doherty starting!!!

[Syteanric 1]

2 starts and 2 decent games for the doc... long may it continue i say!

jas :)

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]As usual, you have no means of challenging the content of my statements.  I am now bored with you. [/quote]

Oooooooooo!  That''s a bit superior!  Run out of insults have we?  Try reading what I''ve said and responding if you''ve got the bottle.  Luckily I don''t do boredom.

[Syteanric 1]

now now children.. now now...

jas :)

[Houston Canary 0]

I''ve read it. It is sub par repetitive tripe. That bores me.  You admit to having no content, just attacks. Yawn.  Why don''t you show me and anyone else reading this where I am proveably factually wrong.  Stop!  I already know why you don''t. You can''t.  When I have trouble sleeping, then I may re-read you comments bore me to sleep.  Dronny, are you always this bitter after a big win?

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]I''ve read it. It is sub par repetitive tripe. That bores me.  You admit to having no content, just attacks. Yawn.  Why don''t you show me and anyone else reading this where I am proveably factually wrong.  Stop!  I already know why you don''t. You can''t.  When I have trouble sleeping, then I may re-read you comments bore me to sleep.  Dronny, are you always this bitter after a big win?[/quote]

Put me right then O great superior one.  If you''re so smart then why do you have to stoop to insults?  Your main defence is always to accuse others of your own faults.  There must be a name for this sort of psychological condition.  It would be nice for me and the other posters on here to see you say something along the lines -

"Perhaps I''ve overdone the insults, perhaps I''ve been a bit quick to judge other people , perhaps I''ve not taken enough time to listen to other points of view and I''ll address this in the future."

Like I said, read through the thread and you will see that there are plenty of people have have pretty much the same opinion of what you say as I do.

 

[Dronny Canary 0]

Some highlights from the erudite analysis of Houston.

“You are an idiot”

“You people are so pathetic”

“Cameltoe, your previous missive……..”

"No only are you intolerant, you are a jackwad."

"You use of the term something to the effect of "talking a lot of gash" made you sound very homosexual, So if are just gay………"

"I assumed if he hates it so much he is likely a homo."

"It is you who is living in the council flats with grubs, leeches, sluggos, addicts, slouches and losers"

 

 

 

[Dronny Canary 0]

Just a thought Houston.  Perhaps your favourite Norwick player might be a natural at American Football.  His all action clutch and grab style would sure go down well with all those quarter backs.  How about playing him in the "back field" and seeing how many "shutouts" you might get, especially on all those "road games" you''ve been talking about!  Hut Hut Hut!

[Houston Canary 0]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"]Just a thought Houston.  Perhaps your favourite Norwick player might be a natural at American Football.  His all action clutch and grab style would sure go down well with all those quarter backs.  How about playing him in the "back field" and seeing how many "shutouts" you might get, especially on all those "road games" you''ve been talking about!  Hut Hut Hut![/quote]

Religion is the last refuge of a scoundrel, Dronny. You''re not even good at that!  Instead, you resort to cheap attacks on nationality which only continue the process of making you look stupid.  Now you''re doing my job for me. Thanks.  Obviously Amerrycan football, as you call it (it''s just plain old "football" without a capital letter)   Once again, you cannot debate the content of my statements because you know I am right.  So you go for the cheap laugh (and get none) on a forum that features a thread dedicated to football. Oi, oi, oi, bloke mate in a lorry by the flat.  Hey, I can make retarded fun of English colloquialisms too!  I am hilarious!

If nothing else, you got off the boring and changed things up a little making this fun again.  I so love being the topic of conversation among people who have never met me, and most likely never will.  Since you have nothing better to do, Dronny, why don''t you look through my comment history and see how often I resort to insults and/or name calling first.  How is your socialized medicine working out for you at the EU? More inane shots that mean nothing to me but will likely get you all stirred up, kind of like you thought "hut, hut, hut" would me. HAH!

[Dicky 0]

Houston, can I just say, as an impartial observer in all of this, you are coming across as a sanctimonious and childish prat?

[ron obvious 1,502]

[quote user="Dicky"]Houston, can I just say, as an impartial observer in all of this, you are coming across as a sanctimonious and childish prat?[/quote]Seconded

[Gingerpele 0]

HE DIDNT EVEN FALL OVER!!!!!

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"]Just a thought Houston.  Perhaps your favourite Norwick player might be a natural at American Football.  His all action clutch and grab style would sure go down well with all those quarter backs.  How about playing him in the "back field" and seeing how many "shutouts" you might get, especially on all those "road games" you''ve been talking about!  Hut Hut Hut![/quote]

Religion is the last refuge of a scoundrel, Dronny. You''re not even good at that!  Instead, you resort to cheap attacks on nationality which only continue the process of making you look stupid.  Now you''re doing my job for me. Thanks.  Obviously Amerrycan football, as you call it (it''s just plain old "football" without a capital letter)   Once again, you cannot debate the content of my statements because you know I am right.  So you go for the cheap laugh (and get none) on a forum that features a thread dedicated to football. Oi, oi, oi, bloke mate in a lorry by the flat.  Hey, I can make retarded fun of English colloquialisms too!  I am hilarious!

If nothing else, you got off the boring and changed things up a little making this fun again.  I so love being the topic of conversation among people who have never met me, and most likely never will.  Since you have nothing better to do, Dronny, why don''t you look through my comment history and see how often I resort to insults and/or name calling first.  How is your socialized medicine working out for you at the EU? More inane shots that mean nothing to me but will likely get you all stirred up, kind of like you thought "hut, hut, hut" would me. HAH!

[/quote]

Do us a favour mate.  Do as I suggested, read back through this thread.  The references to "back field", "shutouts" and "road games" all came from among YOUR "wise words.  Just an indication of how confused you are! All the insults from my previous post are also from YOU on this thread.    Yet again you have shown that you are quick to dish it out but oh so sensitive at being on the receiving end.  You''ve called me "gay" and a "jackwad", now you accuse an atheist of being "religious" and to cap it all you try to make feeble jokes about the English.............and I''m not even English!!!!  Have a nice day!

[hugoagogo 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"][quote user="Dronny Canary"][quote user="Houston Canary"]

HERBIE is BACK!  I was worried you might not show up here after having the other thread in which you manage only personal insults against me REMOVED after I put you in your place. You are a laughable silly man.  Could you  not take the literary beating any longer? Didn''t you claim you were done with me?  Then you have the other thread removed, and now you come here for more. Make up your mind, HERBIE.  Can you show me where I claimed US cartoons are better than English ones?  Did you miss where I explained how the Flinstones must have taken place in Europe?  Not only that, but England since they spoke English.  

