santeria13
Sublemon
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2014
- Messages
- 2,384
Eh? He can't have been good and had a disappointing performance. Christ, only people with agendas can get tied up in such knots.
He was wrong in explaining it in such a contradictory way but I agree with his point. All he really said was that the performance that Rooney put on today was typical of Welbeck a couple of years ago where his all round play was impressive but when it came to putting the ball in the net, he wasted his chances. That's what Rooney did today and what that poster meant by 'disappointing', just as most would have labelled it a disappointing performance were it Welbeck who had missed the same chances while playing decently the rest of the game.
Then I went on to explain that Rooney usually does the opposite in that his all round play is quite poor yet he manages to get a goal or two despite how bad he plays for the rest of the game. This is the reason most people, I included, are not fond of him. The real question is: Is his tendency to play bad for long periods in many games justified by his productivity? I believe not but I am not going to criticise another poster for having a different opinion by calling him a 'Fanboy'. Rather I will argue my reasons for believing this to be the case.
In what way do I have an agenda? I'm simply writing what I see. I dislike Rooney as a player in the same way I dislike Cleverley, Young and Valencia as players. Why does debating that point with certain people on a forum amount to me having an 'agenda'. I could just as easily call anyone defending him, such as yourself, a 'Fanboy' , but you are not and I likewise, do not have an agenda. We just have a difference in opinion and neither one is correct nor incorrect.
You are the one getting tied up in a 'knot'. It's quite obvious what that poster meant to say yet you seem to be stuck on his poor choice of words rather than referring to the actual point he or I made.
Last edited: