
Originally Posted by
beachbreak
when his perspective is different than mine is fine,but when it leaves out so much significant info like tony g.,who i'm not the guy to defend,and often puts obviously wrong photos like the 'infamous casino pier',and totally makes contradictory statements based on questionable sources like,so,let's see,was springsteen a 'big-time surfer,' or, 'not a very good surfer,' and was springsteen 'paddling out at dawn patrol,' 'sleeping on the beach,' or 'not to be woken up,' and my wife who has no interest in surfing whatsoever read it and thinks 'springsteen is known to show up at manasquan inlet from time to time' definitely makes it sound like the boss surfs the inlet a handful of times a year.
i don't know this guy jon,it would not be fair to attack him or surfer's journal in a mean-spirited way,but come on,people,just because he's making us feel so good about our identity doesn't mean we should just go along with his very narrow and totally incorrect representation of our history.
i'd bet springsteen and those guys were summer kooks who surfed a little on small days in the summer like all those summer kooks we complain about on swellinfo every summer,not 'a big-time surfer.' and if jon is such the pier local,then how does a photo end up in his article that is clearly some other pier.i'm not a pier local and it really stinks how this has happened before with him.the fact that so many lesser guys who moved away or are criminals or dirtbags are glorified,but tony is never mentioned,though he was on the peak at the pier back then,was on the world tour before anyone else,and never moved away to do it,either,and still totally rips.i could go on forever.