G. Rex - to clarify, the Cameroon kits were not wife beaters, they lacked the requisite mustard/tobacco stain.
ARE YOU FRIGGIN KIDDING ME??????????????? He said on the radio that he still enjoys "an occasional glass of wine." There are some differing thoughts on whether someone needs to be teetotal. Part of the problem here is definiing the term "alcoholic." It's called a disease, but people make a decision to quit doing it, so it's not a disease in the sense cancer or MS are. At any rate, I do know people who have quit drinking and have later enjoyed an occasional beer or glass of wine, and seem to function just fine. The image Kim paints of a guy downing shots at a bar is a little harder to reconcile but....... ARE YOU FRIGGIN KIDDING ME????????????? So did Ray take him to this bar, or was there an event there?
There was a post-game event at the bar. And yes, Gazza was having shots. I was surprised myself because I thought he would really want to make a good impression on Ray of the sort of "I've got all my troubles behind me." Ray was there as well and spent some time talking with Paul (who I offended by calling Mr. Gascoigne).
I do substance abuse research, and it's not a good sign if a guy who clearly had a drinking problem is now drinking shots with the "new" team. Pretty irresponsible of Gazza as well as the team. Yeah, he's a big boy and makes his own decisions, but it's not right to put someone with that kind of history in that situation again. If this is Ray's idea of getting the team to "bond" with the new guy its not a very bright way to do it. Makes me feel sorry for Gazza and fearful that more problems will be on his horizon.
Shame on you! The least you could have done was to drink his shots for him! Which leads me to the other poster. I absolutely agree with this.
Man, I wish I was. It really made me sad to watch. I was on the fence about him coming this past week. Got more excited when I say how fit he looked in the pictures but it all went to crap on Sat eve as I watched him sit in the corner at the downstairs bar and do shots. He wasn't really mingling with the guys either, some did come up to speak to him as well as fans. K
Oh man. I bet that guy who wrote that article in Soccer365 wishes he could make a couple of edits right about now.
I don't think that MLS should hire anybody who has ever posted on bigsoccer.com. That whole place if full of mouthbreathing jacknutses some of whom are just this side of criminals, and the rest are worse. Anybody who has ever posted on bigsoccer is a raving idiot and deserves to be shot, skinned alive, and then drawn and quartered!
Wink duly noted, but no, nothing changes about that article. The following paragraph is perhaps the one in question: "Certainly DC United and MLS do well to make sure the player is fit. They do well to lay it on the line regarding the player's off-field behavior. But there is growing evidence that the former England international has developed a greater maturity later in life. The potential upside to such a signing seems worth taking the risk" Well, the report on this board would certainly contradict the public image of the player that has been projected of late, and may well be a disqualifier, but I was arguing that I would love to see a fit Gazza playing, for giving the player a second chance, and noted the trial time made sense to all concerned. So no, I don't "wish I could make a couple of edits." Sometimes you put faith in people, and people let you down.
This could be why Gazza's flying back to England shortly. His little drinking bit could've ruined whatever chances he had here, what a shame.
I'm sorry dcuinvermont, I responded to your message in the wash post gazza thread before i saw this post, so I think I may have misinterpreted what you wrote. (in case you see that other post). However, I have to still say that I couldn't disagree more with this opinion that Ray & DC United should have to police Gazza's personal behavior when he hasn't done anything wrong. I doubt he was forced to go to the after party for one thing. I doubt that just because he goes to an after party that he is being placed in a situation beyond his control. I know many recovering alcoholics of the hardcore variety that can function in social situations without feeling the pressure to drink. I know some that cannot but are wise enough to avoid these situations. I know its just a difference of opinion, but Gazza needs to withhold himself from these occasions if he cannot handle the temptation to drink heavily. What is Ray & DC to do? United holds many events for the team that I'm sure involve drinking. Should they ban Gazza for his own good from team parties or hanging out with his mates at a bar? Should he not be allowed to Marco's infamous backyard bbq's because there might be alcohol there? Or should the team ban its players from drinking in public because one player might have a problem restraining himself? Clearly, if Gazza is going to be part of this or any other football team, he will need to police himself or avoid these social situations at the risk of alienating himself from the team. But I don't think that any of the DC braintrust should try to keep him away from things that are perfectly legal and within good taste. If that means he gets drunk, then he gets drunk. He definitely won't be the first DC player to be drunk in public, that I can assure you of.
Gazza's behavior is clearly only his to control. But lets ask the question, How many times have DC gone out drinking as a team this year? Is this the usual team thing? No. Then why choose the weekend that Gazza's here to go out drinking? A backyard picnic is a much better option. They don't have to police him, but don't explicitly put him in a difficult situation. It's just weird that they'd choose this weekend to have a "night out on the town."
Actually, this is becoming a regular thing. I've been to two so far this year at the Capital Lounge. I think there have been other post-game events as well. (although I'm not positive) As someone who was actually there to witness Gazza drinking, I have NO FRICKEN' IDEA HOW MUCH HE HAD TO DRINK AND I CHALLENGE ANYONE TO ACTUALLY PRODUCE THAT INFORMATION! (This is directed at people who were not there but are making judgements based on what other posters have said, which to my knowledge has not included any information about the amount he drank.) My recollection is that he was drinking liquor (think tumblers rather than "shots") and quietly sitting in the corner of the room next to the bar downstairs. In my conversation with him, he did not slur nor come off as "drunk" in any way shape or form!
