We are at our worst at 2-0 up

Originally Posted by NedKelly

But it’s not edgy is it?

#makeedgygreatagain

Stop changing the subject you bore, there are some great opinions here, let them breathe

Originally Posted by Sheik JaBooty

It’s not about the opinion, it’s about the motive behind it. Some people need to go against the grain, or consensus, because it implies a superior knowledge, something the ‘everyman’ supporter is just too thick to see. It’s an obvious, boring ego trip, nothing more.

Bit like suggesting Antony is good.

seems like you have an inferiority complex.

I just state my opinion. wolves looked dangerous every time they had the ball.

Originally Posted by Bobby C

Stop changing the subject you bore, there are some great opinions here, let them breathe

Eh up it’s George Floyd

Originally Posted by NedKelly

Eh up it’s George Floyd

Keep on topic or £#%&! off

Originally Posted by jem

seems like you have an inferiority complex.

I just state my opinion. wolves looked dangerous every time they had the ball.

Not at all. I just see it, and call it out, for what it is. Sometimes mate, when literally everyone is telling you that you walk, sound and quack like an idiot you might want to be a bit more introspective.

Originally Posted by Sheik JaBooty

It’s not about the opinion, it’s about the motive behind it. Some people need to go against the grain, or consensus, because it implies a superior knowledge, something the ‘everyman’ supporter is just too thick to see. It’s an obvious, boring ego trip, nothing more.

Bit like suggesting Antony is good.

In fairness I don't think its ego or edginess, or wanting to go against the grain.

Weirdly, considering it was 2-0, I was fuming at half time, as I knew we'd played well but that it should have been 4-0 and knowing our inevitable collapse was coming.

I think Jem just misdiagnosed this same frustration and implied we had played poorly (or 'worse than Wolves').

Sorry for saying you don't know what you think Jem, but its the only way I can square such an odd opinion on that 1st half!

Originally Posted by Bobby C

Keep on topic or £#%&! off

I actually think we’d played well for a while after going 2-0 up, we just couldn’t kill the game off. It was a hell of a lot better than a couple of months back when we’d concede with minutes - sometimes seconds - of going ahead.

We’re still shaky confidence wise, a few more games with this line up and we’ll probably look more settled at the business end of games, especially with some players returning to full fitness.

Originally Posted by RedNick80

In fairness I don't think its ego or edginess, or wanting to go against the grain.

Weirdly, considering it was 2-0, I was fuming at half time, as I knew we'd played well but that it should have been 4-0 and knowing our inevitable collapse was coming.

I think Jem just misdiagnosed this same frustration and implied we had played poorly (or 'worse than Wolves').

Sorry for saying you don't know what you think Jem, but its the only way I can square such an odd opinion on that 1st half!

New to Jem mate? He once said De Gea had good distribution and that Valencia should play centre mid purely because he could ‘see’ things the rest of us couldn’t.

He also pretends to be other people so he can argue with himself. Motwyw.

Originally Posted by Bobby C

Keep on topic or £#%&! off

Sorry George.

Originally Posted by NedKelly

I actually think we’d played well for a while after going 2-0 up, we just couldn’t kill the game off.

Well that can’t be right, surely? We got played off the park dont’cha know…

Originally Posted by NedKelly

Sorry George.

Side whisper: "rascist"

Originally Posted by Sheik JaBooty

New to Jem mate? He once said De Gea had good distribution and that Valencia should play centre mid purely because he could ‘see’ things the rest of us couldn’t.

He also pretends to be other people so he can argue with himself. Motwyw.

No, not new to Jem, but I like to try and see the good in people. Although I think he called me a @#%&! once.

Originally Posted by RedNick80

No, not new to Jem, but I like to try and see the good in people. Although I think he called me a @#%&! once.

Why, did you say the Sun rises in the East or something?

Originally Posted by Sheik JaBooty

New to Jem mate? He once said De Gea had good distribution and that Valencia should play centre mid purely because he could ‘see’ things the rest of us couldn’t.

He also pretends to be other people so he can argue with himself. Motwyw.

ah. so, we're down to just straight lying now. I have never pretended to be anyone else so that I could argue with myself. I've also kept the same name, unlike some scoundrels.

you can accept it or not, but I was mereltly stating an opinion about the game that I was watching. similarly, the comments about de gea and valencia.

as noted already, your comments about wanting to appear edgy reflect your state of mind, not mine. good day, sir.

Originally Posted by jem

ah. so, we're down to just straight lying now. I have never pretended to be anyone else so that I could argue with myself. I've also kept the same name, unlike some scoundrels.

you can accept it or not, but I was mereltly stating an opinion about the game that I was watching. similarly, the comments about de gea and valencia.

as noted already, your comments about wanting to appear edgy reflect your state of mind, not mine. good day, sir.

It's been known since the days of RI mate. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

So, not exactly "lying" then?

Originally Posted by NedKelly

Eh up it’s George Floyd

Originally Posted by Sheik JaBooty

It's been known since the days of RI mate. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

So, not exactly "lying" then?

it's been alleged since the days of ri, but it is nonsense. and you stated it as a fact. despite not having any proof (not surprising, given that there could not be any proof of something that never happened) and despite it being ridiculously unlikely, even in the absence of proof either way.

not sure why you are confused. did I say valencia should play cm to appear clever or because it's what I think? you ascribe motives that have no basis in reality. why is that? why not just deal with the comment? he had attributes which made him a solid option in the middle, but not so obviously a winger. he was also the best right back in the league. I'm fine with you having a different opinion, but if you want to suggest I only put forward my opinion to be contrarian and seem clever, (a) you're wrong; and (b) I have no time for that shit or for you. soz.

Originally Posted by Dr Stranger

Are you laughing (ganging up) because I pointed out on another thread mainoo isn't diddy, or because you also are...

Anyway, on topic, yes! Although it wasn't a penalty, we do get shaky legs when we are clear in front

2-0 is a very dangerous scoreline*. If we're 1-0 up, unless we're supremely confident of going on to get a third, we should steer well clear of trying to get a second.





*copyright of Warren Barton, Garth Crooks and various other £#%&!nuts.

Originally Posted by jem

it's been alleged since the days of ri, but it is nonsense. and you stated it as a fact. despite not having any proof (not surprising, given that there could not be any proof of something that never happened) and despite it being ridiculously unlikely, even in the absence of proof either way.

not sure why you are confused. did I say valencia should play cm to appear clever or because it's what I think? you ascribe motives that have no basis in reality. why is that? why not just deal with the comment? he had attributes which made him a solid option in the middle, but not so obviously a winger. he was also the best right back in the league. I'm fine with you having a different opinion, but if you want to suggest I only put forward my opinion to be contrarian and seem clever, (a) you're wrong; and (b) I have no time for that shit or for you. soz.

Rattled...