Rage Online

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:

&quotdeanwindass&quot wrote:

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot 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 getting off that easily? Eeek

I'm not personalising it. I'm answering your question, namely

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:What possible motive could I have for being critical of an OUFC player without due cause?

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.

As I said before, you're obviously entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it.

Rubbish.

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.

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!

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.

&quotdeanwindass&quot wrote:

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:

&quotdeanwindass&quot wrote: I'm not getting off that easily? Eeek

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.

As I said before, you're obviously entitled to your opinion, I just disagree with it.

Rubbish.

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.

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!

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.

Jesus Christ man, get a grip.

That is way way OTT.

Anyone know the phone number for anger management classes?

I hope DW and GY won't mind me saying so, but I don't think this debate is capable of being progressed any further.

&quotamershamwrighty&quot wrote:I hope DW and GY won't mind me saying so, but I don't think this debate is capable of being progressed any further.

I'm more than happy for you to say so and agree entirely. Let's move on shall we?

Pity Stevenage didn't drop points last night, I thought they might away at Wrexham. Let's hope with the trophy and roughly two league fixtures a week they can't keep it up.

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:
Anyone know the phone number for anger management classes?

I think if you asked your GP they'd refer you.

&quotdeanwindass&quot wrote:

&quotGodalmingYellow&quot wrote:
Anyone know the phone number for anger management classes?

I think if you asked your GP they'd refer you.

I was being charitable and not thinking of myself.

I might try the national bullying helpline though!

&quotamershamwrighty&quot wrote:I hope DW and GY won't mind me saying so, but I don't think this debate is capable of being progressed any further.

Does that mean that we all agree that he's actually not that good?!

Whatever. True fans don't notice the defenders so much, they are impatiently waiting for us to hare forward in wave after wave of thrilling attacks. Which is why e.g. Yemi was more popular than Gary Smart.

&quotamershamwrighty&quot wrote:I hope DW and GY won't mind me saying so, but I
don't think this debate is capable of being progressed any further.

Spoilsport! Somebody give GY a bigger spade so he can dig a deepr hole it's such good fun watching him try to wriggle out

So, what's the verdict on Wright? Would anyone like to offer an opinion?

&quotMally&quot wrote:

&quotamershamwrighty&quot wrote:I hope DW and GY won't mind me saying so, but I
don't think this debate is capable of being progressed any further.

Spoilsport! Somebody give GY a bigger spade so he can dig a deepr hole it's such good fun watching him try to wriggle out

Eh?

&quotAndrewmaha&quot wrote:So, what's the verdict on Wright? Would anyone like to offer an opinion?

I quite like him. Decent down to Earth commentator, and his son Wright Phillips can play a bit as well.

I’m staying well out of this argument, other than to say that Dean Windlass once got sent off three times in one game before Keith Cox bought him and then sold him on for a 100% profit margin.

It’s an interesting and focused discussion, which is what Rage Online is all about. i.e being right, right, right.

&quotAndrewmaha&quot wrote:So, what's the verdict on Wright? Would anyone like to offer an opinion?

For an awful player he is exceptionally good.

There that settles it.

&quotSnake&quot wrote:I’m staying well out of this argument, other than to say that Dean Windlass once got sent off three times in one game before Keith Cox bought him and then sold him on for a 100% profit margin.

It’s an interesting and focused discussion, which is what Rage Online is all about. i.e being right, right, right.

Apparently this is what Rage Online is all about&#058

http://www.oxfordshireforums.co.uk/topi ... _ID=105150