Thracian Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Seems I'm getting a bit of a pillorying from certain elements on that stuttering alternative City forum complaining about the raised voice(s) of "fickle fans". The torrent, or should I say the Rivers of Babylon (and friends), are pouring their cold water on my complaints. They are clearly upset because I campaign against: a) Goalless bore draws (and defeats) like Preston, Wolves, Burnley, QPR and others. b) Disjointed, uninspiring football. c) Over cautious tactics. d) Not playing our strongest team e) Playing people out of position for no good reason. f) Not signing a specialist goalscorer g) Not having sufficient faith in our better Academy players h) Persisting with people who don't do their jobs effectively. The abuse suggests that I shouldn't be concerned about the long term future of our game and our club. * It pains me greatly when Leicester City is included on television football programmes as a momentary afterthought because, basically, they had nothing by way of highlights to show. * It pains me that we play a game and don't have a shot in the first half an hour (while our best player sits on a bench) * It pains we when radio commentators reluctantly admit at half-time "nothing's happened". * It pains me to see once rampant City having a first team squad that includes one genuiine striker (who is struggling for fitness) * It pains me that English football generally is being invaded by foreign players who are no better than the young players in our own Academies who consequently cannot get a game (because our game will suffer in the end). * It pains me that managers refuse to accept their responsibility for playing entertaining exciting football. * It pains me that the effect of the above is to drive fans away and so threaten the support of sponsors and television companies who rely on the game being a specacle, because their money is the lifeline to the game's survival. "Hazzman" is typical of the pillory-people when he accepts the 0-0 draw as okay at Preston "so long as we win our home games". Fact is though we lose loads of our home games. Do the rivers of Babylon attempt to wash our game clean of these ills? No. They convey the air of acceptance, that fans should be supportive whatever and if they are not reacting according to their definition of support they are mocked as being fickle. The alternative forum is aptly named cos so far I've clocked up forty-eight years of fickleness! It'll be nice to qualify as a real fan. Just a few more years and a more accepting attitude should do it.
Dunc Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 But you also have to realise that a number of the points on your manifesto are your opinion not fact. Based on that, not everyone is going to agree with you and because you are relatively aggressive with your arguments you are going to get people's backs up. I personally don't agree with much of what you say Mr Walker, but you are entitled to your OPINIONS, however, don't complain when people don't agree that a 18 yr old left back whose played 3 games and not been overly impressive is the answer to our lack of goals.
Thracian Posted 31 October 2005 Author Posted 31 October 2005 But you also have to realise that a number of the points on your manifesto are your opinion not fact. Based on that, not everyone is going to agree with you and because you are relatively aggressive with your arguments you are going to get people's backs up. I personally don't agree with much of what you say Mr Walker, but you are entitled to your OPINIONS, however, don't complain when people don't agree that a 18 yr old left back whose played 3 games and not been overly impressive is the answer to our lack of goals. Don't think I quite said that except by suggesting that attacking football starts from the back. What I do think in relation to Sheehan (as an attacker) is that his value as a dead ball specialist is badly needed - because virtually all our free kicks have been wasted this season. Quite what you and others have against him in comparison to others that have filled that position so far, I don't know. Smith is 18 too - is that a problem?
Dunc Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 I don't have a problem if he was picked, by the same token I don't believe Johansson has done anything wrong at the moment either, he is a better defender than Sheehan and CL has already stated that he's realised we need more aerial ability at the back. Since he's played LB we've looked solid so IMO the defence is not the issue, its the underperforming Hughes, Hammond, Williams, Kisnorbo & Sylla that are the problem at the moment. I would probably start Smith tomorrow either in place of Hamill or Sylla.
Babylon Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Oh look... another thread repeating exactly the same points raised in every other thread going at the minute. If you had been on here yesterday someone created a whole thread about you and your posts so it isn't just on talking balls. For some reason the moderators decided to delete it.
Babylon Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Oh and seeing as you seem to be pointing fingers at me i'd like to point out I started neither thread. I only posted one post on talking balls saying I had spoken up against your points and a few others seemed to be doing so.
Thracian Posted 31 October 2005 Author Posted 31 October 2005 I don't have a problem if he was picked, by the same token I don't believe Johansson has done anything wrong at the moment either, he is a better defender than Sheehan and CL has already stated that he's realised we need more aerial ability at the back. Since he's played LB we've looked solid so IMO the defence is not the issue, its the underperforming Hughes, Hammond, Williams, Kisnorbo & Sylla that are the problem at the moment. I would probably start Smith tomorrow either in place of Hamill or Sylla. We'll agree to differ over Nils defensive qualities cos I have no problem with Levein's defence (it was just as mean when Sheehan played in it) but this team needs as many attacking pluses as possible (hence my reference to the free kicks). Glad to hear you favour Smith though. That will be a step forward.
Thracian Posted 31 October 2005 Author Posted 31 October 2005 Oh and seeing as you seem to be pointing fingers at me i'd like to point out I started neither thread. I only posted one post on talking balls saying I had spoken up against your points and a few others seemed to be doing so. Well I certainly didn't start it. Did you enjoy what happened at Preston?
Babylon Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Well I certainly didn't start it. Did you enjoy what happened at Preston? I agree with quite a lot of your points just not your consistent posting on every thread, repeating over and over and over the same things. We all know your views now!! I'm not even getting into a debate on things as i'm just repeating what i've written on numerous other threads.
Thracian Posted 31 October 2005 Author Posted 31 October 2005 I agree with quite a lot of your points just not your consistent posting on every thread, repeating over and over and over the same things. We all know your views now!! I'm not even getting into a debate on things as i'm just repeating what i've written on numerous other threads. You are right of course. My fight for attack against safety-first-soccer HAS become over zealous. I shall sit back now and let you non-fickle fans do what you think best. I just hope that the Sheehan's, the Smiths and the Chambers actually want to play for the club by the time they get the chances they deserve. For my part, I shall just follow your debates with interest and in the hope that City finally recapture the values that once made them such a wonderful team to watch - and at the very highest level.
Dunc Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 For my part, I shall just follow your debates with interest and in the hope that City finally recapture the values that once made them such a wonderful team to watch - and at the very highest level. That must have been in the 60's/70's mate cause they've never done it when I've watched. Even under MON we were direct and competitive (the Grinders I believe). Why you are suddenly so vociferous about attacking flair when you've watched turgid football for the best part of 30 years is beyond me, your campaign should have begun long ago.
Ric Flair Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 That must have been in the 60's/70's mate cause they've never done it when I've watched. Even under MON we were direct and competitive (the Grinders I believe). Why you are suddenly so vociferous about attacking flair when you've watched turgid football for the best part of 30 years is beyond me, your campaign should have begun long ago. It's not that often that I agree with you sunshine, but your right there. I can't remember seeing an attacking Leicester side other than a few games under McGhee, even under O'Neill we were classed as battlers.
Frenzied Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 And funnily enough, we've played some of the best, most attractive football that I've seen over the past 25 years, under Levein.
lush Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 The torrent, or should I say the Rivers of Babylon (and friends), are pouring their cold water on my complaints. Do the rivers of Babylon attempt to wash our game clean of these ills? The alternative forum is aptly named cos so far I've clocked up forty-eight years of fickleness! It'll be nice to qualify as a real fan. Just a few more years and a more accepting attitude should do it. How could this website cope without quotes like these. Passion to express oneself is fast becoming "against the rules". DavieG made the point recently, "I see little opportunity for change as it's fast becoming part of the culture of this country to control people. Hence their delight at the rise and rise of synchronised clapping, why else do they continue to, not only play music at every opportunity but also cringingly awful stuff as well and it is laughably considered to be atmosphere". If you want robotic style debate, then not appreciating what people like Thrachian has to say, is what you`ll end up with. Just yesterday, i noticed atleast 2 people who had had enough of the stale OS messageboard, and favoured the transfer to premier league debate (here). Good, sensible, inteligent and entertaining debate will die if we dont enlighten eachother with what we have to say. Thracian has good, sensible, inteligent and entertaining debate worth listening to. Regards lush (Chairman of the Thracian fan club)
Babylon Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Thracian has good, sensible, inteligent and entertaining debate worth listening to. Regards lush (Chairman of the Thracian fan club) Yes he is, he is allowed to say exactly what he wants! No one is denying him his right to put a point across. What people are fed up with is him turning every single thread into a repeat of others by trying to ram home his opinion over and over again. We already know how he feels and don't need to be told 20 times a day how he thinks a young left back if the answer to all our problems
BartonFox Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Seems I'm getting a bit of a pillorying from certain elements on that stuttering alternative City forum complaining about the raised voice(s) of "fickle fans". The torrent, or should I say the Rivers of Babylon (and friends), are pouring their cold water on my complaints. They are clearly upset because I campaign against: a) Goalless bore draws (and defeats) like Preston, Wolves, Burnley, QPR and others. b) Disjointed, uninspiring football. What is inspiring football? Chelsea or Real Madrid??? c) Over cautious tactics. Not wanting to lose, how terribly wrong of him. d) Not playing our strongest team And what is that exactly? e) Playing people out of position for no good reason. Other than Dublin who is out of position? f) Not signing a specialist goalscorer If I am not mistaken de Vries has scored goal where ever he has been, Hammond scored abroad and Hume has bagged a fair few for Tranmere. Who should we have signed? g) Not having sufficient faith in our better Academy players Both Stearman and Sheehan have been given their chances and only Stearman has warranted being kept in, it's the harsh fact of first team football. Weslowski would be in if it wasn't for a broken leg. As for Chambers the lad is still a kid and not ready for the first team yet. h) Persisting with people who don't do their jobs effectively. Who gauges their effectiveness? The abuse suggests that I shouldn't be concerned about the long term future of our game and our club. * It pains me greatly when Leicester City is included on television football programmes as a momentary afterthought because, basically, they had nothing by way of highlights to show. If that is a serious concern then I suggest you might need to redress your priorities, who actually cares? * It pains me that we play a game and don't have a shot in the first half an hour (while our best player sits on a bench) Because the opposition should just roll over and let us have our own way? * It pains we when radio commentators reluctantly admit at half-time "nothing's happened". It takes 2 team,s to play a game. Again if this is a top priority just now. * It pains me to see once rampant City having a first team squad that includes one genuiine striker (who is struggling for fitness) Hmmmm, Hammond has played his whole career as a forward and Dublin starte dlife there too. * It pains me that English football generally is being invaded by foreign players who are no better than the young players in our own Academies who consequently cannot get a game (because our game will suffer in the end). I fully concur, but at least CL is giving a chance to our top 3 or 4 and he has stated time and time again he is trying to sort us out from under 8's upward. * It pains me that managers refuse to accept their responsibility for playing entertaining exciting football. It is a results based business, if they lost 4-3 every week they'd be sacked every couple of months. * It pains me that the effect of the above is to drive fans away and so threaten the support of sponsors and television companies who rely on the game being a specacle, because their money is the lifeline to the game's survival. I think you'll find people are being 'driven' from the game because of the cost and you get primadonna's like Steven Gerrad and Rio Ferdinand complaining 100 grand a week isn't enough. Couple that to the fact there are a greater number of leisure choices these days it isn't a given you'll retain your fanbase "Hazzman" is typical of the pillory-people when he accepts the 0-0 draw as okay at Preston "so long as we win our home games". Fact is though we lose loads of our home games. Do the rivers of Babylon attempt to wash our game clean of these ills? No. They convey the air of acceptance, that fans should be supportive whatever and if they are not reacting according to their definition of support they are mocked as being fickle. The alternative forum is aptly named cos so far I've clocked up forty-eight years of fickleness! It'll be nice to qualify as a real fan. Just a few more years and a more accepting attitude should do it. It is about accepting that the Club needed an overhaul and things are being put in place to provide all those fanciful aspects you crave. You seem to be symptomatic of the modern day 'old school' football fan who thinks the football being played was better 10 years ago and that things must change in an instant.
Guest Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Good, sensible, inteligent and entertaining debate will die if we dont enlighten eachother with what we have to say. Classic!
SilverFox Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 It pains me that you haven't been found out yet Chandler. Boring Boring Chandler, with the same old boring boring agenda :sleep:
lush Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Yes he is, he is allowed to say exactly what he wants! No one is denying him his right to put a point across. What people are fed up with is him turning every single thread into a repeat of others by trying to ram home his opinion over and over again. We already know how he feels and don't need to be told 20 times a day how he thinks a young left back if the answer to all our problems He hasnt said that to my knowledge, but i hear what you say, and as chairman, i will deal with it!! Erm, Miss Moneypenny, would you kindly write up a letter to Thracians office explaining this public outcry, jolly good.
Babylon Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 He hasnt said that to my knowledge, but i hear what you say, and as chairman, i will deal with it!! Erm, Miss Moneypenny, would you kindly write up a letter to Thracians office explaining this public outcry, jolly good. ha ha Trust me he has.
Chimp Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 It pains me that you haven't been found out yet Chandler. Boring Boring Chandler, with the same old boring boring agenda :sleep: Y'know, I was thinking exactly the same thing... with every new post Thracian is starting to sound and behave more and more like Chandler.
Head Honcho Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Oh look... another thread repeating exactly the same points raised in every other thread going at the minute. If you had been on here yesterday someone created a whole thread about you and your posts so it isn't just on talking balls. For some reason the moderators decided to delete it. This forum is not about slagging off other people just because you don't like what they have to say. Fine argue their point with them, that's not a problem, but do it constructively, don't just start slagging them off because your views differ from theirs. This is most probably why the thread was deleted
lush Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Well said Allen. I hope others including one bitter moderator can learn from your words?
davieG Posted 31 October 2005 Posted 31 October 2005 Y'know, I was thinking exactly the same thing... with every new post Thracian is starting to sound and behave more and more like Chandler. No way, he's never mentioned anything positive about Mr Adams. Seriously, ok there is a common approach but the substance is completely different.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.