Stories are only appearing occasionally at the moment as I am travelling. A more regular service should be established by mid-week
By Tony Attwood
Florian recently provided us with an example of how real debate and argument works. In case you missed it, I have reproduced the illustration at the end of this piece. The article it comes from can be found here. And I very much welcome this illustration as I think it is a perfect reflection as to what we get on Untold.
Apart from the messages that you can see on Untold each day we receive many more which are never published. In this regard Untold is no different from most websites that get over a million page views a year. Of course as a result I constantly get accused of not publishing comments which argue against points made in Untold articles, but much of the time I am deleting commentaries that fall into the lower categories of the pyramid below. Mostly I publish the first of these, but then not the repeats – which is more generous that the rules of engagement in this site require.
It is also worth noting that these messages tend to go in waves, with either one person with lots of online personalities, or multiple people copying each other, writing in with the same general type of complaint.
Now I can understand why people read websites that they don’t agree with – indeed I keep an eye on the Daily Mail and Telegraph’s site (for example) even though I abhor most things they stand for, just to see how very rich tax avoiders are attempting to propagate their corporate views day by day. So I have no argument with watching those to whom one is opposed.
However I tend not to write to such publications, since I am clearly not going to move any of the newspapers from their set point of view.
But some people like to argue with Untold and one issue in particular issue has attracted my attention these last few days was a complaint that I have changed my mind over an issue during the time Untold has been running.
It is a complaint to which I immediately plead guilty in general although not to some of the details within the complainant’s piece. But I rather think that changing one’s mind is a normal part of some people’s lives, and I am always a little suspicious of people who never change their mind, because it seems to me they are not responding to issues and evidence. I used to think one series on TV was excellent, now I think it is rubbish. I used to enjoy the company of person X, now I can’t stand her. I used to think that politician x or footballer y was quite good, but now… that sort of thing. I change my mind a lot.
But it appears that some people feel that by changing my mind on something or other, all the ideas on Untold come tumbling down in one great collapse. As opposed to the notion that ideas evolve and change over time. Yet another grand divide between people, it seems.
I don’t think I am somehow less worthy of the right to cast an opinion than others, just because I used to hold a contrary view. You, as a reader might feel that my position in an argument is less worthy of note because of this change of heart, which is of course your judgement to make. But I am not sure that where any person stands on any argument actually affects the argument itself.
Anyway all this comes from the suggestion that in the past I had had a different attitude towards the FA Cup from that which I have now. I haven’t been back and checked the historical details because they are irrelevant – what is relevant is the implication that changing one’s point of view is somehow a weakness or a sign that one’s comments cannot be trusted, and that it automatically means the argument falls. You may think I am a total prat – that’s up to you to decide, if it is of any interest to you, but that makes no difference to the argument.
But since that point of changing one’s mind has come up let me add my view, which tends to be the other way around – that people who never change their mind are the ones to be wary of. People with “fixed views” can, in my experience be dangerous because the world clearly changes.
Certainly, some things for me are inviolable, such as freedom of expression, which I am quite strong in advocating overall, but not to the extent of saying anyone can say anything on a particular blog especially if the point is irrelevant or has been said before. But others (like the importance of winning the FA Cup for Arsenal) are really not so fixed. There was a time when I used to think the FA Cup wasn’t very important; now with Arsene Wenger being the person who has won the FA Cup more than anyone else, I do think it is important.
My change of view (which in reality is neither here nor there, I’m just a guy who supports the club and who expresses his view on a blog) coincided not so much with Arsenal’s return to trophy winning, but with the arrival of the football clubs supported by billionaires who were willing to drop vast amounts of their wealth into the club, along with sovereign wealth funds from Middle East countries supporting a chain of clubs around the world.
And I would argue, not to change one’s views of what the club should be doing as the world changes is not reasonable. As matters stand in terms of the investment in some clubs, and as I am occasionally reporting, the alleged activities of Manchester City, plus the proven activities of Real Mad, Barcelona and Atletico Madrid in terms of child trafficking show that some clubs will stop at nothing to protect their investment.
A similar issue arises when we consider the question of diving. Just because an Arsenal player is considered to have dived doesn’t mean that one can’t criticise the many other players who do it. Nor does it mean that we shouldn’t call for better refereeing.
