Who are you to decide who's talking out of their arses and who isn't?
Edit: You're welcome.
Female commentator on MOTD
- Thread starter pert
- Start date
Edit: You're welcome.
Shit. Am I being intellectually dishonest?
Well by golly-molly-gee, I best go hang myself from the top o' that barn there.
I reckon you LOVE the attention your posts get. It's the highlight of your day. Finally, the internet, the great equaliser, oh yes! You can safely broadcast your superior knowledge of debates and arguments to us lesser folk without fear of reprisals. No more getting beaten up by Big Hank over in the corner because you corrected him when he said "Bob and me" rather than "Bob and I". No more abuse, no more lonliness, no more old life! I've found a new calling. Yipee! Yahoo!
I can log on to RedCafe and show everyone how smart I REALLY am. I don't have to pretend anymore. People will love me for who I am, not for what I say. They'll accept me, love me unconditionally, I have friends at last. I'm liked!
Guess what, mate. You're not.
I'm the same as everyone else - most of us make judgements about whether someone seems to be 'talking' sense.
My judgement is partly based on whether people can be bothered to be accurate in their portrayals of situations and the arguments of their opponents - if they can't then it is much less likely their views are valid. When they come to conclusions that seem obviously wrong and can't produce any coherent reasons I'd reckon they have a highly-trained rectum.
'Bob & me' - wonderful!
... and the evidence that I really do any such thing is what exactly? I remember one or two debates with other posters following a grammatical question certainly - not exactly jumping in to correct them is it?
I don't need any respect or friendship from anyone over the net tbh - though I get on well with a few posters I quite like - the opinions of posters like yourself don't really count, Count.
I'm not sure whether you have already given your opinion of this womans commentary performancees but, to save me trawling through this thread again, can you tell me what you think?
I will then decide whether you are talking out of your arse.
Should I point out that 'Count' has five letters? or not?
It seems you have a greater need to correct people than you do discussing football on a football forum.
Would that be a fair observation?
If she said she was commentating in the nude, would everyone listen?
I didn't get to see/hear her latest one - thought she did ok in the one I did see/hear which involved the 'ball rolling almost apologetically' phrase. You'll notice that I referred to that previous debate and what was posted earlier in this thread.
I stand by the remark that these threads provide an opportunity for sexist 'humour' as well.
If it's a football topic of interest then I'll comment.
'Is Hargreaves a good player?' for example (I'd happily defended him many times in different threads before criticising Noods for misrepresenting some of the chief's arguments in favour of OH).
This topic - like most about female participation in football - is something of a composite because I reckon that most judgements about such participation are based more on prejudice than fact - so I'm going to be pointing that out. (I also haven't heard Oatley's recent performance so it would help if posters bothered to give their reasons like Marching.)
Edit:
The AIG logo was something worth discussing as well - I didn't like it being there but didn't think it was 'wrong' - and explained why - some people insisted if I didn't like it I must think it was wrong - so I pointed out again that they are not the same thing. Does that constitute 'correcting people' or 'continuing the debate'? I feel (and felt) the latter.
Well I doubt I will ever see you at Old Trafford.
While your taking shit on the match day thread, im usually at Old Trafford supporting the team.
Did OK? That it?
I wouldn't be so rude as to say you are talking out of your arse but, after spouting more words than most on this subject, I expected more from you.
Well I'm not going to say she's the best commentator on earth when I don't reckon she is am I? Admittedly the cafe-style would usually mean someone would have to say she was great in order to defend her - but I think we've established I don't post that way.
She was fine, she was okay - that means she wasn't 'shit', 'crap', 'bad' or 'something you'd be happy to screw but wouldn't want to talk to'.
F-ing Hell.
Can't you just answer the question rather than trouble yourself with what other caf people think.
Throughout this thread you have been at pains to get posters to give their reasons why they thought she was shit/crap/bad yet you give no reasons for your opposite opinion. How about giving us some reasons why you have come to the conclusion she was fine.
However, IMO, if you think the commentary clip in this thread shows her to be fine I am amazed.
i cant be bothered reading this thread but surely feeding seagulls isnt trying to defend the awful grating commentry provided by that woman
Women commentators = wrong.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Unfortunately, the match day thread is still available to be read after the final whistle.
Not quite.
To do that in detail would mean finding a download of the previous commentary to which I refer. However, my memory provides the following positives:
Doesn't rabbit on at 100 mph giving us more info than we need.
Uses apt language to describe events.
Doesn't get way over-excited when there's nothing happening.
Didn't make any factual errors (like saying a decision is given for a foul when it's offside).
Doesn't feel compelled to try and sound like everyone else or rehearse 'ad libs'.
OK, I give up. You've now started talking out of your arse.
And the Fulham commentary is in post #79