ALL Ronaldo's future/comments/speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reading that article reminded me again of something I wanted to bring up earlier.
This business of "The train only passes once"...what the feck is that all about. Trains have a habit of passing the same place every day...at least the trains I knew. So what sort of metaphor is that? Is this Scolari's mental state that he can come out with drivel like that.

Scolari at Euston trying to buy a ticket.......

Scolari: Am I in time for the 7:00pm to Earl's Court?
Ticket dude: Sorry, that train only passed here once. You'll never see it again. You have to walk on that one.
Scolari: Que?

Somebody needs to tell Ronnie that trains pass every single fkn day, even on Sundays
 
kietotheworld said:
I thought Ronaldo's cheeky look to his left during minute 34 of the game against West Ham was a clear sign of disrespect towards Sir Alex Ferguson. Saw this coming from then really.
Click to expand...

Number7 said:
To be fair he was even at it during the CL Final...this moment caught by Lineker and the bbc cameras

0,,6051774,00.jpg


This was aimed at the United fans. Absolute fecking disgrace :mad:
Click to expand...

kietotheworld said:
Minute 34 of the game against West Ham, the one when he arrogantly scored in the first couple of minutes. The fecking cnut.
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol:
 
The Hairdryer said:
Please don't tell me anyone on this board is stupid enough to fall for a clear propaganda piece like this. Crying Busby survivors FFS.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know, the idea that survivors of the tragedy might be emotional around the 50th anniversary of Munich, it's a ridiculous suggestion isn't it :rolleyes:

The Hairdryer said:
Bullshit. If this did happen the british media would not fecking flinch in reporting it. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

'Ronaldo was rude at memorial' is not the biggest headline ever. And given the mood of even the media at the time, I'm sure there was absolutely no appetite for publishing such a story. Plus there are many occasions where the media will hold back from reporting a story, for many different reasons. What we can surely except is that, true or not, Ronaldo will sue if he's aware of it. Obviously the authors paper believe the story enough to back him up and publish it, because it's crying out for libel. There are some pretty solid witnesses to confirm it one way or another

The Hairdryer said:
If you were a thick cnut like 99% of the popoulation then these two cleverly designed paragraphs will have made you, subconciously, or even conciously, come to a moral conclussion.

I'm not defending Ronaldo for his actions in wanting to go to Madrid but it should be illegal for journalists to just invent shit like that. Hitler would be proud of it.

Not doubt there's a bunch lemmings around the nation reading this now cursing Ronaldo for shitting on the munich survivors though.:wenger:
Click to expand...

Given you weren't present, how do you know 100% this story is nonsense? I hope its not true, I think Ronaldo lacks class and dignity, but something like this is going too far. If it is true, I say fair play to the journalist, who knew when publishing that people like you wouldn't believe it whether it was true or not. Is it so hard to believe a footballer can be an utter cnut? I don't think so, and I'm more likely to take the word of someone who was there than someone like you who simply doesn't know what went on
 
Brad said:
I know, the idea that survivors of the tragedy might be emotional around the 50th anniversary of Munich, it's a ridiculous suggestion isn't it :rolleyes:



'Ronaldo was rude at memorial' is not the biggest headline ever. And given the mood of even the media at the time, I'm sure there was absolutely no appetite for publishing such a story. Plus there are many occasions where the media will hold back from reporting a story, for many different reasons. What we can surely except is that, true or not, Ronaldo will sue if he's aware of it. Obviously the authors paper believe the story enough to back him up and publish it, because it's crying out for libel. There are some pretty solid witnesses to confirm it one way or another



Given you weren't present, how do you know 100% this story is nonsense? I hope its not true, I think Ronaldo lacks class and dignity, but something like this is going too far. If it is true, I say fair play to the journalist, who knew when publishing that people like you wouldn't believe it whether it was true or not. Is it so hard to believe a footballer can be an utter cnut? I don't think so, and I'm more likely to take the word of someone who was there than someone like you who simply doesn't know what went on
Click to expand...

To be fair though, Brad, you've been eager throughout this whole saga to paint Ronaldo as the most despicable human being on the planet.

If there were a newspaper article claiming he bathed in the blood of virgins you'd probably be inclined to believe it.
 
Count Duckula said:
To be fair though, Brad, you've been eager throughout this whole saga to paint Ronaldo as the most despicable human being on the planet.

If there were a newspaper article claiming he bathed in the blood of virgins you'd probably be inclined to believe it.
Click to expand...

Not the most despicable human being on the planet, but one who lacks any semblance of class or dignity

Fair point though, given my opinion of the man, I am inclined to believe reports if they don't portray him in a positive light. Then again I wouldn't instantly dismiss a report that portrays him in a good light, I'd try to take an objective view of things. I try to assess the validity of the source, so obviously anything from Marca is evidently likely to be utter bullshine, an article in the Guardian is likely to have more substance, and an article as potentially libelous as this must have something going for it, unless the author and paper in question are exteremly stupid. It wasn't a backpage headline, the story wasn't used sensationally to shift papers. I just don't see what Hairdryer does to completely dismiss it 100% out of hand
 
Brad said:
I know, the idea that survivors of the tragedy might be emotional around the 50th anniversary of Munich, it's a ridiculous suggestion isn't it :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Huh? I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't be emotional only the author of the article was using their emotions as propaganda and to paint Ronaldo as a super villian.


'Ronaldo was rude at memorial' is not the biggest headline ever. And given the mood of even the media at the time, I'm sure there was absolutely no appetite for publishing such a story. Plus there are many occasions where the media will hold back from reporting a story, for many different reasons. What we can surely except is that, true or not, Ronaldo will sue if he's aware of it. Obviously the authors paper believe the story enough to back him up and publish it, because it's crying out for libel. There are some pretty solid witnesses to confirm it one way or another
Click to expand...

Sorry I don't believe this for a second. The media in the country have shown time and time again that they have no scruples and if they think it would have sold papers, which it would have, then they would have reported it.


Given you weren't present, how do you know 100% this story is nonsense? I hope its not true, I think Ronaldo lacks class and dignity, but something like this is going too far. If it is true, I say fair play to the journalist, who knew when publishing that people like you wouldn't believe it whether it was true or not. Is it so hard to believe a footballer can be an utter cnut? I don't think so, and I'm more likely to take the word of someone who was there than someone like you who simply doesn't know what went on
Click to expand...

It's clear that you believe this piece cause it fits in nicely with your already formed opinion of Ronaldo.

Those who are able to engage in a bit of critical thinking can see the article for what it is - bullshit.
Click to expand...
 
The Hairdryer said:
Huh? I'm not suggesting that they shouldn't be emotional only the author of the article was using their emotions as propaganda and to paint Ronaldo as a super villian.

Sorry I don't believe this for a second. The media in the country have shown time and time again that they have no scruples and if they think it would have sold papers, which it would have, then they would have reported it.

It's clear that you believe this piece cause it fits in nicely with your already formed opinion of Ronaldo.

Those who are able to engage in a bit of critical thinking can see the article for what it is - bullshit.
Click to expand...

And what critical thinking have you engaged in eh? Have you tracked down sources at the occasion to hear their alternative viewpoints? Have you done some research into this journalists background for making valid news reports? Or are you just choosing to believe that your hero couldn't possibly do such a thing, without having any knowledge whatsoever of what went on?

I'm inclined to believe the piece because of several factors I identified in my reply to Count. But yes, it does fit in with my opinion of Ronaldo. Which is based on the things I've seen and heard him do, rather than simply wanting to hate him
 
It seems unlikely in the extreme that this story didn't come out at the time if it is true in any real sense.
 
Thing is, Ronaldo's brought this upon himself now.

It's one thing to burn bridges, but it's pretty fecking stupid to burn bridges before you've even crossed over them.

There's no one left to balance the scale, so it's a free for all.
 
Brad said:
And what critical thinking have you engaged in eh?
Click to expand...

I've shown critical thinking in my posts following that article brad, pointing out how it's nothing more than a propaganda peice. Unlike lemmings like yourself who fell for it hook line and sinker.

Have you tracked down sources at the occasion to hear their alternative viewpoints? Have you done some research into this journalists background for making valid news reports?
Click to expand...

:lol: You really expect to try and get in touch with those munich survivors, other journalists and Ronaldo and Rooney to get their version of events?
Is everyone else on this site expected to go to such lengths before forming an opinion here,or just me?

The thing is you don't have to do any investigating to see it's a load of rubbish.



Or are you just choosing to believe that your hero couldn't possibly do such a thing, without having any knowledge whatsoever of what went on?
Click to expand...

Who said he's my hero:confused: My last post before that one criticising that article in this thread pretty much lambasted Ronaldo for wanting to leave. I even said he'd be a Judas if he left.

I'm inclined to believe the piece because of several factors I identified in my reply to Count. But yes, it does fit in with my opinion of Ronaldo. Which is based on the things I've seen and heard him do, rather than simply wanting to hate him
Click to expand...

I'm not inclined to believe an article just because it fits in with my belief system. You'd do well to do the same Brad.
 
Makes no difference if the article is true or not. It's out there. And there'll be lots more of them. There's a war going on and last I heard "all is fair"
 
The Hairdryer said:
I've shown critical thinking in my posts following that article brad, pointing out how it's nothing more than a propaganda peice. Unlike lemmings like yourself who fell for it hook line and sinker.

:lol: You really expect to try and get in touch with those munich survivors, other journalists and Ronaldo and Rooney to get their version of events?
Is everyone else on this site expected to go to such lengths before forming an opinion here,or just me?

The thing is you don't have to do any investigating to see it's a load of rubbish.

Who said he's my hero:confused: My last post before that one criticising that article in this thread pretty much lambasted Ronaldo for wanting to leave. I even said he'd be a Judas if he left.

I'm not inclined to believe an article just because it fits in with my belief system. You'd do well to do the same Brad.
Click to expand...

Here's a thought then mate. What if it's actually true? yes its being used at a time and in a way to portray Ronaldo in a certain light. But despite your 'critical thinking', which frankly wasn't particularly critical at all and did little to establish whether the article was true or not, I still see no reason to dismiss it 100% out of hand. I'm sure the courts will decide this issue for us anyway, because I genuinely cannot see Ronaldo not suing, whatever the validity of the story

And everybody judges everything according to their belief system Hairdryer, don't be such a Charly to think that you're beyond everyone else on that score
 
WeWonItTwoTimes said:
Hairdryer, you still haven't answered my question.

Presumably you're expecting Ronaldo to sue the guardian for defamation seeing as you think the story isn't true?

If he doesn't sue, would you still think it wasn't true?
Click to expand...

He might. Players sue newspapers all the time. This fact and the fact that the papers have insurance for it tells you something doesn't it?
 
Brad said:
Here's a thought then mate. What if it's actually true? yes its being used at a time and in a way to portray Ronaldo in a certain light. But despite your 'critical thinking', which frankly wasn't particularly critical at all and did little to establish whether the article was true or not, I still see no reason to dismiss it 100% out of hand. I'm sure the courts will decide this issue for us anyway, because I genuinely cannot see Ronaldo not suing, whatever the validity of the story

And everybody judges everything according to their belief system Hairdryer, don't be such a Charly to think that you're beyond everyone else on that score
Click to expand...


I guess I was brought up in a different era than you. When I was at school the whole Nazi thing was still in the back of everyones mind. In fact a few of my teachers faught in WWII. We were taught to decifer propaganda by engaging in crtical thinking. When I read that article the whole thing stunk of it. The same tactics Hitler used to convince the german public that invading neighbouring soveriegn nations was a good idea.

Yes, the already had some preconcieved notions, but Hitler played on them. Told them what they wanted to hear, painted a Villian, painted a Victim. The rest is history.

I hate to bring up Hitler and WWII in a football debate, but in this case it's highly relevant
 
WeWonItTwoTimes said:
There is no ''might'' about it, if it isn't true he'll sue the Guardian.

The insurance is there to protect themselves against making honest mistakes.
Click to expand...

:lol: Honest mistakes. Good one.

He might not sue if he's leaving as everyone already hates him. Not going to change anything sueing one newspaper for one article is it?
 
WeWonItTwoTimes said:
There is no ''might'' about it, if it isn't true he'll sue the Guardian.

The insurance is there to protect themselves against making honest mistakes.
Click to expand...

If it is true, he still might sue!

And of course insurance is necessary in the media print publishing industry, it doesn't mean its a sign that they think they can print any old garbage and rely on it. I'm sure their premiums take a mighty hit when they are found guilty of reporting mis-truths, never mind the time and energy they have to spend fighting their corner
 
BahamaRed said:
MANCHESTER United could be a step closer to signing Dimitar Berbatov with Tottenham closing in on Spain striker David Villa.
Click to expand...

And how many times have the papers, who do not make up anything at all or edit anything at all to make it sound even worse than it is involving Ronaldo or ever ever lie peddled this story?

He's a rubbish-ish sulker. We'd be going hugely backwards.

Sultan said:
You're lucky I'm on duty.

I'm sure someone else would have reacted very differently.
Click to expand...

Is true. I'd have shagged his granny for it.

Sultan said:
I reckon majority are now coming round to believe Ronaldo is a c**t.

Better late, and all that...
Click to expand...

Your mum and I are so proud.

Number7 said:
To be fair he was even at it during the CL Final...this moment caught by Lineker and the bbc cameras

0,,6051774,00.jpg


This was aimed at the United fans. Absolute fecking disgrace :mad:
Click to expand...

The dirty greasy winker.

Wibble said:
It seems unlikely in the extreme that this story didn't come out at the time if it is true in any real sense.
Click to expand...

Shhhh!

Only little girls don't agree with Sultan and Brad that in spite of Ronaldo acting like an utter git, some of this is crap and there is likely more to this than meets the eye.

I've been reliably told this again and again by Sultan in this thread.
 
You really love highlighting your own posts by using a big font, don''t you Jason? Do you think your opinions are so incredible that no one should miss them?
 
WeWonItTwoTimes said:
There is no ''might'' about it, if it isn't true he'll sue the Guardian.

The insurance is there to protect themselves against making honest mistakes.
Click to expand...

He's already won damages for an imaginary story about him being unprofessional in training. This story has a big complication though.

The problem with this was that it was published not in their print paper but on their internet blog section.

There are some real questions there. Where is the server located? Is the blog directly under the control of a centralised editor or is it self-uploading? Does the writer carry defamation insurance (he won't if he's a private contractor). Is he an employee or a private contractor?

Internet webblog defamation law is a total bitch and a wildly new area for the UK especially - it is a lot different than suing over a paper - presuming Ronaldo's people ever even get wind of it in the waves and waves of "burn the witch" coverage that I doubt he's going to be scouring just to see his face.

On second thought, he might be looking at the pictures... :nervous:
 
The Hairdryer said:
I guess I was brought up in a different era than you. When I was at school the whole Nazi thing was still in the back of everyones mind. In fact a few of my teachers faught in WWII. We were taught to decifer propaganda. When I read that article the whole thing stunk of it. The same tactics Hitler used to convince the german public that invading neighbouring soveriegn nations was a good idea.

Yes, the already had some preconcieved notions, but Hitler played on them. Told them what they wanted to hear, painted a Villian, painted a Victim. The rest is history.

I hate to bring up Hitler and WWII in a football debate, but in this case it's highly relevant
Click to expand...

I'll bring your guessing game to an end. You most certainly were born in a different era!

As far as I'm aware, the Guardian isn't trying to have us believe Ronaldo believes in the master race, and it hails from Madrid... evidently the writer doesn't like Ronaldo as a person. Quite possibly because of what he's witnessed of the lad himself. Yes, this piece is coming out now for a reason, to meet a particular agenda, so that much is propaganda. But it doesn't mean the content at the heart of the story isn't true. It's not as if there aren't young folk who don't particularly respect old folk and their experiences around these days...

Still, I hope for the lads sake, this story isn't true or embellished out of all proportion. I'm afraid without being there, without somebody you trust giving you a different account, or without the story having been proved to be fraudulent, you simply don't know whether its true or not
 
jasonrh said:
Shhhh!

Only little girls don't agree with Sultan and Brad that in spite of Ronaldo acting like an utter git, some of this is crap and there is likely more to this than meets the eye.

I've been reliably told this again and again by Sultan in this thread.
Click to expand...

I see you've moved back to gimmicks to try and make your point

I eagerly anticipate a picture of a cute innocent cat purring lovingly at Cristiano as he helps a little old lady (no doubt wearing Madrid merchandise) cross the road...
 
Brad said:
I'll bring your guessing game to an end. You most certainly were born in a different era!

As far as I'm aware, the Guardian isn't trying to have us believe Ronaldo believes in the master race, and it hails from Madrid... evidently the writer doesn't like Ronaldo as a person. Quite possibly because of what he's witnessed of the lad himself. Yes, this piece is coming out now for a reason, to meet a particular agenda, so that much is propaganda. But it doesn't mean the content at the heart of the story isn't true. It's not as if there aren't young folk who don't particularly respect old folk and their experiences around these days...

Still, I hope for the lads sake, this story isn't true or embellished out of all proportion. I'm afraid without being there, without somebody you trust giving you a different account, or without the story having been proved to be fraudulent, you simply don't know whether its true or not
Click to expand...


The way it was written, the fact that it wasn't reported at the time suggests to me it's either:

A. Made up.

B. Told in way that it barely resembled what actually happened.
 
The Hairdryer said:
:lol: Honest mistakes. Good one.

He might not sue if he's leaving as everyone already hates him. Not going to change anything sueing one newspaper for one article is it?
Click to expand...

Well seeing as I've worked for a newspaper I do happen to think I have a fair idea of what goes on. Of course honest mistakes happen, I've made one myself and the paper had to write an apology in the next available edition.

Of course he would sue the paper, its not just United fans who would think less of him over the incident is it?
 
Jason, there is no need for the huge font.

This always remind me a story told about a politician which used to give good speeches. He would write his speeches up and would read from his notes if he forgot some part. After one speech he forgot his notes and someone got hold of them. They were mostly just a copy of his speech, but there was one interesting bit. At one point he wrote a comment, 'this is a week argument, better shout'.
 
The Hairdryer said:
The way it was written, the fact that it wasn't reported at the time suggests to me it's either:

A. Made up.

B. Told in way that it barely resembled what actually happened.
Click to expand...

I dismiss the 'reported at the time' aspect entirely. It's very common for stories to be known to the media and not printed, or not printed until a later date, for all manner of reasons

Do you seriously suggest at that time, a paper would have had the appetite to print such a story? Because I don't

I can see how you could charge the article as writing in a way that barely resembled what happened. But I come back to the point you simply don't know... although, clearly you're prepared to believe something of the type actually happened if you think its merely sensationalist reporting, in which case why couldn't it have happened in a manner the journalist describes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.