The world of football commentary and debate is horribly biased overall towards the lower approaches to debate in the diagram below, as can be seen on the issue of referees. We constantly have people writing in saying “I’ve looked through your analysis of 160 games and many of your reviews of decisions are clearly wrong” but they don’t give examples. We took the trouble to review 160 games with video evidence; to counter our arguments one would need to take a fairly large of the games, clearly chosen at random, and give a detailed analysis of the errors we made.
Instead each time we get another generalisation what actually is achieved is that our argument is strengthened because of the assertion that is given that we are wrong, rather than an analysis.
Likewise ignoring the underlying contention that the organisation of PGMO, being so utterly different from the organisation of refereeing in other major leagues, leaves the argument against our stance incomplete. The question of why PGMO is a reasonablequestion. Just saying that one can find certain referee decisions wrongly awarded in Arsenal’s favour doesn’t affect anything, any more than seeing an Arsenal player dive for a penalty makes the activities of serial divers of any club, acceptable.
This lack of logic and reasonableness is everywhere. Consider the fact that the Telegraph newspaper has announced that Carragher will not be writing for Telegraph for rest of season. That says that the penalty for spitting at a passer by is three months suspension from one’s job. But why three months? It is as valid a question here as it was when he threw a coin into the crowd at Highbury an was suspended for three games.
Indeed one might also ask: why can’t more people join in reasoned debate when it comes to football? Is it because they never learned how to do it at school? Is it because of the widespread acceptance of religious creeds which have little evidence within them? Is it because of the way purveyors of the news do their job? Is it because broadcasters with their phone-ins actively encourage emotional responses to events rather than analytical?
I suspect it is a combination of all of these. Here is the chart….
Now that us spectators are the product, we actually do have some power.
Wenger to journalists: “Your job is to get everybody to suffer.”
That was beautiful Tony. Logic and common sense is all lost in society today let’s flog a dead horse till it becomes alive again is the mentality today. Reasonable continual logical debate is probably going to happen when Piers fake news Morgan will stop supporting Arsenal…
We might ask, why can’t more people join in reasoned debate full stop? Your points in the last paragraph are all relevant. I would go further – the way news is put across and the way people are deliberately distracted by this and that is intended to keep them ignorant. You have to delve deep and be very sceptical and persistent to find out the truth of many things.
It would help if one or two offenders here took note of the item at the bottom of the pyramid. I’ll engage in reasonable discussion with most people but reserve the right to reply in kind, which to be honest takes me to their pathetic level, so I’ll try to resist.?
Wow! Really excellent piece. I’ve been visiting Untold since I was in highschool nd I’ve never been disappointed.
The person who criticized you for changing your mind and opinion is probably the same person who criticizes Wenger for being stubborn, inflexible and fixed in his ways.
Tony,
for many people reasoned debate means : I am right….
There are basic errors of logic on both sides of the AW debate – on one side, he can do nothing right. If a player develops, it is in spite of him. If a player disappoints, it is all down to the manager etc.
On the other side (such as this blog), there seems to be complete faith in the manager – but this is logically invalid too, because time catches up with us all. Everyone here will reach a point in life when he can no longer perform well in his job.
The truth is hidden in between. He did some great things for our club. But he was also quite dishonest about many things during the austerity years. I can forgive him his errors of judgement on the field. But not for the secret contracts, the lies about player sales etc.
I was one of AW’s biggest supporters, but when it became clear that he was on the side of the money men, I lost a lot of respect for him. I realise that AW may have genuinely believed he was doing the right thing, but he is still responsible for what he did.
