I don't socialise or associate with lower league serfs anymore. I went on the Leicester board the other day and it made me feel cheap and dirty.
It wasn't supposed to be funny. It was an observation. I don't use CI anyway, I've never read the forum so I don't know what it's like. I was referring to the laughable way they "break news" that's already weeks old. If the author had been away on holiday and missed a transfer story, then fair enough, but it shouldn't be in there as latest news because it isn't. I have no objection to people trying to post information, transfer rumours etc, but there shouldn't be a smug sense of pride surrounding the breaking of news, especially when their story is at least a week and a half old and was originally reported by Sky. If they get the information from somewhere else, all they have to put is "According to Sky Sports...", or wherever the source is not "As first reported on CI".
You don't use CI yet still felt the need to condemn it. They seem well ahead of the local media and hardcore fans to me.
Don't know mate I didn't hang around. Dropped in, called Proud a clueless **** and ****ed off. It was like a SAS mission behind enemy lines. Quick, ruthless and efficient.
I'm not condemning the forum, like I said I've never been on it. I don't think I've ever read anything on that site that I hadn't already read/heard elsewhere. I mean how hard is it to read other sources such as Not606, Newsnow and Sky to acertain where the material is coming from, instead of passing it off as their own.
Maybe we should have a HCAFC civil war. CI and amber nectar would ally against not606 and footymad I'd guess. Footymad could ally with them for all I care we'd still win.
Given the way some of you on this thread manage to generalise about a whole group of people - in this case, users of CI - you'd probably fit right in on there. You might need to get a sense of humour first, mind.
I didn't really think it need spelling out. The site is split into articles and a forum. I only ever come across CI on newsnow, which only ever links to articles. Having never read the forum, I can't comment on what it's like. It's probably the word site that threw people, but I just assumed that having labelled the forum as a separate entity, the two could be distinguished. To be clear, it's the articles they're writing that are naffing me off.
