Damn TJ, that's killer! I know some guys in a band...that'd make for some killer music for my show...hehe I'll be nice, though. You'd have to use the Limp Bizkit/Staind version of the song, though. Better guitar work.
WORLD CUP news! Avalanche caught cheating!
- Thread starter Tyger
- Start date
Dude, I got a band - I'll send you TJ and Tha Flashpoint's version with me wailing on tha axe.
And you mean tha Public Enemy/Anthrax version, n'est pas?
And you mean tha Public Enemy/Anthrax version, n'est pas?
Now there's a thought Pipes !
I think I'll just pay my boss the money and tell Rancid to naff off !!
Cya in the dole queue m8
Pete
TJ, I suppose as an homage to Anthrax and Public Enemy your guys could use that style, but I have a version that's done by Staind and Limp Bizkit that I dig a bit more because of the guitar work...the guitar riff has a harsh edge that I like. But yes, please send along the Lambini/Flashhpoint version soonest...I can debut it during a Friday Night Kegger and if the hardcore types who dig that show like, then I can take it mainstream on the weekly FB Radio...
Pete :
Through all this I've been avoiding a lot of the "Chinese Whispers" as you've so artfully put it. (And probably the best inuendo for it, actually) I've read a lot of the 'rumormill' on RSP, including a Beatdown accusation (GZ, according to one poster, kicked the snot out of Salm). There's also the accusations that it's just Avalanche burning the bridge behind them before they go 24/7 on X-ball. There's also money acusations, and so on. But I don' tput any weight into those theories because, frankly, it's just rumormill bull****. I know there's no basis in facts.
What I know was reported on Warpig, Paintball.com and p8ntballer.com. Infrences are based only on what I know from expirence. I have not guessed to Salm's motive, only to question what it would be. I'm also questioning the 'party line' that he acted alone, when I know full well that he couldn't have acted alone in this matter. I mind it disturbing that nobody else has even QUESTIONED this, let alone is not investigating it!
I'm also questioning if this will be shuffled under the rug, like all the other stories, or if the usual paintball mags will grow a pair and actually expose this for the record. (And even then, they need to grow a pair larger than PGI's, I men good lord, Robbo's testosterone level is enough to fuel a sperm bank for months...)
The fact that I wasn't there is irrelavant. I keep telling you guys this, and yet you still don't believe me. If tournament paintball wants to be the high-profile end of paintball, what you do affects ME directly. You want to be the glory guys? Good. Have at. Just don't have the audacity to be shocked when the fallout hits you in the ass. If MY GAME is affected, I have full right to complain.
And if Salm's actions are percieved as standard playing procedure for all paintball players, then you better believe that I have the right to be angry, not only annoyed or amused.
Pete, you continually take pot-shots at me becasue "You weren't there" and "You don't play tournaments." Imagine if a "Sports Illustrated" writer caught wind of this story, and ran it as "XTREME Unsporsmanlike Conduct"? Talking about the incidents of cheating in paintball, along with other "Xtreme" sports people who push rules (LIke Tony Hawk's controvercial 'best trick' which happend almost 10 minutes after the official time to do tricks expired some years back...) Paintball doesn't have the TV or sponsor money that skating has. And more than likely this SI writer dind't play tournaments and wasn't there either. What I'm being critical about is no diffrent than a sports writer being critical of the "Hand of God" or the Buckner "Between the legs" or even Barry Bond's arrogance at the plate. I wasn't at the world series either, do I not have the right to have an opinion on that eiher?
IF you heard of a scenario game that featured "German Soldiers" giving full 'heil hitler' salutes as part of the rules, you'd more than likely be offended. Would you enjoy having me tell you that you have no right to post your opinion becase you weren't there, and you don't play scenario games? No, you'd tell me to stuff that opinion up my tail. Welcome to my world.
So can I assume your back is feeling better? Cool.
-Tyger
Being there and getting in on conversations that aren't in print, seeing the actual people and hearing their words on site, reading facial expressions, and looking at the way people react in person are sources of information for which there is no substitute. It's all about the context in which the written information is set, and all the team players, specators, and other witnesses are in this case and others like it more credible.
In short, yes, you had to be there and apparently you weren't.
In short, yes, you had to be there and apparently you weren't.
See now that's elitist.
That's similar to saying that since I wasn't alive durring World War 2, I have no right to pass judgement on Adolf Hitler. Does't that sound stupid?
How about this. "Since you don't play football (soccer) you have no right to have an opinion on what happened in a match."? Still stupid?
It's an elitist attutude that will shatter once a major publication starts reporting third hand information. Even if the reporter was not "There", he writes the story of what happened based on available information. I don't see a diffrence here.
Other than tournament player are trying despertely to hold onto thier elite status and not let the res of us riff-raff see into what really happens. And, yes, I've talked to a few people who were "there", and I've heard a few things from them that would be unprofessional to repeat without proof. So, I don't.
-Tyger
Strange New World
But I'm gonna agree with Tyg on this one. He's offered plainly defined opinions and some conjecture and made it clear which was which and offered reasoning for his views. No totally outrageous claims (and with regards to this story there have been plenty of outrageous claims making the rounds) or anything in that neighborhood IMO and the topic and event are certainly worthy of discussion.
Are different people gonna have differing views on the same events--sure they are and so what? Interestingly, when someone is willing to make a public statement it often says as much about them as it does about whatever their remarks pertain to.
Is Tyg right or wrong? Or anyone else in this or any other thread offering ideas, views or opinions. Not the point. Agree or disagree, your call.
But I'm gonna agree with Tyg on this one. He's offered plainly defined opinions and some conjecture and made it clear which was which and offered reasoning for his views. No totally outrageous claims (and with regards to this story there have been plenty of outrageous claims making the rounds) or anything in that neighborhood IMO and the topic and event are certainly worthy of discussion.
Are different people gonna have differing views on the same events--sure they are and so what? Interestingly, when someone is willing to make a public statement it often says as much about them as it does about whatever their remarks pertain to.
Is Tyg right or wrong? Or anyone else in this or any other thread offering ideas, views or opinions. Not the point. Agree or disagree, your call.
J