Imagine said:
getmeabeer said:
As a club that’s in its 25 year we have 7 retired numbers now, how many dose a club like Fife or Nottingham have?
I understand why both Dickinson and Lawson are both retired. However I have to ask the question now are we a Club that just wants to retire jerseys?
And in that one line, you wreck any hope of your points being taken seriously...
Quite how an obvious typo/auto-correct/momentary lapse in memory reduces the validity of point made by others baffles me.
Do we now vet a post for spelling and grammar, and if found to be less than perfect totally disregard the person's opinion?
Others are allowed their opinion, and they are allowed opinions contrary to yours. Argue your corner, make your point - but to belittle someone with no counter argument is the recourse of the dogmatic.
Personally, I think the argument to retire Voth's number can be made. An argument based upon club identity and what he brought to the team dynamic. Although he was far from our best player in the last few seasons, he was the identity of the club. The length of service argument shouldn't really factor, or we are retiring Franny, Stone and G very soon.
Retiring a number is the biggest honour a sporting club can bestow. Doing it too quickly, or based on an up swell in public opinion is dangerous. Too many retired numbers dilutes the honour.
I am luke warm at the idea of retiring Voth's number so soon - feels a little rushed. In the same way, retiring Stone's number is something that needs a little space from his playing career.
But, if we are hosting Voth's jersey to the rafters we may as well do Stone. It is arguable that Stone has brought more to this club than Voth, and should be similarly honour.