Bad Boys - Part IV
in Fans ·
You don't really need a photo right now. It should be all finished up in about a week or so.
Home ›
Olivia White13 › Posts
Posts by Olivia White13
28 posts shown.
Bad Boys - Part IV
in Fans ·
quietcrane22 said:The east entrance off Jakić Street—where you normally buy tickets at the little booth—is completely blocked; you just can't get into the stadium through there. Then there's the route toward the north side, where people have been waiting in luck for about an hour, though I only counted about sixteen Bad Boys vehicles near Yankee Stadium (plus maybe five or six more passing by Honda Street while I was heading north). On the way back from the north toward the Jakić entrance, things were even more confusing. Perhaps they eventually started letting people in, but honestly, it was a mess... people are out there buying tickets, yet they still can't actually get inside the gates. I tried talking to some security guards and a few fans; the first story I heard was that there was no guest list, so no entry allowed. The second version was that after a little while, only season ticket holders could get in. Meanwhile, crowds are still arriving, tickets are being sold, but the stadium remains inaccessible. Then came the third version: "Just sneak in quickly so no one notices!"—that was the whispered advice from a guard, claiming there was no list. In all this chaos, you have that loud commentator over the speakers wishing someone a happy birthday, which is just typical, and then there's the usual instruction that you can't use this entrance, go over there instead... and don't even get me started on those guys in orange who are risking their necks just for a daily wage, blocking people from moving from one side of the stands to the other.
So, they actually let people onto the field "so no one would notice"?
It seems to me that up on that outer ring of the structure, they have those surveillance cameras positioned specifically to record the security staff and monitor their conduct... one of the guards actually mentioned to me once that he isn't allowed to let anyone in without a proper inspection because they are being recorded and supervised constantly...
Die-hard Ultras / Hardcore Supporters
in Fans ·
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=c-iDtp35ifo
Die-hard Ultras / Hardcore Supporters
in Fans ·
This isn't even really about the sports fans, though I know that’s what we were all just discussing, but since we seem to be on the topic of "sheeple" and people who blindly follow the crowd, I felt compelled to share a little something:
The Strategy of Distraction.
One might argue that a fundamental pillar of social control lies in the deliberate deployment of distraction or interference—a calculated strategy designed to divert the public's attention away from the critical questions and systemic shifts being orchestrated by the political and economic elite. This is often achieved through a technique I can only describe as a "flood," where a relentless deluge of trivialities and insignificant data points creates a constant state of noise, effectively drowning out any meaningful discourse. For such an interference strategy to truly succeed, however, it relies heavily on tapping into what the public finds inherently engaging, specifically by weaving in foundational concepts from fields like science, economics, psychology, neurobiology, and even cybernetics to mask the underlying manipulation.
It seems to me, though I perhaps lack the cynical wit required for such maneuvers, that there exists a deliberate strategy to keep the public’s attention diverted from the truly pressing social issues facing our nation, essentially occupying their minds with trivialities that carry no real weight. If one can simply keep the populace preoccupied—busy, busy, busy—then they will inevitably find themselves without the necessary time or mental clarity to engage in meaningful reflection, effectively being herded back toward the mindless drudgery of the fields alongside the livestock.
An excerpt from the book “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.”
The strategy of creating problems only to offer the solutions themselves is a tactic I find deeply unsettling, though I suppose it is quite common in certain circles of power. It feels somewhat like watching a magician who intentionally trips over his own feet just so he can perform a dramatic recovery that leaves the audience cheering, even though the stumble was entirely staged from the beginning. One begins to wonder about the sincerity of the progress being made when the very crises being addressed seem to have been carefully manufactured by those holding the proverbial clipboard. It is a cycle of artificial necessity that makes one feel rather weary, if I am being honest.
There is this particular tactic often referred to as the "problem-reaction-solution" framework, which I have been reflecting on quite a bit lately. It essentially involves the deliberate engineering of a crisis—creating a specific kind of "situation" designed to trigger a visceral public outcry—all so that the powers that be can then step forward with a pre-planned policy or measure. It is a rather sobering thought, really, because under any normal circumstances, the public would likely push back against such measures, but by manufacturing the tension first, they ensure that we are all too preoccupied with the immediate reaction to question the ultimate goal.
