Greenlizard0 Weekend Football Thread ** spoilers ** [21st - 24th Jan 2012]

One More Solo said:
...
Click to expand...

Looked to me that he might have caught his left foot ;)

And that of course was after I mentioned the stuff about Suarez which Tom brought up. I can't predict the future :p

As for DM's usual essay of bs. What's ridiculous is his assumption that I've not said many times that Suarez backs into defenders, exaggerates contact, rolls around and feigns injury.
 
BaZ87 said:
Looked to me that he might have caught his left foot ;)

And that of course was after I mentioned the stuff about Suarez which Tom brought up. I can't predict the future :p

As for DM's usual essay of bs. What's ridiculous is his assumption that I've not said many times that Suarez backs into defenders, exaggerates contact, rolls around and feigns injury.
Click to expand...

Where did I make this assumption exactly? I didn't because I've seen you say it, but your argument always includes "show me a video of where he went down without contact".

You've also purposefully misinterpreted what I said. I didn't say exaggerates contact I said causes contact then goes down, entirely different thing and makes exactly your argument of no one showing you a video of him going down without contact, crap.

If someone tags you and you make a meal of going down that is one thing.

If you run into someone with the express intention of causing the contact to go down and get a freekick, its a dive.

Suarez runs INTO people constantly all game long trying to get freekicks, just because there is contact does NOT mean he's exaggerating what contact there is.

Yet again you've posted trying to twist what people mean and make it a "Suarez doesn't really dive, he just makes a meal of being fouled" defence of him.
 
Jesus H christ Baz, you purposefully misinterpret my post and EVERY SINGLE TIME you post when someone says anything about Suarez diving you have two standard responses.

"show me a video of him diving without contact"

"of course he exaggerates contact"

response 1 or 2 depending on what you are replying to.

You are always implying with both of them that Suarez doesn't dive, if you want to be pedantic about it you can claim whatever you want.

If you cant' see how replying to my post in which I said NOTHING about exaggerating contact but talking about diving by FORCING contact, with your standard reply about how you've never claimed he doesn't exaggerate contact, comes across as suggesting it can only be a dive or him just exaggerating contact, well, I really don't know.


Of course you could explain what part of your post was relevant to mine and clear up any confusion.

Read my first post again and then point out where I made an assumption and tell me why you felt the need to, in response to me NOT talking about him exaggerating contact you felt the need to talk about him doing so?

The ONLY way your post about admitting many times he exaggerates contact makes sense, is if(according to you) the two options were complete dive of being fouled and making a meal of it.

This has been your default Suarez response for months.
 
So I didn't defend him, you made that up? That's a common problem with your posts DM. You invent something and then you write a wall of text based on what you invented.

I've never said Suarez doesn't play-act/dive or whatever you want to call it. I've regularly said that Suarez will back into defenders and go down looking for free-kicks, exaggerates any contact there is, rolls around and feigns injury. That's not a defense of him or an implication that he doesn't cheat. Other people have then chose to ignore all of that and pick out one aspect of what I've said about him (at the time) not going to ground under no contact.

The ONLY way your post about admitting many times he exaggerates contact makes sense, is if(according to you) the two options were complete dive of being fouled and making a meal of it.
Click to expand...

This is something I've brought up before. Different people tolerate different degrees of cheating/diving. There are people that believe that if there's any possibility that you can stay on your feet, if you don't then it's a dive, no matter how much you're being fouled. I disagree with that because if you don't go to ground, you don't get your free-kick. You then also have peoples views on the same thing by 2 different players; how often would Alan Shearer back into a defender to win a free-kick? Would he ever be called a cheat or was that just good forward play?
 
DM, how many times are you going to go off on one about how people can't understand your posts, before you realise that the only common denominator in all the times it occurs is in fact you, and your ridiculously verbose writing style?
 
Weebull said:
DM, how many times are you going to go off on one about how people can't understand your posts, before you realise that the only common denominator in all the times it occurs is in fact you, and your ridiculously verbose writing style?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I use english, problem is you assume that it's only MY posts which are misunderstood, its not hence you are in fact completely wrong.

