Turn on thread page Beta

Archive FTBL/0002/REC/HPOO watch

  • View Poll Results: liverpool vs west ham cup final vote for the winner
    west ham
    16
    39.02%
    liverpool
    25
    60.98%

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by darth_vader05)
    or you can name the other one to, 'dont post football topics here?' :idea:



    i cant think of anything atm! :ninja:
    :toofunny:

    and kpg, you are soo right.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Seriously, just call it Fred.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    This is getting increasingly absurd, as not only have i argued my respective stances on various issues (and non-issues) on numerous occasions, i'm being invited to do so again :eek:

    I will simplify things for you, on a numerical basis. In numerous posts previous, I have....

    (1). Explained my employment of the pun, its confirmation of existance for the reader, not to mention on numerous occasions i have labelled this a 'non-issue', which it is...it was a confirmation of the pun so why you continue to be a pedant, asking why i involved the three ..., this is a non-issue per se. I've explained why i involved the word in brackets....you need know nothing else....you really should have 'got it' by now (that is, why i used it in brackets) as i've explained it in numerous posts.

    (2). I've had to consistently explain my (shallow) stance on gender equalities to you. I am not a feminist, i do not believe my tone was disproportionate in response to the OPs attack, it was an aggression triggered due to the tone he adopted and his insult of labelling me a feminist who should "go clean the dishes". His post may as well have contained various swear words, which would have gone through filtered, akin to my own - i deemed his post aggressive, vicious attack, irrespective of him not employing swear words....I'm not a feminist, and there is no 'contradiction' you continue to ramble on with. I've explained my position on this before, and i don't wish to do so again. Yes, my language was vile, and as i have previously explained, wholly uncharacteristic of me, and i regret stooping to the aggressive tones he initiated....however, i stand by my position that my tone was in no way disproportionate in response to the OPs reponse. The fault mainly lies with the aggressor, and that is the OP. My initial post never warranted such a response and tone of response, and ive already explained my stance on the 'masturbation and fella' line, and i don't wish to do so again.

    (3). A mis-use....i won't google the precise definition of this, but it's pretty much not using language correctly, using it badly. You accused me of this. Whereas my spelling has been of a good standard, and most often is, your posts throughout have contained a multitude of spelling mistakes...

    concluding point....(just to add to the many conclusions i have been making for the last 2-3 pages of this thread)

    (1). I don't contradict myself on gender equalities, feminism et al. I've explained how so in numerous past posts, and i don't wish to do so again. It's getting increasingly tedious, particularly having done this (explaining all my stances for that matter) for the last 24-36 hours ish...

    (2). As previously brought up by myself, my response to the OP was a response to he, and he only. It wasn't to you, sure, you had to read it at some point and evidently to find some of the language vile, but it was a language and tone vented at the OP and not yourself, yet you're disproportionately rambling on about this as though it were your very own post i had aggressively responded to. It was his post, if anyone has the right, want, need, whatever....to talk it up on a disproportionate basis, then he has. He private messaged me with his feelings towards my post and i replied with my respective feelings on his first response to myself. It was 'done and dealt with' in a civil, private context, and was dealt with amicably with no bad feelings still swimming around - i have already informed you of the existance of this private messaging between myself and the OP. If anyone is guilty on any sort of disproportionate basis, you are, and it's to a gross degree. Not only have i explained my stances on numerous occasions but i find myself explaining that i have done the explained throughout with my postings. This is getting pathetic, and maybe we should set a deadline for this absurdity to come to a close, it would certainly not be a pre-mature death. It should have died a long time ago, had it not been for some rambling on with a non-issue, a crazy and quite impossible (but seemingly not as far as you yourself are concerned) misinterpretation with regards to an alleged contextual inappropriateness of my own, your staunch refusal in accepting me not to be a feminist, and your insistence (as displayed by your pointlessly extending the life span of this thread and its current, and ridiculously unwarranted, argumentative nature) that you have a superior debating skill to that of my own, one in which you profess to being able to laugh about in D & D. I continue in my struggle to see this superiority of your own, and struggle to envisage seeing any future material of yours, changing any of my concrete self perceptions of you and your 'skills'.

