all this was leading. Mods - Wrong forum for this thread Yes. Even my feeling of deja vu is getting a feeling of deja vu! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Now you mention the Sir Bobby Charlton incident you may be right as i have some vague recollection about it but then that goes to prove how a distant perception in this instance can overlook minor issues. No doubt had he been a director of Saints we would be well aware of any irregularity and maybe local bias can have a positive and a negative impact. I think legends can make mistakes and be forgiven especially minor off the field incidents but admitting to cheating whilst actually playing no matter how minor in some peoples eyes is simply wrong in mine and is insulting to your fans, your profession and your team mates. Still one man's meat is another man's poison and comes back to the essence of the debate. What makes a sporting legend and can it be actually quantified. Elsewhere it has been alluded on the MLT in Dubai thread that MLT lost a contract because of his admission and today we hear Tiger has lost a sponsor because of his infidelity and we can only assume family values are important to that sponsor and we can only make assumptions as to why MLT lost his contract that he allegedly spoke about that night in Dubai. If I could bottle what makes a sporting legend it would have to be where there are no dissenting arguments against the label and complete agreement. In our local world it would for me be Bates unequivocally, then Channon and I can appreciate why Paine should be on the list although his playing days were very much during my infancy and so difficult for me to relate whereas Bates' influence has permeated through the club through more than 1 generation. Elsewhere it would be the likes of Redgrave, Coe, Bolt, Lance Armstrong, Ali, Giggs, Gower, Willis, Vivian Richards, Pele, Moore, Brooking to name just a few that spring to mind. And as if by magic the underlying reason for this "thread" appears, another snipe at LeTissier. So because Sir Bobby Charlton's transgretion is forgivable/forgetable as it's a "distant perception." You're tying yourself up in knots here, you can ignore Gerrard's bar brawl, Rooney's sex with aging prostitutes and Terry's various off pitch indiscretions but you will continually harrang LeTissier for one botched betting scam. "But it's cheating!" you squeal. It was a botched attempt at first throw in, it's hardly the hand of god or Thierry Henry is it? How do you place Maradona or Henry in your moral hit list? Both guilty of cheating... but it's not first throw in is it? That's the biggest crime of them all isn't it? lol You'd hope that the Christmas spirit might have visited chez 19c this year but obviously not as yet again we get bored sh1tless by yet another thread to knock LeTissier. It would seem that the whole argument revolves what qualifies for 19c's bile. Apparently you can get away with murder as long as it's off the pitch. Of the pitch, off the pitch, off the pitch, that's all we hear from you. You bring up all sorts of great sportsmen and hold them as a yardstick for greatness and then defend Rooney, Gerrard and Terry for some shocking behaviour off the pitch and that's acceptable as it's off the pitch. What completely freaky morals you have... I could understand it if Matt was some journeyman footballer who spent a few years at Saints and didn't achieve much but I would say, without fear of contradiction, that Matt would be in any Saints fans top five footballers of all time. He earnt the right to be forgiven and that's what's missing from 19c's seemingly endless *****fest... forgiveness... It's rather sad and extremely pathetic, that during this time of the year, one sad, lonely, bitter little man can't forgive Matt for one botched mistake and show a little Christian spirit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Interesting question. I think it's the fans that make someone a legend, someone who is still talked about regularly after their sporting career is over. As far as Saints are concerned I suppose that would include Bates, Davies, Stokes, Ball, Keegan, Channon, Le Tissier to name but a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pap Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Matt Le Tissier is a legend. Played his whole career at Saints, scored some of the best goals the PL has ever seen, instrumental in keeping us up and rightly regarded as a Premiership legend. But as other posters have pointed out, it's all too clear where this thread is headed. I didn't give a crap about the spread betting thing when announced, when it was on the "MLT to coach penalties" thread nor do I give a crap now, using "definition of a legend" as a springboard to define a legend before finally concluding that MLT doesn't match up (with a certain someone redefining "tit" as part of the process). MLT is a legend. Full stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Hence why I am trying to give it a Saints angle as I am suspended from the lounge etc for challenging a poster with regards 'popular music'. A bit sad really. Seriously? Hahaha, that's so funny. Has someone got a link as I've got to read this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MbaleSaint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Interesting question. I think it's the fans that make someone a legend, someone who is still talked about regularly after their sporting career is over. As far as Saints are concerned I suppose that would include Bates, Davies, Stokes, Ball, Keegan, Channon, Le Tissier to name but a few. I wouldn't include Keegan because he was only with us for two seasons, but agree with all others and would add Lawrie Mac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 A legend is: a collection of stories and memories (popularly regarded as historical, but can be myth). So whether sporting or not, details of individual ability, personality, misdemeanors, mistakes and heroics all become heresay, and personal viewpoints or bias are irrelevant. So for examnple, 19, your very own personal criticism of Le Tiss can only fuel his status as popular legend. I guarantee that no legend exists that (or who) isn't a pot of controversy and contradiction. The more extreme, the bigger the legend. (Take Ben for example.............) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Just to say if you have the opportunity you may want to listen to the R5L debate at 9am this morning on what makes a sporting legend. Is it pure ability? Personality? Their actual sport? Is it affected by their past misdemeanours? Is it simple bias? How many Man U fans voted for Giggs last night or is it recognition of a model professional in the mould of Sir Bobby Charlton? Should be interesting given some debates we often get involved with on this forum regarding the use of the word legend. 19, in your attempt to disguise the real point of the thread I assume that you think that we are all so thick that we cannot see through it ! Sadly, though perhaps understandably, some have taken the bait and allowed you to re-open the MLT debate for about the 6th time now ! We all know (and most disagree with) your view on this subject so please give it a rest as it only serves to tarnish your almost non existent credibility even further !! Sorry to say this but IMHO it is patently true ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La BoIS Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Out of the contenders I would probably have voted for Cav, incredible achievement. But there could only really be one winner who like AP has been constantly overlooked and that of course is The Power. A total legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 If I could bottle what makes a sporting legend it would have to be where there are no dissenting arguments against the label and complete agreement. In our local world it would for me be Bates unequivocally, then Channon and I can appreciate why Paine should be on the list although his playing days were very much during my infancy and so difficult for me to relate whereas Bates' influence has permeated through the club through more than 1 generation. That's a ridiculous argument! You're the only loser who disagrees that MLT's a legend- so that means that he is not because there is one 'dissenting argument'? By that logic I can come out and disagree that Ted Bates is a legend and that automatically takes away his legend status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 That's a ridiculous argument! You're the only loser who disagrees that MLT's a legend- so that means that he is not because there is one 'dissenting argument'? By that logic I can come out and disagree that Ted Bates is a legend and that automatically takes away his legend status. A player may be a legend to one supporter but not to another. Then he is still a legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Seriously? Hahaha, that's so funny. Has someone got a link as I've got to read this. Its in the Arts thread - use the search function. If you read Rory's latest post on his top 5 albums then you'll know where I was coming from. There wouldn't be enough room in pseuds corner. Interesting debate on R5L earlier even if it got hijacked by the stereotypical football oiks who tried to defend the likes of Best's and Worthington's off field antics and that Woods is entitled to do what he likes afterall 'have you seen the women is knocking about with' Yawn. At the end of the day the sports star can make their own choices but if it contravenes the image they have built up for themselves they have to accept the pain of their actions like loss of sponsorship or business deals or loss of support etc. It was left to Lord Coe to talk about role models and the importance of the way you conduct your life both on and off the pitch, your longevity in your chosen sport and the level of competition you faced. Therefore, I think we should conclude that true sporting legends compete at the highest level globally and for many that would be the Olympics and for footballers and cricketers many successful international and test caps respectively. Channon is a true Sainst legend and one that transcends football because of his subsequent achievements. MLT cannot hold a candle to the acheivements of Giggs and although he competed in a major league in never was tested at an international or european club level and can only ever be classed as a local hero and perhaps a maverick/flawed genius in the vein of a Best, Worthington or Bowles type character. His book is hardly a testament to being a role model for todays young footballers and humilty rather than arrogance is perhaps another mark of a true legend. The 40 odd pages of fan's 'tributes' in MLT's book was lazy and ill conceived in my opinion and smacked of arrogance unlike any other sporting book I have read before or since. So what makes a sporting legend well a recognisable sport in the truest sense of the word which removes golfers, drivers, snooker and darts players and after that I would defer to Lord Coe. At least we can conclude that unfortunately at this club we have had very few genuine sporting legends (as oppose to local heros) and that is purely down to our size and pulling power more than anything else IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Is Giggs a legend? - I'm not sure - he certainly is one of the best and most successful footballers of his generation and is more likely to be a lgend to Man U fans, but I think he still falls short of legendary status. A legend needs to capture the imagination of the public at large and have a profund impact on their sport eg Tiger Woods, Micheal Jordon and Michael Schumacher - in football you would have to look at Pele and Maradonna. Saints have legends sure - MLT, Stokes, Channon, Keagan but are they legends of the game as a whole,? Probably not. Also I don't think past misdemeanors affects their status unless they do something like take drugs etc. Tiger Woods will still be one of the greatest golfers of all time - he is just a bad husband. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noodles34 Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 And as if by magic the underlying reason for this "thread" appears, another snipe at LeTissier. So because Sir Bobby Charlton's transgretion is forgivable/forgetable as it's a "distant perception." You're tying yourself up in knots here, you can ignore Gerrard's bar brawl, Rooney's sex with aging prostitutes and Terry's various off pitch indiscretions but you will continually harrang LeTissier for one botched betting scam. "But it's cheating!" you squeal. It was a botched attempt at first throw in, it's hardly the hand of god or Thierry Henry is it? How do you place Maradona or Henry in your moral hit list? Both guilty of cheating... but it's not first throw in is it? That's the biggest crime of them all isn't it? lol You'd hope that the Christmas spirit might have visited chez 19c this year but obviously not as yet again we get bored sh1tless by yet another thread to knock LeTissier. It would seem that the whole argument revolves what qualifies for 19c's bile. Apparently you can get away with murder as long as it's off the pitch. Of the pitch, off the pitch, off the pitch, that's all we hear from you. You bring up all sorts of great sportsmen and hold them as a yardstick for greatness and then defend Rooney, Gerrard and Terry for some shocking behaviour off the pitch and that's acceptable as it's off the pitch. What completely freaky morals you have... I could understand it if Matt was some journeyman footballer who spent a few years at Saints and didn't achieve much but I would say, without fear of contradiction, that Matt would be in any Saints fans top five footballers of all time. He earnt the right to be forgiven and that's what's missing from 19c's seemingly endless *****fest... forgiveness... It's rather sad and extremely pathetic, that during this time of the year, one sad, lonely, bitter little man can't forgive Matt for one botched mistake and show a little Christian spirit. here, here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 That's a ridiculous argument! You're the only loser who disagrees that MLT's a legend- so that means that he is not because there is one 'dissenting argument'? By that logic I can come out and disagree that Ted Bates is a legend and that automatically takes away his legend status. I said arguments and whilst some may be a bit shy on here in the face of some heated responses plenty of people agree with me. Dubal Phil told us MLT had lost a contract over his admission why would that be if they did not dispute he was a legend or the betting scam did not bother them? Your argument is flawed with regard to Ted Bates as the dissenters need a reason to dispute whether a man is a local hero or not and clearly they may struggle to find any ammunition against him. Some people are above debate unfortunately you cannot accept that MLT is not one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 It was good to hear Matt called a Saints legend over the PA system on Saturday wasn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Is Giggs a legend? - I'm not sure - he certainly is one of the best and most successful footballers of his generation and is more likely to be a lgend to Man U fans, but I think he still falls short of legendary status. A legend needs to capture the imagination of the public at large and have a profund impact on their sport eg Tiger Woods, Micheal Jordon and Michael Schumacher - in football you would have to look at Pele and Maradonna. Saints have legends sure - MLT, Stokes, Channon, Keagan but are they legends of the game as a whole,? Probably not. Also I don't think past misdemeanors affects their status unless they do something like take drugs etc. Tiger Woods will still be one of the greatest golfers of all time - he is just a bad husband. I'd agree with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 It was good to hear Matt called a Saints legend over the PA system on Saturday wasn't it. You'd have to have a self confessed history of mental illness not to believe MLT was anything other than a legend at SFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I don`t think that 19C`s problem with MLT is purely about "Throw-ingate" I remember him making derogatory remarks about him very early in the year, before the book came out. I did respond to him at the time saying that if he was going to add MLT to his hate list (LM and LC) then he was asking for trouble and wouldn`t be taken seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graffito Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 The on line Oxford Shorter Dictionary: Legend: Noun:an extremely famous or notorious person I think MLT qualifies. In fact, NC, by this definition you seem to be enhancing his legendary status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 You'd have to have a self confessed history of mental illness not to believe MLT was anything other than a legend at SFC. Why would you suggest such a thing. Purely, it is down to opinion. I was as big as fan as MLT as the next Saints fan prior to his admission so like his lost business contract why should you need to be mentally ill to withdraw your support. Are the sponsors who withdrew their support from Tiger Woods yesterday mentally ill because they don't agree with his off course conduct? No they just have a set fo values that they prefer their sporting stars to mirror and in that regard I am no different, not mentally ill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 December, 2009 Author Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I don`t think that 19C`s problem with MLT is purely about "Throw-ingate" I remember him making derogatory