And Dronny, holy cow, the hypocrisy or double standard or whatever you want to call it coming from your head is amusing too. Hugaboo was the one who began the vulgarity, and I asked what it meant since it made no sense in the context it was used.  I write gash he accused in a negative tone.  I thought maybe gash meant something besides lady parts, so I asked.  When it was confimed that it does mean what it has for ever, I assumed if he hates it so much he is likely a homo. Not that there''s anything wrong with that.  I keep reminding you there is nothing wrong with it but the offense taken suggests you do find something wrong with it and are not so tolerant as me, whom it has been suggested time and again, is not. Maybe he should have said I write balls. 

I tried to steer the conversation back to the game, but all you dips want to do is attack me.  Once again, I love being the center of attention of people I have never, and most likely will never meet. If you are idiot enough to think what I show you here is what I do at work, then yes, you should be concerned about those I work with and for. Likewise, I guess, if I was idiot enough to believe these bitter, narrow minded, jealous and victim-wannabe personalities you portray here were how you acted at work, then I fear for the people who eat the burgers you serve.

Oh come on, that was funny! Smile, lighten up, and come on you Yellows!

 

[/quote]

If you could just crawl out from up your own rectum for a couple of minutes, try doing this:

1) Read through this thread carefully

2) Think why it is that reasonable people like me take offense at what you say and how you say it

3) Get a dictionary and look up the words "sarcasm" and "funny" both of which you obviously don''t understand

4) If you still don''t get it then ask one of your kids to do this for you

5) When making posts on here in future try to look at other points of view instead of calling people "idiots", "jackwads", "gay" etc if they don''t agree with what you say

6) When you''re wrong have the decency to admit it instead of upping the hysterical smart-ass insults

7) Try reading the posts of people like Cam and Nutty, who I certainly don''t always agree with but whose contributions often give a different perspective from mine and add to my understanding of the issues surrounding my club.  If you concentrated on what Cam says instead of trying to come up with more "funny" insults (Camel toe etc) you might just learn something. 

If you do the above then some of your comments on here might just get a little respect from the other posters

 

[/quote]

Dronny, if you don''t like my comments, don''t read them.  If you don''t want personal attacks on yourself, don''t make them on me. Your penchant for double standards is not ignored by me.  Maybe it is by people who disagree with me, but this shows their own hypocrisy when they only attack my comments and not yours.  

Unlike you, I don''t need to re-read an entire thread to reply to the vile ingorance spewing from your keyboard.  I have even tried to steer this back on topic, but you just won''t let go of it.  Why don''t YOU re-read the entire thread and see where you and Hugoagogo went wrong. Then come back an apoligize and I will not comment further on this thread. Either that, or just shut your pie hole. I do not intitiate most personal insults, I react to them in kind. Stay out of the kitchen.

[/quote]

so i''m gay and a pinhead oh yeah and vulgar mmm what else houston??well i enjoyed the game yesterday and docs showing oh but i doubt you saw any of the game .SO SHUT UP YOU CLIENT!!!!!Oh and just cos you never watched Batfink its your loss!

[Dronny Canary 0]

Be careful Hugo, Houston may use some of that superior wit and intellect to put you down while calling you a religious gay or even taking the mickey out of being English.  Stand by to be well and truly put in your place!

[Houston Canary 0]

[quote user="Dicky"]Houston, can I just say, as an impartial observer in all of this, you are coming across as a sanctimonious and childish prat?[/quote]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

Geez, Dronny, once again, harping on about my colloquialisms as if that somehow weakens the valid points I have been making.  I did not deny that I use terms that seem normal to me and that everybody else understands but which you nitpick at as if they are from some other planet.  And yes, the baseball championships here are called the World Series. I have explained why other times to the same drips who think that somehow proves the US thinks too much of itself. Dronny, you even added a nice comment to a thread titled "goalies", a term intolerant jackwads like you have attacked me for on other occasions. Why did you not attack the originator of that thread?  Because in reality you are not at all bothered by the word. So you are putting on a show here, and getting your a$$ handed to you over and over. Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!  You can''t.  ha ha ha[:P] (is there a smiley face with a middle finger on it? If so, add one here for Dronny) (or the 2 fingered salute so it is the British version even though he knows what my one means)

[McCanary 0]

Not sure if you are doing this on purpopse, HC ....but you are coming across as a class 1 eejit here!

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

[quote user="Dicky"]Houston, can I just say, as an impartial observer in all of this, you are coming across as a sanctimonious and childish prat?[/quote]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

Geez, Dronny, once again, harping on about my colloquialisms as if that somehow weakens the valid points I have been making.  I did not deny that I use terms that seem normal to me and that everybody else understands but which you nitpick at as if they are from some other planet.  And yes, the baseball championships here are called the World Series. I have explained why other times to the same drips who think that somehow proves the US thinks too much of itself. Dronny, you even added a nice comment to a thread titled "goalies", a term intolerant jackwads like you have attacked me for on other occasions. Why did you not attack the originator of that thread?  Because in reality you are not at all bothered by the word. So you are putting on a show here, and getting your a$$ handed to you over and over. Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!  You can''t.  ha ha ha[:P] (is there a smiley face with a middle finger on it? If so, add one here for Dronny) (or the 2 fingered salute so it is the British version even though he knows what my one means)

[/quote]

Oh dear!  You really are having a bad day Houston.  Got the feeling that others on here are as sick of you as me?  Your "colloquialisms" are relevant as they were all about football and suggest that perhaps you''re not quite with it where that is concerned.  As I said, your ego can''t even take a bit of light-heated banter, which was all my post was about.  I have never mentioned the World Series or attacked you for using the term "goalie" so there''s a couple of COMMENTS THAT ARE FACTUALLY WRONG!!  By the way, what do you think of our new netminder?  I know plenty of fantastic Americans who have a real sense of the strengths and weaknesses of their country and can give and take a bit of ribbing.  Unfortunately you don''t seem to be in their number.  If you want a few more things that you have said that are FACTUALLY PROVABLY WRONG over then try these for a start:

My wife and kids will testify to the fact that I''m not "gay".  They will (as will all the local churchmen around here) confirm that I''m not religious.  My birth certificate will confirm that I''m not English.  My posts will confirm that I never made any "gash" or "anti-gash" comments.  They will also prove that I never mentioned the World Series or attacked someone for using the term "goalie".  Doherty never has been and never will be my "saviour" or "god" and I''ve never made any comment to that end.  So Einstein, stop side-stepping & ducking and diving someone of limited intellectual capacity like me and deal with those factually incorrect comments for a start.  I await your pearls of wisdom O great one!   

[nutty nigel 7,527]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

 

[/quote]

Really[*-)]

I think Black Sabbath used to sing about you[:O]

[8]Can you help me thought you were my friend
Whoah yeah[H]

 

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Houston Canary"]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

 

[/quote]

Really[*-)]

I think Black Sabbath used to sing about you[:O]

[8]Can you help me thought you were my friend
Whoah yeah[H]

 

[/quote]

Shame on you for "piling on" poor Houston, although as with most of his comments I''m not quite sure where!