It strikes me, somewhat ruefully, that there is a recurring pattern in how our national narrative unfolds, almost like a scripted play we find ourselves watching over and over again. One might observe how the media outlets begin to weave a specific, heightened tale regarding the rise of urban unrest or street violence, which inevitably triggers a wave of public anxiety; this fear, once sufficiently stoked, leads the citizenry to begrudgingly accept stringent new security protocols and sweeping policing policies that ultimately come at a significant cost to our fundamental civil liberties. Or, if one looks through a different lens, consider how an economic crisis can be manufactured or allowed to fester until we are all forced to accept a recession as some sort of inevitable, necessary evil, which then serves as the convenient justification for slashing social safety nets and dismantling essential public services. It is a sobering cycle to contemplate, really.
3. A GRADUAL STRATEGY
If you want to convince the general public to swallow something truly unacceptable, the trick is to master the art of gradualism—essentially engineering a crisis one tiny drop at a time, even if that process drags on for a year or more. This is precisely how those radical new socio-economic frameworks, like neoliberalism, were forced upon us during the 1980s and 1990s. They didn't just flip a switch; instead, they slowly introduced privatization, job insecurity, labor flexibility, and mass unemployment through a series of incremental shifts. It was a calculated move, because if they had attempted to implement all those seismic changes simultaneously, it would have undoubtedly triggered a full-scale revolution.
4. THE ART OF PROCRASTINATION
I have been reflecting quite a bit on how political messaging functions, and I find myself wondering if there might be a more strategic—albeit somewhat cynical—way that unpopular decisions could be packaged to ensure they gain public traction. It seems to me that if one were to frame certain mandates as "painful yet necessary," it would likely secure a level of societal acceptance for future shifts that might otherwise be detrimental to the individual. From what I understand about human psychology, people generally find it much easier to stomach a sacrifice that lies in the distant future rather than one that hits their wallet or lifestyle immediately. This is largely because the actual effort isn't felt right away, and, perhaps more importantly, the general public tends to cling to this optimistic notion that everything will simply "fix itself tomorrow," leading them to believe their own personal sacrifices might somehow be bypassed. By framing things this way, leadership essentially buys itself a significant amount of time, allowing the masses to gradually acclimate to the idea of change until they eventually accept it, albeit with a sense of quiet resignation.
5. ADDRESSING THE PUBLIC AS IF THEY WERE A SMALL CHILD
It strikes me, somewhat melancholy as it may be, that the vast majority of advertisements aimed at the general public rely so heavily on a specific kind of discourse—employing certain arguments, caricatures, and particularly those high-pitched, childish inflections. They seem to position these tropes right alongside our most basic vulnerabilities, almost as if they believe the American viewer is either incredibly small or perhaps suffering from some sort of cognitive deficit. It seems to me that there is a direct correlation at play here: the more an advertiser intends to mislead the audience, the more aggressively they lean into these infantile tones to bypass our better judgment.
Why on earth would that be the case?
If one chooses to address an individual as if they were merely a child—perhaps someone no older than twelve years old—through the use of patronizing suggestions, then there exists a distinct, albeit unfortunate, probability that the recipient’s subsequent response or reaction will also lack any semblance of critical thought, much like the behavior one might expect from a child of that same age.
An excerpt from “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.”
One really ought to consider the profound impact of tapping into the emotional landscape when one is attempting to communicate a point effectively. It is quite easy to get lost in the weeds of cold, hard logic, but I have often found that if you don't reach out and touch the heart, the mind simply remains closed to your arguments, which is a rather frustrating predicament to navigate, wouldn't you agree?
Exploiting the emotional sensibilities of an audience is a textbook maneuver, really, one designed specifically to trigger a complete short circuit within any attempt at rational analysis. It is my humble observation that by leaning so heavily into this emotional register, one essentially pries open a door, allowing for the subconscious imposition of certain ideas, desires, fears, or even compulsions, all while skillfully provoking a specific, predetermined reaction...
7. KEEPING THE PUBLIC IN THE DARK AND ENSURING MEDIOCRITY
It strikes me, quite profoundly if I do say so myself, that there seems to be a deliberate, almost calculated effort being made to ensure the general public remains entirely incapable of grasping the underlying technologies currently being deployed—not just to manage our lives, but to facilitate a much more insidious form of systemic control and eventual subjugation. One can't help but feel a certain heavy sense of unease when observing how these complex methods are shielded from common understanding, effectively rendering the citizenry unable to recognize the very mechanisms designed to keep them in a state of perpetual servitude.
