Adi_Dem
Well-known member
You continue with your abuse calling names, bullying behaviour but you think you are some white knight. You stand by calling someone a d*(head on a messageboard, that shows no remorse, no self awareness. You feel justified in behaving that way, I find it childish and immature.
Well, opening up with 'word salad' is clearly an insightful way to start any post and will immediately set the tone. But I will repeat. Instead of just making wild accusations please point me to anything prior to your insults (which I see you're trying to deny) whcih could possibly be construed as bullying, insulting or anything like that. Please also tell me where I abused or bullied Steve. I have asked that several times now so please point me to it.
Bottom line here is we disagree on a football thread. I didn't call you specifically out for being analytically lazy, I said some people are. You took umbrage with that, but you'd already shown yourself to be emotional on this subject with others before I interjected.
It is self evident from the thread which of us is getting emotional here. I didn't say you were specifically calling me analytically lazy. I made a general observation about the tone of your post which has been eloquently summarised by indeedido. I am completely without emotion on the subject of Connolly. We disagree and that really isn't a problem for me but it very clearly is for you. This thread refers.
I stand by you throwing the statement 'he offers nothing' and 'offers nothing in every single game he plays', is analytically lazy. It's a superficial analysis of his game play. That isn't an insult, some people think deeper on subjects than others, it isn't labelling someone as thick, just some are not that interested in looking beyond the superficial for a variety of reasons. They may not have the time, may let emotion cloud their judgement, they may not have the knowledge or experience. I'm no 'expert' but I do have a bank of knowledge having trained youths for 12 years, been on courses, workshops, read text books. I've invested quite a lot into it. Now I don't get every call right, but I shouldn't play down my investment in learning the nuances of the game. I'm anti anti-expert. I value knowledge, I value experience and I'm not going to apologise for that. If you or anyone else is intimidated by that, then the response is you have the opportunity in life to learn more, if that's what you value. Don't whine because someone else has put the effort in to get accreditations, to learn, put their own money into going on courses. Who knows you could even learn something from me if you were open minded enough.
To present that paragraph as not being insulting is frankly absent any empathy or self awareness at all. What is interesting though is how hypocritical you are. On the Derby thread I spelled out the law on causation and explained why in my expert professional opinion it was likely (not certainly but likely) in the context of what was in the public domain to fail at court if the legal arguments were ever tested. You got very emotional and it very much clouded the discussion which once again became quite personal on your part (once again bringing up old threads designed solely to embarrass and mock me). You then went on to challenge my expert view with what can only be described as a google law degree nonsense on very specific points around the law of causation. I simply pointed out that you were wrong. Because you were. So on that occasion you were very, very anti-expert and in fact it made you really rather angry and it manifested in the same sort of condescending, insulting word salad you now offer here. You think I am whining because you put time and money into football accreditations and that I should learn from you? The arrogance is utterly astounding.
This is a football messageboard. I don't have time to set out a thesis on why I think Connolly is woeful. Moreover I don't need to. It's a messageboard. And to take such umbrage with a phrase like 'he offers nothing' on a bloody football messageboard is frankly ridiculous.
If you ever offered an olive branch, I certainly haven't seen one and your continuation on this thread to stand by your insults isn't an olive branch. Mine was earlier in this thread. But I'll offer you one again, I'm not angry with you despite the petty insults, I'm not emotional despite your amateur psychology...I'll get a pyschologist for that, I'm asssuming you haven't invested your time in this domain. We both love the boro, and we're not in competition with each other, this isn't an intellectual ******* contest. I'd like you to ruminate over how this started and ask yourself does any footballer truly offer zero, in every single appearance? Were your comments a little over the top, does someone have the right to challenge that? I have accepted many times that connolly hasn't got the goals we hoped, but you absolutely should not measure a player purely on one metric, or even quantifiable metrics alone. That goes for most things in life, lies damned lies and statistics is a true adage.
There is no 'if'. I offered it on the Derby thread. Another poster tagged you to look at it. It was ignored. In any event it is now firmly withdrawn. You haven't offered any such olive branch here and instead have doubled down on everything you have said. You are clearly angry and emotional. It pours off the page. I absolutely know we aren't in competition with each other but you completely misunderstood and continue to misunderstand the problem here. At no stage whatsoever did I have any problem with your opinion or you challenging my view that he is very very poor. You've somehow managed to convince yourself that I am the one that has the difficulty accepting an alternative view but actually this started and continues because you very clearly made derogatory comments about people having a different view than yours before then going after me. It's that simple.
It's interesting what you say about measuring a player on one metric though since there's a certain hypocrisy in that you judged Uche precisely on that basis:
Ikpeazu
Iirc some thought he would be a 15 goal striker generally the same ones that think that Warnockball is a tactic fit for the 2021 championship
fmttmboro.com
In fact, you said "Yeah I think about 10 at a push, but that would hinder not help us. It's like when people were saying Britt was important to us as our top scorer on 10-14 goals, in reality he was holding us back."
Very odd.
I WILL reflect on this thread, I'm man enough to do that. My recommendation is that you do too, and honestly ask if you could or should have behaved better, if you were right to be abusive and to stand by that abuse and to if you can improve yourself? Your umbrage really comes from me saying it's rediculous to claim a footballer offers zero in every single game he plays. That's the kindle that lit this anger in you. Is that a fair claim by me, and was it a fair reaction by you? It isn't calling you rediculous, simply the idea of absolutes in analysing a footballer.
I hope you do but if this post is anything to go by it seems unlikely that you will move an inch. In answer to your question I have already reflected on it. I have re-read it several times as I have the Derby thread. I have nothing to apologise for or to change. This is all on you and your approach. When you start questioning someone's mental health, bringing up stuff designed solely to embarrass and belittle, claim that somehow this thread was designed specifically as a red rag for you and hold your own view up as 'better' than others then I'm afraid you're going to get called a d*ckhead.
As I have already described my 'umbrage' (and I am not angry in any way) came not from you having a different view but rather your entire approach which other posters have also spotted, which essentially said 'I know best because you lot are analytically lazy, silly and ridiculous'. When I pulled you up on it you've basically lost the plot and started being quite vicious.