    Regards
    WHW

    nb: I will be travelling from one country to another tomorrow, and it's by no means one of a simple cross-border England to Wales variety...so it may take me a while to respond to any of your future posts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I know that Conference clubs only get £5000 per game, which sometimes doesn't compensate for the number of people staying at home and watching it on the tv rather than going to the game.

    Plus i'd rather watch Division 1 football rather than the premier league, but that's down to personal preference.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cindy)
    :toofunny:

    and kpg, you are soo right.
    what about 'la la land'? :ninja:

    (thats what i've called my home ground on fifa street :cool: )
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The irony is that Ipswich won't even see anywhere near that 1.25 million in the transfer market.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    anyone mentioned anything about the size of Garrincha's penis yet? he's ****ing huge
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There's your answer!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by white_haired_wizard)
    This is getting increasingly absurd, as not only have i argued my respective stances on various issues (and non-issues) on numerous occasions, i'm being invited to do so again :eek:
    You are invited to answer my points directly, something which you haven't done yet. I advised that you comment beneath each of my paragraphs, but you choose not to- this exemplifies how you choose not to address the points. You can't just block everything together without reference to exactly what i've said. It probably takes another couple of minutes to use the 'quote' button a few more times.


    I will simplify things for you, on a numerical basis. In numerous posts previous, I have....
    I proposed this numerical system for your benefit and you didn't follow it, so you can't say you are simplifying it for me. At least quote what I said in my last post. A couple of times may be understandable, but you conistently avoid doing so.

    (1). Explained my employment of the pun, its confirmation of existance for the reader, not to mention on numerous occasions i have labelled this a 'non-issue', which it is...it was a confirmation of the pun so why you continue to be a pedant, asking why i involved the three ..., this is a non-issue per se. I've explained why i involved the word in brackets....you need know nothing else....you really should have 'got it' by now (that is, why i used it in brackets) as i've explained it in numerous posts.
    From the one that highlights typos :rolleyes:. Why did you involve the word in brackets, preceded by oops sorry'? You don't need to explain this in future, as long as you recognise that 'car crash' was used twice in the same sentence which you denied earlier.

    (2). I've had to consistently explain my (shallow) stance on gender equalities to you. I am not a feminist, i do not believe my tone was disproportionate in response to the OPs attack, it was an aggression triggered due to the tone he adopted and his insult of labelling me a feminist who should "go clean the dishes".
    Your initial response, which is usually a good barometer for how one feels close to the time of the event (:rolleyes:), was:

    'dont ever call me a ****ing feminist again, you prick. That`s the last thing i am or ever will be.'

    From the 'don't ever', the '****ing', and the 'prick', it is clear that you took massive exception to being called a feminist. So much so, that you forgot, or failed to realise, that fighting objectification is intrinsically linked to feminism. In future, I suggest you hide your strong feelings against objectification if you wish never to be called a feminist again. From everything you've said you believe in a facet of feminism, yet vehemently oppose being called one. This is where there is a contradiction. If somebody had only ever read your opinions on feminism in this thread, how can you blame them for calling you a feminist??? *For the record I haven't even called you a feminist, all along I've been highlighting the inherent contradiction.* Deja vu. How many times do I have to make these points!!! :eek:

    His post may as well have contained various swear words, which would have gone through filtered, akin to my own - i deemed his post aggressive, vicious attack, irrespective of him not employing swear words....
    Some of the things you have said are absurd, and this is one of them. The fact is, that he didn't swear at you, but the words 'go', 'wash', 'dishes' & 'feminist' probably felt like it to you. You proposing that he may have sworn at you is another example of you worming your way out of things- he did not swear, there is no record that he did so...you don't even know his tendencies in confrontation because you earlier admitted you had never been in a confrontation with him, so saying he is capable of such things is frankly slanderous.

