Jump to content

Nuff Said

Members
  • Content Count

    8,356
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Posts posted by Nuff Said


  1. 17 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

    Honestly would not mind seeing Sorensen get his proper debaut in his, well, proper place. Much as he has been good at covering for us would be interesting seeing him in his natural position and the postion he came here to play in

    Absolutely this. He looks so comfortable playing at left back, I'm itching to see what he can do in his "correct" position.


  2. 2 hours ago, horsefly said:

    Yep! you're right that the idea of a sporting director/head coach set up is not transformational in and of itself. I think what was transformational was the principles upon which he set it up. Webber and Farke were told that there wouldn't be £millions gambled anymore, that they would be expected to bring into the team talented young players from abroad, and those developed through the youth system. Some of those would be sold on for profits that would sustain future development and squad improvement. We have seen the fruits of that approach: economically self-sustaining (not dependent upon the whim of some diletante billionaire) and some of the best football we have ever seen.  I wonder how many other teams would love to be in that position?

    Doh! Transformational.


  3. Agreed horsefly. I would add that what he did could be seen as not that transformatory (if that's a word), i.e. bringing in a sporting director. But if it was that easy, every club would be doing it. As it is, how many clubs would like to be us now? Probably pretty much everyone below us in the league - "Why aren't we Norwich?"


  4. 1 hour ago, lake district canary said:

    But it isn't nonsense to think that people affiliated with the BLM have tried to hijack it for their own agenda.  You see it all the time in all sorts of issues - feminism/religion/sexism etc where extremists try to take over and try to own the agenda. I've seen it even in jazz where in some online groups, extreme black views (mainly in the USA, it has to be said) sometimes come to the fore where if you are white, you are not considered to play authentic jazz because you are white (the line is "jazz is our music") - this in an age where most people consider music to be universal. Sure the heritage is there in black history and we all know that, but its quite an eye opener to see the bitterness there and makes you realise the extent of the racism problem on both sides. 

    Breaking down the divides is hard to do, but the work has to carry on to integrate everyone together and get the message across, but once the gestures have been spoiled by the extremists, then the best thing imo is to change the gesture or at least modify it to keep it in the public view without enabling the extremists to ruin it.

    But you are handing extremists the perfect way to shut down views they don’t like. All they need to do is start a few rumours about BLM or whatever it is, which the press, Facebook groups and Twitter bots will jump all over. By your rules the message then has to be altered by enough to disassociate it from those rumours, losing any public awareness and momentum. Surely it’s far better to let “sunlight disinfect” things and stand up for what you believe in, honestly discussing any accusations.


    P.S. Didn’t know you were a jazz fan Lakey?


  5. 2 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

    **** me! Is there a bigger culprit in this thread than you at deflecting? Outrageous.

     

    You repeatedly post arguments on the lines of "this might happen and that would then demonstrate x". Then when challenged you introduce a different argument. Go back and actually engage with some of the points made or I have to assume you're just on a wind up (successfully in my case 😣).

     

    1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

    What utter nonsense.  My line has been consistent throughout, and that’s that Christoph would be wise to maintain a dignified silence on why he chooses not to kneel because there are many who are already gearing themselves up for the metaphorical internet pile-on [Edit: Nuff Said - the the avoidance of doubt I have used the bold highlighting here] if he dared to admit not fully embracing the currently approved version of ideological purity.

    You accused King Canary of wanting to ostracise Zimmerman. When he pointed out he hadn't said that, you didn't respond but did say "Lo and behold, the witch trial has begun."  Deflection

    KC objected to the use of the words "Witch trial" and stated that he thought some people and groups might change their opinion of Zimmerman *if* he held views they disagreed with. You replied with "Standard modus operandi of the intolerant illiberal woke left.  You’re free to say what you want but if it doesn’t fit with our ideology we’ll cancel you, lobby your employer to sack you, and fill social media with why you’re such a bad person." More deflection and exactly what  I described in my post quoted above. No-one is saying Zimmerman should be cancelled, suggested lobbying for him to be sacked or post anything about him on social media. In fact, KC said exactly the opposite.

    You replied "You stated that he should explain why he chooses not to kneel so that you and others can then shoot him down." Again, this at best exaggerates the truth for rhetorical effect, but is actually just a lie.

    You then continued to use inflammatory language without engaging with the points other posters made to you. Deflection.

    You replied to my post to object to the fact I had altered your post (despite the fact I had highlighted the text changed and specifically said that in my first sentence). You didn't reply to the point I made. Deflection.

    Having said all this, my main objection to your posts is still not that you refuse to engage with the argument except in the rare case where it suits you, but you continually predict ridiculous outcomes that will not happen from so-called woke reactions that haven't occurred - as in the text highlighted in your quote above. This is just crowd baiting nonsense. Fortunately most of the posters on here are a reasonable bunch and can have a polite debate, so don't fall for this.