This is deeper than football – it is a financial rip off of hard working people. And the quality of a person’s debate has nothing to do with what is really right and really wrong.
thanks, tony; fortunately, AW has become immune to “ad hominem” arguments …
about “danny the diver”, just one or two factual remarks:
– first, milan’s goal was no game changer at all; it did not change a thing, actually
as a matter of fact, here’s the transcript (exclusive for untold) of gattuso’s speech before the game – repeated almost word for word at half-time:
“lads, we are two goals behind, and we are about to step onto a pitch where the home team has a nearly perfect record this year (apart from defeats against an alienish de gea backed by the PGMO, and a mcity team that 7 months into the 2017-2018 season, would still be able to run off the pitch a team of eleven huskies (actually i’ll be taking advantage of our stay in england to ask guardiola the brand of their mineral water) …
anyway, should they score a goal (which they have more than an outside chance to do), it won’t change anything for us, since we have to score 3 (three!!) to make it to the next round, so keep that in mind: their first goal won’t mean a thing, literally”
– secondly, to support the guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2018/mar/17/uefa-pussycat-danny-welbeck-dive-besiktas) i suggest march 15 be remembered, from now on, as the Arsenal Diving Plot, and an effigy of danny welbeck be drawn and quartered in front of the gates of the new white hart lane, to celebrate the thwarting (thanks to guardian columnists) of the plot.
Gooner Dave
What evidence do you have for your claims?
Secret contracts and selling players?
I can throw a lot of criticism Wengers way but I don’t believe he would intentionally weaken his squad and therefore chances of success.
GoonerDave
Arsene Wenger was obliged by the owners of Arsenal to operate on a tight budget for several years and still deliver Champions League qualification year after year.
His other option would have been to leave Arsenal. His loyalty to the club meant he stayed – and aren’t we lucky he did? What other manager would have achieved what he did in those circumstances? Not Pep or Mourinho, that’s for sure.
I have yet to see the evidence that he is past it. His analytical thinking and his long experience, as well as his values, have led him again and again to get us out of sticky situations. The latest three wins bear this out once again.
GoonerDave
Can you provide some clarity on your claim that Wenger has been guilty of being dishonest over many things? Something factual would be nice, not something propogated or manufactured by the media.
GoonerDave isn’t going to reply, he has achieved his aim to get a reaction and we will see him in a month.
Fair play if I have read you wrong GoonerDave and you do give an answer.
GoonerDave might (I repeat ‘might’) be referring to the secrecy surrounding his assurances to the bankers (at the time of the new stadium loan) that he would remain at the club for at least five more years. This only came out a couple of years ago.
Of course it could be something completely different, and I don’t know what he meant about ‘player sales’.
All seems a bit pointless to bring up to me.
Tony
Good article.
The changing of ones mind is simply a natural development of thought that can be brought about by any number of events.
For example:
in reaction to previously unavailable evidence.
in reaction to a change of circumstances. (the appearance of mega rich financial backers)
in reaction to a change in personal circumstances.
in reaction to constant exposure to an alternative point of view, either friendly or malevolent.
in reaction to the passing of time.
These are just a few reasons for changing ones mind, but there must be many many more.
Like Tony, I would be very suspicious of anybody who NEVER changed there opinion. But conversely I would have no problem with somebody who maintained an opinion for an entire lifetime.
The following is the reason (or at least a significant part of it) as to why Tony changed his view on the importance of the FA Cup. I think it is a perfectly valid reason.
Tony: “My change of view (which in reality is neither here nor there, I’m just a guy who supports the club and who expresses his view on a blog) coincided not so much with Arsenal’s return to trophy winning, but with the arrival of the football clubs supported by billionaires who were willing to drop vast amounts of their wealth into the club, along with sovereign wealth funds from Middle East countries supporting a chain of clubs around the world.”
But I have a different take on it.
I think there are 2 massive reasons for the decline in importance of the FA Cup.
1) The decline in importance of the FA Cup is directly proportional to the rise in importance of the Champions League.
2) The decline in importance of the FA Cup has been significantly affected by the arrival of the continental superstars to the Premier League.
Point 1 first.
-The first thing is the sheer scale of financial reward, simply for qualifying for the CL. It simply dwarfs the financial rewards for winning the FA Cup.
– The second is your Clubs Global status. As much as winning the FA Cup is great to do, and is seen throughout the World, it is not being an FA Cup winning team that elevates your Club into the ‘elite’, it is being seen as a ‘Champions League’ Club that does that. And that leads directly to point 2.
Point 2.
– When any player from abroad is looking for a move to the Premiership, are they looking for an FA Cup winning Club or a Champions League Club? What do you think will sell your Club to the latest Spanish superstar? The fact they’ve just won the FA Cup or the fact they’ve just qualified for the Champions League? I think we all know the answer to that.
