SMUDGER

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="CDMullins"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="CDMullins"]

No wonder he wanted out, he was sat at the side of the pitch watching Wes Hoolhan, and Jamie Cureton play infornt of him.

No wonder is confidence was low when Roeder and even Gunn played Rusty up front instead of him.

 

He could have been an absolute class act for us.

 

[/quote]

What? like having a strop because Clingan took a penalty instead of him?............good riddence.

[/quote]

 

It wasnt just that was it, lets be fair he''s different calibre to the players on the park for us week in week out.

for 6 months he''s had to watch Hooli go round in circles with his left foot, tread on the ball, mis-place 5 yard passes, get blown over by a gust of wind and stop mid-game to clean a bit of mud off his white boots.

He should have been the first name on the team sheet!

 

[/quote]

Now you''re just being silly, entertaining, but silly.

[pennywise 0]

[quote user="cityangel"]

But to Smudger''s credit he never changes his mind, sticks to his principles and never shys away from replying to any critisism on here .

A lot of us, me included, often go with the flow of results, if we lose several we''re upset and want action, if we win several we lay down our arms and surrender.

[/quote]

blimey i bet your other half couldn`t wait for bedtime  during the promotion season [;)]

[Lord Flashheart 0]

[quote user="1st Wizard"]Ah, I see its Smudgers turn today...............makes a change![:D][/quote]Don''t worry wiz we haven''t forgotten about you. [;)]

[Chunky Norwich 0]

Going back to the Real Norwich thing, maybe we could change our name to reflect our Sandringham and George VI links?

[CDMullins 436]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="CDMullins"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="CDMullins"]

No wonder he wanted out, he was sat at the side of the pitch watching Wes Hoolhan, and Jamie Cureton play infornt of him.

No wonder is confidence was low when Roeder and even Gunn played Rusty up front instead of him.

 

He could have been an absolute class act for us.

 

[/quote]

What? like having a strop because Clingan took a penalty instead of him?............good riddence.

[/quote]

 

 

 

It wasnt just that was it, lets be fair he''s different calibre to the players on the park for us week in week out.

for 6 months he''s had to watch Hooli go round in circles with his left foot, tread on the ball, mis-place 5 yard passes, get blown over by a gust of wind and stop mid-game to clean a bit of mud off his white boots.

He should have been the first name on the team sheet!

 

[/quote]

Now you''re just being silly, entertaining, but silly.

[/quote]

 

Its true though! Lupoli could have played exactly where Hoolhan has. he''s been horrible.

I feel sorry for Lup''s not given a fair crack of the whip and always nicked goals.

The celebration against Charlton showed he really wanted to be here.

I really hope he does well for Sheff U.

[7rew 0]

[quote user="cityangel"]

But to Smudger''s credit he never changes his mind, sticks to his principles and never shys away from replying to any critisism on here .

A lot of us, me included, often go with the flow of results, if we lose several we''re upset and want action, if we win several we lay down our arms and surrender.

[/quote]You mean that when the results change, our judgement of a results driven business changes with it.Thats just the working of a rational mind.

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="cityangel"]

But to Smudger''s credit he never changes his mind, sticks to his principles and never shys away from replying to any critisism on here .

A lot of us, me included, often go with the flow of results, if we lose several we''re upset and want action, if we win several we lay down our arms and surrender.