[Dronny Canary 0]

Houston says: "Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!"  Well try this for starters Einstein:

(About Doherty playing in the Orient game) "We will win anyways, but no clean sheet. 4 to 3 now, instead of 4-0." Factually wrong Houston!

"Nobody outside of Norwich rates this buffoon." As I live outside Norwich and know supporters of other clubs who do rate him then this is factually incorrect Houston.

"every opposing fan in England seems to get a kick out of our team''s fascination with the guy" How many opposing fans have you spoken to Houston?  As I work with fans of other clubs who don''t get a kick out of this then this is also "factually incorrect".

"You are an idiot, I.S." If I.S. had the developmental condition that would lead to the technical description of "idiot" then he would by definition not be able to contribute to this message board in the way he does, so this is also factually incorrect. 

Now many of your "comments" are opinions and not "facts" so it''s not so much a question of proving them wrong as you showing that you have reasonable grounds for your opinions backed up by appropriate experience.  So if we look at one or two of your "opinions"........

"He is a liability, overall."  "His wage per quality has to be about the lowest on the team." "Having that clown in the back field limits our attack when the other team is at full strength." "His play usually unsettles the entire team, and the first 10 minutes of the match suggest that it did again yesterday." "it wasn''t until then the other players felt comfortable to play their own game instead of the "be ready to cover for blunderpuss" style that requires them to back pedal quicky and frequently."

Have you got any FACTUAL EVIDENCE, Houston to back any of this up?  How many games have you seen live in the past couple of years on which you base your opinion?  On what grounds do you claim to have greater insight than experienced posters who have been to most matches in recent times?

The problem that I have with you is that you have little actual experience of seeing the team live and yet speak as if from great authority.  When people challenge your "opinions" you don''t respond but simply try to belittle them and call them names.  Once you start showing a bit of respect to other posters on here you might just get a little in return. 

 

[Houston Canary 0]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"][quote user="Houston Canary"]

[quote user="Dicky"]Houston, can I just say, as an impartial observer in all of this, you are coming across as a sanctimonious and childish prat?[/quote]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

Geez, Dronny, once again, harping on about my colloquialisms as if that somehow weakens the valid points I have been making.  I did not deny that I use terms that seem normal to me and that everybody else understands but which you nitpick at as if they are from some other planet.  And yes, the baseball championships here are called the World Series. I have explained why other times to the same drips who think that somehow proves the US thinks too much of itself. Dronny, you even added a nice comment to a thread titled "goalies", a term intolerant jackwads like you have attacked me for on other occasions. Why did you not attack the originator of that thread?  Because in reality you are not at all bothered by the word. So you are putting on a show here, and getting your a$$ handed to you over and over. Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!  You can''t.  ha ha ha[:P] (is there a smiley face with a middle finger on it? If so, add one here for Dronny) (or the 2 fingered salute so it is the British version even though he knows what my one means)

[/quote]

Oh dear!  You really are having a bad day Houston.  Got the feeling that others on here are as sick of you as me?  Your "colloquialisms" are relevant as they were all about football and suggest that perhaps you''re not quite with it where that is concerned.  As I said, your ego can''t even take a bit of light-heated banter, which was all my post was about.  I have never mentioned the World Series or attacked you for using the term "goalie" so there''s a couple of COMMENTS THAT ARE FACTUALLY WRONG!!  By the way, what do you think of our new netminder?  I know plenty of fantastic Americans who have a real sense of the strengths and weaknesses of their country and can give and take a bit of ribbing.  Unfortunately you don''t seem to be in their number.  If you want a few more things that you have said that are FACTUALLY PROVABLY WRONG over then try these for a start:

My wife and kids will testify to the fact that I''m not "gay".  They will (as will all the local churchmen around here) confirm that I''m not religious.  My birth certificate will confirm that I''m not English.  My posts will confirm that I never made any "gash" or "anti-gash" comments.  They will also prove that I never mentioned the World Series or attacked someone for using the term "goalie".  Doherty never has been and never will be my "saviour" or "god" and I''ve never made any comment to that end.  So Einstein, stop side-stepping & ducking and diving someone of limited intellectual capacity like me and deal with those factually incorrect comments for a start.  I await your pearls of wisdom O great one!   

[/quote]

It''s like trying to talk to a cat, explaining things to you, Dronny. First of all, for those too thick to figure it out, MY comments are not all directed towards one person when I am being attacked by several. So when I made the comment  about the world series, it was a pre-emptive strike against which ever one of you were going to use it. Trust me, it''s come up plenty of times before.  I already explained the homo remark was an answer to Hugoagogo whom I mistook for you based on your shared dullness and similar (lack of) style. It was Hugo making gash sound like something he reviled, and I took him up on that, and then accidentally you.  I never said YOU attacked me for using the term "goalie" but you have been attempting to belittle my country with your funny references to American lingo, especially as it relates to football, or Amerrycan football, as you call it.  I have been criticized by users here for using "goalie" and I find it hypocritical of those who make such criticisms to not be equal in their disdain for the term as they choose only to comment on my use of the term and not the guy (or bloke) who included it in the title of his thread. 

You did finally make me laugh when you referred to your previous comments as light hearted banter.  Did you read any of your comments before sending them, or have you looked back at them?  They do not come across as banter.  That, and completely missing what I meant regarding scoundrels'' last resort being religion.  Good God, man!  My point there was that you are not even a good scoundrel because you resort to anti-American stereotypes as your last resort.  You went the wrong direction, and you answer that by claiming you don''t go to church.  You likely didn''t go to school much either.

Hugoagogo''s obsession drove him to start an entire thread dedicated to me, I see.  Ha ha, it backfired on both of you as you have been taken to the woodshed by people who know what they''re talking about, and suddenly YOUR tone changed. How gutless or stupid of you.  If you meant what you wrote, stick with it. Don''t back down. It makes you look weak minded and easy to manipulate.  You should stick to your guns on the thread dedicated to me that backfired badly, but instead you become so complimentary about things American. Make up your mind.

As for the content of my previous comments (holy crap, I don''t believe I have to waste time clarifying this) I was OBVIOUSLT referring to the comments related to the thread topic.

When I am wrong, I admit it, so stuff it to the one who was whining that I should just admit I was wrong.  I''ve admitted it plenty of times AND thanked the one(s) who set me right, eejut.

[Camuldonum 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Houston Canary"]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

 

[/quote]

Really[*-)]

I think Black Sabbath used to sing about you[:O]

[8]Can you help me thought you were my friend
Whoah yeah[H]

Nope you are just dealing with a Southern Baptist. Think Worthington out and the Doc out - with attitude.

So just a Southern Baptist and they can be safely disreguarded in the scheme of things. 

[:D]

 

[/quote]

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"][quote user="Dronny Canary"][quote user="Houston Canary"]

[quote user="Dicky"]Houston, can I just say, as an impartial observer in all of this, you are coming across as a sanctimonious and childish prat?[/quote]

Really?  Sanctimonious AND childish?  That''s an odd mixture. What is your impartial summary of Hugoagogo and Dronny and nigel and ron obvious and whomever else has been piling on me?  Are they manly and brave and cultured and righteous?  Does it even matter? If all you can do is attack me, then I have obviously made some valid points. Shooting the messenger does not change the message.