As the season drew to a close last year, we were still in a battle for the top four, as well as into the later stages of the FA Cup.
When I posted on here I openly said I thought it was more important for Arsenal to Qualify for the Champions League than it was for them to win the FA Cup, and that was even with the knowledge that there was a record at stake, if we could win the FA Cup.
But I believed then, and I believe now, that Champions League football is absolutely vital to our survival as an elite Club.
I believe we could, and indeed did, go 10 years plus without and FA Cup, and still maintain our elite status.
If we were to miss out on Champions League football for 10 years on the trot that would be an absolute disaster for Arsenal Football Club.
1, 2, maybe 3, 4 seasons at a push, without Champions League qualification we may survive. Any more than that would be a disaster for us, so as such, it doesn’t matter a jot if we only get to the round of 16 when we do qualify.
WE WOULD BE A CHAMPIONS LEAGUE CLUB. That’s all that matters.
This is what Wenger was talking about when he said that the top 4 is a trophy. Alright, I think using the term ‘trophy’ was a bit unfortunate as it simply gave his detractors something else to bash him with, but fundamentally he was and is absolutely correct.
In order of importance:
1 – Winning the Premier League.
2 – Winning the Champions League.
3 – Qualifying for the Champions League.
4 – Winning the Europa League. (Only recently for obvious reasons)
5 – Winning the FA Cup.
6 – Winning the League Cup.
As a footnote:
I think this does not necessarily apply to every Club, but only they could tell you that.
For example, would Crystal Palace take Champions League qualification in preference to FA Cup glory? I very much doubt it, but even if they would, surely that would just strengthen the case for the Champions League 4th place trophy, wouldn’t it?
So despite Tony’s case for the defence of the FA Cup, personally I still put Champions League qualification ahead of it, in importance to Arsenal FC anyway.
It’s not as much FUN, I grant you, but never the less.
Footnote 2:
My problem, as usual for me, is in the medias take on it.
We qualify for the Champions League and it’s derided.
We don’t win trophies and we are criticised.
We win trophies and they are derided as ‘insignificant’.
We fail to qualify for the Champions League and we are derided.
Others qualify for the Champions League and they are exulted.
Others fail to win a trophy and it is ignored.
But, as anyone who ever takes the time to read my posts will know, my opinion of the media is slightly bellow that of my opinion of the bubonic plague.
Gooner Dave
Did you ever hear of Stephen Hawking? While time took away his physical fitness, time had no negative effect on his mental fitness. In death, he is still a giant of theoretical physics.
What is the point of having a debate if neither party is prepared to be swayed by what the other may say?
Is the purpose of a blogg simply to provide a forum for individuals to say what they think only, or is it to simply allow people to say what they think and what they want, without taking notice of what others may say?
I believe that bloggs are intended to stimulate debate amongst like-minded people who may not always have the same opinions about everything.
It is not parliament when debate usually has to follow party lines.
Where the ensuing debate is positive in its nature and well-meaning, then the blogg is a success and there is no reason why participants should not change their minds as a result of the arguments put forward by fellow supporters.
If supporters of other clubs wish to join in, there is no reason why they cannot, but within the spirit of the positive debate.
I have seen supporters of other clubs comment on this and other bloggs in a positive way, and I feel that those comments are welcome.
Indeed, where they correct participants in respect of comments about their club, that is beneficial.
Where they come simply to gloat or to insult, then their participation is unwelcome and deserves the opprobrium it usually gets.
The difference, therefore, between this and a few other similar positive bloggs and others that I have enjoyed and then left, is that the latters’ participants seem to feel that insulting the club, the manager, players and other participants is de rigour, and simply miss the point about debate and what bloggs are really all about.
They might initially make each other happy as they share their negativity, but that increased negativity will simply make them even more miserable individuals than they were before.
Could you be anymore logocentric – probably not. Still, if you are happy a few overseas tourists have taken you to be Lord Wenger’s voice on earth then you am I to pour scorn. Amen.
jjgsol
“…..there is no reason why participants should not change their minds as a result of the arguments put forward by fellow supporters.”
