| This forum 15:36 - Feb 3 with 11175 views | mattjenkins1990 |
I have been regularly following the planet swans forum and do enjoy a number of the threads and debates posted.
What i cannot understand is why people are so hostile to one another, personal attacks on users including people who contribute regularly and moderators ... why ?
I honestly have seen less petulance in a school playground. We are all Swansea city fans with opinions about the club we love regardless of geographical location, status in the forum, season ticket holders or Trust members. We should not be Verbally attacked for posting our thoughts and opinions, its what makes freedom of speech great.
Swansea is supposed to be a family club, is highly regarded around the UK and the world for this, however this forum doesn't feel very family like to me
|  |
| |  |
| This forum on 09:05 - Feb 4 with 1844 views | ItchySphincter |
| This forum on 21:08 - Feb 3 by jackonicko |
Very good post - agree with a lot of that.
It's amazing how polarising Laudrup turned out to be. I remember having a huge amount of man-love for Laudrup in that first season. I think it peaked for me in the COC semi final against Chelsea - but with hindsight it started to wane after that. Yes, the wembley final was good, but it was against Bradford and apart from the selection of Ki at centre-back to keep a few nerves jangling before kick off, it was a procession. After that, the spark seemed to go and whilst there were some moments of terrific make-up sex (Valencia away) the relationship was doomed.
For others, that spark is still very much alive and they continue to hope that one day they'll get back together. Not for me.
However, I was very much against Project Garry. I was fine for it to see out the season, - and I think the board pushed ML at the right time. The vermin game was make or break - and I didn't think ML would get the rallying win that we ended up with. However, to give him the job full time for the full season was lunacy. This was not the time to experiment and I feared the worst.
Happy to put my hands up and say I was wrong. I did much the same to Huw at the fans forum - he clearly knows better than me!
But that's not to say I don't have concerns. Noone can argue with the points on the board and the wins at OT and home to Arsenal are to be cherished. I've patted GM on the back metaphorically for the Soton game.
Someone else posted on here that its a first world problem to worry about the style of play, and it is, but it does worry me. You say we have evolved - but to me evolution means progression and the way we have played this season seems a retrograde step. We can't compete financially with the big boys - we compete by being different, not the same. Southampton are now more Swansea than Swansea - and look where they are in the table. Hell, even when they lost to us on sunday, they lost playing like we used to with all the possession and no penetration :)
I also don''t like the way GM talks about what he does when things go well. Even today, he talks about how he has been speaking with Ash to make him a better captain and leader.
I think some of it is confidence (or lack of), but he is quick to point the finger of blame when things go well but talk about how the team have listened to what he has asked them to do when we win. That grates on me. It grates on others. But whenever GMs tendency to 'me me me' gets brought up, it quickly degenerates on here.
Another good example is the 'coward' thread. The sentiment of that post was true, but that thread quickly got out of control because of who started it. However, Monk was absent in his leadership that day, hiding on the bench when all was going wrong on the pitch. A problem of his own making, with the flawed team he put out, and he ran for cover. Coward is an emotive word - and therefore got a huge reaction - but the point was lost that he wasn't very brave that day either! |
There's only one or two that have perpetuated the Laudrup myth but like anything, say it loud enough and long enough and it will become accepted truth. Simple fact of the matter is that by nature we can't help but judge people by our own standards when the simple truth is that a fair number on here are severely lacking. |  |
| |
| This forum on 10:12 - Feb 4 with 1800 views | perchrockjack |
Sorry Brynnie, but you can only judge a poster on either what you know of him personally (we don't) or whayt is posted.
YOU and your chum/s have been on Monk s case all season coming up with a stream of vindictive, vicious and frankly distracting crap. You re in defence mode mode but you given it to me so you ll get it back.
Just about every victory under Monk has led to a negative slant, the latest laughingly, being our passing game and how its deteriorated, questions about tactics, his personal courage even .
We ve had the nauseating sight of a single poster ,thankfully gone, basically bullying a director into a meeting to express HIS view. FRankly ,the irector should be ashamed of doing that. It was a dark hour.
We ve had the Board, bless em, the people who appointedMonk, being virtually accused of being involved in a conspiracy to shaft the club ONLY to make millions for themselves. Strangely enough, this matter seems somewhat quieter now so it might just be the case we should not worry or fret and support the fookers who put their money into the club to put us where we are now. We owe these people everything andfrankly should not even be having this exchange..
THERE ARE PLENTY out there like PRJ who feel the same way. |  |
| |
| This forum on 10:41 - Feb 4 with 1789 views | Private_Partz |
| This forum on 08:48 - Feb 4 by Ponderosa |
The reluctance to accept Monk is because of who he is. Where he came from. His background. Unless Laudrup got replaced by Mourinho some of our fans would never have accepted whoever the replacement was. But because it was Monk, the club captain, and the person viewed by some as the Union Leader who led the great revolution against the Great Dane. And I'm pretty sure that if Laudrup was still here and we were on 33 points at this point of the season the negative side of this forum would be creaming in their pants. He was on a hiding to nothing from day one. |
I disagree. Many supported him from day one. I did because I think he is a top bloke. On the other hand I did not agree with the sacking of ML. I believe it was done because of managment style not results. I was also concerned about appointing a complete rookie without even interviewing anyone else. I felt there was a huge likelyhood that this would end in disaster. We were a couple of points off relegation and half the division were in the same boat. Gary has exceeded all my expectations and I am happy that my concerns turned out to be unfounded.
Gary is still a young inexperienced manger and the apparent fall off in our style of playing means we could be in for a rough end of the season and this is what concerns a few.
With regards to ML I am still a fan and I only mention him when others decided to have a go at him. I believe this to be the case for 99% of Laudrup posts they are merely a response.
I cannot belive anyone wants Gary to fail to be proven right unless they are not swans supporters and are here on a wind up.
The problem is many look for black and white arguments when shades of grey are all that exist.
My hope is we can debate issues in future without name calling and abuse. I have an easy option. If anyone is abusive to me I cut the conversation dead and continue the debate with others. Having said that I would say I hardly ever have to do that. Generally if you are polite to others you will be treated as such.
Sorry about that. What an effing ramble :-) |  |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| This forum on 10:51 - Feb 4 with 1775 views | Ponderosa |
| This forum on 10:41 - Feb 4 by Private_Partz |
I disagree. Many supported him from day one. I did because I think he is a top bloke. On the other hand I did not agree with the sacking of ML. I believe it was done because of managment style not results. I was also concerned about appointing a complete rookie without even interviewing anyone else. I felt there was a huge likelyhood that this would end in disaster. We were a couple of points off relegation and half the division were in the same boat. Gary has exceeded all my expectations and I am happy that my concerns turned out to be unfounded.
Gary is still a young inexperienced manger and the apparent fall off in our style of playing means we could be in for a rough end of the season and this is what concerns a few.
With regards to ML I am still a fan and I only mention him when others decided to have a go at him. I believe this to be the case for 99% of Laudrup posts they are merely a response.
I cannot belive anyone wants Gary to fail to be proven right unless they are not swans supporters and are here on a wind up.
The problem is many look for black and white arguments when shades of grey are all that exist.
My hope is we can debate issues in future without name calling and abuse. I have an easy option. If anyone is abusive to me I cut the conversation dead and continue the debate with others. Having said that I would say I hardly ever have to do that. Generally if you are polite to others you will be treated as such.
Sorry about that. What an effing ramble :-) |
Hard to argue with any of that  |  |
| |
| This forum on 10:58 - Feb 4 with 1767 views | icecoldjack |
| This forum on 10:41 - Feb 4 by Private_Partz |
I disagree. Many supported him from day one. I did because I think he is a top bloke. On the other hand I did not agree with the sacking of ML. I believe it was done because of managment style not results. I was also concerned about appointing a complete rookie without even interviewing anyone else. I felt there was a huge likelyhood that this would end in disaster. We were a couple of points off relegation and half the division were in the same boat. Gary has exceeded all my expectations and I am happy that my concerns turned out to be unfounded.
Gary is still a young inexperienced manger and the apparent fall off in our style of playing means we could be in for a rough end of the season and this is what concerns a few.
With regards to ML I am still a fan and I only mention him when others decided to have a go at him. I believe this to be the case for 99% of Laudrup posts they are merely a response.
I cannot belive anyone wants Gary to fail to be proven right unless they are not swans supporters and are here on a wind up.
The problem is many look for black and white arguments when shades of grey are all that exist.
My hope is we can debate issues in future without name calling and abuse. I have an easy option. If anyone is abusive to me I cut the conversation dead and continue the debate with others. Having said that I would say I hardly ever have to do that. Generally if you are polite to others you will be treated as such.
Sorry about that. What an effing ramble :-) |
Pretty much sums up how i think RE Laudrup.
Great post. |  | | |
| This forum on 12:51 - Feb 4 with 1728 views | Parlay |
| This forum on 17:34 - Feb 3 by acejack3065 |
I have no agenda and I just try and post objectively about my football team.
What has been very noticeable and alarming is that since Laudrup has gone there has been a noticeable split in the fanbase.
There has been a complete unacceptance of Monk as a replacement and it's carried on for an entire year. As a manager he has been subject to higher scrutiny than any other Swans boss in recent memory. This has been wholly unfair as Monk has displayed enough loyalty already to the club and the fans, as well as providing some legendary results since taking over. Beating Cardiff in his first game, Man utd away and Arsenal at home are immense achievements which would be enough to cement the reputation of any other Swans manager.
Our style has evolved which is necessary for any team if they wish to stay relevant and successful. We have sacrificed a few possession points for league points whilst still scoring some great goals. Regardless of how our football has transformed into success, some posters have seen this as an ultimate betrayal to the fabled "swansea way", a dogmatic approach that determines that our passes should be short and along the ground. Any deviation from that approach is nothing short of heresy as the system must always be upheld for the east stand sayeth so!
In a direct reaction to such football snobbery and hysterical despair another section of fans has emerged. These fans are so bewildered at the distance of which the other fans have lodged their heads so far up their backsides, they have resorted to over celebrating every little success in order to try and neutralise the nay-sayers.
This has created a polarised planet swans where objectivity and freedom of thought are swallowed up in an entrenched feud between people who feel the need to argue about what Swansea City was and what it is now becoming.
For me it's completely irrelevant as Swansea City are enjoying their 4th year in the Premier League and are two wins away from almost certainly guaranteeing a 5th. We've done it by playing pretty, fighting ugly, singing loudly and upsetting the footballing order. Lastly, we've done it together. Please can we continue to live the dream together! |
I was going to reply yesterday but wasnt sure if it was you, but after today and a quick search showed it was.
For someone who claims to be so objective and in it with everybody else... You dont half have an agenda with certain posters and often reply to the username rather than the content. You are also partial to a goading comment now and again and often refuse to debate things properly with a bitchy sign off refusing to explain your part.
You are as much a part of the issue as the ones this thread was designed for. Regardless of your speech designed for an applause like an audience member clearing their larynx on the Oprah show with the intended purpose of making the seals clap.
If everybody looked at things objectively and contributed fairly without insults and goading then we would be in a far better place as a group of fans.
I just cant accept that you do. |  |
| |
| This forum on 13:33 - Feb 4 with 1699 views | jackolantern |
As an admin of a different sporting forum in the past, you need to ban multiple accounts and anonymous proxies. They are only used to wind up posters or to reinforce existing wind ups. | | | |
| This forum on 13:39 - Feb 4 with 1690 views | dickythorpe |
| This forum on 13:33 - Feb 4 by jackolantern |
As an admin of a different sporting forum in the past, you need to ban multiple accounts and anonymous proxies. They are only used to wind up posters or to reinforce existing wind ups. |
As ever how do you "prove" someone is on a wind up? How do you prove that some aren't arguing deliberately? MINEFIELD!!!
How do you prove that a Mod is fit for purpose?
How do we know we exist?
What did you have for supper last night?
Where is my copy of White Fang?
IS Yom Kipper a Jewish fish? |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| This forum on 14:11 - Feb 4 with 1667 views | acejack3065 |
| This forum on 12:51 - Feb 4 by Parlay |
I was going to reply yesterday but wasnt sure if it was you, but after today and a quick search showed it was.
For someone who claims to be so objective and in it with everybody else... You dont half have an agenda with certain posters and often reply to the username rather than the content. You are also partial to a goading comment now and again and often refuse to debate things properly with a bitchy sign off refusing to explain your part.
You are as much a part of the issue as the ones this thread was designed for. Regardless of your speech designed for an applause like an audience member clearing their larynx on the Oprah show with the intended purpose of making the seals clap.
If everybody looked at things objectively and contributed fairly without insults and goading then we would be in a far better place as a group of fans.
I just cant accept that you do. |
What do you mean you weren't sure if it was me or not? i've only got one username and i've stuck to it since about 2008.
I try to be as objective as I can and I change my mind when I'm proved wrong. My mind has changed on several things and I'm not afraid to admit when I've been wrong.
I don't personally know anyone on this site and I've never knowingly met another poster so to suggest that I post with an agenda towards some is quite laughable. I don't have any preference to peoples usernames because I don't know the people behind them. I can gaugue what a posters opinion might be on something based on their previous posts but thats about it.
I don't post on here as frequently as some others but when I do its usually for the enjoyment of discussion. There are posters that I like to frequently read and agree with usually like ECB, Monmouth, and a few others. There are also posters who i usually disagree with from football to politics like Brynmill, Davillin and Lohengrin but I truthfully enjoy their contributions. They are part of the reason to why I post as well.
My opinions are based on what I see and I don't require affirmation from other posters to validate myself. If I have an opinion I throw it into the mix. In this instance its about the divide in this forum.
Fair enough if you don't think I'm impartial because that's your opinion but don't misrepresent me as someone who only posts to reinforce a messageboard bias that has very little to do with me.
Which posters do you think I have an agenda with and which ones do I leave bitchy sign offs to? I'd love to know in case they deserve an apology. |  | | |
| This forum on 14:44 - Feb 4 with 1652 views | jackolantern |
| This forum on 13:39 - Feb 4 by dickythorpe |
As ever how do you "prove" someone is on a wind up? How do you prove that some aren't arguing deliberately? MINEFIELD!!!
How do you prove that a Mod is fit for purpose?
How do we know we exist?
What did you have for supper last night?
Where is my copy of White Fang?
IS Yom Kipper a Jewish fish? |
You don't prove anything you simply disallow/ban multiple accounts.
The rest of your post is nonsense. | | | |
| This forum on 14:49 - Feb 4 with 1632 views | Parlay |
| This forum on 14:11 - Feb 4 by acejack3065 |
What do you mean you weren't sure if it was me or not? i've only got one username and i've stuck to it since about 2008.
I try to be as objective as I can and I change my mind when I'm proved wrong. My mind has changed on several things and I'm not afraid to admit when I've been wrong.
I don't personally know anyone on this site and I've never knowingly met another poster so to suggest that I post with an agenda towards some is quite laughable. I don't have any preference to peoples usernames because I don't know the people behind them. I can gaugue what a posters opinion might be on something based on their previous posts but thats about it.
I don't post on here as frequently as some others but when I do its usually for the enjoyment of discussion. There are posters that I like to frequently read and agree with usually like ECB, Monmouth, and a few others. There are also posters who i usually disagree with from football to politics like Brynmill, Davillin and Lohengrin but I truthfully enjoy their contributions. They are part of the reason to why I post as well.
My opinions are based on what I see and I don't require affirmation from other posters to validate myself. If I have an opinion I throw it into the mix. In this instance its about the divide in this forum.
Fair enough if you don't think I'm impartial because that's your opinion but don't misrepresent me as someone who only posts to reinforce a messageboard bias that has very little to do with me.
Which posters do you think I have an agenda with and which ones do I leave bitchy sign offs to? I'd love to know in case they deserve an apology. |
Nothing to do with multis. I just wasn't sure whether it was you that i have noticed in the past doing as I described. At the time i didn't have the inclination to search your post history. After a brief exchange with you today it jogged my memory that indeed it must have been you and a quick search confirmed that. So i posted here what i was going to yesterday. I have had first hand experience of you wading into a debate where i am being as polite as possible only to goad and attempt to belittle. | |
| |
| This forum on 15:00 - Feb 4 with 1621 views | acejack3065 |
| This forum on 14:49 - Feb 4 by Parlay |
Nothing to do with multis. I just wasn't sure whether it was you that i have noticed in the past doing as I described. At the time i didn't have the inclination to search your post history. After a brief exchange with you today it jogged my memory that indeed it must have been you and a quick search confirmed that. So i posted here what i was going to yesterday. I have had first hand experience of you wading into a debate where i am being as polite as possible only to goad and attempt to belittle. |
You must think very highly of yourself if you think that I care enough about you to wade into your debates simply to to goad and belittle you. Since you've trawled through my previous posts i'd love for you to back up your accusations that I target other posters to back up my "agenda".
In the past I have agreed with what you've posted, disagreed with what you've posted and generally been ambivilent towards you where others have told me not to bother or engauge with you.
I used to think you were entertaining but that conception has been pretty much shattered. You argued tediously over 9 pages and ECB made a comment which went ignored so I commented on it. Is that what you're reffering to when you say you have "had first hand experience of me wading into a debate where i am being as polite as possible only to goad and attempt to belittle"? | | | |
| This forum on 15:08 - Feb 4 with 1606 views | Parlay |
| This forum on 15:00 - Feb 4 by acejack3065 |
You must think very highly of yourself if you think that I care enough about you to wade into your debates simply to to goad and belittle you. Since you've trawled through my previous posts i'd love for you to back up your accusations that I target other posters to back up my "agenda".
In the past I have agreed with what you've posted, disagreed with what you've posted and generally been ambivilent towards you where others have told me not to bother or engauge with you.
I used to think you were entertaining but that conception has been pretty much shattered. You argued tediously over 9 pages and ECB made a comment which went ignored so I commented on it. Is that what you're reffering to when you say you have "had first hand experience of me wading into a debate where i am being as polite as possible only to goad and attempt to belittle"? |
And here we are, exhibit A.
"You must think pretty highly of yourself"
"i used to find you entertaining"
There are many posters on this site who have their posters they like and posters they dislike. They act impartial and often post under the guise of fairness yet are nothing of the sort. You are one such poster.
Lets just take today for example. You have accused me of arguing semantics and berating lisa, an amazing accusation considering the events of the last 24 hours all but proving it was indeed the other way around, yet your "fairness and impartiality" and lets not forget your "objectivity" prompted you to twist reality to take an inaccurate stance merely because of a username that you have decided you do not like. Not to mention trying to argue that a 30 yard shot constitutes carving out a clear chance. | |
| |
| This forum on 15:16 - Feb 4 with 1602 views | acejack3065 |
| This forum on 15:08 - Feb 4 by Parlay |
And here we are, exhibit A.
"You must think pretty highly of yourself"
"i used to find you entertaining"
There are many posters on this site who have their posters they like and posters they dislike. They act impartial and often post under the guise of fairness yet are nothing of the sort. You are one such poster.
Lets just take today for example. You have accused me of arguing semantics and berating lisa, an amazing accusation considering the events of the last 24 hours all but proving it was indeed the other way around, yet your "fairness and impartiality" and lets not forget your "objectivity" prompted you to twist reality to take an inaccurate stance merely because of a username that you have decided you do not like. Not to mention trying to argue that a 30 yard shot constitutes carving out a clear chance. |
Simply put, which posters do I favour and whcih posters do I slate, regardless of what they type? You're the one throwing around accusations.
Why are you so obsessed with what constitutes a clear cut chance? F**king hell let it go. | | | |
| This forum on 15:26 - Feb 4 with 1583 views | Parlay |
| This forum on 15:16 - Feb 4 by acejack3065 |
Simply put, which posters do I favour and whcih posters do I slate, regardless of what they type? You're the one throwing around accusations.
Why are you so obsessed with what constitutes a clear cut chance? F**king hell let it go. |
You seem to favour the clique, lisa et al. Im not saying you slate posters regardless of what they type but when you feel you can jump in to favour the clique under a cloud of impartiality then you do it.
Eh? Who is obsessed with what constitutes a clear chance? And why let it go? You do understand what the discussion was about right?
The discussion was regarding our game plan and how some say it was a masterclass. I stated that how is it a masterclass to create no clear goalscoring chances. The reply was "we scored and hit the post".
So in order to determine if it was a gameplan that was intelligent in its planning and execution we will have to decipher what is a good chance and what isnt. As the scenarios then come quite different. We either played defensively and carved open 3 good chances or we played defensively and carved open none.
I have stated that a good chance is a chance where the striker is expected to score more often than not. I think that is fair dont you? It can then translate into future game plans and a base to work from. You cannot go into each game hoping that your best chance is a shot from 30 yards and overwhelmingly more often than not, it wont go in.
If you dont see the difference then i dispair. | |
| |
| This forum on 16:05 - Feb 4 with 1551 views | mattjenkins1990 |
| This forum on 15:26 - Feb 4 by Parlay |
You seem to favour the clique, lisa et al. Im not saying you slate posters regardless of what they type but when you feel you can jump in to favour the clique under a cloud of impartiality then you do it.
Eh? Who is obsessed with what constitutes a clear chance? And why let it go? You do understand what the discussion was about right?
The discussion was regarding our game plan and how some say it was a masterclass. I stated that how is it a masterclass to create no clear goalscoring chances. The reply was "we scored and hit the post".
So in order to determine if it was a gameplan that was intelligent in its planning and execution we will have to decipher what is a good chance and what isnt. As the scenarios then come quite different. We either played defensively and carved open 3 good chances or we played defensively and carved open none.
I have stated that a good chance is a chance where the striker is expected to score more often than not. I think that is fair dont you? It can then translate into future game plans and a base to work from. You cannot go into each game hoping that your best chance is a shot from 30 yards and overwhelmingly more often than not, it wont go in.
If you dont see the difference then i dispair. |
I think a good chance is both one where the player is expected to score and also the 30 yarder depending on the player taking the chance.
Shelvey said in the post match interview that monk told him to shoot more, its part of the gameplan, we were aware of what the tactics were Sunday, stay tight and look to break. We as a club have always tried to pass the ball into the back of the net however if you have players that have the natural ability that the likes of Sheley and Siggy possess then a good chance could be a shot from 30 Yards. | |
| |
| This forum on 16:11 - Feb 4 with 1538 views | Parlay |
| This forum on 16:05 - Feb 4 by mattjenkins1990 |
I think a good chance is both one where the player is expected to score and also the 30 yarder depending on the player taking the chance.
Shelvey said in the post match interview that monk told him to shoot more, its part of the gameplan, we were aware of what the tactics were Sunday, stay tight and look to break. We as a club have always tried to pass the ball into the back of the net however if you have players that have the natural ability that the likes of Sheley and Siggy possess then a good chance could be a shot from 30 Yards. |
I agree to a point, in terms of chances being better depending on who they fall to.
But i don't think anybody in the world will score more 30 yarders than they miss, even Cristiano Ronaldo. Nobody should be expected to score them they are just a bonus if they come off. They cannot be constituted a great chance. | |
| |
| This forum on 10:09 - Feb 5 with 1451 views | sixpenses |
| This forum on 21:09 - Feb 3 by little_britton |
This thread has been a good read without anybody abusing other posters,lets hope it's a sign of things to come |
Really
"Utter nonsense,some people would have loved us to be relegation fodder so Monk would have gone.
Fu*k me Icey its a year tomorrow since Laudrup left and one pri*k is still wa*king over him." | | | |
| This forum on 10:11 - Feb 5 with 1446 views | Darran |
| This forum on 10:09 - Feb 5 by sixpenses |
Really
"Utter nonsense,some people would have loved us to be relegation fodder so Monk would have gone.
Fu*k me Icey its a year tomorrow since Laudrup left and one pri*k is still wa*king over him." |
Which of course is the truth and the truth is not abuse. |  |
| |
| This forum on 10:14 - Feb 5 with 1437 views | sixpenses |
| This forum on 10:41 - Feb 4 by Private_Partz |
I disagree. Many supported him from day one. I did because I think he is a top bloke. On the other hand I did not agree with the sacking of ML. I believe it was done because of managment style not results. I was also concerned about appointing a complete rookie without even interviewing anyone else. I felt there was a huge likelyhood that this would end in disaster. We were a couple of points off relegation and half the division were in the same boat. Gary has exceeded all my expectations and I am happy that my concerns turned out to be unfounded.
Gary is still a young inexperienced manger and the apparent fall off in our style of playing means we could be in for a rough end of the season and this is what concerns a few.
With regards to ML I am still a fan and I only mention him when others decided to have a go at him. I believe this to be the case for 99% of Laudrup posts they are merely a response.
I cannot belive anyone wants Gary to fail to be proven right unless they are not swans supporters and are here on a wind up.
The problem is many look for black and white arguments when shades of grey are all that exist.
My hope is we can debate issues in future without name calling and abuse. I have an easy option. If anyone is abusive to me I cut the conversation dead and continue the debate with others. Having said that I would say I hardly ever have to do that. Generally if you are polite to others you will be treated as such.
Sorry about that. What an effing ramble :-) |
Excellent post | | | |
| This forum on 11:23 - Feb 5 with 1409 views | sixpenses |
| This forum on 10:11 - Feb 5 by Darran |
Which of course is the truth and the truth is not abuse. |
Truth is not an abuse
That was certainly abusive
Neither was it true
The fact is you have generated a massive amount of Laudrup posts by your continued abuse and repeated goading lies about one of our most successful managers ever. Same as 2 Danish posters on the other site recently said how your racial abuse had driven them from this site. You know the ones that were going to feck off after Laudrup left according to you. Your prime currency is abuse Darran and it is pitiful
Yet you are the one who said they did not want Garry Monk anywhere near the club as manager and he knows where the door is if he does not do as he is told (re him not wanting more experienced help as it would be a personal failure). All I wanted was a fair selection process that would consider the likes of Koeman who was throwing himself at us.
This latest truth is similar to your string of lies like your recent FACT .........
"Whether Bony had a pre-season or not that pr*ck Laudrup still wasn't picking him in November. FACT"
even though
- he played in every one of the 5 games that month and started 4
- he played 80% of all the game time available up to his injury in the final game
Despite European rotation for games within a few days of each other including consecutive away games that included Russia
If fact no one played more games under Laudrup than Bony last season including playing in every single PL game for which he was available and almost total European game time from the outset.
Compare and contrast Gomis who was getting an average of 17 minutes a game this November (without any fitness issues). Yet his goal that month gave us a fantastic win against Arsenal and an extra 2 PL points (twice as many additional points as Bony's goals earned us in his first 5 months, with massively more playing time).
You are the one with hatred issues Darran and have used them to rip this site apart. Perhaps you are the one that needs to get over Laudrup and the fact that he did not fawn over you like your beloved Bren. Those that have done the greatest disservice to Monk are those that have kept up the repeated lies about Laudrup and some of the excellent players he brought to us, thinking in some way that this was some kind of twisted support for Monk. When indeed it has polarised the fanbase and detracted from where we currently are.
What I do know is I always support the team and those that think anyone would want the team to lose to make a name on an internet forum, truly are judging others by their own very sad standards.
If I ever referred to Monk with abuse and lies as you do our previous highly successful manager, I would be rightfully ripped apart - as should your lies and abuse. | | | |
| This forum on 11:31 - Feb 5 with 1395 views | Darran |
| This forum on 11:23 - Feb 5 by sixpenses |
Truth is not an abuse
That was certainly abusive
Neither was it true
The fact is you have generated a massive amount of Laudrup posts by your continued abuse and repeated goading lies about one of our most successful managers ever. Same as 2 Danish posters on the other site recently said how your racial abuse had driven them from this site. You know the ones that were going to feck off after Laudrup left according to you. Your prime currency is abuse Darran and it is pitiful
Yet you are the one who said they did not want Garry Monk anywhere near the club as manager and he knows where the door is if he does not do as he is told (re him not wanting more experienced help as it would be a personal failure). All I wanted was a fair selection process that would consider the likes of Koeman who was throwing himself at us.
This latest truth is similar to your string of lies like your recent FACT .........
"Whether Bony had a pre-season or not that pr*ck Laudrup still wasn't picking him in November. FACT"
even though
- he played in every one of the 5 games that month and started 4
- he played 80% of all the game time available up to his injury in the final game
Despite European rotation for games within a few days of each other including consecutive away games that included Russia
If fact no one played more games under Laudrup than Bony last season including playing in every single PL game for which he was available and almost total European game time from the outset.
Compare and contrast Gomis who was getting an average of 17 minutes a game this November (without any fitness issues). Yet his goal that month gave us a fantastic win against Arsenal and an extra 2 PL points (twice as many additional points as Bony's goals earned us in his first 5 months, with massively more playing time).
You are the one with hatred issues Darran and have used them to rip this site apart. Perhaps you are the one that needs to get over Laudrup and the fact that he did not fawn over you like your beloved Bren. Those that have done the greatest disservice to Monk are those that have kept up the repeated lies about Laudrup and some of the excellent players he brought to us, thinking in some way that this was some kind of twisted support for Monk. When indeed it has polarised the fanbase and detracted from where we currently are.
What I do know is I always support the team and those that think anyone would want the team to lose to make a name on an internet forum, truly are judging others by their own very sad standards.
If I ever referred to Monk with abuse and lies as you do our previous highly successful manager, I would be rightfully ripped apart - as should your lies and abuse. |
See you then.  | |
| |
| This forum on 11:37 - Feb 5 with 1392 views | LeonisGod |
| This forum on 10:41 - Feb 4 by Private_Partz |
I disagree. Many supported him from day one. I did because I think he is a top bloke. On the other hand I did not agree with the sacking of ML. I believe it was done because of managment style not results. I was also concerned about appointing a complete rookie without even interviewing anyone else. I felt there was a huge likelyhood that this would end in disaster. We were a couple of points off relegation and half the division were in the same boat. Gary has exceeded all my expectations and I am happy that my concerns turned out to be unfounded.
Gary is still a young inexperienced manger and the apparent fall off in our style of playing means we could be in for a rough end of the season and this is what concerns a few.
With regards to ML I am still a fan and I only mention him when others decided to have a go at him. I believe this to be the case for 99% of Laudrup posts they are merely a response.
I cannot belive anyone wants Gary to fail to be proven right unless they are not swans supporters and are here on a wind up.
The problem is many look for black and white arguments when shades of grey are all that exist.
My hope is we can debate issues in future without name calling and abuse. I have an easy option. If anyone is abusive to me I cut the conversation dead and continue the debate with others. Having said that I would say I hardly ever have to do that. Generally if you are polite to others you will be treated as such.
Sorry about that. What an effing ramble :-) |
How do you know ML is a top bloke? From the little I know about ML outside of the public eye, I've heard him described as surley and uncooperative. I've never met him though, so wouldn't know. I was happy enough with him as out manager until it all started going t*ts up though.
But my main point is that we'd lost our way on the pitch under ML. It might be ugly at times now, but it was also painful to watch in ML's last season on many an occasion. By the end our fluidity had gone then and we were weak at the back. Purely from a footballing perspective his time had come imo. I know he had a lot to deal with in that season, but at the time we seemed on an inevitable slide. My only regret with ML leaving when we did is that our Europa League chances went out of the window with him. I've a hunch he'd have got more out of the team against Napoli.
I don't see that now with Garry, even if it's been a rough month. The togetherness shown at S'ton shows we are working hard for each other. West ham at home was a good game with a good performance against a difficult team and that wasn't long ago at all. |  | | |
| This forum on 11:40 - Feb 5 with 1383 views | sixpenses |
| This forum on 11:31 - Feb 5 by Darran |
See you then. |
How would you know  | | | |
| This forum on 23:09 - Feb 6 with 1275 views | Private_Partz |
| This forum on 11:37 - Feb 5 by LeonisGod |
How do you know ML is a top bloke? From the little I know about ML outside of the public eye, I've heard him described as surley and uncooperative. I've never met him though, so wouldn't know. I was happy enough with him as out manager until it all started going t*ts up though.
But my main point is that we'd lost our way on the pitch under ML. It might be ugly at times now, but it was also painful to watch in ML's last season on many an occasion. By the end our fluidity had gone then and we were weak at the back. Purely from a footballing perspective his time had come imo. I know he had a lot to deal with in that season, but at the time we seemed on an inevitable slide. My only regret with ML leaving when we did is that our Europa League chances went out of the window with him. I've a hunch he'd have got more out of the team against Napoli.
I don't see that now with Garry, even if it's been a rough month. The togetherness shown at S'ton shows we are working hard for each other. West ham at home was a good game with a good performance against a difficult team and that wasn't long ago at all. |
I said Gary was a top bloke :-). I agree though that I also think ML is. I can only go by what I see. True it has been a tough month for Gary but it was also a though time for ML with unprecedented injuries and fixtures crammed in as a result of are Europa League success. I would even say the latter' s time was tougher. Just like ML we now have a good run in to the end of the season with players coming back from injury and winnable games on the horizon. | |
| You have mission in life to hold out your hand,
To help the other guy out,
Help your fellow man.
Stan Ridgway
|
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