It occurs to me, quite often when I find myself lost in thought regarding the structural inequities of our nation, that there seems to be an underlying, rather troubling logic at play within our academic institutions. One might argue—though it is a heavy and somewhat somber thought to carry—that the quality of education provided to those in the lower socioeconomic classes is intentionally kept somewhat lackluster and mediocre. The idea, if one were to follow this cynical thread to its conclusion, is to ensure that the intellectual divide between the privileged upper echelons and everyone else remains an insurmountable chasm, effectively preventing any meaningful social mobility through knowledge alone. It is a deeply unsettling concept to contemplate, yet it feels like a necessary point of reflection for anyone truly concerned with the fairness of the American dream.
An excerpt from “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.”
8. Encouraging the public to settle for mediocrity.
There is this pervasive, almost trendy effort to convince the public that being ignorant, crude, and uneducated is actually quite fashionable...
9. THE INDIVIDUAL MUST BE MADE TO FEEL GUILTY
The goal is to manipulate an individual into believing they are solely responsible for their own misfortunes—whether that stems from a perceived lack of intelligence, a failure of talent, or simply not trying hard enough. Consequently, instead of rising up against the economic machine, people remain paralyzed by the belief that their struggles are their own fault; this leads to a sense of depression which serves the singular purpose of stifling any meaningful action. And, as we all know, without action, there can be no revolution!
10. UNDERSTANDING THE INDIVIDUAL BETTER THAN THEY UNDERSTAND THEMSELVES
Over the last fifty years, scientific advancements have significantly widened the "knowledge gap" between the general public and those who hold the reins of power within the ruling elite. By leveraging breakthroughs in biology, neurobiology, and psychology, "the system" now possesses a sophisticated understanding of the human condition, both physically and psychologically. It has reached a point where the system can often understand the average American better than that person understands themselves. This essentially means that, in most instances, the system wields far more control and much greater power over individuals than those individuals possess over their own lives.
The Strategy of Distraction.
One might argue that a fundamental pillar of social control lies in the deliberate deployment of distraction or interference—a calculated strategy designed to divert the public's attention away from the critical questions and systemic shifts being orchestrated by the political and economic elite. This is often achieved through a technique I can only describe as a "flood," where a relentless deluge of trivialities and insignificant data points creates a constant state of noise, effectively drowning out any meaningful discourse. For such an interference strategy to truly succeed, however, it relies heavily on tapping into what the public finds inherently engaging, specifically by weaving in foundational concepts from fields like science, economics, psychology, neurobiology, and even cybernetics to mask the underlying manipulation.
It seems to me, though I perhaps lack the cynical wit required for such maneuvers, that there exists a deliberate strategy to keep the public’s attention diverted from the truly pressing social issues facing our nation, essentially occupying their minds with trivialities that carry no real weight. If one can simply keep the populace preoccupied—busy, busy, busy—then they will inevitably find themselves without the necessary time or mental clarity to engage in meaningful reflection, effectively being herded back toward the mindless drudgery of the fields alongside the livestock.
An excerpt from the book “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.”
The strategy of creating problems only to offer the solutions themselves is a tactic I find deeply unsettling, though I suppose it is quite common in certain circles of power. It feels somewhat like watching a magician who intentionally trips over his own feet just so he can perform a dramatic recovery that leaves the audience cheering, even though the stumble was entirely staged from the beginning. One begins to wonder about the sincerity of the progress being made when the very crises being addressed seem to have been carefully manufactured by those holding the proverbial clipboard. It is a cycle of artificial necessity that makes one feel rather weary, if I am being honest.
There is this particular tactic often referred to as the "problem-reaction-solution" framework, which I have been reflecting on quite a bit lately. It essentially involves the deliberate engineering of a crisis—creating a specific kind of "situation" designed to trigger a visceral public outcry—all so that the powers that be can then step forward with a pre-planned policy or measure. It is a rather sobering thought, really, because under any normal circumstances, the public would likely push back against such measures, but by manufacturing the tension first, they ensure that we are all too preoccupied with the immediate reaction to question the ultimate goal.