Baz is currently being misunderstood by Tom in the Spanish thread, and, half the forum is being misunderstood by the other half of the forum in just about every single thread in these forums.

So am I the common denominator, no, I'm just the one who points it out the most.

This also ignores the main point, Baz ASSUMED something that simply was not there, I didn't write it, not that I wrote it with too many words or in a strange way. I wrote one thing and Baz ASSUMED something else entirely.

I mean, something 95% of this forum manages to completely misread is, me saying Song is crap and Eboue is leagues ahead of Song...... according to this forum means I think Eboue is the single best player in the world, even though I've had to repeatedly tell people I don't think Eboue is remotely close to the best player in the world. All I've said is he's better than other Arsenal players who have started, and half this forum have decided for me, but never from a single one of my posts, that I think Eboue is the bestest player ever.
 
Last edited:
Is the point where I should say something like "Jesus H Christ read my post again"?

Because I'm fairly sure that I never said you were the only person that it happens to. Just that it happens to you an awful lot, and I rarely see anyone coming in and saying "yeah, actually, I understood what DM said." Guess why.

Anyway, I've tried to point out that your long, windy posts don't lend themselves towards easy comprehension before, and they've fallen on deaf ears then, so I'll end on this.

drunkenmaster said:
Yeah, I use english
Click to expand...
Citation needed.
 
BaZ87 said:
So I didn't defend him, you made that up? That's a common problem with your posts DM. You invent something and then you write a wall of text based on what you invented.

I've never said Suarez doesn't play-act/dive or whatever you want to call it. I've regularly said that Suarez will back into defenders and go down looking for free-kicks, exaggerates any contact there is, rolls around and feigns injury. That's not a defense of him or an implication that he doesn't cheat. Other people have then chose to ignore all of that and pick out one aspect of what I've said about him (at the time) not going to ground under no contact.



This is something I've brought up before. Different people tolerate different degrees of cheating/diving. There are people that believe that if there's any possibility that you can stay on your feet, if you don't then it's a dive, no matter how much you're being fouled. I disagree with that because if you don't go to ground, you don't get your free-kick. You then also have peoples views on the same thing by 2 different players; how often would Alan Shearer back into a defender to win a free-kick? Would he ever be called a cheat or was that just good forward play?
Click to expand...

Yet again you've excluded an entire possibility, and THE ONLY THING I MENTIONED in the original post, this is my point. This has nothing to do with going down when you don't HAVE to when someone makes contact.

When for instance Kompany runs into Suarez its barely a tap and Suarez goes down, that is what you're talking about.

I am NOT TALKING About that and it was patently obvious. I'm talking about when Kompany does nothing, Suarez runs INTO Kompany on purpose and throws himself to the ground. This isn't exaggerating contact, its flat out cheating.

Every time you talk about Suarez you try to box it into he dived with no contact or you explain as you've now done again that sometimes he makes a meal of it and try to combine it with how the whole forum is debating if its really a foul or a dive. That has nothing to do with what I was saying.

Also look at your original post, it clearly said show me a video of him going down with no contact. For months now your argument is always diving with no contact and show me a video, or, we can't decide if going down when you can stay on your feet is diving. Neither of these are what I was talking about and again, because you've made this either one or the other argument MANY times before. Your post yesterday was again saying...... if he's not a cheater than show me the video........ not of him cheating or diving, but diving with no contact. The implication with all your other posts and that explicit statement of needing a video with no contact again really does add up to, no contact OR its arguable its even a dive, completely ignoring the option of, force contact, and complete dive, which is what Suarez does.
 
Last edited:
Weebull said:
DM, how many times are you going to go off on one about how people can't understand your posts, before you realise that the only common denominator in all the times it occurs is in fact you, and your ridiculously verbose writing style?
Click to expand...



You didn't claim it is only me that does it...... but my posts are the only common denominator..... again, both learn to read my posts...... and your own.

See I both didn't need to also exclaim hey , I understood that post, because I did understand it. You posted something completely incorrect, you specifically said I was the ONLY common denominator, maybe you need to look up what the word ONLY means in the dictionary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom