Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Ke1t

The Giant Mackie Theory

Recommended Posts

So I've been looking at this picture for a while, and there was something about it that didn't seem right... other than Mackie wearing an Aberdeen strip.

 

_59851732_mackie_sns.jpg

 

Couldn't put my finger on it... but I FINALLY figured it out. The little thing in focus just to the right of Mackie (our right) seemed to be a very familiar shape, but at first I just dismissed it as a piece of grass flying off the boot of a nearby player. But the more I studied this picture the more it became apparent that it wasn't simply a bit of grass.

 

This next picture shows my theory as to what that mystery object is.

 

vg7ccj.jpg

 

That's right. I've identified the mystery object as a Soviet MIG-17, manufactured circa 1952, and being heavily utilised against American aircraft in the skies over Vietnam when they were having the popular Vietnam War that they made films about.

 

Now, given the object is in focus (mostly) and Mackie is also in focus (unmongtunately) I'd estimate that they're really close together, rather than Mackie simply being half a mile closer to the camera. The unfocused crowd, by which I mean they're not in focus rather than just not paying attention, the unfocused crowd can't be more than 50 yards away, and this gives us a second solid basis to assume Mackie and the MIG-17 are really close together.

 

So I've got three theories in total regarding the original photograph.

 

Theory 1. It's a piece of grass, common enough in a sport played on a grass surface.

 

Theory 2. There's a tiny, tiny, MIG-17 flying around Pittodrie, and it was getting close-up recon pictures of Mackie.

 

Theory 3. This is, in fact, a picture of a regular sized MIG-17... flying around a Darren Mackie that I estimate to be... hang on, MIG-17 = 11.26 metres long. Mackie's heid is approximately 10 times the size of the MIG, and the human body is approximately 7 times the height of the heid, so 11.26 x 10 x 7 = 788.2 metres in height. So, this is in fact a picture of a regular sized MIG-17... flying around a Darren Mackie almost 800 metres tall.

 

I've discounted Theory 1, because ...I have. Theory 2 is just fucking ludicrous when you come to think of the logistics behind a tiny MIG-17.

 

This leaves me with theory 3, that there's a fucking GIGANTIC Darren Mackie schlubbing around Aberdeen, as yet unnoticed thanks to a combination of perpetual rain, low cloud, and his inherent ability to hide his vast size simply by overshadowing it by being pish at fitba.

 

We tend to view people by their primary, most salient point. So, as the story goes, a man can do good deeds all his life, but he fucks ONE goat... and what's he remembered for?

 

I reckon this is how it is with Darren Mackie.

 

He's so unbelievably shite at fitba that the fact he's 800 metres tall simply gets forgotten or not even noticed in the first place.

 

He steps over the Ricky Donald stand and starts his warm up... what are people saying? Not, "Jesus fucking SHITBALLS! Do you see how fucking GIGANTIC Darren Mackie is? He's fucking ENORMOUS! How in the FUCK have we not noticed this before? It's LITERALLY beyond fucking BELIEF that an 800 metre tall Downs -looking fucker could have been at the club all this time and we've never noticed! How have we not noticed? Dave! Dave!* How have we not noticed?"

 

No. What they say when Darren Mackie steps OVER the Ricky Donald stand is,

 

"Jesus fucking SHITBALLS!... It's Darren Mackie. He's pish. How in the FUCK has no-one in management noticed this before? It's LITERALLY beyond belief that a player as pish as Darren Mackie could have been at the club all this time and they've never noticed! How have they not noticed? Dave! Dave!* How have they not noticed?"

 

So my theory, through a a perfectly logical deductive process, is that Darren Mackie is indeed 800 metres tall, and that picture back up there is a genuine representation of the scale of Darren Mackie compared to a Soviet Cold War fighter jet, specifically the MIG-17, or 'Fresco' as NATO countries named it.

 

I'm now imagining Darren Mackie atop the Empire State Building, or the mini-scrapers in Seaton I suppose, fending off buzzing MIG-17's as he clutches Craig Broon in his giant, hairy mitt.

 

"Gie's a new coantract!" he bellows at Broon, as he swats another Soviet jet out of the air. "Gies a new coantract!"

 

I think what I'm trying to say here is that I'm really, really fucking bored right now.

 

 

 

 

*Dave is the name of the mate of the guy I'm speculating is stating his astonishment at giant Darren Mackie. And the pish Darren Mckie.

Edited by Ke1t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like one of the polystyrene planes you used to get bought for you as a kid Kelt, are you sure it's not one of them?

 

I hadn't considered it might be a toy MIG-17, but if that were the case then obviously all my Theory 3 calculations and investigations are for nothing. So I think it's probably reasonable to say that the chances of it being a toy are, if we're to be serious for a second, slim to none in the light of my (far more exciting) 800 metre tall Darren Mackie Theory.

 

I don't mean to discredit or ignore alternate theories... I welcome them.. it's just that they're all wrong except for The Giant Mackie Theory.

 

Jesus... it even has a cool name.

Edited by Ke1t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I get a mod ...or *cough* Admin... to rename this thread The Giant Mackie Theory?

 

Can I do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I never factored in for a moment that Darren Mackie was 800 Meters tall, but it's pretty obvious once it's out in the open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would explain him as a player and how he hardly ever got the ball in the net... it would be like one of us normal-sized folks... "The Little People" as Mackie calls us (and for some reason I'm imagining him saying that in an Irish accent.) It would be like one of us trying to control and volley a frozen pea into the neck of a beer bottle.

 

The evidence just keeps mounting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All just fits when it's laid out like that. Poor lad really, canna help his size. Can see why they kept playing him front on his own even though he doesn't score goals though, what manager wouldn't with an 800 meter tall striker?

Edited by dervish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All just fits when it's laid out like that. Poor lad really, canna help his size. Can see why they kept playing him front on his own even though he doesn't score goals though, what manager wouldn't with an 800 meter tall striker?

 

I think the logic would have been 1 Darren Mackie... technically, and if your only possible criteria is height, and in NO WAY WHATSOEVER factor footballing ability into this equation.... 1 Darren Mackie technically = 400 Peter Crouches, give or take a Peter Crouch or two.

 

And who wouldn't want to sign 400 Peter Crouches as your main striker, for the price of 1 Darren Mackie.

 

"The Little People"

 

That's what he calls us.

 

Darren Mackie, I mean.

 

Come to think about it, that's probably what Peter Crouch calls us too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The logic is articulate and incontestable. Mackie is, in fact, a very tall giant. No other theory stacks up. Well proved, sir.

 

His legacy is less than giant however. He will not be remembered for his excellence at AFC.

 

This just goes to show that it has always been a management problem these last couple of decades. Not only did these fuckwits running AFC not even deduce the magnitude of Mackie, or certainly, not on the scale that we now know indisputably, they didn't even have the common sense to realise that it's actually quite difficult to stick the ball in a pokey wee onion bag at either end of a tiny wee stadium when you're 800m tall.

 

If it wasn't on such a disproportionate scale, we might have forgiven the management. Y'know, 10 or 12 metres but ffs, 800 metres is pretty HUGE.

 

Every manager who ever picked him for a starting XI should be shot on principle. Cunts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The logic is articulate and incontestable. Mackie is, in fact, a very tall giant. No other theory stacks up. Well proved, sir.

 

His legacy is less than giant however. He will not be remembered for his excellence at AFC.

 

This just goes to show that it has always been a management problem these last couple of decades. Not only did these fuckwits running AFC not even deduce the magnitude of Mackie, or certainly, not on the scale that we now know indisputably, they didn't even have the common sense to realise that it's actually quite difficult to stick the ball in a pokey wee onion bag at either end of a tiny wee stadium when you're 800m tall.

 

If it wasn't on such a disproportionate scale, we might have forgiven the management. Y'know, 10 or 12 metres but ffs, 800 metres is pretty HUGE.

 

Every manager who ever picked him for a starting XI should be shot on principle. Cunts.

 

God almighty! Time for my bed! :hysterical:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've solved it. He's a mountain. Not a Munro - he's too short for that at only 787 metres. He must be a Corbett (they are from 762 - 914.4m). My guess is that he is the mountain called "The Brack" on the South side of Glen Croe. A pretty immobile massif (except over Geological time) - anyone seeing the similarities? The Brack, like Darren Mackie is 787 metres tall. I think when there's a full moon, or at night-time, or on Tuesdays and Thursdays or something like that The Brack turns into Darren Mackie. Or Darren Mackie turns into The Brack.

 

Glad we put that one to bed nice and quick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fantastic just fantastic, however there is one key factual in-accuracy

 

Steve Paterson noticed how bad Giant Darren Mackie was, unfortunately he was a jackie so his opinion was immediately discounted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously think we've missed a trick here with giant Mackie. With him being quite obviously 800 ft tall why did we deploy him as a striker?

Defense was where this colosus should have been, goalkeeper included. We've all heard the term "parking the bus" we could have "parked the Mackie".

 

We would have been unstoppable. A 1-3-7 formation would have dominated Europe for years.

I hope someone informs the club to keep an eye out for another 800 footer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seriously think we've missed a trick here with giant Mackie. With him being quite obviously 800 ft tall why did we deploy him as a striker?

Defense was where this colosus should have been, goalkeeper included. We've all heard the term "parking the bus" we could have "parked the Mackie".

 

We would have been unstoppable. A 1-3-7 formation would have dominated Europe for years.

I hope someone informs the club to keep an eye out for another 800 footer.

Why compromise with an 800 footer, approximately one third the size of the 800m Mackie?

 

There are still gaps to be found if an 800 foot giant parks his foot in front of the net. It's a Mackie we need to park. No room then.

 

Good point though. Defence is where he should have been employed. No need for Clangers then, nor any goalkeeper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why compromise with an 800 footer, approximately one third the size of the 800m Mackie?

 

There are still gaps to be found if an 800 foot giant parks his foot in front of the net. It's a Mackie we need to park. No room then.

 

Good point though. Defence is where he should have been employed. No need for Clangers then, nor any goalkeeper.

 

 

I read the OP wrong, i thought it was 800 ft not 800m.

 

My Mackie is a hobbit in comparison to Kelts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been studying that photo closely for some time.

 

I think it may actually be a dragonfly, rather than a MiG17.

 

Which would put Mackie at a still not inconsiderable 24feet tall.

 

Which might explain why all the houses in Kemnay have not been accidentally crushed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...