“The difference, therefore, between this and a few other similar positive blogs and others that I have enjoyed and then left, is that the latter’s’ participants seem to feel that insulting the club, the manager, players and other participants is de rigour, and simply miss the point about debate and what blogs are really all about.”
Absolutely spot on.
From: THE CAMBRIDGE UNION.
What makes a good debater?
Typically, judges decide how persuasive debaters have been through three key criteria:
Content: What we say and the arguments and examples we use.
Style: How we say it and the language and voice we use.
Strategy: How well we engage with the topic, respond to other people’s arguments and structure what we say.
In other words just saying:
-You’re all paranoid.
-You’re all biased.
-It all evens out.
-Wengers crap.
etc. etc. etc.
Without evidence or examples, is simply not enough on a ‘debating’ forum.
And as Tony has stated many times, one of the rules of this blog is that opinions are supported with evidence/examples.
As such, why people get annoyed when they’re invited to leave for failing to comply with the rules is beyond me.
I give you tearyeyed.
Embarrassing.
It’s nothing to do with ‘words’ or their meaning. It’s about debate, argument, and the development of your premise with evidence or supporting examples.
If people wish to just keep repeating there ‘opinion’ as if that in itself is somehow sufficient, then that’s up to them, but to my mind that gets us nowhere.
a) Wenger’s great.
b) No he’s not, Wenger’s shit.
a) Well I think he’s really great.
b) No he’s not, he’s absolutely crap.
Yep, that really gets to the heart of the matter doesn’t it.
slight rectification
i wrote “milan’s goal”
you should read “danny’s goal” … obviously
I ‘d like to add to that chart by by inserting ‘WHATABOUTISM /’ in between Counterargument and Contradiction .
Just like Pires name was brought when Danny dived. All in vain to try to tie in a non existent pattern of similar behavior. That there was a difference of 14 year difference between the two incidences is only a minor point!
In the spirit of argument , I’d sure like to hear from those who organised the Black Scarves Moment, the black baggers ,the ‘WENGER OUT’ and ‘ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ‘ poster printers.
How are you guys doing ? Hope you didn’t lose all your money in you misguided endeavours ?
And what are those zany plane banner guys are upto nowadays ?
The Women’s FA Cup tie has been postponed.
Hopefully this news is early enough, to stop people travelling should they be so inclined. I suspect this is too late.
Thank you, Tony.
GoonerDave,
You can already see, by the significant number of replies to your comment, each highlighting a distinct aspect, that the issue of “dishonesty” in the context of Arsenal going through the barren years is much more nuanced than one might be willing to admit initially. Now, extend this pattern to pretty much everything that happened in the club’s recent history, and you can see why media is the enemy, with its oversimplified points of view.
Speaking of which:
A famous scientist was asked by one of his students to define the notion of “point of view”. His answer was:
Every person’s visual field is composed by a horizon. When that horizon becomes so narrow as to get down to a point, that person says: “This is my point of view”.
Happy learning.
Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal were doing so well when they were at Highbury playing there winning the Premier League Titles thrice under his guidance in his first 6 years as the Gunners manager. Talking about change, trouble started for him when Arsenal moved to the Emirates Stadium. The building of which was at his instigation to primarily start making Arsenal get more money from gate takings to enable the club sign more top quality players which wasn’t a bad thought out idea and wish for the club but for the progress of it as a forward thought out plan But when the move to the Ems materialised, Arsenal started to pay the price for the move in financial terms by resorting to sell their top quality players to their rival to clubs to service repayment of the bank loan they took to build the Ems. But painfully, Arsenal could not win the PL Title again at the Ems which they have moved to. A situation I believe they didn’t bargain for as other money bag sponsored rival clubs have sprang up like Chelsea and Man City to not only rival Arsenal for the PL Title win but also rival Man Utd to the extend of making it near impossible for both Arsenal and Man Utd to win the PL Title again due to the heavy financial investment on many top quality players recruitment being recruited by these 2 top PL club sides. But there is no doubt, Arsenal move to the Ems has increased their financial earning power substantially enabling the club to sign more and more top quality players every transfer window to rival their 3 main rival club sides: of Chelsea, Man Utd and Man City for the PL Title win as it were then. But Liverpool and Tottenham Hs have now come in into the fray with a resurgence thus even making getting a top 4th place difficult for Arsenal to get as it stands now. A top 4th finish they’ve been getting with some ease for 20 seasons but last season and possibly this season. Save, if a miracle does happen to see us getting a top 4th finish this season. But does getting a top 4th place finish better than to win the FA Cup and the League Cup since the former qualifies a club for the glamorous UCL which is a prestige competition organised for the elite club sides in European football, with the latter qualifying a club for the Europa League Cup which is another elite clubs competition organised for the clubs who missed out qualifying for the UCL?
Talking about politics and sports. Can the two be seperated from each other as they seemed to be interwoven? For instance, if England, France and Germany maybe likely joined by their other allies in Europe and elsewhere in the World went ahead to boycott the Russian organised 2018 FiFA World Cup to hit back at Vladimir Putin for ordering the use of nerves agent to kill people in England? Wouldn’t it amount to, it is the government of counties that have the final say on football tournament participation and not FIFA despite their stance of non interference by government of counties in football administration who are affiliated to FIFA? If the boycott that is threatening on the table does take place to force Putin’s hand to start having a rethink on his new kind of communist authoritarian policy that forbids any opposition to him and his polices like Joseph Stalin, the former Soviet Union leader ruled the Russians with his inhibited murderous iron hand culture according to history, whose steps Putin is appearing to be toeing. Since all the apparatus of government is in Putin’s hand, are the Russian people powerless to get rid of him assuming they want to do that? Or they have accepted what he has been doing and loved it? Hmmm.
Arsene Wenger’s Arsenal were doing so well when they were at Highbury playing there winning the Premier League Title thrice under his guidance in his first 6 years as the Gunners manager. Talking about change, trouble started for him when Arsenal moved to the Emirates Stadium. The building of which was at his instigation to primarily start making Arsenal get more money from gate takings to enable the club sign more top quality players which wasn’t a bad thought out idea and wish for the club but for the progress of it as a forward thought out plan But when the move to the Ems materialised, Arsenal started to pay the price for the move in financial terms by resorting to sell their top quality players to their rival top clubs to service the repayment of the bank loan they took to build the Ems. But painfully, Arsenal could not win the PL Title again at the Ems which they have moved to. A situation I believe they didn’t bargain for as other money bag sponsored rival clubs have sprang up like Chelsea and Man City to not only rival Arsenal for the PL Title win but also rival Man Utd to the extend of making it near impossible for both Arsenal and Man Utd to win the PL Title again due to the heavy financial investment on many top quality players recruitment being recruited by these 2 top PL club sides seasonally. But there is no doubt, Arsenal move to the Ems has increased their financial earning power substantially enabling the club to sign more and more top quality players every transfer window to rival their 3 main rival club sides: of Chelsea, Man Utd and Man City for the PL Title win as it were then. But Liverpool and Tottenham Hs have now come in into the fray with a resurgence thus even making getting a top 4th place difficult for Arsenal to get as it stands now. A top 4th finish they’ve been getting with some ease for 20 seasons but last season and possibly this season too. Save, if a miracle does happen to see us get a top 4th finish this season. But does getting a top 4th place finish better than to win the FA Cup and the League Cup since the former qualifies a club for the glamorous UCL which is a prestige competition organised for the elite club sides in European football, with the latters qualifying a club for the Europa League Cup which is another elite clubs competition organised for the clubs who missed out qualifying for the UCL?
Talking about politics and sports. Can the two be seperated from each other as they seemed to be interwoven? For instance, if England, France and Germany maybe likely joined by their other allies in Europe and elsewhere in the World went ahead to boycott the Russian organised 2018 FiFA World Cup to hit back at Vladimir Putin for ordering the use of nerves agent to kill people in England? Wouldn’t it amount to, it is the government of counties that have the final say on football tournament participation and not FIFA despite their stance of non interference by government of counties in football administration who are affiliated to FIFA? If the boycott that is threatening on the table does take place to force Putin’s hand to start having a rethink on his new kind of communist authoritarian policy that forbids any opposition to him and his polices like Joseph Stalin, the former Soviet Union leader ruled the Russians with his uninhibited murderous iron hand culture according to history, whose steps Putin is appearing to be toeing. Since all the apparatus of government is in Putin’s hand, are the Russian people powerless to get rid of him assuming they want to do that? Or they have accepted what he has been doing and loved it? Hmmm.