remarks about him very early in the year, before the book came out. I did respond to him at the time saying that if he was going to add MLT to his hate list (LM and LC) then he was asking for trouble and wouldn`t be taken seriously. MOG that was because I questioned his role in Pinnacle and the level of judgement he exhibited. IMO I feel vindicated in my assessemnt at the time and far more venerable posters than I took the same stance. If it was before that then I don't remember but suspect if I did it would have been along the lines of all those connected with the club past and present pulling in the same direction in an attempt to save the club before administration. Again it was just an opinion of which I think you'll agree I am entitled without the resultant personal abuse, a comment not directed at yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greenridge Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Nineteen prehaps you could consider limiting your hatred towards MLT to just one thread on the forum rather than your scatter-gun approach which seems to be infecting them left, right and centre? You could even start the thread yourself and whenever you feel depressed and lonely you could fire a few diatribes on the one thread which everyone else could then chose to ignore. As for 'Legend' then of course there is no single objective definition and as such the variables are endless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 MOG that was because I questioned his role in Pinnacle and the level of judgement he exhibited. IMO I feel vindicated in my assessemnt at the time and far more venerable posters than I took the same stance. If it was before that then I don't remember but suspect if I did it would have been along the lines of all those connected with the club past and present pulling in the same direction in an attempt to save the club before administration. Again it was just an opinion of which I think you'll agree I am entitled without the resultant personal abuse, a comment not directed at yourself. I fully appreciate that everybody has opinions. They are free to have them and equally free in this country (at the moment) to express them. I do query, however the validity of not only repeating them over and over again, but also of starting threads that you know perfectly well will descend into the "personal abuse" that you complain of. I don`t think that there are any regular users of this forum who are unsure of your views on MLT. Sometimes less is more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I said arguments and whilst some may be a bit shy on here in the face of some heated responses plenty of people agree with me. Dubal Phil told us MLT had lost a contract over his admission why would that be if they did not dispute he was a legend or the betting scam did not bother them? Your argument is flawed with regard to Ted Bates as the dissenters need a reason to dispute whether a man is a local hero or not and clearly they may struggle to find any ammunition against him. Some people are above debate unfortunately you cannot accept that MLT is not one of them. I'm more than willing to accept that MLT is not above debate, as there is obviously no way one could argue that when in doing so they are debating it. However, this argument surely neglects the fact that Legend status is subjective, and therefore just because you do not feel he is a legend, which admittedly you have a reasoned argument for, does not mean he does not command Legend staus; in the eyes of others. Obviously noone could have any argument against Ted Bates, and perhaps that was a bad example to use, but my point was that just because one person feels there is a reason to question someone's legend status, doesn't stop him being a legend to the majority, and therefore still deserving of legend status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie2008 Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I'm more than willing to accept that MLT is not above debate, as there is obviously no way one could argue that when in doing so they are debating it. However, this argument surely neglects the fact that Legend status is subjective, and therefore just because you do not feel he is a legend, which admittedly you have a reasoned argument for, does not mean he does not command Legend staus; in the eyes of others. Obviously noone could have any argument against Ted Bates, and perhaps that was a bad example to use, but my point was that just because one person feels there is a reason to question someone's legend status, doesn't stop him being a legend to the majority, and therefore still deserving of legend status. :smt038 MLT= Legend IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Nineteen prehaps you could consider limiting your hatred towards MLT to just one thread on the forum rather than your scatter-gun approach which seems to be infecting them left, right and centre? You could even start the thread yourself and whenever you feel depressed and lonely you could fire a few diatribes on the one thread which everyone else could then chose to ignore. As for 'Legend' then of course there is no single objective definition and as such the variables are endless. Exactly. I have no doubt that there are "Sporting Legends" in American Football and Baseball. Are they sporting legends to me?? Of course not, but am I sure that they are to some people in America. Some of my sporting legends are Barry Briggs, Tony Rickardsson and Jason Crump. People who represented one of the most dangerous sports in the world consistantly, with great courage, dedication and great success. Are they even known to most people? No, because they take part in a "minority sport". Does that take away there "Legend" status?? Of course not. MLT will alway be a legend to me for his skill, flair, loyalty and the fact that I went home smiling after games more often than not when he was playing. NOTHING will or can detract from those marvellous memories. As the song says.... "They can`t take that away from me". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 :smt038 MLT= Legend IMO Mine too!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Legends are such a odd band of people. They can be great sportspeople, actors, politicians, etc.. But they can also be bad, or eccentric, or just one-offs. The people who are often mentioned in the same breath as... they broke the mould when they made him/her. In terms of sportspeople, MLT comes under so many of these categories that he almost qualifies for a category on his own. Sportspeople today have to train and practice, train and practice. That's not to say that MLT didn't. But his gift of being able to play magical football didn't come with practice, although that did no harm. It was always there. Personally, I have always put the skillful players above the runners and the cloggers and the effective players. And MLT was at the very top of that pile of skillful players. Add in the fact that he has been putting in time for charities for as long as he has been around, and you end up with an all-round person. Plus, he's human. He makes errors of judgement, and he apologises for it. No arrogance, no pride, just human. Oh, he's a legend, all right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchards Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 I'm beginning to wonder if Mr canteen has had a bad experience with MLT recently as he is obsessed by him. The day will come when the club will install a statue of him at the gates of St Mary's so that 99.99% of supporters can admire him for what he did for us. Shame the 0.01% will have the urge to **** on it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joensuu Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 MLT is in every way a living legend to all true saints fans. Nothing will ever convince me otherwise (certainly not some interweb skate/troll) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsland Red Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Yes. Even my feeling of deja vu is getting a feeling of deja vu! It's like deja vu all over again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedAndWhite91 Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 It's like deja vu all over again! Have you posted this before??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Hence why I am trying to give it a Saints angle as I am suspended from the lounge etc for challenging a poster with regards 'popular music'. A bit sad really. You wanted Ollie to win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eurosaint Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Why would you suggest such a thing. Purely, it is down to opinion. I was as big as fan as MLT as the next Saints fan prior to his admission so like his lost business contract why should you need to be mentally ill to withdraw your support. Are the sponsors who withdrew their support from Tiger Woods yesterday mentally ill because they don't agree with his off course conduct? No they just have a set fo values that they prefer their sporting stars to mirror and in that regard I am no different, not mentally ill. In the reality most of these companies don't give a sh#t about the actual transgressions of the individual. All they are worried about is short term bad publicity ! It won't surprise me at all if Tiger comes back from all of this, both stronger and richer ! If he returns to centre stage after adversity, there will be no end of companies queueing up for his services ! Also the MLT abberation (minor as it was) is already long since forgotten by all except for the 'Saintsweb One' !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Mullet Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 It's quite sad that there may be Saints fans who do not consider MLT to be a legend. Not sure whether its due to short memories, a need to trawl and be controversial or just plain thick? Frankly who cares. MLT is a Saints legend. Not necessarily a footballing legend like Pele or Maradonna but a Saints legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted 14 December, 2009 Share Posted 14 December, 2009 Legends are such a odd band of people. They can be great sportspeople, actors, politicians, etc.. But they can also be bad, or eccentric, or just one-offs. The people who are often mentioned in the same breath as... they broke the mould when they made him/her. In terms of sportspeople, MLT comes under so many of these categories that he almost qualifies for a category on his own. Sportspeople today have to train and practice, train and practice. That's not to say that MLT didn't. But his gift of being able to play magical football didn't come with practice, although that did no harm. It was always there. Personally, I have always put the skillful players above the runners and the cloggers and the effective players. And MLT was at the very top of that pile of skillful players. Add in the fact that he has been putting in time for charities for as long as he has been around, and you end up with an all-round person. Plus, he's human. He makes errors of judgement, and he apologises for it. No arrogance, no pride, just human. Oh, he's a legend, all right. Agree with this but would add that there are obviously legends that are better known than others - e.g. everyone knows the legend of Robin Hood, fewer the legend of Ceridwen - and I think other criteria are that they will be spoken of after their time and the stories, accurate or not, are passed on to later generations. Strict accuracy in the telling is not important - I don't doubt Ron Davies (legend) leaps even higher with each passing year. Therefore, players of less than the highest 'quality' can be legends (Franny) and underachievers (Stan Bowles, probably better known for extra-curricular activities) also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now