    I'm not a feminist, and there is no 'contradiction' you continue to ramble on with. I've explained my position on this before, and i don't wish to do so again.
    No, no you haven't explained your position in relation to my point. For probably the 10th time: feminism and fighting objectification are intrinsically linked, therefore your reaction was disproportionate in the extreme:

    ''dont ever call me a ****ing feminist again, you prick. That`s the last thing i am or ever will be.''

    This is contradictory. If you can't see that you are delluded, or just very stubborn.

    Yes, my language was vile, and as i have previously explained, wholly uncharacteristic of me, and i regret stooping to the aggressive tones he initiated....however, i stand by my position that my tone was in no way disproportionate in response to the OPs reponse. The fault mainly lies with the aggressor, and that is the OP. My initial post never warranted such a response and tone of response, and ive already explained my stance on the 'masturbation and fella' line, and i don't wish to do so again.
    Credit where it's due, you finally regret your mis-use of language, which incidentally can be defined as: (misuse) 'improper or excessive use'- ie your expletives and insults or 'pervert: change the inherent purpose or function of something' ie your use of the words 'masturbate over' + your spinning of 'mis-use' itself (oh the irony). This was what I meant by 'mis-use' but you never asked me to clarify it, you assumed it to mean whatever you wanted and decided to focus on my spelling mistakes, therefore 'spinning' your own definition contrary to what you accused me of.

    (3). A mis-use....i won't google the precise definition of this, but it's pretty much not using language correctly, using it badly. You accused me of this. Whereas my spelling has been of a good standard, and most often is, your posts throughout have contained a multitude of spelling mistakes...
    Here is the root of your problem. You don't know what it means, let alone what I meant by it, so you make up your own definition. If you think typos and spelling mistakes are misusing something, try to think of misuse as a conscious decision and get back to me. repeated swearing and using words like masturbate in awkward contexts is a conscious choice. Typos are not.


    concluding point....(just to add to the many conclusions i have been making for the last 2-3 pages of this thread)
    Precisely your own conclusions, disregarding my points. I may aswell not be here if you continue to ignore almost everything I write. Comment underneath each of my paragraphs in your next post please.

    (1). I don't contradict myself on gender equalities, feminism et al. I've explained how so in numerous past posts, and i don't wish to do so again. It's getting increasingly tedious, particularly having done this (explaining all my stances for that matter) for the last 24-36 hours ish...
    You are being asked to do so because you haven't done it properly. Address each of my paragraphs.
    (2). As previously brought up by myself, my response to the OP was a response to he, and he only. It wasn't to you, sure, you had to read it at some point and evidently to find some of the language vile, but it was a language and tone vented at the OP and not yourself, yet you're disproportionately rambling on about this as though it were your very own post i had aggressively responded to.
    You forget again, or are fibbing again.

    Klinsmannic: 'He was a legend on and off the pitch' (post number 3)

    WHW: 'so masturbating over the fella as a legend on and off the pitch, don't count your chickens...' (post number 9)

    Then you have the audacity to ask why I reacted?

    It was his post, if anyone has the right, want, need, whatever....to talk it up on a disproportionate basis, then he has. He private messaged me with his feelings towards my post and i replied with my respective feelings on his first response to myself. It was 'done and dealt with' in a civil, private context, and was dealt with amicably with no bad feelings still swimming around - i have already informed you of the existance of this private messaging between myself and the OP
    .

    That's bewteen you and him; it doesn't mean this has to stop. The only way it can stop is if you address all of my points directly. It can't be too hard, you've already admitted your regret at using bad language which is a good start.

