Jump to content

ThorpeCanary

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    796

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by ThorpeCanary

  1. Posted

    2 minutes ago, Orly said:

    I'll still be right behind Farke & Webber even if we are relegated, but it doesn't mean I have to be blind to any potential failings in the meantime.

    Agreed. Like every other human they won't get it right all the time. Perhaps it was felt that any money that would have been spent wouldn't have improved the team enough to be warranted and seeing where improvements are needed in January was preferred. Injuries have now meant that has not turned out to be the case.

    For as long as we have a team giving it their all and playing for the manager I'll be 100% behind them all no matter where we finish this season. I think Uniteds poor form can cause expectations to rise a little too high and forget the calibre of players they are still able to put out against us. 3-1 loss but fighting till the end and while injuries are not the sole cause of our frustrations they are still there and as with Onel we can be optimistic for our key players return.

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

  2. Posted

    Just now, Alex Moss said:

    Ever here when we win, Tin Pott?

    And the answer to that is why this **** should be banned once Pete has looked at his or her post history. There’s a difference between a genuine frustrated supporter venting, and someone that 110% categorically revels in it and is here only to bring the mood of the loyal NCFC supporter down. And that isn’t helpful for our club.

    I’ve seen true NCFC supporters banned from here on many occasion, yet this w⚓️ is allowed to carry on? Ridiculous.

    You should see the match thread. Problem is 10 years without beating us and being consigned to league 1 has left a lot of pent up emotions down the road and they'll take every chance they can get. If you told me 12 months ago that would come in match threads where we lose at home to United on weekends when they're travelling to Southend I'd have bit your arm off 😂

    • Haha 1

  4. Posted

    2 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

    Imagine your title with “women” and “men” replaced with “black” and “white”. That wouldn’t be acceptable. That’s why it’s not ok.

    You may be right but you could argue this everywhere. The amount of times I see articles on the bbc where I think "this would never have been acceptable if you replaced X with y" is incredible.

    Take a non to serious example below

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/blogs-trending-48278772

    It's actually about men talking at council meetings but like OP BBC were quite happy to run the headline "men talk too much" the same gender much more likely to hide their emotions, not open up and talk to people and ultimately take their lives. As with your reply this wouldn't have been acceptable if used with any other group so why was it here? 

    You never quite see the uproar when it's in the other direction..

  5. Posted

    26 minutes ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

    People (me) have reacted to a post saying women shouldn't commentate on mens football.

     

    This has not been said.

    As TVB said the OP could have made his point better and the thread title is misleading. I don't think the commentary was the best last night when Lacazette missed a shot simply saying "And that's why he hasn't been getting in the team" was clearly pure guesswork and incorrect as in actual fact he has been out injured for nearly 2 months. 

    It has nothing to do with gender though, I've never liked Michael Owen as as a commentator and Troy Deeney had a bit of a nightmare on Soccer Saturday a few weeks back but then again like the Carney last night these people don't have the years and years of experience that the others do.

    Least favourite has to be Jonathon Pearce though. Never forget his meltdown over goal line technology during the 2014 WC.

     

    • Like 1

  7. Posted · Edited by ThorpeCanary

    18 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

    The significance of that should not be underestimated. Once voted for MPs will find it hard not to vote for again. And if there is an election Johnson will campaign as the PM who did what May could not, and got a deal approved in a vote, only for rebel MPs to block it with yet another manoeuvre.

    He did not get the deal approved he got it passed for second reading.

    In my opinion there will be those who voted for the second reading who will soon find reasons not to when the time comes.

  8. Posted

    Directly following the paragraph OP has posted.

    "That contradicts previous comments from Canaries sporting director Stuart Webber, who has said that Pukki was one of the strikers under consideration when he was one of the recruitment chiefs at Wolves, before the striker went on to join Celtic in 2013."

    That's Incorrect by David Freezer. How does being offered a player by email (which i'm sure SW inbox is full of) suddenly mean he hadn't considered him previously.

    Maybe we didn't scout Buendia either he just turned up at the training ground Odemwingie style.

  9. Posted

    43 minutes ago, hogesar said:

    We didn't "mug off" Hoolahan - Russ and Wes were both delighted to be able to share the day together, if you ever get a chance to speak to them...

    This. 

    Also unlike in that situation there isn't anyone else in the club even close to serving nearly as long as Tettey so it's a moot point.

    • Like 1

  11. Posted

    Just now, ricardo said:

    Ive laid it at varying odds since early in the year.

    Fair enough. As for Macron I feel he may be saying "Non" while that deal is still in contention but as with Juncker I don't possibly imagine he'll say the same if faced with no deal

  13. Posted · Edited by ThorpeCanary

    4 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

    So, if you were an MP sitting in the House of Commons, knowing that Junker has said no more extensions, would you:

    A) vote for the deal or B) vote against the deal?

    I think I'd view it as him trying to put pressure on accepting what is a very good deal for the EU and would imagine he'd soon change his mind if faced with no deal and would therefore vote against it.

  14. Posted

    32 minutes ago, king canary said:

    Yes- the old forum legend First Wizard was well known for his ability to completely change his opinion of a manager/player/owners based off two or three games. 

    Equally, I've got very little time for people who dig in and refuse to change their opinion because they can't admit to having been wrong in the first place.

    So have your opinions on our owners changed at all since earlier in the thread? 

