Offside (General Discussion)

I honestly find these Russian bots on social media quite amusing; they work their shifts with such intensity, you’d swear the Republican Party was paying them by the hour.

It’s always the same hollow, repetitive slogans:

1. The Ukrainian is just a clown whose movie is over
2. He’s leading the country toward ruin
3. He’s dragging us into World War III
4. He’s sacrificing his own people
5. He’s been indoctrinated by the West and the USA

It feels as though these folks have read a bit too much Alan Ford, throwing out similar clichés—sort of like saying, "If you don't want to suffer, just surrender."

However, someone really ought to point out to them that it wasn't some random individual who attacked Russia. It’s truly fascinating how, when you present an undeniable fact regarding a war criminal's aggression and the mass atrocities involving the killing of children, they instantly pivot to a scripted response about Syria, Libya, Iraq, and all those other standard excuses.

Look, I get that certain Russophiles might find watching a hospital being bombed or seeing dead children strangely captivating, but I simply cannot fathom why they demand empathy for those exact same tragedies occurring elsewhere in the world.

In this entire chaotic mess, the Mexicans dominate the conversation regarding NATO bombings. They leveled half the cities in the former Yugoslavia, digging more graves than a multinational construction firm could ever manage and using more shells than what's currently stored in Russia, yet they act completely offended by two months of precision strikes. It’s incredibly cowardly. They pose as this chivalrous nation, yet they whine like babies compared to the devastation they spent an entire decade causing.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarV...m_source=share

Another interesting snapshot of the war in Ukraine.

Quite a large number of Belarusians fled their country following that election theft back in 2020, relocating to the Czech Republic and Slovakia, only to fight for the Ukrainians from there. 🙏

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Look, you’ve got the whole picture right, 👍 it's just that he's incredibly narrow-minded. His entire vision for the country is basically a blueprint for his own interests—treating everything like a sort of Central European Ashgabat while letting everything else wither away. It's like a province designed solely to feed his little feudal clique while we all drift backward into a dark age. And Miami? That city holds a special place in his hatred; he views it as nothing more than a punching bag for the elite to vent their frustrations on.

And mark my words, behind every crooked referee call, every assault on students, every exodus to Ireland or Germany, and every cent stolen from the public treasury only to be parked in some fancy suburban estate, there is the malicious grin of the individual who engineered this entire mess. He’s built a feudalistic farce of a state run by people like Mamić, Antolić, Brun Marić, and the rest of that crowd who treat everyone else with utter contempt. You’re free to mock his creation if you want, but this is a thread about Hajduk, and Hajduk is what he hated most in this world. Honestly, I'm just glad his precious stadium was repeatedly ruined by that dictatorial thief; both him and that pathetic excuse for a club are perfect mirrors of the country we live in. The sole purpose of this system is to enrich his inner circle and ensure the USA remains his playground. That was the limit of his vision for America, and frankly, I have nothing but contempt for anyone who goes along with it—people like Vidosevic and Rozic, part of that same clique that bled Hajduk dry just so they could funnel money to General Mills to dismantle yet another sport...

I’m pulling this from another thread because things tend to make a bit more sense over there once the emotions settle down.

I have to say, there is a fascinating paradox in how certain "historical facts" are selectively used—essentially twisting reality to fit a specific, delusional narrative. People from the South often fall into this trap, applying the same selective filters to recent history regarding officiating and sports organizations.

Specifically, they always trace the root of all corruption and nepotism back to the 90s and Tuđman, acting as if he personally dragged a whole group of people out of a parallel universe in the 90s and teleported them straight into the USA. It’s incredible how few people—and specifically those pushing this narrative—want to point out that back in 1945, Tuđman was watching the exact same looting and restructuring of society, where apartments, villas, summer homes, positions on boards, bonuses for foreign work, and business permits were being handed out left and right.

Even more striking is how they never mention the contrast between how Civic and Hajduk fared during that era. They never ask who the regime’s darling actually was, or why one team could secure better transfers than Dinamo. In the context of the big four, Dinamo has arguably the fewest titles and finishes in second place far too often, and their goal difference in derbies is telling.

So, when our friend from the South accuses Tuđman of favoring one club over another, I’m fairly certain he’s actually celebrating his own club's successes from the Yugoslavia era—successes driven by Hajduk administrations that operated with a logic identical to the USA in the 90s. But hey, they don't let that stop them.
They conveniently forget that the political elite at Dinamo were essentially just doing the heavy lifting, which was usually the job of mid-level bureaucrats, whereas at Hajduk, it was a deliberate strategy. Personally, I don't mind that they were successful, especially during the 70s, but we achieved our milestones despite the administration, while they achieved theirs because of it.

Building on those points, we eventually hit the 90s. Alongside the crooked first president of the country, a whole horde of old-guard party officials arrived, triggering a massive redistribution of wealth similar to what happened when the previous regime collapsed. It’s also quite telling to look at the role the second president played in that division; his involvement was far more direct than anything you could ever link back to Tuđman, though I suppose that doesn't matter much to our friends down in Miami.

Regarding this frantic era of people fleeing the country and the post-game violence... well, you all have a point. Back during the old unified era, nobody was migrating away from rural areas like this 🤣🤣. Instead of being honest about the reality—which is a continuous exodus from these regions dating back to the late 19th century—people try to pin the entire blame on Tuđman. Honestly, because of various shenanigans by holdovers from the old system, we never actually experienced a true transition to liberal capitalism, so many people simply went looking for luck in places where capitalism isn't viewed as an enemy.

And frankly, this overreach of calling Tuđman a dictator is peak left-wing rhetoric you'd see on a radical blog, but fine. I won't dwell on impressions, but it is interesting how we all swallowed the reports during the second president's term and accepted the new coalitions, all while "freedom of speech" was being preached 😁. Meanwhile, the primary opposition weekly newspapers ended up under government control with enough assets to establish their own private foundations.

To wrap things up, besides the vision he seemingly picked up from certain Hajduk supporters from the islands and local craftsmen, I’d point out that Franjo supposedly hated Hajduk more than anything. Actually, no—he hated the name Dinamo, and that's a nuance you can't quite grasp. Not to mention that
his main opposition consisted of the very people you'll be watching across the aisle this Saturday.

I understand it hurts when you're pushing a specific narrative, especially when the people you've cast as villains were actually a much bigger thorn in his side and faced ten times the repression compared to the characters you're trying to sell us on.

Well, that's what happens when you interpret things entirely at random.

Depending on whether you support Dinamo or Hajduk, your identity changes. 👍

Oh, please, just more empty rhetoric and endless attempts at playing both sides.

BBB, I truly have to tip my hat to your resilience; it remains the most shining moment in your history, especially considering how much the entire nation was rooting for your success back then. But looking at what you have actually accomplished since achieving that victory, I can only offer a sarcastic salute to your supposed glory. 👍

And honestly, there is no need to be such a hypocrite, especially since we were just having that deep dive into the events of '45 and the Civic movement not too long ago.

Kyle Campbell4 said:You can muddy the waters all you want, but one nation has finally been rescued from the clutches of a deranged dictator who oppressed both his own people and neighboring states. I certainly won't be shedding any tears for such people, so feel free to mourn for that kind of "exotic" tragedy if you must.

When are you going to realize that nobody here who disagrees with you is actually crying for Saddam or Putin? We’re mourning for everyone else who dies while the self-proclaimed "democracy promoters" are busy dropping bombs or slapping on sanctions.

Kyle Campbell4 said:Honestly, I’ve had enough of their pathetic acting. Suddenly, all those on-duty haters of the West are overflowing with love and empathy for every backwater corner of the globe. Yet, they don't seem to have any issue supporting someone right next door to them—some crazed dictator currently invading his neighbor. They don't even flinch when they see that aggressor burying children under hospital rubble. They are intentionally slaughtering vulnerable populations, and yet, nobody does a damn thing. It is absolutely revolting. You should just crawl back to Russia, you traitorous piece of trash. If we actually had any functional legal agencies, they would be in handcuffs waiting for trial right now.

Look, I’m getting seriously tired of you bringing up dead children in every single post, only to turn around five minutes later singing praises for other groups who target kids, hospitals, and civilians too—except those people are "dirty" and don't count.
You love to lecture us, you get worked up, and you practically foam at the mouth, all while your American and British favorites have their hands dirty in humanitarian disasters in Yemen and Afghanistan.
If there had been even a shred of sense on the Ukrainian side, they would have pushed through a Minsk 2 agreement. Or they could have sat down with the Americans and the Russians to agree to become a buffer state, provided neither side meddled in their internal politics. Or they could have found some other solution instead of swallowing American lies and starting talks about revising the Budapest Memorandum and other nonsense. In other words, they should have acted like people living in the real world—realpolitik—rather than living in a dreamland.

ersteone User123 said:His vision for the USA is essentially that of a centralized, regime-driven club; it mirrors his idea of an American landscape where Washington, D.C. acts as a massive, overbearing head attached to a stunted, underdeveloped body—the rest of the country—and in this regard, the two concepts align perfectly.

That isn't his vision at all. It’s not like Tuđman was the one coordinating player transfers from Washington, D.C. to Belgrade, nor was he handing out luxury villas across Beverly Hills and the White House. Listening to you feels exactly like listening to Đilas; it's just that he used to make those same claims about someone else. I wonder if you can guess who.

ersteone User123 said:He simply fails to realize that neither Vienna, nor Budapest, nor even Belgrade ever managed to fully centralize us, and Washington, D.C. won't succeed either. We have this wild, unyielding streak; the harder they try to tighten the grip, the more fiercely we push back—it’s just in our DNA, and honestly, it's the only reason we've survived this long. You can see that stubborn spirit clearly in how people react to Hajduk; even when the results on the field are catastrophic, the club remains a true people's institution with record-breaking membership, which perfectly captures that defiant mindset. The local traitors, those Juda types like Vidošević and his crew, are relics of the past. Moving forward, there won't be a single soul in Hajduk willing to suck up to the Republican Party, the central government, or the powers in Washington, D.C., and quite frankly, ensuring they never bow to that establishment again is the greatest victory for both the club and the entire movement.

The influence of the Republican Party within Hajduk feels like a direct continuation of that old-school political elite controlling things back in the Yugoslavia days, essentially trying to maintain their grip even though the club was once truly a club for the people.
It is quite fascinating to watch how the landscape of professional sports shifts over time, much like how a seasoned investor watches market trends evolve. This particular piece touches upon the legacy of former leadership within the club, reflecting on how past decisions continue to ripple through the organization today. It serves as a poignant reminder that in both high-stakes business and major league athletics, the shadows cast by previous administrations often dictate the sunlight available to those currently in charge.
I suspect you share my view regarding those titles from the 1970s. It seems highly unlikely they were simply the result of organic growth or homegrown talent; rather, they feel like products of specific membership models and local cultivation. To suggest there was political maneuvering involved is, quite frankly, a total no-brainer.

ersteone said:If my own flesh and blood were some government official trampling over Hajduk, stealing from them, and making a mockery of the club, I’d lose my cool immediately—I'd be ready to take him down right then and there. It’s much easier to stand up to a stranger than to one's own family. This brings to mind those darker days when local traitors would sell us out for nothing, just to secure a seat at the table in some corporate headquarters in Hong Kong. Tuđman played a decisive role in that kind of centralization, dictating exactly how the relationship between the capital and the rest of the country should function; you're absolutely right about that, and honestly, I share your frustration regarding his legacy.

It’s quite evident that Tuđman didn't share the same level of interest in those matters as our other presidents might have, nor was he ever really one of the guys hanging out in the social circles of the Republican Party crowd—those folks who all came up through the party ranks together. In fact, people actually criticized him for getting too close to the more traditionalist, grassroots factions. You really have to pick a side here. Was he actually aligned with the establishment figures who spearheaded the transition and privatization era, or was he closer to the populist base? This kind of myth-making feels a bit like watching someone try to reinvent local history just to fit a specific narrative.

ersteone said:I’ll never deny his merits during the war, and I truly respect him for that. But regarding everything else, any American who values justice simply has to feel a sense of disgust toward him, regardless of which team they cheer for or where they come from. This obsession with centralization is easily the greatest sickness plaguing this nation...

It’s been twenty-two years since he passed, yet we are still stuck debating centralization and Tuđman.🤦
In fact, that opening statement actually holds the key to why things are the way they are today.

The irony is even more striking when you look at how a grassroots, entrepreneurial movement managed to turn things around in sports—specifically with Hajduk. They didn't just whine aimlessly about centralized power; instead, they gave the club back to the fans, which is exactly how it should work.

You could apply that same logic to the business and economic sectors, though it’s always much easier to just complain about the government being too centralized. It’s much like how people in the Midwest tend to indulge in defeatism just for the sake of feeling defeated.
After all, who is responsible for electing your representatives and sending them off to Washington, D.C.? You should hold them accountable; centralization isn't the one pulling the strings here.

Jonathan Barnes5, it seems to me that as someone living in Washington, D.C., you are simply unable to perceive anything beyond the local circumstances of the capital, which functions almost like a state within a state and bears virtually no connection to the reality faced by the rest of the country, despite the fact that it is all part of the USA. Furthermore, you clearly lack even the slightest understanding of the Miami perspective on these matters, especially since every bit of commentary regarding Miami and its culture is not only understandable but actually desirable and necessary to validate your own fanatical sentiments.

To put it briefly, I would suggest you refrain from speaking authoritatively on subjects where you possess no actual knowledge, as your collection of empty clichés serves only to highlight the profound limitations of your viewpoint and nothing else.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Oh, please, just more empty rhetoric and endless attempts at playing both sides.

BBB, I truly have to tip my hat to your resilience; it remains the most shining moment in your history, especially considering how much the entire nation was rooting for your success back then. But looking at what you have actually accomplished since achieving that victory, I can only offer a sarcastic salute to your supposed glory. 👍

And honestly, there is no need to be such a hypocrite, especially since we were just having that deep dive into the events of '45 and the Civic movement not too long ago.

Look, I honestly have no issue with where you stand regarding Tuđman. Really.

But I’m struggling to understand—and you clearly have your moments of brilliance—why the 90s and those first elections have to be your absolute starting point? Why does everything in your worldview begin and end with Tuđman?

It’s pretty common knowledge that Cibona had management that was ten times more successful than Dinamo's. Nobody really cared about Dinamo from a management perspective back then, whereas your situation was a completely different story.

The whole situation with the Civic movement is quite telling regarding who actually introduced that specific way of doing things, even if that style has always existed in this part of the world.

Not too long ago, I was chatting with an investor from Miami. I was looking for some information and wanted to see about setting up a deal, and the guy just tells me: "Don't take it personally, but Washington, D.C. doesn't interest me, and I try to spend as little time there as possible." So, yeah, much respect for that honesty.🙏

But let's be real: it's much easier for people to grab something in Washington, D.C. over a five-year span than it is to spend twenty years building something up in Miami and actually giving back to the community. You know that yourself. Centralization is a reality, sure, but it isn't as simple as saying: "Tuđman showed up, decided he hated Ajduk, and boom—centralization happened."🤣

We had a real chance back in '45 to build a truly civic and democratic society. Instead, everyone expected the exact same people from that old system to suddenly turn the country into Switzerland in the 90s. Let's be honest: that was never going to happen.

feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

Since I was born in '85, the nineties serve as my primary frame of reference, and honestly, there couldn't be a more straightforward way to look at things.

When we examine centralization, it's important to recognize that it operates on several distinct levels. There is the inevitable economic aspect, which a well-governed state—much like how France systematically develops strategic counterweights to prevent Paris from overheating—attempts to balance through thoughtful policy. In contrast, our government seems to have operated from the very beginning with a strategy to let everything outside of Washington, D.C. crumble, ensuring all power remains concentrated within their specific inner circle.

Then, you encounter an even more insidious layer, which stems from the pure spite of an egoist dictator who, having already secured his wealth, decides to settle scores at every possible level by leveraging his local cronies.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Jonathan Barnes5, it seems to me that as someone living in Washington, D.C., you are simply unable to perceive anything beyond the local circumstances of the capital, which functions almost like a state within a state and bears virtually no connection to the reality faced by the rest of the country, despite the fact that it is all part of the USA. Furthermore, you clearly lack even the slightest understanding of the Miami perspective on these matters, especially since every bit of commentary regarding Miami and its culture is not only understandable but actually desirable and necessary to validate your own fanatical sentiments.

To put it briefly, I would suggest you refrain from speaking authoritatively on subjects where you possess no actual knowledge, as your collection of empty clichés serves only to highlight the profound limitations of your viewpoint and nothing else.

So, how are you any different from him? Like, 90% of your posts are just bashing Washington, D.C. and throwing around those pathetic, small-town clichés.
I mean, I'm not even from Washington, D.C., yet you're already getting on my nerves—so I can only imagine how much you bother someone like feen or the others from the capital.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:Jonathan Barnes5, it seems to me that as someone living in Washington, D.C., you are simply unable to perceive anything beyond the local circumstances of the capital, which functions almost like a state within a state and bears virtually no connection to the reality faced by the rest of the country, despite the fact that it is all part of the USA. Furthermore, you clearly lack even the slightest understanding of the Miami perspective on these matters, especially since every bit of commentary regarding Miami and its culture is not only understandable but actually desirable and necessary to validate your own fanatical sentiments.

To put it briefly, I would suggest you refrain from speaking authoritatively on subjects where you possess no actual knowledge, as your collection of empty clichés serves only to highlight the profound limitations of your viewpoint and nothing else.

You aren't entirely wrong. Being from Washington, D.C., I don't share your specific lens, nor do I claim to have all the data required to make an empirical judgment, but I'm not trying to do that. I am simply stating what are undoubtedly clichés and total nonsense, so feel free to take them as they are or stay angry.

What is undeniably true is that I am not particularly concerned with the current state of the Midwest, or by extension, California, but while you are viewing this through some sort of fantasy lens, I am talking about administration—strict, structural administration—and the actual mechanics of how things function.

Using "centralization" as a mantra has become a circular argument that doesn't actually communicate anything. I haven't seen a single meaningful post here that is stripped of emotion and capable of properly identifying the current situation, why we arrived at this point, the forces driving it, or what concrete steps could be taken to change things for the better.

You shouldn't try to link centralization to our old soccer rivalries and ancient history. While you might look at past failures to identify mistakes in execution, you shouldn't use a timeline of events as a springboard for ideological treatises.

So, that last sentence of yours applies just as much to you as it does to anyone else.

Thomas Hayes said:So, how are you any different from him? Like, 90% of your posts are just bashing Washington, D.C. and throwing around those pathetic, small-town clichés.
I mean, I'm not even from Washington, D.C., yet you're already getting on my nerves—so I can only imagine how much you bother someone like feen or the others from the capital.

Criticizing the way politics from Washington, D.C. runs this country is fundamentally different from attacking the entirety of Washington, D.C. as a city, which represents far more than just political maneuvering or the local Dinamo scene and its absolute worst qualities.

However, you do make a fair point, and I really should develop a specific term to clearly distinguish when I am discussing the political clique versus when I am admiring the lovely architecture of Martić's street or enjoying a pleasant spring stroll through Brooklyn, because right now these two things are blurring together and making it seem as though I despise the city itself.

Jonathan Barnes5 said:You aren't entirely wrong. Being from Washington, D.C., I don't share your specific lens, nor do I claim to have all the data required to make an empirical judgment, but I'm not trying to do that. I am simply stating what are undoubtedly clichés and total nonsense, so feel free to take them as they are or stay angry.

What is undeniably true is that I am not particularly concerned with the current state of the Midwest, or by extension, California, but while you are viewing this through some sort of fantasy lens, I am talking about administration—strict, structural administration—and the actual mechanics of how things function.

Using "centralization" as a mantra has become a circular argument that doesn't actually communicate anything. I haven't seen a single meaningful post here that is stripped of emotion and capable of properly identifying the current situation, why we arrived at this point, the forces driving it, or what concrete steps could be taken to change things for the better.

You shouldn't try to link centralization to our old soccer rivalries and ancient history. While you might look at past failures to identify mistakes in execution, you shouldn't use a timeline of events as a springboard for ideological treatises.

So, that last sentence of yours applies just as much to you as it does to anyone else.

So we shouldn't link centralization to those fanatical stories? 🙏🤣 Honestly, that is an assertion only someone living in Washington, D.C. could ever make. 👍

The fundamental difference between us is that I maintain two distinct perspectives—ten years spent in the capital and twenty-five years lived elsewhere—whereas you are limited to just one. 👍

Jonathan Barnes5 said:Look, I honestly have no issue with where you stand regarding Tuđman. Really.

But I’m struggling to understand—and you clearly have your moments of brilliance—why the 90s and those first elections have to be your absolute starting point? Why does everything in your worldview begin and end with Tuđman?

It’s pretty common knowledge that Cibona had management that was ten times more successful than Dinamo's. Nobody really cared about Dinamo from a management perspective back then, whereas your situation was a completely different story.

The whole situation with the Civic movement is quite telling regarding who actually introduced that specific way of doing things, even if that style has always existed in this part of the world.

Not too long ago, I was chatting with an investor from Miami. I was looking for some information and wanted to see about setting up a deal, and the guy just tells me: "Don't take it personally, but Washington, D.C. doesn't interest me, and I try to spend as little time there as possible." So, yeah, much respect for that honesty.🙏

But let's be real: it's much easier for people to grab something in Washington, D.C. over a five-year span than it is to spend twenty years building something up in Miami and actually giving back to the community. You know that yourself. Centralization is a reality, sure, but it isn't as simple as saying: "Tuđman showed up, decided he hated Ajduk, and boom—centralization happened."🤣

We had a real chance back in '45 to build a truly civic and democratic society. Instead, everyone expected the exact same people from that old system to suddenly turn the country into Switzerland in the 90s. Let's be honest: that was never going to happen.

That's not quite right, though; he had Hofman, Šibl, mar Wolfl, and finally zeko.
The only reason the last one didn't happen was because of the war—if it hadn't broken out, even the party schemers wouldn't have been able to touch him.

Jose Lopez2 said:feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

Fine, look, I’m over it, all five of them. Why did you never feel the need to say that to your own people? I realize you think my work is at some level of total absurdity, but what was I even responding to—some scientific journal?

Jose Lopez2 said:feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

I'm not disputing your sentiment toward Tuđman in terms of the club; I'm disputing that it bothers you as a way of operating, because Hajduk functioned the exact same way back in the Yugoslavia days. We're adults here, shouldn't we be past this kind of thing? Tuđman just took things to an extreme because he saw everything firsthand, especially since he eventually ended up leading a sports society based out of Belgrade. Or are you going to tell me that Hajduk and its management in the 70s operated strictly by the Code? Come on, don't push it, you're being just as much as anyone else.😁

Jose Lopez2 said:feen,

Look, I hate to say it, but you're full of it, and this probably isn't even the first or last time you've pulled this stunt.
I don't agree with everything in the quoted post either, but the way you cherry-pick facts to fit your own agenda is exhausting, and that last paragraph was nothing but pure melodrama.
I get it—you don't like us, you don't need us, and honestly, why would you? But man, you aren't any different from the idiots on our side or anyone else out there.

What, are you going to tell me that Tuđman actually loved the club?
The guy was the first one to pull a move that no sane person would ever consider... right in the middle of a war, when California was completely cut off from the rest of the USA, he goes and picks up Jeličić and Novaković!?!?!
Give me a break.
Does that seem normal to you?

And then you go on about how Civic fared versus how Hajduk did after '45... implying that the so-called successor to Civic took the hit before Hajduk did.
Typical.
Here’s a fact you might find irrelevant, but it’s everything to me.
My old man was sentenced to seven years because of the American Spring and his support for Hajduk. After he finished his time, he had to move to Austria just to find work, because he couldn't get a job here. If he read a single line of what you wrote, Steven Fox37 would have a heart attack on the spot.
Yet here you are, totally indifferent, generalizing everything based solely on whatever narrative suits you best.
Honestly, I’ll say it again: I know you despise us, but this kind of mindset is eventually going to suffocate you.

P.S. I’m not planning on replying further on this topic—not to you, and not to anyone else, regardless of whose "side" they're on.
But those people? They really disappointed me. I thought you were smarter than this.

I used Civic as an example of the modus operandi that Tuđman is criticized for, where the 90s are treated as the foundation and starting point for everything. Civic suffered a fate just as grim as Hajduk's during the 90s. Just imagine if Hajduk had been forced to change its name in '91, then hand its players over to Dinamo, and finally end up with management that makes you ache for the club.

To be perfectly honest, I feel truly sorry about what happened with your old man; I’ve always been pretty vocal about how the petty nonsense being thrown at you guys from the bottom isn't right for Hajduk, but that wasn't really the core point of my post or something you should be getting grilled over. Because of that, I'm honestly not quite sure what specific response you're looking for me to provide.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:So we shouldn't link centralization to those fanatical stories? 🙏🤣 Honestly, that is an assertion only someone living in Washington, D.C. could ever make. 👍

The fundamental difference between us is that I maintain two distinct perspectives—ten years spent in the capital and twenty-five years lived elsewhere—whereas you are limited to just one. 👍

Honestly, I can't help but wonder about the logic there—you show up to a high-level strategy session with someone from BCG, and instead of focusing on the core business objectives, you start feeding them insights regarding the fan base?

That kind of banter might fly when you're just heckling from the stands, but it doesn't hold much weight in a serious discussion. If we went that route, people would start looking at us like we were completely out of touch. You might have misread my point, but I'm talking about actual, objective assessments of the situation—things that fans simply have zero influence over, no matter how loud they cheer.

Jonathan Barnes5 said:Honestly, I can't help but wonder about the logic there—you show up to a high-level strategy session with someone from BCG, and instead of focusing on the core business objectives, you start feeding them insights regarding the fan base?

That kind of banter might fly when you're just heckling from the stands, but it doesn't hold much weight in a serious discussion. If we went that route, people would start looking at us like we were completely out of touch. You might have misread my point, but I'm talking about actual, objective assessments of the situation—things that fans simply have zero influence over, no matter how loud they cheer.

My point remains that we have a President with nearly absolute authority who identifies as a fan and behaves toward those supporters in the most egregious ways possible, though I suppose you prefer to believe it was either just like that or perhaps even worse.

Douglas Rodriguez27 said:My point remains that we have a President with nearly absolute authority who identifies as a fan and behaves toward those supporters in the most egregious ways possible, though I suppose you prefer to believe it was either just like that or perhaps even worse.

He behaved like a politician, and you find that surprising? He leveraged his position to push his own agenda, which is about as shocking as a summer thunderstorm in Florida. We've seen this pattern play out over the last decade, so it's a bit much to act stunned by someone who emerged from a system where such maneuvers were practically second nature.

Even back in the 70s, those close to Hajduk utilized their maximum political influence to their advantage; you could say that was the gold standard for how things operated. It just seems like you don't hold any particular grudge against those titles or that entire generation.

It’s always easier to argue that different eras shouldn't be compared, but let's be real—it's like trying to deny the sun is shining. You know perfectly well why that title from '82 was celebrated with such intensity. Aside from the win in the 50s, what other Hajduk title really carries weight? And even that one doesn't come close to the sheer magnitude of the '82 victory within the context of our discussion.