That I have agreed with on a number of posts, but it isn't the point that was being discussed; it was apportioning blame for goals. Nothing more difficult or controversial than that.
Dodgy keeper
- Thread starter askewshair
- Start date
-
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
-
That I have agreed with on a number of posts, but it isn't the point that was being discussed; it was apportioning blame for goals. Nothing more difficult or controversial than that.
I watched the game and saw enough to contest your claim that Jak was responsible for two goals, which is what you pinned your call for change upon.
It's the Dodgey Keeper thread ffs; is talking about the dodginess of the keeper wrong, or should we give you more space to sell jeans? I answered your points, I made the effort to try and discusz the detail. You resorted to abuse, as usual. It doesn't bother me, you do it regularly when you're wrong.
As is often recommended to others, if OLM is so frustrated reading us discuss the performance of keepers in a thread entitled "Dodgy Keepers" he could always ignore the thread and join another one that is more intent on finding new puns for whatever the topic of the day is.
Marshall was always going to get his chance because City/Ehab/Steve/Mike/who the **** ever spunked 5 mil on him. Jak could have played out of his skin every game, but Marshall was always going to come in under those circumstances. He hasn't had a real look in with Marco, cos Marco has a set of balls, FACT.
You overreacted to the criticism of Jakupovic, I merely pointed out that Marshall had received far more flack and all the players should be treated the same. I don't remember calling for any change, I just understand why there was one.
You responded with 'You redefine ****ing shabby' and then have the nerve to accuse me of resorting to abuse. Sell more jeans ffs?
On the match day thread you said you hadn't actually seen the game and were just going on what you had read.
I'd report this totally disproportionate response to what was meant as a simple joke, but I guess there's not much point.
Have a coffee and wake up properly and re-think your response.
How did I take a pop? I made a joke about the threads that descend into puns which you seem to like to defend. Sorry if you took offence. As I said, maybe you haven't had your coffee yet. You telling me to **** off is a touch more offensive than anything I said though.
Regarding watching the game - go back and read when that was and try and understand I included that as a mark of honesty with the person I was having a discussion with, as that was the truth at that time.
You're not the judge and jury on here. I didn't overreact to the comment on Jak, I simply put another view and expressed an opinion that the criticism was negative and opening up another thread to do it was poor - I still do.
I used the word '****ing' indirectly with PLT when he deliberately ignored my fairly offered points and decided to open up a call to arms against GLP and myself - that, in my opinion was childish and I use exceptional terms to put emphasis on that.
You have decided to be the arbiter of good taste - which, judging from your response to Sydney is more than a tad ironic.
You are constantly critical of anyone who disagrees with you, always resorting to the 'bored' line and the normal piss take. Try putting that 'You redefine ****ing shabby' into the context of the conversation it was in and it is a fair enough response on here.
You have criticised me and told me to move on for discussing and defending Jak on a thread that was set up for no other reason but to criticise him - I thought it was unfair criticism and sought to explain why I thought that, after many more digs, you finally used the bored line again and joined in with Chazz in trying to take the piss.
Sell more jeans, ffs? Yes, you don't want reasoned discussion about Jak (as Sydney says, you can move on yourself and not take part) as you say it clutters it, or something like, but you do far worse all of the time; except we tolerate that.
Just to show how you get involved and grow these things:
On another thread (so, everton), you had this pathetic conversation with Patty; his was an innocuous, harmless remark, you turned it into something else - Patty withdrew before you entered your bored and move on mode.
As you said, "Everyone would love him to be at City", which is all that Patty said, but you decided to make it another, unnecessary piss-take conversation. Try practicing what you preach and things might go more smoothly.
Although I said I wouldn't respond until after Everton, can I just say our best goalie is back in form for Colin.
And he knows a thing or two about goalies.
http://static.squarespace.com/stati...2/1404130566761/Paddy Kenny Leeds On Tour.jpg
Have no idea why they spunked that money for Marshall. If he wasn't happy with Jak, why didn't he get a loanee in until '10 birds' was fit? That close season must go down as the most chaotic ever. Incredible we are still in with a shout of staying up.
And he knows a thing or two about goalies.
http://static.squarespace.com/stati...2/1404130566761/Paddy Kenny Leeds On Tour.jpg
Have no idea why they spunked that money for Marshall. If he wasn't happy with Jak, why didn't he get a loanee in until '10 birds' was fit? That close season must go down as the most chaotic ever. Incredible we are still in with a shout of staying up.
Last edited: