So it's just one way? I'll tell you now that one reason I take breaks from here is that whenever I try and counter a view, the default response is to call me a happy clapper (or infer that) or complain because someone's not allowed an opinion.. Goes both ways Schad. I end up frustrated because I put a view across and the point is missed or ignored or just responded with the default of "happy clapper v bed wetter". You yourself did that yesterday (failed to respond when I countered your point that was specifically a question to me) I sometimes wonder if it is because they don't want to agree/admit or even compromise in the discussion at all. Nearly every time i and others get accused of it. HAVE THE DISCUSSION AS THATS WHAT THE FORUM IS FOR! Ps. You may have noticed yesterday evening me try and defend a less positive poster.... for which I was shot down
This is bang on right! DISCUSS!! Ps... anyone doubting it can be done should read the exchange between me and Hot Brovil yesterday/Friday. We clearly were poles apart on the topic. Nobody cried negative v positive. We had two or theee posts putting our opposing views across and it was clear we weren't going to agree. So we agreed not to. I'll admit to one thing. I become a terrier after a bone sometimes when people fail to recognise a discussion point and throw the happy clapper approach at me. It's more likely to make me worse... a bit like booing an opponent.
In this case, it's because I went to sleep around that time, and there were a few pages of new discussion when I was back on the forum...I try to avoid inserting old conversation into new. Normally I'll respond to any posts directed my way. Then how about an agreement from everyone: no more of this bullshit. Engage with the actual points being made. Stop engaging with the perceived motives of the posters. Stop making broad statements about the predilection of posters for moaning or reflexively backing club officials or what have you. Agree?
We all have to practice what we preach, though. And that means no more opening forays into threads that consist of blanket chastisements of those deemed to be finding too many faults with the club or team.
Every cloud has a silver lining - I wasn't able to get to the match v Norwich yesterday, but I've got a ticket for the replay on Wed 18th January - £12 for adults, so very reasonably priced. We could now have a debate about fixture pile-up, but isn't that the whole point about Puel's squad rotation? Use enough different players so that individuals don't burn out/get injured. It's now a question of priorities - League Cup vs League vs FA Cup (probably in the descending order of relative importance, as viewed by most fans). The important thing, and something that seems to be lost sometimes, is that WE ARE ALL SAINTS FANS, and want what is best for the club, although we all have different approaches and opinions on the best way of achieving this ultimate Nirvana (no, not the band)
This reminds me of a Small Ad in Viz, along the lines of "I'm a bit tasty, anyone want a fight?". The Viz editorial staff then said that this sounded like a good idea, and anyone who wanted a punch up should reply to the advert, then tell everyone how they got on. Seems an eminently sensible way of resolving this - I'll get popcorn and a ringside seat.
Is it? Or does he use the fixtures as an excuse for chopping & changing as he has no idea of his best side or how to get the best out of what's at his disposal? Burnt out? Really? If Virgil can play nearly every game, then so can the rest. Injuries will happen regardless of protecting players. The absolute best and proven way to have a player happy, fit and motivated is have them playing every week in a system they and their team-mates understand. Always has been like that, always will.
Isn't your 2nd paragraph slightly contradictory/hypocritical mate? I get as pissed off as anyone with the positive/negative debate but think it's wrong to suggest it's mainly the 'negative' people who do it. It works both ways if we're honest... I've seen plenty of 'why you being so negative for' (paraphrasing) comments that don't address the point made, and vice versa. As Schad says it's bullshit whoever does it but it's wrong to suggest that it's all one way imo. I think everyone should play the post rather than the poster, so to speak.
Disagree. The game has changed, levels of fitness are higher than they've ever been, hence the demands on the human body are greater than they've ever been. The pace and athleticism demanded in the PL are greater than in most European Leagues (no, I'm not saying it's the best league in the world, just the most physical). In the 1960s, clubs had 1st team squads of about 15 players, and started every game with 1 substitute. In the 1970s players had cortisone injections to get them through a season - ask Mick Channon about that. It's why some mornings he can hardly walk; neither could Peter Osgood after he retired. How many players do Arsenal, Man Utd, City or Chelsea routinely use in a season? An exception might be Leicester last season, but you could argue that they are all burnt out this season as a result. The only thing in football that doesn't change is that the fans claim to know more about the team and the game than the manager. Always has been like that, always will.
That's probably because you are wrong! We would agree with you and then it would mean we were both wrong! However if you were right then we would be in danger of being wrong. In some circumstances you can be right and wrong at the same time, that's when it gets a bit complicated.