Guess what, Dicky.  You claiming to be impartial comes across as sanctimonious.  I bet you felt really superior when you sent your comment.  Do you still feel that way now I have exposed the irony of it?

 

Geez, Dronny, once again, harping on about my colloquialisms as if that somehow weakens the valid points I have been making.  I did not deny that I use terms that seem normal to me and that everybody else understands but which you nitpick at as if they are from some other planet.  And yes, the baseball championships here are called the World Series. I have explained why other times to the same drips who think that somehow proves the US thinks too much of itself. Dronny, you even added a nice comment to a thread titled "goalies", a term intolerant jackwads like you have attacked me for on other occasions. Why did you not attack the originator of that thread?  Because in reality you are not at all bothered by the word. So you are putting on a show here, and getting your a$$ handed to you over and over. Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!  You can''t.  ha ha ha[:P] (is there a smiley face with a middle finger on it? If so, add one here for Dronny) (or the 2 fingered salute so it is the British version even though he knows what my one means)

[/quote]

Oh dear!  You really are having a bad day Houston.  Got the feeling that others on here are as sick of you as me?  Your "colloquialisms" are relevant as they were all about football and suggest that perhaps you''re not quite with it where that is concerned.  As I said, your ego can''t even take a bit of light-heated banter, which was all my post was about.  I have never mentioned the World Series or attacked you for using the term "goalie" so there''s a couple of COMMENTS THAT ARE FACTUALLY WRONG!!  By the way, what do you think of our new netminder?  I know plenty of fantastic Americans who have a real sense of the strengths and weaknesses of their country and can give and take a bit of ribbing.  Unfortunately you don''t seem to be in their number.  If you want a few more things that you have said that are FACTUALLY PROVABLY WRONG over then try these for a start:

My wife and kids will testify to the fact that I''m not "gay".  They will (as will all the local churchmen around here) confirm that I''m not religious.  My birth certificate will confirm that I''m not English.  My posts will confirm that I never made any "gash" or "anti-gash" comments.  They will also prove that I never mentioned the World Series or attacked someone for using the term "goalie".  Doherty never has been and never will be my "saviour" or "god" and I''ve never made any comment to that end.  So Einstein, stop side-stepping & ducking and diving someone of limited intellectual capacity like me and deal with those factually incorrect comments for a start.  I await your pearls of wisdom O great one!   

[/quote]

It''s like trying to talk to a cat, explaining things to you, Dronny. First of all, for those too thick to figure it out, MY comments are not all directed towards one person when I am being attacked by several. So when I made the comment  about the world series, it was a pre-emptive strike against which ever one of you were going to use it. Trust me, it''s come up plenty of times before.  I already explained the homo remark was an answer to Hugoagogo whom I mistook for you based on your shared dullness and similar (lack of) style. It was Hugo making gash sound like something he reviled, and I took him up on that, and then accidentally you.  I never said YOU attacked me for using the term "goalie" but you have been attempting to belittle my country with your funny references to American lingo, especially as it relates to football, or Amerrycan football, as you call it.  I have been criticized by users here for using "goalie" and I find it hypocritical of those who make such criticisms to not be equal in their disdain for the term as they choose only to comment on my use of the term and not the guy (or bloke) who included it in the title of his thread. 

You did finally make me laugh when you referred to your previous comments as light hearted banter.  Did you read any of your comments before sending them, or have you looked back at them?  They do not come across as banter.  That, and completely missing what I meant regarding scoundrels'' last resort being religion.  Good God, man!  My point there was that you are not even a good scoundrel because you resort to anti-American stereotypes as your last resort.  You went the wrong direction, and you answer that by claiming you don''t go to church.  You likely didn''t go to school much either.

Hugoagogo''s obsession drove him to start an entire thread dedicated to me, I see.  Ha ha, it backfired on both of you as you have been taken to the woodshed by people who know what they''re talking about, and suddenly YOUR tone changed. How gutless or stupid of you.  If you meant what you wrote, stick with it. Don''t back down. It makes you look weak minded and easy to manipulate.  You should stick to your guns on the thread dedicated to me that backfired badly, but instead you become so complimentary about things American. Make up your mind.

As for the content of my previous comments (holy crap, I don''t believe I have to waste time clarifying this) I was OBVIOUSLT referring to the comments related to the thread topic.

When I am wrong, I admit it, so stuff it to the one who was whining that I should just admit I was wrong.  I''ve admitted it plenty of times AND thanked the one(s) who set me right, eejut.

[/quote]

Well pardon me for insulting the whole "Amerrycan" (your term not mine please note) nation by saying this:

"Perhaps your favourite Norwick player might be a natural at American Football.  His all action clutch and grab style would sure go down well with all those quarter backs.  How about playing him in the "back field" and seeing how many "shutouts" you might get, especially on all those "road games" you''ve been talking about!  Hut Hut Hut!"

Yep that''s really sticking the boot into the old Anti-American stereotypes!  And you tell others to "lighten up".  Just because I have a problem with your attitude does not mean that I have a problem with all Americans as you found out on the other thread.  That''s just silly!!!  I love American sports, especially hockey and football but I wouldn''t be so arrogant as to lecture an American on either of them.

Now if you can put your paranoia to one side, perhaps you could give a reasonable response to my previous post which, as you requested, challenges the factual basis of some of your statements.

[Houston Canary 0]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"]

Houston says: "Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!"  Well try this for starters Einstein:

(About Doherty playing in the Orient game) "We will win anyways, but no clean sheet. 4 to 3 now, instead of 4-0." Factually wrong Houston!

"Nobody outside of Norwich rates this buffoon." As I live outside Norwich and know supporters of other clubs who do rate him then this is factually incorrect Houston.

"every opposing fan in England seems to get a kick out of our team''s fascination with the guy" How many opposing fans have you spoken to Houston?  As I work with fans of other clubs who don''t get a kick out of this then this is also "factually incorrect".

"You are an idiot, I.S." If I.S. had the developmental condition that would lead to the technical description of "idiot" then he would by definition not be able to contribute to this message board in the way he does, so this is also factually incorrect. 

Now many of your "comments" are opinions and not "facts" so it''s not so much a question of proving them wrong as you showing that you have reasonable grounds for your opinions backed up by appropriate experience.  So if we look at one or two of your "opinions"........

"He is a liability, overall."  "His wage per quality has to be about the lowest on the team." "Having that clown in the back field limits our attack when the other team is at full strength." "His play usually unsettles the entire team, and the first 10 minutes of the match suggest that it did again yesterday." "it wasn''t until then the other players felt comfortable to play their own game instead of the "be ready to cover for blunderpuss" style that requires them to back pedal quicky and frequently."