    I can't pretend that the football or results we saw that first season were brilliant but like all teams our size who fall out of the premier League if you don't bounce back you'll soon have to reduce expenditure and it was that for me that afforded Farke breathing room

    I remember after the 1-1 at Portman road thinking that of the two teams when considering what was being developed and the age of our squad we had the brighter future of the two clubs. I could never pretend to predict what happened next though!

  15. Posted

    2 minutes ago, kick it off said:
     @DaveClark_AFP
    FollowFollow @DaveClark_AFP
    More

    In case there's anyone still arguing what Juncker said or meant or has authority to say or whatever, a EUCO source who was in the room said the leaders' "draft is silent about a extension, it's too soon. If it's voted down on Saturday we're in a different situation."

    8:14 AM - 17 Oct 2019

    Thanks.

    Makes sense for him to dismiss an extension when he's going full throttle for a deal. We'll see what happens later.

  16. Posted

    First turbines I saw as a young child were those near Yarmouth at Blood Hill (since replaced) which would have been the late 90s. According to google those things were rated at 225kW compared to the one you just linked which is 12,000kW. Just one of those Haliade-X is worth over 50 of those little things!

    I hope the UK continues to embrace offshore wind and look forward to seeing how much a % of our electricity comes from it in the future.

  17. Posted · Edited by ThorpeCanary

    8 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

    BBC reporting Junker has said no extension if  the deal is turned down by Parliament THANK YOU 😀

     

    I

    This is the quote I'm looking for SwindonCanary. Best I've found so far is 

    ""We have a deal so why should we have a prolongation?"

    What happens if it's voted down? Is it ruled back in then?

  18. Posted · Edited by ThorpeCanary

    Junkers Remarks not that surprising. I've always seen the deal as pretty much Brexit in name only and if there's a risk of No deal then the EU will take this deal all day long. 

    If this gets voted down and it's no deal Vs an extension of imagine he will change his tune.

    Edit: I'm actually struggling to find where he has actually ruled out an extension as the BBC are reporting...?

  19. Posted

    15 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

    I'm pleased we've come to an agreement, but we really need to see the deal in print.

    If I recall correctly SwindonCanary you were quite critical of Mays deal and were against the £39b heading to the EU

    Curious on your thoughts on this one

  20. Posted

    1 hour ago, king canary said:

    Often not on this forum.

    The whole 'oh you thought Farke might not be good when we finished 14th and couldn't score but now we're top of the league you love him so you're fickle!' argument gets made quite a bit.

    I think being willing to change your mind depending on the evidence is a good thing, quite a few on here seem to disagree...

    Mostly agree with this post but would argue you're being a bit lenient there. There were much harsher words used regarding Farke and at times a lack of appreciation of the circumstances (such as the massively reduced budget compared to prior seasons) afforded to him, Webber etc.

    Just like if our poor form continues over the next few weeks along with any warranted criticism of tactics etc there will be those calling for his head with little appreciation for the fact that we're competing in the best league in the world and Farke, like all managers won't get it right all the time. 

    I don't mind seeing these old threads again. It's good to see despite the original posters 3 main grievances all staying in place we still won the league last season. If anything it should serve as a beacon of hope to todays pessimists.

  22. Posted · Edited by ThorpeCanary

    16 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

    Why was the question flawed? It could not have been expressed simpler or clearer. Remain or Leave?

    When I take a taxi, I state my destination and leave it up to the taxi driver to choose the best route. I do expect the driver to behave honourably and take me with greatest efficiency. It is the same with the referendum. We stated our destination was to leave the EU and expected the HoP to behave honourably and carry out our wishes - as they said they would. The HoP is like the taxi driver who finds every excuse under the sun not to deliver to our destination but expects us to still pay the running meter. 

     

    In my opinion your analogy doesn't work because in that example you and anyone in that taxi with you will want to head to that same destination, you might disagree one which is the best route but overall you are all in agreement of where that taxi should take you.

    That can't be said of the 52%. According to the poll Swindon just posted only 20% want no deal? What % of those who want a deal and perhaps voted for Brexit believing they would get one would vote for No deal vs Remain?

    For me an analogy would be theres a group of 10 at a club who just took a simple binary vote on "Do we leave this club" 6 vote yes and the decision is made. Only then do we realise of those six, three wish to go to another club, 1 (woops) want to go home and the other 2 want to go for food. You're saying that for the original 4 who wished to stay it's tough luck, they were outvoted and now we follow the 3 to the other club. Doesn't work for me.

    • Haha 1

  23. Posted

    4 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

    There were two options on the referendum ballot paper. Remain or Leave. There was no multiple choice question. There was nothing about 'do you want to join an EU Army'? - for example. The vote question and result was crystal clear.

    A flawed referendum question which is why we are still here 3 years later. I'm not so much stating what I want to happen as opposed to what I think will actually happen (although admittedly they are the same thing.)

    That is that we are on the path to a second referendum where Remain absolutely will be an option.

    • Like 2

  24. Posted

    7 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

    Because it is clear to everybody that a second referendum is a cynical attempt to split the leave vote.  If there had to be a second referendum it could not have an option to Remain because that has already been decided - and rejected.by the country

    Split the leave vote? Splitting up a group of people who want very different things sounds a good idea to me RTB.

  25. Posted

    Just now, SwindonCanary said:

    In (remain) or out (leave)

    This is my point. Only one of those options is a definitive option. You're once again stacking those who want a deal with those who would leave with no deal which as your own poll just stated is a lowly 20%. If there is a 2nd referendum it wouldn't make the mistake of the last one. It will be remain vs an actual leave proposition (if not 2)

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...