    If anyone is guilty on any sort of disproportionate basis, you are, and it's to a gross degree. Not only have i explained my stances on numerous occasions but i find myself explaining that i have done the explained throughout with my postings. This is getting pathetic, and maybe we should set a deadline for this absurdity to come to a close, it would certainly not be a pre-mature death. It should have died a long time ago, had it not been for some rambling on with a non-issue, a crazy and quite impossible (but seemingly not as far as you yourself are concerned) misinterpretation with regards to an alleged contextual inappropriateness of my own, your staunch refusal in accepting me not to be a feminist,
    I haven't called you a feminist lol...I have just asked you to acknowledge that fighting objectification is a part of feminism!!! :eek:

    and your insistence (as displayed by your pointlessly extending the life span of this thread and its current, and ridiculously unwarranted, argumentative nature) that you have a superior debating skill to that of my own, one in which you profess to being able to laugh about in D & D. I continue in my struggle to see this superiority of your own, and struggle to envisage seeing any future material of yours, changing any of my concrete self perceptions of you and your 'skills'.
    You seem to get 2, another 2, add them together and get 5. So because I continue to ask for adequate responses to my points, I have professed my 'superior debating skills.'? I quote you White Haired Wizzard:

    ''you`re deliberately, obviously, mistaking my superior debating skills (evidently demonstrated on this thread) for your alleged `worming out of arguments being raised''

    ''you two are like two peas in a pod.....a pod resembling the greatest of stupidity.''

    ''and im pretty disappointed with the nature of your arguments, the quality of them, how you convey them,''

    ''Ive dismissed your `arguments` will absolute ease and i see no point in this thread being bent any further than it has already. I`m off for the night, mainly to read some feminist literature before i go to bed. You`re both full of crap''

    Please quote directly where I have said I'm a better debater. I think you'll find I'm not that shallow.


    nb: I will be travelling from one country to another tomorrow, and it's by no means one of a simple cross-border England to Wales variety...so it may take me a while to respond to any of your future posts.
    If you ever get around to actually addressing my points I'll be very grateful.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    put me into the utd team please. thanks.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by calderstonesLFC)
    No, but the top clubs do need it.
    It comes down to this though..who wants to watch championship games? Fans whos team play in the championship. Who wants to watch the Premership? A global market. Hence why the shares are so different.
    We're not talking about the top clubs. The bottom club gets £29m more a year than the Championship does.

    Besides, it is obsurd. You know what, as an Orient fan, I do not want my club to have an amazing two seasons and get into the Premiership. The day Orient get into the Premiership would be the day we go bust because we would not have enough money to sustain a place in the league, we would spend too much trying to sustain a place, and we would cease to exist. All the money in the game is bull**** and takes away from what football is about.

    I don't care if it means our top clubs can't win the Champions League: we would gain so much more from our national sport if it wasn't dominated by 4 teams, and if there were 20 teams who weren't earning THIRTY TIMES more than the next nearest. There is more to football than the Champions League and fecking money. :mad:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Leyton Orient. Come on the O's.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The day Orient get into the Premiership would be the day we go bust because we would not have enough money to sustain a place in the league, we would spend too much trying to sustain a place, and we would cease to exist.
    Any club that goes bust has only themselves to blame. Whether they're chasing the title like Leeds or just trying to stay in the division. Charlton are the perfect example that clubs just need a bit of patience and don't need to over spend or pay ridiculous wages to become established in the top division.

    My problem isnt with Sky,
    Ultimately it all stems from Sky's involvement in rebranding the first division into some kind of sellable spectacle. As a result all the attention gets focussed on the top division and the distribution of Sky's money follows suit with where most of the attention is.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kpg)
    Any club that goes bust has only themselves to blame. Whether they're chasing the title like Leeds or just trying to stay in the division. Charlton are the perfect example that clubs just need a bit of patience and don't need to over spend or pay ridiculous wages to become established in the top division.
    Charlton were floating just below and in and about the Premiership for years though. If a team these days were to do well and get promoted from League Two to the Premiership in successive seasons (unlikely but it has happened) they would go bust.

