The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 I was going to give that a like Irm14 but I don't like the Blackman comment..........so I won't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 28 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said: I was going to give that a like Irm14 but I don't like the Blackman comment..........so I won't What don't you like about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Andicis said: Again, pure slander with nothing to back this up. You can't just lie to fit your narrative. Martin might be a good character in the changing room. None of us know, since we're not employees of Derby County, unless you're secretly Richard Keogh. We get it, you don't like Martin, however at least do him the courtesy of making valid points against him. Agree Andicis but note that it would be libel (written) as opposed to slander (spoken) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 38 minutes ago, lrm14 said: What don't you like about it? "Enduring Nick Blackman". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 33 minutes ago, Strange yearnings said: Agree Andicis but note that it would be libel (written) as opposed to slander (spoken) Ahhh, thanks for the correction. Knew they had similarities, didn't know the distinct difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 4 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said: "Enduring Nick Blackman". Well it's not about his character but about his performances, which I think we can all agree haven't been the best. Believe me when I tell you I wanted him to prove me wrong and start banging in goals, hell he could have sprinted over to where I was sat and screamed "Look how wrong this idiot was" and I wouldn't have minded but sadly that wasn't the case. Anyway I was using him more to reinforce the point that form comes and goes which he is a example for, having been on both extremes of the spectrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 I'm interested to know how we're a better side without Chris Martin... Are we playing Premier League football these days? Because with CM we were for three years knocking on the door of promotion. Now that we're better off without him, I can only assume I've been in a coma for the past 12 months and missed out on the promotion party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 What next? We're a better team without Hughes, Hendrick and Thorne? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Sheriff Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 41 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: I'm interested to know how we're a better side without Chris Martin... Are we playing Premier League football these days? Because with CM we were for three years knocking on the door of promotion. Now that we're better off without him, I can only assume I've been in a coma for the past 12 months and missed out on the promotion party. Just watch saturdays game and then Tuesdays. there you go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninos Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 48 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said: I'm interested to know how we're a better side without Chris Martin... Are we playing Premier League football these days? Because with CM we were for three years knocking on the door of promotion. Now that we're better off without him, I can only assume I've been in a coma for the past 12 months and missed out on the promotion party. So let's see, your "profound" answer to us being better without Martin ... is to say "are we in the premier league" but then tell us that for three years with him we've failed to get there. Some serious weak logic there, dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich84 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, Simsy said: Just watch saturdays game and then Tuesdays. there you go! And of course that was all Martins fault.... They were all s**** on Saturday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninos Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 56 minutes ago, Andicis said: Ahhh, thanks for the correction. Knew they had similarities, didn't know the distinct difference. Perhaps you shouldn't rush to accuse people of breaking the law when you are ignorant of what the law is? Especially when they were just making an interesting, but totally innocuous point about a football player on a forum. Just a thought buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 1 minute ago, Ninos said: Perhaps you shouldn't rush to accuse people of breaking the law when you are ignorant of what the law is? Especially when they were just making an interesting, but totally innocuous point about a football player on a forum. Just a thought buddy. It's still libel. So that isn't even the issue. And besides the point, why even use that in the ''innocuous point'', with no evidence to back it up? Surely questioning someones professionalism isn't actually innocuous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 20 minutes ago, Simsy said: Just watch saturdays game and then Tuesdays. there you go! And I thought we were a bit better because the midfield played twenty yards further forward and without Butterfield slowing us down and the fact that wolves may well be the best team in the league this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 1 hour ago, Bris Vegas said: What next? We're a better team without Hughes, Hendrick and Thorne? No, we need to be rid of Keogh for us to magically transform into a good team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lrm14 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 10 minutes ago, Andicis said: It's still libel. So that isn't even the issue. And besides the point, why even use that in the ''innocuous point'', with no evidence to back it up? Surely questioning someones professionalism isn't actually innocuous? Because when people arbitrarily don't like players (like some posters on this forum) and have no evidence to back up why they don't like said player, it's easier to create false narratives to make themselves look better. 'I don't like Martin because of reasons I can't explain' makes them look like fools, 'I don't like Martin because of his terrible professionalism' makes you sound smarter. Well smarter until someone calls you out on it that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andicis Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 26 minutes ago, lrm14 said: Because when people arbitrarily don't like players (like some posters on this forum) and have no evidence to back up why they don't like said player, it's easier to create false narratives to make themselves look better. 'I don't like Martin because of reasons I can't explain' makes them look like fools, 'I don't like Martin because of his terrible professionalism' makes you sound smarter. Well smarter until someone calls you out on it that is. You're bang on here. This is the point I've been trying to make for some time, I will never object to someone saying ''In my opinion, I would prefer if we played without Martin because I don't think he has a high enough work rate'', it's a perfectly valid reason to not want to start him. However, when they delve deeper and claim to know things about the players professionalism, behind the scenes attitude to cite for them not liking the player then I naturally start to question it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Sheriff Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 3 hours ago, Sparkle said: And I thought we were a bit better because the midfield played twenty yards further forward and without Butterfield slowing us down and the fact that wolves may well be the best team in the league this season. Yup but we were also better WITHOUT Martin for 80mins. Just read on sky app Chris Martin has 1 goal in his last 17 championship appearances. 0 in 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoyMac5 Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 11 minutes ago, Simsy said: Yup but we were also better WITHOUT Martin for 80mins. Just read on sky app Chris Martin has 1 goal in his last 17 championship appearances. 0 in 11. Sounds like the stats for Vydra when we signed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted August 18, 2017 Share Posted August 18, 2017 13 minutes ago, Simsy said: Yup but we were also better WITHOUT Martin for 80mins. Just read on sky app Chris Martin has 1 goal in his last 17 championship appearances. 0 in 11. We were better without Martin isn't the same as we were better because we were without Martin. Which is what you're implying. Purposely ignoring the horrific hoofball played on Saturday in comparison to the occasional drive from midfield on Tuesday, the opponent. No game of football was ever won or lost by one person. Ever. Never ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.