To be fair, even in a pub, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to challenge someone to say ‘give me examples of some bad games’. No conversation can ever reach any form of agreement if they were not required to be referenced to something as close to factual as possible. Even if that was as simple as asking someone who says ‘Pogba hasn’t had a good game all season’, for example, to simply commit to saying ‘I thought he was poor against Spurs’. At least we can then begin a debate from a position then. Because if they couldn’t commit to that, then their claim was exaggerated at best, and if I can do that with another 10 games that they also say ‘okay, he played well there’ then we may start to arrive at a point where they consider that perhaps they are not giving a fair account. Not because I am a know it all, but because they now assessed their own position and realised that they don’t actually think that at all. They may think ‘jeez, maybe I just don’t like the guy and I’ve been unfairly judging his performances because of it’. Maybe. That’s how people change opinions.
Without a requirement to do anything of the above, there really isn’t any point, and it is limited to ‘I don’t like Pogba and you do’. I always thought that this forum prided itself on being able to do a bit better than that. Even if it means we ultimately end in disagreement, it would be a higher level of conversation to mere pub talk if both sides were able to at least qualify how they arrived at their positions.
To be fair, we have some great posters on here, who not everything is always accepted, but they can construct an argument and defend it with reason. Ultimately, I think it is because a forum will contain a spectrum from the Jamie Carragher level analysts to the Dog and Duck level, and at times, two people from opposing ends may be trying to argue a singular point, which will naturally lead to frustration. And I respect that. For me personally, I like to talk football in depth, but am learning that not everyone wants to debate on that sort of level. So you will get a 4 paragraph analysis from me sometimes met with something not far from ‘Pogba is shit because he just is and I don’t like his hair’. In such cases, the responsibility would be on me to just not engage.
But that doesn’t necessarily make me right. I’ve had some great debates on here with people who think differently and we’re really challenging each other to qualify our positions. There’s nothing wrong with that either. In football we have all levels from DT and Troopz level to Daniel Taylor and Rory Smith. You get in where you fit in. I have my own style of preference and others will have theirs.
You will just never be able to get away with saying to me ‘Pogba only had 5 good games in x season’ without me asking you to name some bad ones. Not because I’m right and you’re wrong, but I have a different view and would like to see how you got to yours. I’d maybe be able to present 10 games and ask ‘do you honestly think PP was bad in these games?’. If the person then says ‘look, I’m not bothering with that’, that’s fair, but for the sake of debate, it would never change my mind, if that was ever the goal. They may say, ‘okay, I’m exaggerating, he’s had a few bad games’. Which they may then see is a very different reality from the version they have told themselves, which should then lead to the ‘why?’. Why would any fan exaggerate poor performances of their own player? Maybe after self-examining it, they will conclude that it is perhaps personal.