Goodness me. Never having met you in person, in my minds-eye you are a 35-55 year old (possibly slightly balding) male, but the way your behaving makes me think it's more likely you're a 13-15 year-old sniveling menstrual school girl. I realise that I'm now making it personal but really!"GodalmingYellow" wrote:Rubbish."deanwindass" wrote:I'm not getting off that easily? Eeek"GodalmingYellow" wrote: No you are not getting off that easily.
If it was stubbornness, and everyone will note you are personalising it yet again, why would I not have been stubborn about Hargreaves, or indeed any other player I have previously criticised?
I'm not personalising it. I'm answering your question, namely
Well done on seeing the light with regard to Hargreaves, but I don't see how that means that it's impossible for you to be stubborn in terms of your opinion on Wright."GodalmingYellow" wrote:What possible motive could I have for being critical of an OUFC player without due cause?
As I said before, you're obviously entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it.
You are personalising it by claiming it is stubborness rather than a genuine concern as to Wright's performances.
Why would I select Wright for this treatment and not Hargreaves? The simple fact is that you can't answer that because there is no basis for your personalised commentary. Just as when you ran out of argument and couldn't accept someone else's opinion, you slagged off Ty.
Disagreeing with an opinion is one thing, but it is not the same as claiming idiocy or stubborness on the part of someone who disagrees with you.
Is calling someone stubborn really that bad?! As I said you're very much entitled to your view and you asked me to say why you might possibly be still criticizing Wright in spite of his superb recent performances.
I know (and I realise that this sounds very patronising) that it's hard to admit that you were wrong about something, especially having been engaged in arguments about the issue, but considering Wright has been 'oozing class' (Boris) and praised by numerous others on here and TIU (OK, I know that doesn't mean much) and viewed as being a possible MoM candidate in recent games, your stance, in spite of all the evidence, makes it appear, to me at least, as though you're being stubborn.
So, in answer to your question, I think you're being stubborn about Wright rather than Hargreaves because there hasn't been that much heated debate about Hargreaves.
I apologized for calling TY an idiot and I'm happy to do it again: sorry TY, I think I may have had a couple of ales at the time. I'm also sorry for calling you a sniveling menstrual school girl and for assuming that you're middle aged and balding (but obviously not enough to edit it.
I'm sober now too so have no excuse.