Have you got any FACTUAL EVIDENCE, Houston to back any of this up?  How many games have you seen live in the past couple of years on which you base your opinion?  On what grounds do you claim to have greater insight than experienced posters who have been to most matches in recent times?

The problem that I have with you is that you have little actual experience of seeing the team live and yet speak as if from great authority.  When people challenge your "opinions" you don''t respond but simply try to belittle them and call them names.  Once you start showing a bit of respect to other posters on here you might just get a little in return. 

 

[/quote]Let''s nitpick, you obsessed mental midget, Dronny. Nobody outside of Norwich (obviously I mean the NCFC nation, not the cuty limits of Norwich proper) rates him, so counting yourself is disingenuous.  Where were the stories of clubs making him offers during his hold out?  We get them on EVERY OTHER player, but not him. It''s not a great leap to figure out why this was.

Read comments on threads about GoD, and you will see people make the claim about fans from other teams laughing at us for having him and playing him with no consideration to the wreck-about-to-happen that he often is, nor the impact he has on the confidence of players around him. I know some players have said just the opposite, but really do you expect them to say to a reporter that he rattles their nerves?  I will give you the one about I.S. not literally being an idiot. You are right there.  However, that was not the focus of my comment, was it. You had to get to the most obscure facets of my comments to find anything.  That, and the fact you went to the bother is amusing and kind of flattering to me.

What factual evidence to I have to back up the other comments you dug up? None. But I do read plenty of comments from people who were at the games, and from the play-by-play guys, and I see hi-lights on TV sometimes, as well as the full games I watched when NCFC were on TV more often early in the GoD era of destuction.

I do repond to criticisms of my comments, and when they are nasty in tone, I reply in kind. Then I get accused of all sorts of things while the instigator gets support.  I don''t need support, but I do appreciate when it shows up, as it has here a time or two. Geez, one guy said I was being childish, and the next thing you know, Hugoagogo has started a thread about me, and you were his first commenter, Dronny. When the topic was called out, he disappeared and you caved in and got all soft of things American.

To think that nobody who isn''t at the games can comment on them intelligently is stupid.  You certainly COULD comment on American football as well as anyone else.  To think you could not shows lack of confidence in yourself or a ridiculous assumption that Americans are all way more educated on the sport.  I''ve been to 1 NFL game in my life, but I know plenty about it. I probable know more than most who go to the games because I have the benefit of seeing replays and hearing expert commentary.  However, I am not nearly as interested in the NFL as I am in NCFC, so I comment here. Sucks for you, but you don''t have to read my comments, and you certainly don''t have to provide me with more amusement by responding to them in the way you do.  I mean really, I called a guy an idiot and that''s all you got to show me I made a factually incorrect statement?  And that was not even the point being made in that comment.  Bring it on, Dronny! 

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"][quote user="Dronny Canary"]

Houston says: "Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!"  Well try this for starters Einstein:

(About Doherty playing in the Orient game) "We will win anyways, but no clean sheet. 4 to 3 now, instead of 4-0." Factually wrong Houston!

"Nobody outside of Norwich rates this buffoon." As I live outside Norwich and know supporters of other clubs who do rate him then this is factually incorrect Houston.

"every opposing fan in England seems to get a kick out of our team''s fascination with the guy" How many opposing fans have you spoken to Houston?  As I work with fans of other clubs who don''t get a kick out of this then this is also "factually incorrect".

"You are an idiot, I.S." If I.S. had the developmental condition that would lead to the technical description of "idiot" then he would by definition not be able to contribute to this message board in the way he does, so this is also factually incorrect. 

Now many of your "comments" are opinions and not "facts" so it''s not so much a question of proving them wrong as you showing that you have reasonable grounds for your opinions backed up by appropriate experience.  So if we look at one or two of your "opinions"........

"He is a liability, overall."  "His wage per quality has to be about the lowest on the team." "Having that clown in the back field limits our attack when the other team is at full strength." "His play usually unsettles the entire team, and the first 10 minutes of the match suggest that it did again yesterday." "it wasn''t until then the other players felt comfortable to play their own game instead of the "be ready to cover for blunderpuss" style that requires them to back pedal quicky and frequently."

Have you got any FACTUAL EVIDENCE, Houston to back any of this up?  How many games have you seen live in the past couple of years on which you base your opinion?  On what grounds do you claim to have greater insight than experienced posters who have been to most matches in recent times?

The problem that I have with you is that you have little actual experience of seeing the team live and yet speak as if from great authority.  When people challenge your "opinions" you don''t respond but simply try to belittle them and call them names.  Once you start showing a bit of respect to other posters on here you might just get a little in return. 

 

[/quote]Let''s nitpick, you obsessed mental midget, Dronny. Nobody outside of Norwich (obviously I mean the NCFC nation, not the cuty limits of Norwich proper) rates him, so counting yourself is disingenuous.  Where were the stories of clubs making him offers during his hold out?  We get them on EVERY OTHER player, but not him. It''s not a great leap to figure out why this was.

Read comments on threads about GoD, and you will see people make the claim about fans from other teams laughing at us for having him and playing him with no consideration to the wreck-about-to-happen that he often is, nor the impact he has on the confidence of players around him. I know some players have said just the opposite, but really do you expect them to say to a reporter that he rattles their nerves?  I will give you the one about I.S. not literally being an idiot. You are right there.  However, that was not the focus of my comment, was it. You had to get to the most obscure facets of my comments to find anything.  That, and the fact you went to the bother is amusing and kind of flattering to me.

What factual evidence to I have to back up the other comments you dug up? None. But I do read plenty of comments from people who were at the games, and from the play-by-play guys, and I see hi-lights on TV sometimes, as well as the full games I watched when NCFC were on TV more often early in the GoD era of destuction.

I do repond to criticisms of my comments, and when they are nasty in tone, I reply in kind. Then I get accused of all sorts of things while the instigator gets support.  I don''t need support, but I do appreciate when it shows up, as it has here a time or two. Geez, one guy said I was being childish, and the next thing you know, Hugoagogo has started a thread about me, and you were his first commenter, Dronny. When the topic was called out, he disappeared and you caved in and got all soft of things American.

To think that nobody who isn''t at the games can comment on them intelligently is stupid.  You certainly COULD comment on American football as well as anyone else.  To think you could not shows lack of confidence in yourself or a ridiculous assumption that Americans are all way more educated on the sport.  I''ve been to 1 NFL game in my life, but I know plenty about it. I probable know more than most who go to the games because I have the benefit of seeing replays and hearing expert commentary.  However, I am not nearly as interested in the NFL as I am in NCFC, so I comment here. Sucks for you, but you don''t have to read my comments, and you certainly don''t have to provide me with more amusement by responding to them in the way you do.  I mean really, I called a guy an idiot and that''s all you got to show me I made a factually incorrect statement?  And that was not even the point being made in that comment.  Bring it on, Dronny! 