I agree Revelation. Just because of one persons mind doesnt like it doesnt make it wrong. Sign Gazzi cheers
I am saddened, but not surprised to hear of Gazza's apparent drinking. The reason I say apparent is, that when I go to social functions, I usually have a glass in hand, but a non-alcoholic drink. I wasnt there, and I don't know if the man drank or not. The commonly accepted definition of sobriety and recovery includes total abstinence, of all mind or mood altering substances. For some this can include even sugar and coffee. It is a recovering person's own responsibility to police his own sobriety. Whether that includes avoiding situations entirely, going in the company of other non-drinkers, or going despite the inherent risk, depends on the situation, how long in recovery, etc.. In my own recovery, particularly during the early years, I primarily avoided such situations, with the exception of "mandatory attendence" functions for work. In those cases, I made my appearence, and got the hell out of where I didnt belong. In recovery, there is a saying....... sit in a barbershop long enough, and you will get a haircut. Gersman, I beg to differ that alcoholism is not a disease. It is so defined by the AMA, American College of Psychiatry, as well as other medical organizations around the world. As the not so proud owner of a damn good case of this disease, I speak from experience, not a high horse or academic pedestal. I suppose what the real question is, regarding DC United and Gazza, is the team willing to risk a serious drinking and behavioral relapse if they hire Paul? I am looking at the lost productivity and public liability angles here. I can't fault United administration or Ray Hudson for wanting to be damned sure they arent buying a pig in a poke, given cap space issues, and the kind of money Gazza will draw. Obviously, MLS and United are very concerned that this league maintain a family oriented positive image. Certainly a league as young as this can do without the scandals, off-field antics and negative publicity of other leagues around the world. Soccer in America is primarily, at this juncture, a youth sport, so it follows to me that a "wholesome" public image is in the league's best interest. Mark
I guess it was this.... .... that made me think there might be some second thoughts. All caps and a bazillion question marks.
I'll repeat what I said in another thread--are you guys rooting for a team or for the league's image? If you're a DC United fan, how can you turn down the chance for a shakeup, anything to make a difference in the current putrid state of your team? Even Etch says so, and Gazza would be cramping his space in midfield. Secondly, do you honestly think Gazza would be the only alcoholic in MLS if he signs? Those of you who are alcoholics should know, by the sheer numbers, that this is ridiculous. Admit it--this is all about the fear of bad press. That, to me, does not seem sufficient reason to prejudge anyone. Diallo effectively ended Mike Amann's career with a vicious intentionally violent challenge, and he's still playing to cheering throngs, while Gazza gets judged? I don't understand--maybe you can explain your hypocrisy to me.
Sign Gazza. If things don't work out, that's all up to him. Give the man his second chance. Nuff said.
Mark - I appreciate the tone of your post, even as I disagree with some of its content. I think some of this "commonly accepted definition" is based on subjective opinion. One person says a recovering alcoholic needs to abstain from drink entirely, another says he shouldn't smoke or eat chocolate either. My experience with alcoholism is growing up with a father who would come home drunk nearly every night. It had a very negative effect on our family, and lasted for a long, long time. But, a point in time came, after I was no longer living at home, that my father apparently decided enough was enough, and just stopped drinking. He didn't seek counseling. He didn't take medication. He still goes to clubs that serve alcohol, he even drinks O'Douls at times, and seemingly has no interest in drinking. The appeal of it apparently has gone for him and he hasn't taken a drink in close to 10 years now. I respect what you wrote about not wanting to be in certain environments, and I don't doubt that this is effective for you. I'm just saying that one prescription doesn't appear to fit everybody - and I go back to what I said about defining who is an "alcoholic" and who isn't. Remember, what I originally said is: "It's called a disease, but people make a decision to quit doing it, so it's not a disease in the sense cancer or MS are." With all respect to the AMA (and I won't feign respect for the very much of the psyciatric profession) I stand by that. What other disease is cured by the person simply choosing to not do something anymore? I know that things like diabetes and heart disease can be MODIFIED by controlling diet, but it is not the same thing. Similarly, some of the physical effects of alcohol abuse, particularly liver ailments, don't go away when a person quits drinking. But the only "cure" for alcoholism is that a person decides to quit drinking. There are people who can drink a beer and it not affect their behavior. When you drink 5 or 6, it does. Some people do this a lot, some only very occasionally and some never. Defining when this becomes alcoholism is very subjective and so, I reject the idea that it is a disease (which tends to carry the connotation of "I couldn't help but do it"). It is a person with a strong tendency to make a very poor decision of how to deal with something bothering them (and I don't say that self-righteously, because all of us have our shortcomings and weaknesses, no matter how public or private). No doubt that environmental factors, including upbringing, have an effect on this, but the person still has to make the decision, and as you know, no one else can do that for you. So anyway, that's where I'm coming from on this. I think we should avoid blanket characterizations, as well as rushing to judgment on this. I was quite surprised to hear he was "drinking shots," but am hearing some different takes on that now. I understand all the potential concerns, and the things you said about league image, but at this point I'd still say it's a risk worth taking.
I'm sorry dcuinvermont, I think I left my most important point out, since I was in a rush to go home. But I was under the impression that DC players routinely go out (not every game, but a lot) for both unorganized and organized ...uh..., get togethers, that often involve alcohol. Moreno & Etch have been known even to attend BB post game tailgates. I guess I was thinking that Sat. night was more of a regular than irregular thing for DC, and wasn't just b/c Gazza was in town. After over 10 years of admitted, documented, troubled behavior, one night in a DC bar isn't going to confuse or trick a 35 yr old man who wants to put the past behind him. No doubt if they organized a party in a bar just for Gazza, that could be called stupid. Or a stroke of genius? We (well, they) showed Gazza who they were and he showed them who he was. Its out on the table, as if he said, "This is what I'm going to do, can you guys live with it?" I think several of us were under the initial impression that Gazza no longer drank (despite the non-stop jokes about it), but now we know he does or he might. Take a chance or not? Thats Ray's decision I guess.