[/quote]You''ve summed the problem up in a nutshell CA.His approach is essentially that of a religious fanatic; he starts with a fixed axiom - Delia is pure Evil - & derives all his conclusions from this point. Since she is Evil, all those associated with her (the Board) must either also be Evil or deluded - I think he accepts that not all 25,000 fans are evil, so they must be deluded. Gullible sheeple.No amount of rational argument can hold sway with someone with this fixed view of the world.The alternative is the (much misunderstood) scientific view (we are all scientists, whether we know it or not). That is to say that we see things happen, see a pattern & try to use that pattern to decide what happens next. If the pattern isn''t working very well then we adjust it if we can - or abandon it completely if a better one comes along. That''s how we survive as a species. A fanatic is not really interested in what happens next; the fact they continually make incorrect predictions is irrelevant as far as they are concerned. Anybody questioning their assumptions on the grounds of rationality is ignored.Despite its simplicity as a game, football  (because it involves human beings) engenders huge complexities & patterns are very hard to find. How can you predict beating Wolves but losing to teams at the foot of the table? that''s why we "go with the flow", why it''s always a rollercoaster ride. If you''re not a fanatic that is.Strong principles may or may not be laudable; a conviction that you should kill all Jews/Chritians/Moslems/Ipswich supporters strikes me as not a very good principle. You cannot rationally prove or disprove your principles - they are your assumptions, your moral axioms. All you can do is hope that, for most people, love is stronger than hate.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="cityangel"]

But to Smudger''s credit he never changes his mind, sticks to his principles and never shys away from replying to any critisism on here .

A lot of us, me included, often go with the flow of results, if we lose several we''re upset and want action, if we win several we lay down our arms and surrender.

[/quote]

You''ve summed the problem up in a nutshell CA.
His approach is essentially that of a religious fanatic; he starts with a fixed axiom - Delia is pure Evil - & derives all his conclusions from this point. Since she is Evil, all those associated with her (the Board) must either also be Evil or deluded - I think he accepts that not all 25,000 fans are evil, so they must be deluded. Gullible sheeple.
No amount of rational argument can hold sway with someone with this fixed view of the world.
The alternative is the (much misunderstood) scientific view (we are all scientists, whether we know it or not). That is to say that we see things happen, see a pattern & try to use that pattern to decide what happens next. If the pattern isn''t working very well then we adjust it if we can - or abandon it completely if a better one comes along. That''s how we survive as a species.
 A fanatic is not really interested in what happens next; the fact they continually make incorrect predictions is irrelevant as far as they are concerned. Anybody questioning their assumptions on the grounds of rationality is ignored.
Despite its simplicity as a game, football  (because it involves human beings) engenders huge complexities & patterns are very hard to find. How can you predict beating Wolves but losing to teams at the foot of the table? that''s why we "go with the flow", why it''s always a rollercoaster ride. If you''re not a fanatic that is.

Strong principles may or may not be laudable; a conviction that you should kill all Jews/Chritians/Moslems/Ipswich supporters strikes me as not a very good principle. You cannot rationally prove or disprove your principles - they are your assumptions, your moral axioms. All you can do is hope that, for most people, love is stronger than hate.

[/quote]

 

Very eloquently put Ron, and you''ve hit the nail on the head. We have all, at one time or another, tried to engage Smudger in rational argument only to get more and more frustrated by his constant moving of the goalposts to justify his fixed viewpoint. I''ve fallen into the trap many times, and probably will again, but the only real answer is to steer clear and let him rant away to his heart''s content.

[SWP = Poor Mans Ruel Fox!! 0]

[quote user="CDMullins"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="CDMullins"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="CDMullins"]

No wonder he wanted out, he was sat at the side of the pitch watching Wes Hoolhan, and Jamie Cureton play infornt of him.

No wonder is confidence was low when Roeder and even Gunn played Rusty up front instead of him.

 

He could have been an absolute class act for us.

 

[/quote]

What? like having a strop because Clingan took a penalty instead of him?............good riddence.

[/quote]

 

 

 

It wasnt just that was it, lets be fair he''s different calibre to the players on the park for us week in week out.

for 6 months he''s had to watch Hooli go round in circles with his left foot, tread on the ball, mis-place 5 yard passes, get blown over by a gust of wind and stop mid-game to clean a bit of mud off his white boots.

He should have been the first name on the team sheet!

 

[/quote]

Now you''re just being silly, entertaining, but silly.

[/quote]

 

Its true though! Lupoli could have played exactly where Hoolhan has. he''s been horrible.

I feel sorry for Lup''s not given a fair crack of the whip and always nicked goals.

The celebration against Charlton showed he really wanted to be here.

I really hope he does well for Sheff U.

[/quote]

Will be interested to see how Lupes gets on at Sheff U, particularly with their style of play and that they are really looking for a replacement for the goals from Beattie. Personally I''ll be surprised if he is a success and the physicality of Gow and Killen is much more required for NCFC than what Lupoli offers.

As for old Smudge, we all know what you get with him. His views will never change and he thrives on getting under peoples skin. Its up to you if you want to rise to the bait, I cannot help it sometimes!!  I do find it hard to see how he can be a Norwich supporter!

[ellis206 0]

Seriously though, he should be banned from this website, in another thread he is calling someone a to$$er, and basically criticizing every Norwich fan, its obviously killing him that Norwich haven''t lost under Gunn yet, so he has turned abusive!!

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="cityangel"]

But to Smudger''s credit he never changes his mind, sticks to his principles and never shys away from replying to any critisism on here .

A lot of us, me included, often go with the flow of results, if we lose several we''re upset and want action, if we win several we lay down our arms and surrender.

[/quote]

You''ve summed the problem up in a nutshell CA.
His approach is essentially that of a religious fanatic; he starts with a fixed axiom - Delia is pure Evil - & derives all his conclusions from this point. Since she is Evil, all those associated with her (the Board) must either also be Evil or deluded - I think he accepts that not all 25,000 fans are evil, so they must be deluded. Gullible sheeple.
No amount of rational argument can hold sway with someone with this fixed view of the world.
The alternative is the (much misunderstood) scientific view (we are all scientists, whether we know it or not). That is to say that we see things happen, see a pattern & try to use that pattern to decide what happens next. If the pattern isn''t working very well then we adjust it if we can - or abandon it completely if a better one comes along. That''s how we survive as a species.
 A fanatic is not really interested in what happens next; the fact they continually make incorrect predictions is irrelevant as far as they are concerned. Anybody questioning their assumptions on the grounds of rationality is ignored.
Despite its simplicity as a game, football  (because it involves human beings) engenders huge complexities & patterns are very hard to find. How can you predict beating Wolves but losing to teams at the foot of the table? that''s why we "go with the flow", why it''s always a rollercoaster ride. If you''re not a fanatic that is.

Strong principles may or may not be laudable; a conviction that you should kill all Jews/Chritians/Moslems/Ipswich supporters strikes me as not a very good principle. You cannot rationally prove or disprove your principles - they are your assumptions, your moral axioms. All you can do is hope that, for most people, love is stronger than hate.

[/quote]

 

Very eloquently put Ron, and you''ve hit the nail on the head. We have all, at one time or another, tried to engage Smudger in rational argument only to get more and more frustrated by his constant moving of the goalposts to justify his fixed viewpoint. I''ve fallen into the trap many times, and probably will again, but the only real answer is to steer clear and let him rant away to his heart''s content.

[/quote]

If we all took that attitude he would have no one to rant,swear and insult.

Could you realy deprive our resident wacko his pleasures.  Shame on you Beau were is your community spirit[:D]

[First Wizard 0]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest![:|]

[Bristol Canary 17]

[quote user="Fabregas- Poor Mans Ian Crook"]Maybe if we renamed Carrow Road, The Bernabau we could confuse foreign players and get some quality.[/quote]Hahahaha, thats a quality idea.

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest![:|]

[/quote] In other words, you''re rational when you feel like it, otherwise .....I suspect you are the worst offender here when it comes to expecting people to forget your previous pronouncements. I remember one thread in particular where you denied ever using foul & abusive language, then modified that assertion by stating that you only did so when replying to same, then when I furnished you with evidence that you''d sworn at some poor chap with no provocation you asked for more evidence, which I also supplied. It then went very quiet.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest![:|]

[/quote]

 In other words, you''re rational when you feel like it, otherwise .....

I suspect you are the worst offender here when it comes to expecting people to forget your previous pronouncements. I remember one thread in particular where you denied ever using foul & abusive language, then modified that assertion by stating that you only did so when replying to same, then when I furnished you with evidence that you''d sworn at some poor chap with no provocation you asked for more evidence, which I also supplied.