[/quote]

Ducking and diving yet again flower!  When I point out your "factual inaccuracies" you say that of course you meant something else.  I have outlined your factual inaccuracies and you simply haven''t got the balls to admit them.  You offer no factual basis for your "opinions" apart from saying you listened to some commentaries.  You say we get offers for EVERY OTHER player - OK Einstein back that up but as usual I''m sure that this isn''t "factually incorrect" - you just meant something else that I''m too thick to have worked out or perhaps that''s "not even the point being made".  As you saw on the other thread, I have no problem in showing appropriate respect where it is due.  Respecting the American people as a group does not imply I''ve "caved in" where you''re concerned featherweight.

Your paranoia and delusional behaviour really require some professional assistance.  As a qualified psychologist I''d offer my support but unfortunately you appear to live a long way away.  I''m sure you can find some appropriate treatment over there and I genuinely wish you well in your quest for sanity.  Please give my respects to your family who must be going through a very worrying time.  I''d pray for you but I''m not religious (or gay....or English...or a "jackwad"....or "anti gash"  etc... etc....).  Speak to you tomorrow - sleep tight (just be careful the bogey man doesn''t creep in at night!).  Nighty night little Houston.

[Houston Canary 0]

[quote user="Dronny Canary"][quote user="Houston Canary"][quote user="Dronny Canary"]

Houston says: "Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!"  Well try this for starters Einstein:

(About Doherty playing in the Orient game) "We will win anyways, but no clean sheet. 4 to 3 now, instead of 4-0." Factually wrong Houston!

"Nobody outside of Norwich rates this buffoon." As I live outside Norwich and know supporters of other clubs who do rate him then this is factually incorrect Houston.

"every opposing fan in England seems to get a kick out of our team''s fascination with the guy" How many opposing fans have you spoken to Houston?  As I work with fans of other clubs who don''t get a kick out of this then this is also "factually incorrect".

"You are an idiot, I.S." If I.S. had the developmental condition that would lead to the technical description of "idiot" then he would by definition not be able to contribute to this message board in the way he does, so this is also factually incorrect. 

Now many of your "comments" are opinions and not "facts" so it''s not so much a question of proving them wrong as you showing that you have reasonable grounds for your opinions backed up by appropriate experience.  So if we look at one or two of your "opinions"........

"He is a liability, overall."  "His wage per quality has to be about the lowest on the team." "Having that clown in the back field limits our attack when the other team is at full strength." "His play usually unsettles the entire team, and the first 10 minutes of the match suggest that it did again yesterday." "it wasn''t until then the other players felt comfortable to play their own game instead of the "be ready to cover for blunderpuss" style that requires them to back pedal quicky and frequently."

Have you got any FACTUAL EVIDENCE, Houston to back any of this up?  How many games have you seen live in the past couple of years on which you base your opinion?  On what grounds do you claim to have greater insight than experienced posters who have been to most matches in recent times?

The problem that I have with you is that you have little actual experience of seeing the team live and yet speak as if from great authority.  When people challenge your "opinions" you don''t respond but simply try to belittle them and call them names.  Once you start showing a bit of respect to other posters on here you might just get a little in return. 

 

[/quote]Let''s nitpick, you obsessed mental midget, Dronny. Nobody outside of Norwich (obviously I mean the NCFC nation, not the cuty limits of Norwich proper) rates him, so counting yourself is disingenuous.  Where were the stories of clubs making him offers during his hold out?  We get them on EVERY OTHER player, but not him. It''s not a great leap to figure out why this was.

Read comments on threads about GoD, and you will see people make the claim about fans from other teams laughing at us for having him and playing him with no consideration to the wreck-about-to-happen that he often is, nor the impact he has on the confidence of players around him. I know some players have said just the opposite, but really do you expect them to say to a reporter that he rattles their nerves?  I will give you the one about I.S. not literally being an idiot. You are right there.  However, that was not the focus of my comment, was it. You had to get to the most obscure facets of my comments to find anything.  That, and the fact you went to the bother is amusing and kind of flattering to me.

What factual evidence to I have to back up the other comments you dug up? None. But I do read plenty of comments from people who were at the games, and from the play-by-play guys, and I see hi-lights on TV sometimes, as well as the full games I watched when NCFC were on TV more often early in the GoD era of destuction.

I do repond to criticisms of my comments, and when they are nasty in tone, I reply in kind. Then I get accused of all sorts of things while the instigator gets support.  I don''t need support, but I do appreciate when it shows up, as it has here a time or two. Geez, one guy said I was being childish, and the next thing you know, Hugoagogo has started a thread about me, and you were his first commenter, Dronny. When the topic was called out, he disappeared and you caved in and got all soft of things American.

To think that nobody who isn''t at the games can comment on them intelligently is stupid.  You certainly COULD comment on American football as well as anyone else.  To think you could not shows lack of confidence in yourself or a ridiculous assumption that Americans are all way more educated on the sport.  I''ve been to 1 NFL game in my life, but I know plenty about it. I probable know more than most who go to the games because I have the benefit of seeing replays and hearing expert commentary.  However, I am not nearly as interested in the NFL as I am in NCFC, so I comment here. Sucks for you, but you don''t have to read my comments, and you certainly don''t have to provide me with more amusement by responding to them in the way you do.  I mean really, I called a guy an idiot and that''s all you got to show me I made a factually incorrect statement?  And that was not even the point being made in that comment.  Bring it on, Dronny! 

[/quote]

Ducking and diving yet again flower!  When I point out your "factual inaccuracies" you say that of course you meant something else.  I have outlined your factual inaccuracies and you simply haven''t got the balls to admit them.  You offer no factual basis for your "opinions" apart from saying you listened to some commentaries.  You say we get offers for EVERY OTHER player - OK Einstein back that up but as usual I''m sure that this isn''t "factually incorrect" - you just meant something else that I''m too thick to have worked out or perhaps that''s "not even the point being made".  As you saw on the other thread, I have no problem in showing appropriate respect where it is due.  Respecting the American people as a group does not imply I''ve "caved in" where you''re concerned featherweight.

Your paranoia and delusional behaviour really require some professional assistance.  As a qualified psychologist I''d offer my support but unfortunately you appear to live a long way away.  I''m sure you can find some appropriate treatment over there and I genuinely wish you well in your quest for sanity.  Please give my respects to your family who must be going through a very worrying time.  I''d pray for you but I''m not religious (or gay....or English...or a "jackwad"....or "anti gash"  etc... etc....).  Speak to you tomorrow - sleep tight (just be careful the bogey man doesn''t creep in at night!).  Nighty night little Houston.

[/quote]

Ha ha ha, now you''re a qualified psychologist?!?! That''s hilarious. I loved the diagnosis you made because it demonstrates you know nothing about real psychology beyond an entry level college class, but then actually claiming to be qualified, you are the limit, Dronny. I''m laughing as I''m analyzed.  You are up at 1AM sending messages to PinkUn, and you claim to be a qualified psychologist. Man oh man, you are a riot!

