Isak > Wilson

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Charlie Dogscock said:
He'd still done nothing wrong up to that point though - had come into the side, got goals, got sidelined by a bad injury, and come back into the side and was scoring again and getting back to full strength.

Valuations can only be assessed over a significant time period* - otherwise in August 2012 we'd have been able to confidently say Papiss Cisse was our best striker of all time.

*There are obviously exceptions to this role, ie after 10 games of seeing the likes of Luque, Marcelino, Riviere, Boumsong etc, we could easily conclude they were a waste of money and we're never going to get better....Isak was nothing like these however and had played well.
Click to expand...


Whether he did anything wrong is irrelevant and nobody had implied he did mate .

We've gone full circle at last though

He's starting to prove his worth which is great.
 
Roy Munson said:
Whether he did anything wrong is irrelevant and nobody had implied he did mate .

We've gone full circle at last though

He's starting to prove his worth which is great.
Click to expand...

But that's the thing though, he's not "starting" to prove anything, he looked total quality from the moment we saw him against Liverpool in August, and no one is really surprised to see him playing so well now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FadgewackeR, magpie290761, Magnet and 1 other person
Charlie Dogscock said:
But that's the thing though, he's not "starting" to prove anything, he looked total quality from the moment we saw him against Liverpool in August, and no one is really surprised to see him playing so well now.
Click to expand...


Again this comes down to what you think represents good value so far.

Imo he is now starting to prove his worth and had not previously.

I'm seeing numerous media reports saying exactly what I'm saying.
 
Roy Munson said:
Here's 2

You must log in or register to see images


You must log in or register to see images
Click to expand...

Those articles are just as stupid as your argument though.

The headline of the first one is utter bollocks as Howe never doubted him, so saying he's "proving him wrong" is horseshit. The article then contradicts itself by saying Isak had a "shaky start" then talking about a "dazzling debut" against Liverpool.

The second one trips at the first hurdle by saying he "may have taken some time for him to fully spark into life", when he clearly sparked into life on his debut!

Journalists are employed to write sensationalised horseshit that's guaranteed to get a rise because it's so stupid, and you're just confirming that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FadgewackeR and magpie290761
Charlie Dogscock said:
Those articles are just as stupid as your argument though.

The headline of the first one is utter bollocks as Howe never doubted him, so saying he's "proving him wrong" is horseshit. The article then contradicts itself by saying Isak had a "shaky start" then talking about a "dazzling debut" against Liverpool.

The second one trips at the first hurdle by saying he "may have taken some time for him to fully spark into life", when he clearly sparked into life on his debut!

Journalist are employed to write sensationalised horseshit that's guaranteed to get a rise because it's so stupid, and you're just confirming that.
Click to expand...

You asked and I showed you .
 
Roy Munson said:
You asked and I showed you .
Click to expand...

But the problem is that these articles don't in any way say you made a valid point, all they are is 2 badly written bullshit articles that make your point even more ludicrous.

The first one in particular is written by a complete ****** - it takes Howe's comments of a few weeks ago saying that they are building Isak's fitness so he can play 90 minutes regularly, and saying Isak is "proving Howe wrong" because he played a full 90 minutes, which Howe never said he couldn't!
 
Charlie Dogscock said:
But the problem is that these articles don't in any way say you made a valid point, all they are is 2 badly written bullshit articles that make your point even more ludicrous.

The first one in particular is written by a complete ****** - it takes Howe's comments of a few weeks ago saying that they are building Isak's fitness so he can play 90 minutes regularly, and saying Isak is "proving Howe wrong" because he played a full 90 minutes, which Howe never said he couldn't!
Click to expand...


I don't write the articles you asked me to show you so I did.

Unfortunately the articles are not of your 'opinion'

He's now coming good so it's great.
 
Roy Munson said:
I don't write the articles you asked me to show you so I did.

Unfortunately the articles are not of your 'opinion'

He's now coming good so it's great.
Click to expand...

You said you had seen numerous articles saying exactly what you had said, thus insinuating that your point was validated by sensible articles.

You then post 2 stupidly written bullshit hack articles that contradict themselves and are clearly just written as sensationalised horseshit that is designed to get a rise. This doesn't validate your point, but makes it look worse.

Yes he's good now, but the thing is that was never "bad".
 
Charlie Dogscock said:
You said you had seen numerous articles saying exactly what you had said, thus insinuating that your point was validated by sensible articles.

You then post 2 stupidly written bullshit hack articles that contradict themselves and are clearly just written as sensationalised horseshit that is designed to get a rise. This doesn't validate your point, but makes it look worse.

Yes he's good now, but the thing is that was never "bad".
Click to expand...


you asked and I chucked a couple at you one Local press the other national .... my point is valid anyway you just don't like it or the others with this opinion.

Nobody said he was bad that's not relevant to this.
 
Charlie Dogscock said:
Yes he's good now, but the thing is that was never "bad".
Click to expand...

Roy Munson said:
Nobody said he was bad that's not relevant to this.
Click to expand...


"The guy is a dud" (quote from Munse)

Dud:
a thing that fails to work properly or is otherwise unsatisfactory or worthless.
"all three bombs were duds"

"He's been a flop" (quote from Munse)

Flop:
A total failure. be completely unsuccessful; fail totally.

Think you've tied yourself up in knots here mate. I know what you're trying to say, but you've proven a blatant contradicrion of yourself.

Calling him a "dud", "a flop" and "a complete waste of money" IS saying he's bad, even if - and I'm going to repeat this in my best John Cleese voice - even if you did say "so far".

So you've just contradicted yourself.
 
The chuckle brothers go full circle again


1. You are a
2. So far you've been

You must log in or register to see images
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back