It then went very quiet.
[/quote]

Oh shock........I have another life!

And if, as you claim Ronnie, I swore, why haven''t I been banned for it? ...............or was it just a little word that normal people just let go these days?

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="cityangel"]

But to Smudger''s credit he never changes his mind, sticks to his principles and never shys away from replying to any critisism on here .

A lot of us, me included, often go with the flow of results, if we lose several we''re upset and want action, if we win several we lay down our arms and surrender.

[/quote]

You''ve summed the problem up in a nutshell CA.
His approach is essentially that of a religious fanatic; he starts with a fixed axiom - Delia is pure Evil - & derives all his conclusions from this point. Since she is Evil, all those associated with her (the Board) must either also be Evil or deluded - I think he accepts that not all 25,000 fans are evil, so they must be deluded. Gullible sheeple.
No amount of rational argument can hold sway with someone with this fixed view of the world.
The alternative is the (much misunderstood) scientific view (we are all scientists, whether we know it or not). That is to say that we see things happen, see a pattern & try to use that pattern to decide what happens next. If the pattern isn''t working very well then we adjust it if we can - or abandon it completely if a better one comes along. That''s how we survive as a species.
 A fanatic is not really interested in what happens next; the fact they continually make incorrect predictions is irrelevant as far as they are concerned. Anybody questioning their assumptions on the grounds of rationality is ignored.
Despite its simplicity as a game, football  (because it involves human beings) engenders huge complexities & patterns are very hard to find. How can you predict beating Wolves but losing to teams at the foot of the table? that''s why we "go with the flow", why it''s always a rollercoaster ride. If you''re not a fanatic that is.

Strong principles may or may not be laudable; a conviction that you should kill all Jews/Chritians/Moslems/Ipswich supporters strikes me as not a very good principle. You cannot rationally prove or disprove your principles - they are your assumptions, your moral axioms. All you can do is hope that, for most people, love is stronger than hate.

[/quote]

 

Very eloquently put Ron, and you''ve hit the nail on the head. We have all, at one time or another, tried to engage Smudger in rational argument only to get more and more frustrated by his constant moving of the goalposts to justify his fixed viewpoint. I''ve fallen into the trap many times, and probably will again, but the only real answer is to steer clear and let him rant away to his heart''s content.

[/quote]

If we all took that attitude he would have no one to rant,swear and insult.

Could you realy deprive our resident wacko his pleasures.  Shame on you Beau were is your community spirit[:D]

[/quote]

 

Yes, very remiss of me. I feel suitably ashamed[:D]

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest![:|]

[/quote]

 In other words, you''re rational when you feel like it, otherwise .....

I suspect you are the worst offender here when it comes to expecting people to forget your previous pronouncements. I remember one thread in particular where you denied ever using foul & abusive language, then modified that assertion by stating that you only did so when replying to same, then when I furnished you with evidence that you''d sworn at some poor chap with no provocation you asked for more evidence, which I also supplied.

It then went very quiet.
[/quote]

Oh shock........I have another life!

And if, as you claim Ronnie, I swore, why haven''t I been banned for it? ...............or was it just a little word that normal people just let go these days?

[/quote]

 

You almost had me convinced until you threw that whopper in, Wiz![;)]

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Beauseant"]Oh shock........I have another life!

 

 

You almost had me convinced until you threw that whopper in, Wiz![;)]

[/quote]

LMAO..................that gave me todays first chuckle.

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest![:|]

[/quote] In other words, you''re rational when you feel like it, otherwise .....I suspect you are the worst offender here when it comes to expecting people to forget your previous pronouncements. I remember one thread in particular where you denied ever using foul & abusive language, then modified that assertion by stating that you only did so when replying to same, then when I furnished you with evidence that you''d sworn at some poor chap with no provocation you asked for more evidence, which I also supplied.

It then went very quiet.[/quote]

Oh shock........I have another life!

And if, as you claim Ronnie, I swore, why haven''t I been banned for it? ...............or was it just a little word that normal people just let go these days?

[/quote]I''ve done it once, do you want me to go through it again?There is a point where a denial of reality becomes insanity. Of course, being insane doesn''t mean you''re always wrong.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="ron obvious"][quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest![:|]

[/quote]

 In other words, you''re rational when you feel like it, otherwise .....

I suspect you are the worst offender here when it comes to expecting people to forget your previous pronouncements. I remember one thread in particular where you denied ever using foul & abusive language, then modified that assertion by stating that you only did so when replying to same, then when I furnished you with evidence that you''d sworn at some poor chap with no provocation you asked for more evidence, which I also supplied.

It then went very quiet.
[/quote]

Oh shock........I have another life!

And if, as you claim Ronnie, I swore, why haven''t I been banned for it? ...............or was it just a little word that normal people just let go these days?

[/quote]

I''ve done it once, do you want me to go through it again?
There is a point where a denial of reality becomes insanity. Of course, being insane doesn''t mean you''re always wrong.

[/quote]

Its your life to waste Ronnie, personally, I care not a jot what you do![:|]

[pennywise 0]

congratulations to smudger , we`ve signed 5 players got rid of 3 and yet we have a 49 post thread on that idiot  , and i`m as guilty as the next one for getting embroiled in it [:D]

[ron obvious 1,502]

[[quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest!

[/quote]

You''re a sanctimonious lying windbag. And that''s the truth.

 

[missing in action? 0]

tbh smudger is a fani give as much of a toss about his opinion as he probably does of mine..

[ricky knight 0]

I would rather ten smudgers than some of the patronising, happy clapping, Delia is wonderful, we are the real supporters, everything is wonderful at carrow road brigade. If we were in the conference they would still be saying, give it time, the new manager will get it right, our new signing from Dereham is world class, Delia saved us. numpties.

 Smudger and many others said, Grant was crap from the get go, proven right. his signings were''nt up to it proven right. Roeder wrong choice, again right, said relegation was on the cards, stayed up by one win, ctiticised his loan dealings and buys, proven right by the fact we are still struggling. Gunn jury is out but his signings are not nothing to excite, jury out. So where is Smudger so wrong apart from speaking his mind, most things i agree with, I just hope Gunn does get it right.

[Lord Flashheart 0]

I don''t think it''s to do with "speaking his mind", it''s to do with his deliberate attempts to upset his fellow supporters. One can speak ones mind without being a smug, arrogant g*t about it. A lot of other posters around here can manage it, why can''t he? [:O]

[pennywise 0]

[quote user="ricky knight"]

I would rather ten smudgers than some of the patronising, happy clapping, Delia is wonderful, we are the real supporters, everything is wonderful at carrow road brigade. If we were in the conference they would still be saying, give it time, the new manager will get it right, our new signing from Dereham is world class, Delia saved us. numpties.

 Smudger and many others said, Grant was crap from the get go, proven right. his signings were''nt up to it proven right. Roeder wrong choice, again right, said relegation was on the cards, stayed up by one win, ctiticised his loan dealings and buys, proven right by the fact we are still struggling. Gunn jury is out but his signings are not nothing to excite, jury out. So where is Smudger so wrong apart from speaking his mind, most things i agree with, I just hope Gunn does get it right.

[/quote]

smudger is so wrong cos he takes such obvious delight in it when they go tits up ,thats surely  not what supporting your team is about? its the easy option to be negative all the time not the hard option, unless your man united everything goes wrong eventually so your always going to be right at some point, as they say even a broken clock is right twice a day

[PurpleCanary 5,557]

."To Smudger"I’ve been in correspondence for a while now with the editors at the Oxford

University Press over a suitable definition for “to Smudger”. I can tell you

this has not been easy; boy, are they sticklers for accuracy! But you can see

their point. The Oxford English Dictionary is THE definitive guide to the

language. Alien beings in far-flung corners of the universe rely on it. I

finally tried this:

”To Smudger”. Generally, to criticise everything to do with a football club.  Specifically, to make endless negative

predictions about all aspects of the club so that when one of those predictions

comes true then you can gleefully point to that single accurate remark and hope

no-one remembers the dozens of other totally fallacious forecasts that accompanied

it.”