    And anyway, don't you think it is pathetic that a club needs to be actively conscious in making sure they don't go bust? It says a lot about the state of finances in football that it is such an effort to do this. And no team will ever come from the Championship and be in with a shot of the title. In fact, half the Premiership won't ever be at a shot of the title. Premiership football is just so damn predictable, and it's all because of money.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    How can a club just go bust like that? Its been said above that the bottom club will get £30 million pounds, so unless the club spends more than £30 million on players and wages then they can't go bust. Like kpg said, if a club goes bust then it's their own fault for having a sh*te financial strategy.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    There are so many extra costs though to stay in the Premiership. And because Premiership clubs have spent so much on players, teams coming up have a lot of buying to do to try and keep up. Sure, you might say that they have extra money and so it's their own fault if they go bust. But if they don't spend money (I'm talking smaller teams who rise through the leagues quickly here) they will just go straight back down and so therefore they have no hope of ever staying in the Premiership. It's pointless.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Who wants to watch championship matches on the television? Seriously.
    I can only think of about two-dozen matches I would like to see from the chamionship next season as opposed to a hundred or so in the Premiership.

    With the extra £29 million premiership clubs get, they have to utilize that extra revenue on players to try and sustain their position as a premiership outfit. Championship clubs don't. As championship clubs are very well supported, they are better than most other Premier clubs in Europe in regards to financial stability.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by walshie)
    Who wants to watch championship matches on the television? Seriously.
    I can only think of about two-dozen matches I would like to see from the chamionship next season as opposed to a hundred or so in the Premiership.

    With the extra £29 million premiership clubs get, they have to utilize that extra revenue on players to try and sustain their position as a premiership outfit. Championship clubs don't. As championship clubs are very well supported, they are better than most other Premier clubs in Europe in regards to financial stability.
    Spot on.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Premiership clubs need the money because, everytime they got more money, transfer fees go up. In the past 11 years, Leyton Orient have, I believe, spent no more than £50,000 on players. Michael Ballack earns in three days what we have spent in eleven years!

    Is it right that we have a league where, realistically, only four teams can win, and the majority think Chelsea will win anyway. Is it right we have had four champions in 14 years? And is it right that we have a league where it is, probably rightfully assumed that at least 2 of the teams going back down will be the newly promoted ones? With regards to predictability, the only league I can think of more predictable, and therefore boring, than the Premiership is the SPL.

    And who wants to watch Championship matches? I find them a darn sight more entertaining than Premiership matches, because they are so much more closely fought. With the Premiership, half of the matches you know are only going to have one winner. Championship football is only of a slight less quality, yet the matches are more evenly matched, and it is more of a contest. This is what football is all about!

    I am not one of those people who says everyone should watch lower league football, that all Premiership fans are glory hunters, that if my team got into the Prem I would stop supporting them bla bla bla. I hate that. But the Premiership is the top league in England, it should be the best, a showcase. All we are showcasing is money and greed, rather than competition. There is nothing competitive about it.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    ^ I'm an avid Barnet fan, so I'm in no way a glory hunter; not that you said that. But Barnet function in a league which has equal opportunities for most clubs. You will find the club with the largest median attendance for the season will normally win the league.

    I love grass roots, but its a foregone conclusion in the lower leagues as the chairman willing to splash a little cash normally wins the division. Not much input is required to get promoted. Leyton Orient doesn't compete with the likes of Ballack and Henry, so there is no need to panic.

    I also disagree about the 'competition' from Premiership to lower league matches. Lower league winners normally walk their divisions. Arsenal lost so many times last year to supposed mediocre opposition as did Man Utd. The premier league tries to attract quality, and we don't have enough of the Henry's, Gerrards, Joe Coles etc. Every premier league is money driven right accross Europe, it just so happens that the Premiership is better at showcasing than any other IMO. However, I do belive you may find better quality football in La Liga.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: August 26, 2006

5,471

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.