    Nuff said.

    • Like 1

  6. 11 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

    Transparent attempt at deflection.

    **** me! Is there a bigger culprit in this thread than you at deflecting? Outrageous.

     

    You repeatedly post arguments on the lines of "this might happen and that would then demonstrate x". Then when challenged you introduce a different argument. Go back and actually engage with some of the points made or I have to assume you're just on a wind up (successfully in my case 😣).

    • Thanks 1

  7. 5 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

    Here we go yet again, round and round in ever-decreasing circles.  Some people consider taking a knee as being a symbol of support for the BLM movement and all that that entails, whereas others see it merely as a generic sign of opposition to racism.  For those that consider it to be the former, then if they don’t agree with the political aims of that organisation it would be perfectly reasonable not to be seen to give support to it.  Because it is so divisive, football has been naive and gullible to continue promoting it, particularly when it had its own ineffective and hence non-contentious anti-racism campaigns already in place.

    Fixed that for you.

    If Kick it Out was highly effective would we see the huge under-representation of BAME people in the managerial and organisational side of the game? Would we have heard the things Greg Clarke said recently? Or the booing at Millwall and elsewhere? I could go on. I think Kick it Out themselves would say there's an awful lot more to achieve.

    (I heard and to an extent agree with arguments previously put on here about the lack of BAME coaching staff being for other reasons, but still maintain that much more needs to be done to change it. No need to rehash the same arguments, but if someone feels the need to, don't let me stop you)


  8. 33 minutes ago, essex canary said:

    I guess cricket clubs aren't interested in taking the knee probably because ethnic minorities in that sport are predominantly Asian and BLM doesn't represent their interests albeit that the British Raj is equally implemented in racial discrimination.

    In the modern day the ethnic mix of people using food banks may be informative?

    In other words protesting about inequality is fine but it needs to be balanced and representative.

    I take it you also oppose Help for Heroes and wearing a poppy because they don't acknowledge the full political and social context behind military actions, that is they're not "balanced and representative"?


  9. On 19/12/2020 at 23:37, wcorkcanary said:

    Surely that only applies to the  old copper phone lines .

    Fraid not Corkio. The speed of light is the speed of light, and the further you are from your exchange the worse the latency you are going to see. Fibre is like more lanes (bandwidth) on a road but the cars are still travelling at the same speed (latency) you can just get more of them on at the same time.


  10. 32 minutes ago, DraytonBoy said:

    Leeds have got two crucial games coming up (Burnley at home and W Brom away), 6 points will mean only needing around 18 more from the last 22 games to stay up, lose both though and Bielsa will be under pressure. Way too soon to be worried about relegation but the defence is a concern.

    That's a balanced and reasonable post.

    We don't want your sort on here, hysteria and delusion in the face of reality are the entrance requirements. 😉


  11. 3 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

    You stated that he should explain why he chooses not to kneel so that you and others can then shoot him down.  

    Typical.

     

    What he said was that it would help if he explained, not that he *had* to. But you immediately switch into hysterical "the libs are shutting down free speech" mode.

    • Like 1

  12. 21 minutes ago, Bill said:

    when it is deserved and when it is an opinion based on reasoned thought

    not just bleating out vacuous slogans and lies

    and for the record I do not respect the opinions of Farage, Trump, Icke, Patel.......

     

    Absolutely, to get respect you have to earn respect, but the state of political discourse these days is dire. If we all started from a place where we recognise people can hold different opinions to ourselves but still deserve a hearing, maybe we could find common ground. But the binary, “oh no it isn’t, oh yes it is” stuff just leads to shouting and division.

    • Like 4

  13. 3 hours ago, BigFish said:

    This is a generational thing, for the older generation old fashioned stoppers are what they expect, playing in teams that can only play in straight lines and it is a mystery why they have died out in top level football. Godfrey's potential is not just greater than the two in question, he is by any objective measure a much better player. He is playing for a manager that has won titles in five countries and the Champions League 3 times. Gibson played one (ONE) game for a poor Burnley side and Hanley was shipped out after only 10 games at newly promoted Newcastle. I like both, they are suited to the Champs where most teams are only after a battle. That said I would have preferred to be in a world where we could keep Godfrey. The team would be better, the defence would be better.

    It's not a generational thing that we will concede fewer goals with Hanley and Gibson at the back than with Godfrey and whoever.


  14. I thoght this was going to be an NCFC version of Sophie's Choice.

    " £30 million bids come in for two players, both crucial to the team. Which one does Christophe sell, which one does he keep?"

     

     

    More seriously, Paddy says in his piece "respecting others opinions is a quality that has escaped from the political discourse in this country". Amen brother.

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...