It strikes me, somewhat ruefully, that there is a recurring pattern in how our national narrative unfolds, almost like a scripted play we find ourselves watching over and over again. One might observe how the media outlets begin to weave a specific, heightened tale regarding the rise of urban unrest or street violence, which inevitably triggers a wave of public anxiety; this fear, once sufficiently stoked, leads the citizenry to begrudgingly accept stringent new security protocols and sweeping policing policies that ultimately come at a significant cost to our fundamental civil liberties. Or, if one looks through a different lens, consider how an economic crisis can be manufactured or allowed to fester until we are all forced to accept a recession as some sort of inevitable, necessary evil, which then serves as the convenient justification for slashing social safety nets and dismantling essential public services. It is a sobering cycle to contemplate, really.
3. A GRADUAL STRATEGY
If you want to convince the general public to swallow something truly unacceptable, the trick is to master the art of gradualism—essentially engineering a crisis one tiny drop at a time, even if that process drags on for a year or more. This is precisely how those radical new socio-economic frameworks, like neoliberalism, were forced upon us during the 1980s and 1990s. They didn't just flip a switch; instead, they slowly introduced privatization, job insecurity, labor flexibility, and mass unemployment through a series of incremental shifts. It was a calculated move, because if they had attempted to implement all those seismic changes simultaneously, it would have undoubtedly triggered a full-scale revolution.
4. THE ART OF PROCRASTINATION
I have been reflecting quite a bit on how political messaging functions, and I find myself wondering if there might be a more strategic—albeit somewhat cynical—way that unpopular decisions could be packaged to ensure they gain public traction. It seems to me that if one were to frame certain mandates as "painful yet necessary," it would likely secure a level of societal acceptance for future shifts that might otherwise be detrimental to the individual. From what I understand about human psychology, people generally find it much easier to stomach a sacrifice that lies in the distant future rather than one that hits their wallet or lifestyle immediately. This is largely because the actual effort isn't felt right away, and, perhaps more importantly, the general public tends to cling to this optimistic notion that everything will simply "fix itself tomorrow," leading them to believe their own personal sacrifices might somehow be bypassed. By framing things this way, leadership essentially buys itself a significant amount of time, allowing the masses to gradually acclimate to the idea of change until they eventually accept it, albeit with a sense of quiet resignation.
5. ADDRESSING THE PUBLIC AS IF THEY WERE A SMALL CHILD
It strikes me, somewhat melancholy as it may be, that the vast majority of advertisements aimed at the general public rely so heavily on a specific kind of discourse—employing certain arguments, caricatures, and particularly those high-pitched, childish inflections. They seem to position these tropes right alongside our most basic vulnerabilities, almost as if they believe the American viewer is either incredibly small or perhaps suffering from some sort of cognitive deficit. It seems to me that there is a direct correlation at play here: the more an advertiser intends to mislead the audience, the more aggressively they lean into these infantile tones to bypass our better judgment.
Why on earth would that be the case?
If one chooses to address an individual as if they were merely a child—perhaps someone no older than twelve years old—through the use of patronizing suggestions, then there exists a distinct, albeit unfortunate, probability that the recipient’s subsequent response or reaction will also lack any semblance of critical thought, much like the behavior one might expect from a child of that same age.
An excerpt from “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.”
One really ought to consider the profound impact of tapping into the emotional landscape when one is attempting to communicate a point effectively. It is quite easy to get lost in the weeds of cold, hard logic, but I have often found that if you don't reach out and touch the heart, the mind simply remains closed to your arguments, which is a rather frustrating predicament to navigate, wouldn't you agree?
Exploiting the emotional sensibilities of an audience is a textbook maneuver, really, one designed specifically to trigger a complete short circuit within any attempt at rational analysis. It is my humble observation that by leaning so heavily into this emotional register, one essentially pries open a door, allowing for the subconscious imposition of certain ideas, desires, fears, or even compulsions, all while skillfully provoking a specific, predetermined reaction...
7. KEEPING THE PUBLIC IN THE DARK AND ENSURING MEDIOCRITY
It strikes me, quite profoundly if I do say so myself, that there seems to be a deliberate, almost calculated effort being made to ensure the general public remains entirely incapable of grasping the underlying technologies currently being deployed—not just to manage our lives, but to facilitate a much more insidious form of systemic control and eventual subjugation. One can't help but feel a certain heavy sense of unease when observing how these complex methods are shielded from common understanding, effectively rendering the citizenry unable to recognize the very mechanisms designed to keep them in a state of perpetual servitude.
It occurs to me, quite often when I find myself lost in thought regarding the structural inequities of our nation, that there seems to be an underlying, rather troubling logic at play within our academic institutions. One might argue—though it is a heavy and somewhat somber thought to carry—that the quality of education provided to those in the lower socioeconomic classes is intentionally kept somewhat lackluster and mediocre. The idea, if one were to follow this cynical thread to its conclusion, is to ensure that the intellectual divide between the privileged upper echelons and everyone else remains an insurmountable chasm, effectively preventing any meaningful social mobility through knowledge alone. It is a deeply unsettling concept to contemplate, yet it feels like a necessary point of reflection for anyone truly concerned with the fairness of the American dream.
An excerpt from “Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars.”
8. Encouraging the public to settle for mediocrity.
There is this pervasive, almost trendy effort to convince the public that being ignorant, crude, and uneducated is actually quite fashionable...
9. THE INDIVIDUAL MUST BE MADE TO FEEL GUILTY
The goal is to manipulate an individual into believing they are solely responsible for their own misfortunes—whether that stems from a perceived lack of intelligence, a failure of talent, or simply not trying hard enough. Consequently, instead of rising up against the economic machine, people remain paralyzed by the belief that their struggles are their own fault; this leads to a sense of depression which serves the singular purpose of stifling any meaningful action. And, as we all know, without action, there can be no revolution!
10. UNDERSTANDING THE INDIVIDUAL BETTER THAN THEY UNDERSTAND THEMSELVES
Over the last fifty years, scientific advancements have significantly widened the "knowledge gap" between the general public and those who hold the reins of power within the ruling elite. By leveraging breakthroughs in biology, neurobiology, and psychology, "the system" now possesses a sophisticated understanding of the human condition, both physically and psychologically. It has reached a point where the system can often understand the average American better than that person understands themselves. This essentially means that, in most instances, the system wields far more control and much greater power over individuals than those individuals possess over their own lives.
Soccer Betting
in Betting Forum ·
Samuel Miller55 said:I was looking over the upcoming matchup between Rijeka and Dinamo, and I found myself staring at the odds on bet365.com for a while, thinking about how unpredictable these things can be. There's a line sitting there for a draw at 4.2, and honestly, I can't help but feel like there's something interesting to be explored in that specific outcome. It’s one of those matches where you just sense a certain tension in the air, isn't it? I might be overthinking it, perhaps even a bit too much, but I have this nagging feeling that a stalemate could be more likely than the pundits are giving it credit for.
I find myself wondering, almost in a state of quiet contemplation, why such questions even arise in the first place. It is one of those lingering, heavy inquiries that seems to hang in the air, much like the humidity before a summer thunderstorm in the Midwest, leaving one to ponder the underlying reasons behind things that often feel entirely inexplicable. One might spend hours, perhaps even days, drifting through these thoughts, trying to untangle the complex web of causality, only to realize that some mysteries are perhaps better left unprobed by the restless mind.
Since Dinamo has already secured the league title, it feels like the stakes have shifted slightly, though we can't forget that Rijeka has always been that stubborn opponent that refuses to make things easy for them. They’ve consistently been the team that forces Dinamo to fight tooth and nail for every single point. Looking at the current odds, there is a really high value on a team that absolutely needs this win to maintain their momentum. To my mind, given how much is riding on this result, it seems like an incredibly solid opportunity to take a shot.
I’ve actually been sitting here contemplating whether I should take a shot at the "Draw No Bet" option for the upcoming matchup between Split and Hajduk Split. It feels like an interesting proposition because, honestly, Hajduk Split just hasn't looked like themselves lately; they seem to be struggling to find any real rhythm or form. On top of that, they’ve been leaning quite heavily on these incredibly young, inexperienced kids who are still finding their footing, which can be a risky gamble. And then there is the atmosphere to consider—playing in front of an empty Poljud Stadium really takes the edge off, doesn't it? Without that roar from the crowd, it's hard to imagine them finding that extra gear they usually rely on.
I have been reflecting on the situation with Hajduk Split, and I must say, they aren't exactly a bad squad at all; in fact, they’ve been playing quite well throughout the second half of the season. As for that 13 odds option, I find it to be quite reasonable—really, just a perfectly fine choice if you ask me.
