Jump to content

Football: CL is back


Mark Antony

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

You'll never see a more plastic rabble of morons.

Fucking despicable comment.

 

My understanding is that Wigan fans invaded the pitch to goad City players. My sources are admittedly other City fans.

 

As to the sending off, the ref changed his mind due to Wigan players crowding him. A red's a reasonable call for the challenge but the circumstances were ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

My understanding is that Wigan fans invaded the pitch to goad City players. My sources are admittedly other City fans.

I rather doubt they invaded the pitch to goad City players. They had just, you know, won. They might have wanted to celebrate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

My understanding is that Wigan fans invaded the pitch to goad City players. My sources are admittedly other City fans.

As to the sending off, the ref changed his mind due to Wigan players crowding him. A red's a reasonable call for the challenge but the circumstances were ridiculous.

It looked to me like the Wigan fans invaded the pitch to celebrate and congratulate their own players. And if players like Aguero can't take a bit of well-deserved (let's face it, they were utter shit) banter, then that's their problem. Regardless, no matter what was said, you can't go around chinning the opposing team's fans. Hope he gets a long ban.

And how do you know that the ref changed his mind? Are you Derren fucking Brown all of a sudden? And even if he did, he's perfectly entitled to do so, at any point, regardless of any outside pressure. And please don't tell me that City fans never try to influence a ref. They all do it. Every single team does. So just don't bother going there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ljkeane said:

I rather doubt they invaded the pitch to goad City players. They had just, you know, won. They might have wanted to celebrate.

 

2 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

It looked to me like the Wigan fans invaded the pitch to celebrate and congratulate their own players. And if people like Aguero can't take a bit of well-deserved (let's face it, they were utter shit) banter, then that's their problem. Regardless, no matter what was said, you can't go around chinning the opposing team's fans. Hope he gets a long ban.

Well sure, the goading occurred as a part of the celebrations. And if Aguero has reacted badly, he was wrong to. Neither the invasion nor the reaction is acceptable. I've never said otherwise.

3 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

And how do you know that the ref changed his mind? Are you Derren fucking Brown all of a sudden? And even if he did, he's perfectly entitled to do so, at any point, regardless of any outside pressure. And please don't tell me that City fans never try to influence a ref. They all do it. Every single team does. So just don't bother going there.

He had the yellow card out. Then he got surrounded. Then he got the red card out. It doesn't take a genius.

 

Instead of, you know, trying to deflect, why don't you retract the nasty comment you made about City fans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dolorous Gabe said:

Instead of, you know, trying to deflect, why don't you retract the nasty comment you made about City fans?

Why should I? I mean, look at the state of 'em. The plastic is literally flying about all over the place.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Why should I? I mean, look at the state of 'em. The plastic is literally flying about all over the place.

 

One idiot throws the advertising hoarding and you deem that the whole lot are the most plastic bunch of morons around.

Doesn't look much different to the reaction from Arsenal fans when Adebayor scored that goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dolorous Gabe said:

One idiot throws the advertising hoarding and you deem that the whole lot are the most plastic bunch of morons around.

Doesn't look much different to the reaction from Arsenal fans when Adebayor scored that goal.

Good grief.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mme Erzulie said:

So I find all of y'all's mindset to be slightly fascist with your slavish submission to rules. The rules are there to serve the game, not the other way around.

Rules are there to define what is allowed and what's not.

"Let's bend the rules at a whim" and "slavish submission to rules" as you put it, are not the only options. There's also "rules must be followed as much as possible and if they're bad let's change them".

13 hours ago, JordanJH1993 said:

Thank you for giving up, Baxus. As frustrating as it can be, there is a weird enjoyment I get from debating with people who have a one track mind and think they know best. If you hadn’t stopped, we’d have been here until VAR finally came into all competitions and I’d have nothing to ‘whine’ about!

 

Also, @baxus, it says a lot that you’re dragging Spockydog into it. He said very little about the whole thing. If you disagree with my points, fine. I think it is a tad playground to bring another guy into it, as if you’re in a team.

On the other side, I get annoyed by people who use obviously flawed logic.

Never said Spockydog and I are on the same team. Just felt the need to point out he handled this discussion in a much wiser manner than I did. Give credit where credit is due and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, baxus said:

On the other side, I get annoyed by people who use obviously flawed logic.

Never said Spockydog and I are on the same team. Just felt the need to point out he handled this discussion in a much wiser manner than I did. Give credit where credit is due and all that.

'VAR technology did not go wrong at Huddersfield on Saturday. Humans did. Ruling Juan Mata onside was not a clear and obvious mistake. 

Yet video assistant referee Neil Swarbrick still determined to get involved, giving him offside by little more than the hairs on a kneecap.

Invariably, when VAR causes controversy it is its application by humans that is at fault. Poor referees will be poor video assistants, too. Swarbrick should not have got involved.' 

Martin Samuel, chief sports writer at the Daily Mail.

It seems someone else agrees with me. But, no, of course, my logic is obviously flawed, and it is senseless how anyone could possibly share my opinion.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-5410201/Jose-Mourinho-fix-Pogba-hes-not-imagined.html#ixzz57disdYMw
 

ETA: In case you are wondering, I did not go looking for an article in which someone shared my view. I was reading on the Daily Mail this morning and this came up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pro tip, never cite Martin Samuel as support. He's one of those guys who, even when he agrees with you, you should pretend that he doesn't. Like Piers Morgan, for example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may not like Martin Samuel, but that doesn't mean no one is entitled to, and that anyone who does is beneath you. That's called snobbery and arrogance.

I've tried to argue my point with Baxus without ever undermining his, or deeming it worthless. He is entitled to disagree with me, that's fair. What he should not be entitled to do is dismiss anything I say as rubbish. That is 'snobbery and arrogance'.

There are things Martin says that I disagree with and things he says that I agree with, much like most columnists. I am not going to look at what he said and think 'Martin Samuel agrees - I must be wrong.'

I was citing Samuel, as he is a well known columnist in the UK, in a very high position. I never suggested that because he thinks the same as I do that it means I am right. What it does do, though, is discounts Baxus' comments where he says I am using 'obviously flawed logic', which suggests that no one could possibly agree with me. Maybe now, he can see that my opinions might not be that wild, even if he doesn't agree with them. But, given his comments, I think I am reaching with that one.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's not called snobbery and arrogance. It's called knowing the facts.

Martin Samuel isn't 'beneath me'. He's just a professional blowhard who makes his living by constructing a persona that trumpets 'controversy' and 'straight talking' with no particular interest in the facts. 

I don't care who's right and wrong on this particular issue between you guys, but Martin Samuel isn't a source that anyone can expect to be taken seriously as support. No matter which side of this debate he's on. 

And in particular, Martin Samuel agreeing with you doesn't refute the charge of 'flawed logic' because 90% of his columns are based on flawed logic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...