Good article, follows the recent flurry of watford -complementing articles. http://thetwounfortunates.com/watfo...mpaign=watford-are-a-good-team-get-used-to-it
I think most people have given us credit about the way we've played. Its more about what the team is that we get the stick...
I think what is strange is there was criticism of the team GT had for long balls and no respect, then there was criticism for ABs teams however they played and now there is criticism of GZs team more for how the team was made than the style of football. Many journalists do appear to have a program they have to stick to which is to make Watford look bad. As the season is going there are more writings appearing in favour of Watford, the players and style of play, but all seem to be written by journalists who are supporters, the positive articles need to be by independent people.
I always remember the comment "Funny how when Hoddle plays a long ball it's called a brilliant defence splitting long pass, but when a Watford player does the same it's called long-ball".. **** 'em..
I think it was Brian Moore, theTV commentator, who used to annoy me with that. He would virtually orgasm behind his microphone when Hoddle managed such a pass once or twice during a game - yet on the rare occasion he commentated a Watford match, he would sneer at Ian Bolton producing exactly the same thing a dozen or more times during the game. Baffling really.
Nice to hear something positive, though I do think fans of all clubs can be a bit paranoid about any kind of criticism of their beloved club. We aren't the finished article, as yesterday's performance showed, but we're certainly at times very good to watch. A shame the blogger doesn't know the meaning of 'disinterested'...one of my personal bugbears I'm afraid, along with 'iconic', 'outside of', 'unique' and 'awesome'. Pedantry still thrives among the aged!
How about "bored of" and in a similar vein - "would of", "could of" etc.? And the Americanisms of "very unique" and "burglarised" (surely it's "burgled"?). This sort of thing drives me mad (which is also an Americanism for "angry" BTW)......
TRIPLETS !!!! Mrs L absolutely hates bored "of" rather than "with" - however it is now so common that I have accepted that it is part of the natural development of the English language - there is no grammatical reason why bored should not be followed by of rather than with. But "would of" and "could of" are simply totally incorrect uses of the past tense and reveal their users lack of grammatical knowledge.
You should try living up here Leo - as well as the constantly annoying 'would of' etc - the locals insist that the words bring and take mean the same thing, to the extent that 'bring' has disappeared from their vocabulary. Similarly, the word 'this' appears to cover both singular and plural - so 'these' has also disappeared. In the week before Christmas, I covered a P7 class for an absent teacher, and gave them a research task on twelve Christmas related questions. One of those questions was 'When were strings of Christmas tree lights invented and by whom?'. Every pupil in the class asked me what a 'whom' was.
That's weird, Leo...I was separated from my twin at birth....didn't meet her until I was in my 50s! How are you on 'less' and 'fewer'? Even BBC news writers seem not to distinguish those nowadays
Good article, seems to sum up the feelings of lots of Watford fans. Though I do have a feeling that if they took over Charlton and brought a similar team yesterday we would be having a bit of a pop at them for being the Udinese reserves.
I thought the opposite of interested was uninterested "bored of" should be "bored with" "could of" should be "could have" and is the hypothetical present tense; which, strangely, uses the past participle. "would of" should be "would have" as it is the hypothetical conditional also using the past tense for the present, both these two examples are generally writen as the mis-heard could've or would've and unique is a single thing with no others the same so why very unique? I love being a linguistic pedant.
'like'. I can't, like, stand the use of the word 'like'. Why is it like every teenage girl has to like add it into every sentence in like 15 different places? What's that about? I don't like it!
A real twin seriously Theo? - material for a book Yes - less and fewer is another common error - but it does not bother me so much. BB - I think the who - whom thing is easier for people who studied Latin and perhaps German so had to know about cases. Effect and Affect are often mis-used My pet hate is when people fail to talk about orienting themselves and use orientating - a horrible import from America .... oh and weather presenters who talk about rain "in the overnight period" - it is just "overnight" for goodness sake