Since I cannot be bothered to find quotes to prove what I have said about others making the same claims I have does not mean they don''t exist. It just means I can''t be bothered to get as obsessed about you as you obviously are about me. You''ve seen the quotes, of if you have not, you are very new here.  Go back to any and all the GoD threads and read through them. There are plenty of people making similar comments, giving sources and whatnot.

I did not claim I meant something else. I clarified what everybody else knew I meant.  Big difference there, Dronny the qualified psychiatrist!  How could you be qualified to do anything beyond wrapping burgers in foil? 

Your anti-American rhetoric failed and now you''re back pedaling trying to cover it up.  Respecting the American people after making the types of comments you made before certainly DOES indicate you have caved in. You should not have made the comments, or you should have the guts and brains to at least try to back them up.  QUALIFIED PSYCHIATRIST! That is so funny!  If you are a qualified psychiatrist, then you have breeched so many standards of real qualified psychiatrists. Your qualifications will be revoked. Ha ha ha ha, what a laugh. Is socialized medicine that desperate for qualified psychiatrists?  If so, then God help any of the people who depend on you for mental help. Ha ha ha, it''s such a pathetic lie, but I can''t stop laughing about it. Why would you go that way?  Oh Dronny, is that all you''ve got? 

1AM and you''re thinking of me!  How flattered I must feel.  It''s almost 10 here, and I won''t give you a 2nd thought. I know how to separate this from reality. I bet thinking of me will make it hard to sleep and  you''ll be a grump tomorrow. A qualified psychiatrist grump, that is!

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"][quote user="Dronny Canary"][quote user="Houston Canary"][quote user="Dronny Canary"]

Houston says: "Show me where the CONTENT OF MY COMMENTS is proveably factually wrong!"  Well try this for starters Einstein:

(About Doherty playing in the Orient game) "We will win anyways, but no clean sheet. 4 to 3 now, instead of 4-0." Factually wrong Houston!

"Nobody outside of Norwich rates this buffoon." As I live outside Norwich and know supporters of other clubs who do rate him then this is factually incorrect Houston.

"every opposing fan in England seems to get a kick out of our team''s fascination with the guy" How many opposing fans have you spoken to Houston?  As I work with fans of other clubs who don''t get a kick out of this then this is also "factually incorrect".

"You are an idiot, I.S." If I.S. had the developmental condition that would lead to the technical description of "idiot" then he would by definition not be able to contribute to this message board in the way he does, so this is also factually incorrect. 

Now many of your "comments" are opinions and not "facts" so it''s not so much a question of proving them wrong as you showing that you have reasonable grounds for your opinions backed up by appropriate experience.  So if we look at one or two of your "opinions"........

"He is a liability, overall."  "His wage per quality has to be about the lowest on the team." "Having that clown in the back field limits our attack when the other team is at full strength." "His play usually unsettles the entire team, and the first 10 minutes of the match suggest that it did again yesterday." "it wasn''t until then the other players felt comfortable to play their own game instead of the "be ready to cover for blunderpuss" style that requires them to back pedal quicky and frequently."

Have you got any FACTUAL EVIDENCE, Houston to back any of this up?  How many games have you seen live in the past couple of years on which you base your opinion?  On what grounds do you claim to have greater insight than experienced posters who have been to most matches in recent times?

The problem that I have with you is that you have little actual experience of seeing the team live and yet speak as if from great authority.  When people challenge your "opinions" you don''t respond but simply try to belittle them and call them names.  Once you start showing a bit of respect to other posters on here you might just get a little in return. 

 

[/quote]Let''s nitpick, you obsessed mental midget, Dronny. Nobody outside of Norwich (obviously I mean the NCFC nation, not the cuty limits of Norwich proper) rates him, so counting yourself is disingenuous.  Where were the stories of clubs making him offers during his hold out?  We get them on EVERY OTHER player, but not him. It''s not a great leap to figure out why this was.

Read comments on threads about GoD, and you will see people make the claim about fans from other teams laughing at us for having him and playing him with no consideration to the wreck-about-to-happen that he often is, nor the impact he has on the confidence of players around him. I know some players have said just the opposite, but really do you expect them to say to a reporter that he rattles their nerves?  I will give you the one about I.S. not literally being an idiot. You are right there.  However, that was not the focus of my comment, was it. You had to get to the most obscure facets of my comments to find anything.  That, and the fact you went to the bother is amusing and kind of flattering to me.

What factual evidence to I have to back up the other comments you dug up? None. But I do read plenty of comments from people who were at the games, and from the play-by-play guys, and I see hi-lights on TV sometimes, as well as the full games I watched when NCFC were on TV more often early in the GoD era of destuction.

I do repond to criticisms of my comments, and when they are nasty in tone, I reply in kind. Then I get accused of all sorts of things while the instigator gets support.  I don''t need support, but I do appreciate when it shows up, as it has here a time or two. Geez, one guy said I was being childish, and the next thing you know, Hugoagogo has started a thread about me, and you were his first commenter, Dronny. When the topic was called out, he disappeared and you caved in and got all soft of things American.

To think that nobody who isn''t at the games can comment on them intelligently is stupid.  You certainly COULD comment on American football as well as anyone else.  To think you could not shows lack of confidence in yourself or a ridiculous assumption that Americans are all way more educated on the sport.  I''ve been to 1 NFL game in my life, but I know plenty about it. I probable know more than most who go to the games because I have the benefit of seeing replays and hearing expert commentary.  However, I am not nearly as interested in the NFL as I am in NCFC, so I comment here. Sucks for you, but you don''t have to read my comments, and you certainly don''t have to provide me with more amusement by responding to them in the way you do.  I mean really, I called a guy an idiot and that''s all you got to show me I made a factually incorrect statement?  And that was not even the point being made in that comment.  Bring it on, Dronny! 

[/quote]

Ducking and diving yet again flower!  When I point out your "factual inaccuracies" you say that of course you meant something else.  I have outlined your factual inaccuracies and you simply haven''t got the balls to admit them.  You offer no factual basis for your "opinions" apart from saying you listened to some commentaries.  You say we get offers for EVERY OTHER player - OK Einstein back that up but as usual I''m sure that this isn''t "factually incorrect" - you just meant something else that I''m too thick to have worked out or perhaps that''s "not even the point being made".  As you saw on the other thread, I have no problem in showing appropriate respect where it is due.  Respecting the American people as a group does not imply I''ve "caved in" where you''re concerned featherweight.

Your paranoia and delusional behaviour really require some professional assistance.  As a qualified psychologist I''d offer my support but unfortunately you appear to live a long way away.  I''m sure you can find some appropriate treatment over there and I genuinely wish you well in your quest for sanity.  Please give my respects to your family who must be going through a very worrying time.  I''d pray for you but I''m not religious (or gay....or English...or a "jackwad"....or "anti gash"  etc... etc....).  Speak to you tomorrow - sleep tight (just be careful the bogey man doesn''t creep in at night!).  Nighty night little Houston.

