Rumour Mill

RedO always has my back

I'm not covering anyone, I just have a pet peeve about people misspelling player or club names (except for extremely odd or long ones).

Well if it'll help you sleep tonight mate, I think you'll find I spelled it correctly like 3 posts later. As well as in every post about him in Guarin thread. And just about everywhere else I've mentioned his name.


 

I know, RedO, couldn't help myself though.

Shed wrote:Well if it'll help you sleep tonight mate, I think you'll find I spelled it correctly like 3 posts later. As well as in every post about him in Guarin thread. And just about everywhere else I've mentioned his name.


 

Honestly, you just provided an excuse to call out the "Berkley" thing that popped up several times in this section (from a Juve fan, I think?).  I never realised it would bother you so much.  Will have to keep that in mind in the future, would hate to make you feel unduly chastised.

I never called anyone Berkley. You've mentioned it several times but I haven't a clue why as the only persons I've seen say it were Nedved and Blue. Do quote and link me on/to it if I have, though.



Besides, I'm not bothered by anything. Would I really have included a winking emoticon if I had meant that as a serious rebut?

Your detection between jest and earnest needs a tune-up, methinks.

You may want to take a second to reread my post, as you've clearly missed several integral parts of it.

You're right. This disjointed, mess of a point you're attempting to make is completely lost on me. Other than the denotation that a Juve fan made the Berkley blunder (which was my whole point in the first place), I'm failing to see a thing I've wrongly failed to consider when writing my response.

It was your point, but it was one you made in as defensive and argumentative a manner as possible... and one that you phrased in such a way as to be response to an apparent accusation which was nonexistent in my posts. That you continue to be so defensive and touchy seems only to lend credence and legitimacy to what was originally a jocular suggestion I made.

I can see now why Kick seems so concerned for you and your well-being in the staff discussions. It must be tough work to care for such a fragile little snow-flake...

You are nothing if not consistent in your artificial outrage and ability to find offence in situations containing none of it.

Shed wrote:Well if it'll help you sleep tonight mate, I think you'll find I spelled it correctly like 3 posts later. As well as in every post about him in Guarin thread. And just about everywhere else I've mentioned his name.


 

That's "as defensive and argumentative as possible"?



Er, okay.

Shed wrote:You are nothing if not consistent in your artificial outrage and ability to find offence in situations containing none of it.

Shed wrote:Well if it'll help you sleep tonight mate, I think you'll find I spelled it correctly like 3 posts later. As well as in every post about him in Guarin thread. And just about everywhere else I've mentioned his name.


 

That's "as defensive and argumentative as possible"?



Er, okay.

That is, of course, not the post I was referring to as it has absolutely no relation to "Berkley" or your own faux offense at a nonexistent claim that you used the "Berkley" term (given that I specifically stated in the post it was a another poster who misspelled it and yet you responded as though accused anyway). In fact, my response to that particular post was one which pointed out that I had no real problem with a simply typo you made, but was simply using it as a prompt to lightheartedly address the aforementioned "Berkley" issue. The discussion from then on, which contains my apparent (and utterly fictitious) "artificial outrage" stems entirely from your refusal to take that initial post for what it was, and to instead immediately take up a defensive (and yes, argumentative) position against it.

I commend you, Kick, on the patience you've shown in dealing with and protecting this fractious individual.

Spoiler:

This entire debate emanated from my [patently non-serious] response to your 'pet-peeve' post wherein I point out my having spelled Guarin's name correctly everywhere else the occasion occurred, which you responded to by saying it had given you the opportunity, if you so wished, to bring up the Berkley error(s), which neither I ever uttered (as you yourself concede) nor had anything to do with my original comment (defending only my own error, not those of the section as a whole, as that particular remark of yours would seem to suggest). The rest of the comment consists of you bitingly and sarcastically apologizing for 'bothering me so much' and having made me feel 'unduly chastised', which, for me, is as early an 'argumentative' response from either of us as you'll find in this thread.

Spoiler:

Here I am, attempting to be as obliging and conciliatory as possible in my posts by acknowledging you as the fabrege existence that you are, and you somehow still end taking clearly well-meaning statements as hurtful and aggressive.  It worries me so to see you so, Shed. You see the world through your cynical eyes. You're a troubled young man I can tell. You've got it all in the palm of your hand, but your hand's wet with sweat and your head needs a rest.

Spoiler:

Ladies, relax. I'm trying to think here!

Blue Barrett wrote:Ladies, relax. I'm trying to think here!

April Fool's was yesterday.

I understand. Allusions to nonexistent infractions and dodging what would be a simple explanation of why you unnecessarily exhumed and rebutted with the Berkley thing in the first place in response to a post that had nothing to do with it is much easier than just putting an end to what you claim is an obvious and monumental misunderstanding and on my part and explaining your original thinking.

Look after this one, Kick. He's a bull with bones of glass. And I'm being super serial right now.

WTF did i read i read in the last pages and so.

Anyway it is safe to say that Torrid Chelsea time is coming to an end. With Mou recent comments, i have a hard time believing he would not dump him in the summer.

The Question is he going to bring in another CM? I have a hard time believing this being a no either. I think Lampard and Mikel are gone, we need another midfielder to make up the number.

Blue wrote:WTF did i read i read in the last pages and so.

Anyway it is safe to say that Torrid Chelsea time is coming to an end. With Mou recent comments, i have a hard time believing he would not dump him in the summer.

The Question is he going to bring in another CM? I have a hard time believing this being a no either. I think Lampard and Mikel are gone, we need another midfielder to make up the number.

I think we should because we really lack someone who can bring the ball forward with more quality, someone who can give a reference in the build-up and add more creativity and unpredictability to it and someone who can eventually replace Oscar as the AM if he's injured/suspended/poor form because we literally have no one else there atm.
I think we will too because Lampard and Mikel are gone and Van Ginkel just can't fill that void. No idea who it is going to be tho

Kroos will be perfect can play CM and AM.

Shame Bayern will not sell.

Shed layenthing the smackdown all over this jabroni

Koke is another good option, he already plays in a similar system at Alti.

Alti really owe us one for Courtois, they basically have been given one of the best goalkeeper on a permanent basis lol.

fatman123 wrote:Shed layenthing the smackdown all over this jabroni

What does that even mean?

TBH, a want us to sign a CF first, that is number one. Then a CM or LB.

Kick wrote:TBH, a want us to sign a CF first, that is number one. Then a CM or LB.

That is a forgone conclusion by now. The discussion has come to the point where we might sign more then one striker, if Lukaku doesn't come back.

Then sign Diego Costa, before WC, work on signing Shaw while WC is on. Sign a CM and CF after the end of WC depending on performence.