Thats not the point Syd but the usual drivel that because you dare to dream of better, or demand more and that you may not agree that Quinn or Bruce are doing the job correctly, all of a sudden I am talking bollocks and don't want to go to the match. In the 1940's and then the 1950's & 60's, the western world fought such dictatorial ideologies to ensure that I too have the right to an opinion without been told that I am talking bollocks or don't want to go to games? Its just a pity that many individuals must resort to personalising a debate without actually offering any alternative viewpoint to counter my arguments. I can only assume form that that the argument has been surrendered?
I was there in the 3rd division campaign. Where were you? Considering I have been going since 1974/5 season, you don't mind do you if I have an opinion that might differ from yours but then still want to go along and support my beloved SAFC do you? just because I want better and demand more don't let it frighten your tiny narrow and pre-programmed stance will you?
Cest just because I don't agree with you doesn't mean that I want to be shafted by the club and do have original thoughts which are to have success as a club you need stability and to give a manager a chance, and I don't think that Niall has done anything but serve this club well as a player and chairman, he was a ****e manager. If we don't make the right signings over the summer or don't have a good start to the year I'll be calling for Bruce to go but certainly not Niall who in my humble opinion has what's best for the club at heart and gives 150% to the cause. Now if that is following a Stalinist line or taking it up the arse from the club then so be it.
but you generalised the comment mate to all who disagree with you, I have no problem with us not agreeing, its what football and these forums are all about and it will never make me better than you or you better than me.
We can all have opinions but spouting bile against fellow fans views is hardly going to help our club. But then Cest you have a long history of doing just that.
Howay lads, Cest doesn't deserve this. He's been a faithful Sunderland supporter for far too long to be taking this lip.
Not at all and unlike your unintelligent retort (see above as your first attempt at satire perhaps) I welcome debate but didn't resort to just slagging it off without reason or thought. Maybe its all just too much for your capacity to engage in serious debate and perhaps just telling someone they talk bollocks is your only avenue of release but I enjoy the cut and thrust of much older thinking these days, in contrast to your school yard cat calling?
And you a long history of standing on the touchline, merely agreeing with the populist line of thought of the day to make you feel good about yourself, so as not to reveal the lack of imagination and intellect required to enter the fray as an individual worth respecting for debate.
when he's attacking supporters for not having the same view as him for expressing the opinion that he's talking bollocks then yes he does he talks about us being Stalinist when he is the one who's been Stalinist.
Both sides are valid, it's that simple. Cest is a passionate Sunderland fan, and is more than entitled to his view, which is direct, matter of fact, and certainly pretty justified and reasoned. Likewise, people are more than entitled to back Quinn and Bruce, and again, there is justification for this side as well. I love Cest's posts, because it's full blooded heart on the sleeve stuff, the kind we all have with our pals when having a beer, or after the match when we've been dog ****. I also like taking in the thoughts of the lads who back the current regime. Debate is what makes us, pulling peoples opinions apart with no point of justification is not debate.
Cheers Diver. Get some hair on your balls Froggy and grow up. And Syd, some people don't have the wherewithal to enter a debate without first making it personal. The very same people always then feel affronted when they get it back both barrels. You know me, I never start the personal stuff but always finish it.
Cest has given his opinion, and more importantly his reasons for that opinion. Can someone offer a good and valid counter to his opinions, rather than taking digs? I'm all ears, cos i'm a wee bit on the fence at the minute, as i've admitted. Does Quinn get a 'golden ticket' as an idol, legend, great man, and in big part the clubs saviour? Or does the club go hardline, and get a hard faced businessman in to rip up trees, turn stones and gear the club to success at all justified cost? Let's debate this if e may, rather than jibe at each other. When all is said and done, we ARE Sunderland Association Football Club.
So it's your superior imagination and intellect that helps you come up with this little jem in reply to gyans-y-fronts "Considering I have been going since 1974/5 season, you don't mind do you if I have an opinion that might differ from yours but then still want to go along and support my beloved SAFC do you? just because I want better and demand more don't let it frighten your tiny narrow and pre-programmed stance will you? ****ing sanctimonious little tit." (I noticed you edited this last bit out) Make you feel superior does it Cest? And how you come up with garbage like "standing on the touchline, merely agreeing with the populist line of thought of the day to make you feel good about yourself" When I've spent all morning defending Bruce and Quinn. Hardly towing the populist line is it? Stand by for more highly reasoned, highly educated abuse........