I’ve done it again reposting after doing some corrections on my first posting which is against the house rules..Sorry! @Gord, I know you don’t like it but please bear it with me
I’m still crying about my Danny didnt quite dive, isn’t Trumps defence tactics funny article not being posted, but then I realised I was in Pret and it’s started showing the site, but not allowing the link updates to go through, this is happening using some other wifi service providers.
The FA Cup has remnants one of my first favourite competitions for ages. I’m glad the lack of ability of lesser clubs grants then some clemency, until it is taken too far. I enjoyed Wigan’s wins against City so much! Although against Forest and Bradford I was livid, they used that’s unwritten rules Kenton gift goals.
Changing your mind about a subject afterbfurther consideration and coming rob anmore developed conclusion is wonderful and wise.
I still enjoy the stupidity of some commenters and the vivid intent behind the unsubstantiated and often moronic suggestions, I won’t dignify them by calling them arguments or opinions.
Some people are quite dysfunctional, clearly they lack scruples. Wenger out, ok who’s your candidate? So and so is inderpoerformimf, but surely statistically he is one of putney best players and shows good attitude when’s Facebook with adversity? I love that guy, but he’s been performing badly for a season or more. The paper said he was signing and he didn’t, Wenger can’t sign players, are you dumb?
I mean list bing to people repeat near verbatim what an ex rival team player/pundit said about Arsenal is ridiculous, I just think WTF.
The joke is I speak to Wigan fans, Liverpool fans, Newcastle fans, and more often than not they know it’s nonsense and can’t grasp out ‘fans’ complaints or just mock you with the latest headline; until they gatherboynare a real fan and football fanatic and respect you and listen intently to the breakdown of their own teams pros and cons.
I love to listen to Kepwn, the breakdown, Winterbutn, Dixon, Pites, you can hear the passion, the love.
Even today with Cech, he sounded like he was preparing to move, so maybe there is some awareness that a new era is coming.
I was wondering this earlier, Macey; also Butland has hit radars!
It’s quite startling people are so aware we don’t dive, Danny goes down easy, arm on shoulder and down he goes, wins a vital penalty and they bring up somebody historic offence frokndecades ago.
But Costa is just on the right side of the law, Vardy doesn’t dive, Kane is cleaner than a squeegee, but Suarez shouldn’t bite assholes, to manufacture career making moves because husband employees are holding him prisoner.
I just think that the prevelance of mental health problems is overwhelming.
Foreign secretaries reallly shouldn’t talk about criminal investigations surrounding murder, assassinations, regarding national security and international relations but he does. Parliament should put the interest SN of those they go over na novel personal progression, but they don’t.
I think actions speak louder than words, so I wait for Arsene to show them all up.
I’m watching this season make putney team grow, in seems a good value for one un trade.
Smile people, we the believe will Ben laughing.
Also I’m backing belgium at the WC! Also nice for setting presidents in ECJ regarding data breaches I have been buildings thenevidence to make them investigate.
IWIT
I’ve no choice SAA. 🙂
Can I send you some snow? I’ve got lots here.
Actually, it would appear the spring is coming, and nearly all the snow is in the ditches next to the roads. I think we are going to have a gazillion frozen culverts and water running across roads for the next month or so.
Am not suprised uefa ignored d so called Danny dive; Danny didn’t dive ; people are so blinded by their biases DAT dey refused to look and analyse correctly; pls look at d video footage again: luk at Danny’s stride, remember he was on full speed; d milano player’s right arm made contact wit his right shoulder; now it is general knowledge in science DAT a body in motion- top speed, is easily derailed; wat do u expect of a car at 140km per hr DAT suddenly ran into a porthole? Such a situation will result in loss of control by d driver, d car could tumble/veer off d road ,a burst tyre is also very likely; therefore if d milano players right arm was vividly shown to have rested on Danny’s shoulder and considering his speed certainly Danny had been notched and derailed surely he must fall not dive! So these stupid ignorant and biased sentiments must stop; any footballer knows any little interference wit a player in motion. Must result in a fall ,where is d physics principles of motion people learnt at school?