[/quote]

Ha ha ha, now you''re a qualified psychologist?!?! That''s hilarious. I loved the diagnosis you made because it demonstrates you know nothing about real psychology beyond an entry level college class, but then actually claiming to be qualified, you are the limit, Dronny. I''m laughing as I''m analyzed.  You are up at 1AM sending messages to PinkUn, and you claim to be a qualified psychologist. Man oh man, you are a riot!

Since I cannot be bothered to find quotes to prove what I have said about others making the same claims I have does not mean they don''t exist. It just means I can''t be bothered to get as obsessed about you as you obviously are about me. You''ve seen the quotes, of if you have not, you are very new here.  Go back to any and all the GoD threads and read through them. There are plenty of people making similar comments, giving sources and whatnot.

I did not claim I meant something else. I clarified what everybody else knew I meant.  Big difference there, Dronny the qualified psychiatrist!  How could you be qualified to do anything beyond wrapping burgers in foil? 

Your anti-American rhetoric failed and now you''re back pedaling trying to cover it up.  Respecting the American people after making the types of comments you made before certainly DOES indicate you have caved in. You should not have made the comments, or you should have the guts and brains to at least try to back them up.  QUALIFIED PSYCHIATRIST! That is so funny!  If you are a qualified psychiatrist, then you have breeched so many standards of real qualified psychiatrists. Your qualifications will be revoked. Ha ha ha ha, what a laugh. Is socialized medicine that desperate for qualified psychiatrists?  If so, then God help any of the people who depend on you for mental help. Ha ha ha, it''s such a pathetic lie, but I can''t stop laughing about it. Why would you go that way?  Oh Dronny, is that all you''ve got? 

1AM and you''re thinking of me!  How flattered I must feel.  It''s almost 10 here, and I won''t give you a 2nd thought. I know how to separate this from reality. I bet thinking of me will make it hard to sleep and  you''ll be a grump tomorrow. A qualified psychiatrist grump, that is!

[/quote]

Think on this.  Have you ever stopped to think why I am finding your ramblings "interesting" when noone else on here gives you the time of day?  Look up the term "paranoid delusional psychosis".  I deal with it all the time.  You display many of the symptoms and you will also display similar symptoms in your everyday life outside this message board.  While your looking up that term try looking up the difference between psychologist (am example of which I am qualified) and a psychiatrist (which I haven''t claimed to be).  The only reason that I have told you this is because I am genuinely worried about your condition and I feel that I have a duty to point these things out to you.  So go on - get the dictionary and read it up.  Others on here couls also try the same and say what they think.  Sadly the likelihood of your accepting what I have said is extremely unlikely since this is part of the conditon that I suspect you have.  If you don''t take anything else that I''ve said seriously, for the sake of those round you I urge you to seek advice. 

[Houston Canary 0]

Good lord, Dronny, diagnosing someone nased on youtube of PinkUn forum comments is ridiculous.  I am nothing like what you apparently think I am, neither delusional not paranoid.  I am persistent, though. I don''t fold to pressure just because someone or everyone else did. I am having a lot of fun with this which is why I do it.  If I did not get laughs from this, I would find it boring.  Yes, the serious side is okay, but you gotta have some comic relief, and that''s what this tete a tete has been to me. You seem to have determined that I am not the devil after all as you have responded quite kindly and respectfully to my comments on other threads. 

I''ll be there with my boys next summer, or that is the plan.  Maybe I''ll run into you at a pre-season game as I will have to be back home about when they start playing for real.  I''ll be the guy in the NCFC shirt with "Flybe" on it. And the American accent.  

[Dronny Canary 0]

[quote user="Houston Canary"]

Good lord, Dronny, diagnosing someone nased on youtube of PinkUn forum comments is ridiculous.  I am nothing like what you apparently think I am, neither delusional not paranoid.  I am persistent, though. I don''t fold to pressure just because someone or everyone else did. I am having a lot of fun with this which is why I do it.  If I did not get laughs from this, I would find it boring.  Yes, the serious side is okay, but you gotta have some comic relief, and that''s what this tete a tete has been to me. You seem to have determined that I am not the devil after all as you have responded quite kindly and respectfully to my comments on other threads. 

I''ll be there with my boys next summer, or that is the plan.  Maybe I''ll run into you at a pre-season game as I will have to be back home about when they start playing for real.  I''ll be the guy in the NCFC shirt with "Flybe" on it. And the American accent.  

[/quote]

Seriously, Houston, whether you see it or not, some of what you say does worry me.  Most others simply extract the urine but the way you get so hot under the collar so quickly and start going off on one is, let''s say "unusual".  You come across strongly as someone who really wants to have your opinions taken seriously and who is frustrated about not being able to see what''s going on in person.  I genuinely don''t think that you realise how it comes across to the majority of posters.  Persistence is a virtue that I also value, but sometimes the wise man also knows that backing off says more about your character than pressing on.  Strength without respect is not really strength at all.  At the same time you can''t force people to respect you but need to show respect to receive it.  Getting laughs from something is great but getting laughs from others is much more fulfilling. 

Perhaps you''re not quite as "Nutty" (sorry Nigel) as I originally thought.  You are now coming across as a little more sane than many of the people I work with in my day job (and that''s just the staff!) so I''d be quite happy for you to "run into" me in the Summer (as long as it isn''t at the wheel of a truck!).  Perhaps we could exchange a few insults along with a few beers.   

[Houston Canary 0]

 I have joined threads before that were off on 1 tangent, and with a little outsider point of view completely changed the tone from angry and sarcastic to reasonable.  I can''t recall any particular topic, but it has happened plenty of times. Once in a rare while, I will even be recognized for it by another commenter.  Other times, I get jumped on because I am not in Norwich, and as such, have no reason to offer opinion.  Sometimes it is people who were not there that have the clearest point of view.  As I said before, when I come under attack, I respond in kind.  If someone offers a mean-spirited comment, then all bets are off.  I rarely see anyone else get accused of being mean when I am involved in the situation. I have a lot of fun pointing out what I perceive as faults in those angry comments because people take it so personally, so much so they try to get personal with me.  I certainly do not get hot under the collar myself.  I am smiling when I write my comments, and hoping other readers are getting a kick of them too.  Once in a while, on of them will chip in with a begrudging, "You know, HC is right about that even though I don''t usually agree with him."  But don''t get me wrong.  I do not send comments I do not believe in. I just try to have fun with them when I do. I certainly get a decent amount of LOLs after I make a humorous comment.  I''m really very easy going and people who know me consider me to be a good laugh.

I will be staying at my parent''s home in Sheringham, on the beach but will be in the city plenty, too.  Ideally, I will be able to take my boys to a road game. I have never been on 1 myself, but I imagine it must be a hoot, at least on the way there. Maybe not so much on the way home if the game doesn''t go so well, but hopefully we can do that.