But he believes that
such images and concepts can acquire fresh meaning if considered in terms
of the Whiteheadian understanding
of Jesus as our model
of what it means to overcome the common divergence that we as humans experience between that
course of action which God presents to us and that
course of action we find ourselves naturally wanting to
follow (104).
there is no doubting that Arsene has helped to provide us with some incredible footballing moments in the formative years
of his managerial career at Arsenal, but that certainly doesn't and shouldn't mean that he has earned the right to decide when and how he should leave this club... there have been numerous managers at each
of the biggest clubs in Europe throughout the last decade who have waged far more successful campaigns than ours yet somehow and someway each were given their walking papers because they failed to meet the standards laid out by the hierarchy
of their respective clubs...
of course that doesn't mean that clubs should simply
follow the lead
of others, especially if clubs
of note have become too reactionary when it comes to issues
of termination, for whatever reasons, but there should be some logical discourse when it comes to the setting
of parameters for a changing
of the guard... in the case
of Arsenal, this sort
of discourse was largely stifled when the higher - ups devised their sinister plan on the eve
of our move to the Emirates... by giving Wenger a free pass due to supposed financial constraints he, unwittingly or not, set the bar too low... it reminds me
of a landlord who says he will only rent to «professional people» to maintain a certain standard then does a complete about face when the market is lean and vacancies are up... for those who rented under the original mandate they
of course feel cheated but there is little they can do, except move on, especially if the landlord clearly cares more about profitability than keeping their word... unfortunately for the lifelong fans
of a football club it's not so easy to switch allegiances and frankly why should they, in most cases we have been around far longer than them... so how does one deal with
such an untenable situation... do you simply shut - up and hope for the best, do you place the best interests
of those with only self - serving agendas above the collective and pray that karma eventually catches up with them, do you run away with your tail between your legs and only return when things have ultimately changed, do you keep trying to find silver linings to justify your very existence, do you lower your expectations by convincing yourself it could be worse or do you stand up for what you believe in by holding people accountable for their
actions, especially when every fiber
of your being tells you that something is rotten in the state
of Denmark
The rationale is set out in pragmatic terms in Ursula Becker v Finanzamt Münster - Innenstadt [1982] CJEU (Case 8/81) as
follows: `... in cases in which the Community authorities have, by means
of a directive, placed Member States under a duty to adopt a certain
course of action, the effectiveness
of such a measure would be diminished if persons were prevented from relying upon it in proceedings before a court....»
For these reasons alone, I «believe» that the best
course of action going forward is to somehow «abdicate» my duty as a «forceful» judge by using words (I, Brian Martindale, call the
following words «weasle words»)
such as «seems» and «properly» to allow Mr. Dale's (again, according to my personal, singular decision - making process)
action to proceed to the next, actually «meaningful» stage
of legal proceedings.