Manager Watch

  • 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!
To get the hang of this thread... Someone is saying the above is present tense and someone else is saying it's past?

That There's that also that somebody that knocking that about that who that says that you that have that to that put that the that word that 'that' that before that everything.
 
That There's that also that somebody that knocking that about that who that says that you that have that to that put that the that word that 'that' that before that everything.

I couldn't be arsed with quotation marks but I'd have put them in over "that".
 
"They won't admit SS were right"

Fair enough, so what tense is "They won't admit SS are right"

If SS are now proved to be wrong does that mean the statement was actually in the past or is it still in the present?

Present tense again.

They "wouldn't" or "didn't" admit would be past tense. What comes after "admit" has no bearing on the tense of the sentence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John Cardew
Present tense again.

They "wouldn't" or "didn't" admit would be past tense. What comes after "admit" has no bearing on the tense of the sentence.

Or future tense, it could be a prediction.

I read it as more of a prediction to be honest, as the present 'won't' indicates somebody has tried to get them to admit and the conclusive evidence is that they're displaying a characteristic to suggest they refuse to admit.

That's just me though, I'm almost certainly wrong about everything.