The Run In, Relegation Edition

  • 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!
Some fall off must be due to results....even I post less when we lose. It's noticeable that a few people have reappeared because we've had a decent result. However, the greatest reduction must be due to posters not being able to accept different opinions....and then take it personally. I would just say chill out....saying that you've finished an argument, but then having another dig does not count.
Nail on head "fran"
Also, as a relative 'newbie' there seems to be mainly the Class of 2011 posting on here. And, yes, gettng slagged off for having a different view has, I suspect, an effect on whether to continue taking part in the forum or finding another outlet.
 
Nail on head "fran"
Also, as a relative 'newbie' there seems to be mainly the Class of 2011 posting on here. And, yes, gettng slagged off for having a different view has, I suspect, an effect on whether to continue taking part in the forum or finding another outlet.

<rofl>
 
Nail on head "fran"
Also, as a relative 'newbie' there seems to be mainly the Class of 2011 posting on here. And, yes, gettng slagged off for having a different view has, I suspect, an effect on whether to continue taking part in the forum or finding another outlet.

Not sure what you mean by that. You’ll find a great number of the posters here are of ‘vintage’ years.

There’s a difference as well in being ‘slagged off’ for having a different view, and being challenged on that view, or being asked to justify it. That’s discussion, and is what makes a forum tick round. There’s also being called out when a view feels hypocritical or essentially makes no sense.
 
By the way, just because someone is younger, it doesn’t mean their viewpoints have any less weight. Particularly if you’re talking bollocks. That kind of condescending attitude only says something about one of the people.
 
Not sure what you mean by that. You’ll find a great number of the posters here are of ‘vintage’ years.

There’s a difference as well in being ‘slagged off’ for having a different view, and being challenged on that view, or being asked to justify it.
That’s discussion, and is what makes a forum tick round. There’s also being called out when a view feels hypocritical or essentially makes no sense.

I actually think that's hugely improved over the past year or so tbh, as both sides were guilty of it in the past. Much better discussion on here now rather than the previous positive/negative ****e we used to get.
 
Some fall off must be due to results....even I post less when we lose. It's noticeable that a few people have reappeared because we've had a decent result. However, the greatest reduction must be due to posters not being able to accept different opinions....and then take it personally. I would just say chill out....saying that you've finished an argument, but then having another dig does not count.

Good post.
 
Some fall off must be due to results....even I post less when we lose. It's noticeable that a few people have reappeared because we've had a decent result. However, the greatest reduction must be due to posters not being able to accept different opinions....and then take it personally. I would just say chill out....saying that you've finished an argument, but then having another dig does not count.

Yes it does.
 
Only just realised that Stoke actually have some winnable games.
When you say “some”, they only have 2 left!

Home to Palace I can’t see them winning, and the last game at Swansea will be very difficult, especially if we beat the Swans on Tuesday, as both teams will be fighting for their lives.
 
We lose to Everton, Swansea beat Bournemouth and Stoke beat Palace is the nightmare, yet pretty possible, scenario isn't it?
Of course, but it’s also possible that we beat Everton and Swansea, Palace beat Stoke, Bournemouth also beat Swansea, Huddersfield lose all their last 3, and then the Swansea v Stoke match is irrelevant to us, as, indeed is how we get on against City.
 
Of course, but it’s also possible that we beat Everton and Swansea, Palace beat Stoke, Bournemouth also beat Swansea, Huddersfield lose all their last 3, and then the Swansea v Stoke match is irrelevant to us, as, indeed is how we get on against City.

That is possible, yet very unlikely. I'd be shocked if we were safe before the final game.
 
Only just realised that Stoke actually have some winnable games.

I give us a slightly greater chance of staying up that them, but that does possibly include an element of bias on my part. It could be argued that Stoke have at least an equal chance than us, if not greater.

They're much more likely to win two games than we are, in my view. The difference is, of course, we start with a two and a half point advantage (given GD). Six points keeps us up, of that I am certain (whether we'll get them is another matter - I really don't think we will); but six points for Stoke only gives them a sniff survival, nothing more.

Them failing to win at Anfield was very important for us, despite some people on here wanting to keep Stoke alive.