Now, the editors at the OUP were still not convinced – they said no-one would

indulge in such a scattergun approach. It wasn''t mature. It would have no credibility. So I

emailed them this from yesterday:

”None of the players we have bought in will prove to be an improvement

on what we already have and so there for are a complete WASTE OF MONEY.”

I got this back from the OUP:

”So let’s get this straight. If Leijer, Killen, Carney and Gow all turn out to

be good acquisitions and save Norwich from relegation, but McDonald gets sent

back to non-league football, Smudger will claim he was right all along because

he rubbished McDonald?”

Congratulations, I replied, you’ve just Smudgered! And they caved in. The next

edition of the dictionary will immortalise Smudger. He will live on in the

language!

 

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="ron obvious"][[quote user="1st Wizard"]

I pride myself on my ability to change my mind, I would hate to be inflexible. Okay, somethings remain constant with me ie. the board, Smith, Curo etc, but if I''m wrong on other matters, I''ll spot it, and admit to it.

To carry on saying things when in your heart you know you''re wrong, is shameful and dishonest!

[/quote]

You''re a sanctimonious lying windbag. And that''s the truth.

 

[/quote]

Best laugh today, thanks Ronnie.[:D]

[Joanna Grey 0]

[quote user="ricky knight"]

I would rather ten smudgers than some of the patronising, happy clapping, Delia is wonderful, we are the real supporters, everything is wonderful at carrow road brigade. If we were in the conference they would still be saying, give it time, the new manager will get it right, our new signing from Dereham is world class, Delia saved us. numpties.

 Smudger and many others said, Grant was crap from the get go, proven right. his signings were''nt up to it proven right. Roeder wrong choice, again right, said relegation was on the cards, stayed up by one win, ctiticised his loan dealings and buys, proven right by the fact we are still struggling. Gunn jury is out but his signings are not nothing to excite, jury out. So where is Smudger so wrong apart from speaking his mind, most things i agree with, I just hope Gunn does get it right.

[/quote]

But there''s not that many of those types around, even on this Forum. I think that the majority are of the same mind set in that they realise that the best thing for this Club (in fact any Club) is an injection of hard cash, a very large amount of hard cash. Delia et al are in no position to do this and are looking for further investment, they have employed someone to do that. Just because someone does not agree to the totally extreme views of the "Board Out" brigade - by which I mean violent and aggressive protests - that does not mean that they will support the Board to the hilt. There are far more "negatives" on this forum than "positives" but they are both outweighed by the "reasonables".

 

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

.

"To Smudger"

I’ve been in correspondence for a while now with the editors at the Oxford University Press over a suitable definition for “to Smudger”. I can tell you this has not been easy; boy, are they sticklers for accuracy! But you can see their point. The Oxford English Dictionary is THE definitive guide to the language. Alien beings in far-flung corners of the universe rely on it. I finally tried this:

”To Smudger”. Generally, to criticise everything to do with a football club.  Specifically, to make endless negative predictions about all aspects of the club so that when one of those predictions comes true then you can gleefully point to that single accurate remark and hope no-one remembers the dozens of other totally fallacious forecasts that accompanied it.”

Now, the editors at the OUP were still not convinced – they said no-one would indulge in such a scattergun approach. It wasn''t mature. It would have no credibility. So I emailed them this from yesterday:

”None of the players we have bought in will prove to be an improvement on what we already have and so there for are a complete WASTE OF MONEY.”

I got this back from the OUP:

”So let’s get this straight. If Leijer, Killen, Carney and Gow all turn out to be good acquisitions and save Norwich from relegation, but McDonald gets sent back to non-league football, Smudger will claim he was right all along because he rubbished McDonald?”

Congratulations, I replied, you’ve just Smudgered! And they caved in. The next edition of the dictionary will immortalise Smudger. He will live on in the language!
 

[/quote]

Good post.

I look forward to my new edition.

Will it have countless entries under Smudger? All refering to the previous entry.