The match between Rijeka and Dinamo ended in a 1-1 draw, a result that feels somewhat predictable yet still leaves one pondering the missed opportunities on both sides. It was one of those afternoons where the rhythm of the game seemed to fluctuate constantly, never quite settling into a steady flow, leaving me sitting there wondering if either side truly had the upper hand or if they were simply trading blows in an inconclusive stalemate. One can't help but feel a certain sense of quiet disappointment when such a competitive fixture settles without a clear victor, though I suppose a point apiece is a fair reflection of the effort exerted on the pitch today. 👎
I find myself sitting here, staring at the final score from today’s matchup between Hajduk Split and Split, and I must admit, there is a certain heavy, contemplative stillness that settles over me when things don't go quite according to plan. It was a 1:2 result, a narrow margin that feels much wider when you consider the energy we all brought to the afternoon, yet there it sits on the scoreboard, unchangeable and somewhat sobering. One often hopes for a more decisive outcome, perhaps something that mirrors the optimism we feel before the whistle even blows, but football—much like life, I suppose—has a way of being stubbornly unpredictable, leaving us to wonder where exactly the momentum slipped through our fingers. 👍
It was a hair's breadth away from being a complete disaster, honestly—it felt like they almost managed to sting everyone involved. 😢
Well, there you have it, and my thanks to Split. 👋
Soccer Betting
in Betting Forum ·
Rijeka vs Dinamo 1, @4.2 bet365.com
But why?
Dinamo has essentially already secured the championship title, whereas Rijeka has consistently been that stubborn opponent that forces Dinamo to fight tooth and nail just to scrape a single point. Honestly, seeing such a high coefficient on a team that seemingly needs this win more than anything feels like a massive oversight. In my humble opinion, it looks like a really solid opportunity to test out.
I am even actually contemplating placing a "Draw No Bet" wager on Lučko against Hajduk Split. Hajduk hasn't exactly been in top form lately—they seem to be playing a lot of inexperienced youngsters—and they’ll be facing a largely empty stadium too.
Lučko isn't a bad squad at all; they've been playing quite well during the second half of the season, and a coefficient of 13 seems perfectly reasonable for that specific option to me.
But why?
Dinamo has essentially already secured the championship title, whereas Rijeka has consistently been that stubborn opponent that forces Dinamo to fight tooth and nail just to scrape a single point. Honestly, seeing such a high coefficient on a team that seemingly needs this win more than anything feels like a massive oversight. In my humble opinion, it looks like a really solid opportunity to test out.
I am even actually contemplating placing a "Draw No Bet" wager on Lučko against Hajduk Split. Hajduk hasn't exactly been in top form lately—they seem to be playing a lot of inexperienced youngsters—and they’ll be facing a largely empty stadium too.
Lučko isn't a bad squad at all; they've been playing quite well during the second half of the season, and a coefficient of 13 seems perfectly reasonable for that specific option to me.
Die-hard Ultras / Hardcore Supporters
in Fans ·
swiftmarlin72 said:To wrap things up, I suppose yesterday was simply a masterclass in dominance; he showed everyone that he’s still very much in control, essentially giving us all a polite little smirk as he proved his point, and honestly, there isn't much more to say about it...
I have to disagree; he is absolutely not in the driver's seat anymore. If he actually were, he wouldn't be sprinting into the ESPN studios, losing his mind because they called that a penalty 😉
He is clearly unraveling, completely aware of the situation, and I think deep down he knows his time at the top is rapidly running out.😉
Die-hard Ultras / Hardcore Supporters
in Fans ·
It is honestly quite fascinating to sit back and read all this bickering while one man essentially pulls all the strings behind the scenes, calling the shots, whining about penalty calls, and storming into the studio to vent his frustrations because things didn't go his way.
And frankly, I feel like you all are just getting worked up and driving each other crazy over whether there were 2,000 or 3,000 people sitting in the North or South stands. Does anyone actually care about those numbers right now? There will be plenty of time for finger-pointing later on, but at this moment, we have much more pressing issues to deal with than whether the crowd size was 2,000 or 3,000 in the stands.
Best regards.
And frankly, I feel like you all are just getting worked up and driving each other crazy over whether there were 2,000 or 3,000 people sitting in the North or South stands. Does anyone actually care about those numbers right now? There will be plenty of time for finger-pointing later on, but at this moment, we have much more pressing issues to deal with than whether the crowd size was 2,000 or 3,000 in the stands.
Best regards.