Differently abled through distance supporters relying on Radio Leicester commentary piss me off

[Churchill]

It's just common sense really, obviously if you've been to game your able to form your own opinion, while radio coverage will genrally give you nothing but an outline and John Barbers opinion. I do hate radio listeners moaning about "how crap we were today" Especially after narrow defeats and goaless draws.

On the flip side if we lose 9-0 you don't really need to be there to know we were crap.

What I hate about the "I've been to the game shut up" crowd is they take it too far. One game last season I remember we put McAuley up front for the last 5 minutes to win some headers. Which worked fairly well in the last 5, so of course a few that had been to the game said we should start him there. Which I said was a stupid idea, becuase lets face it, it is. But of course, I wasn't at the game, so I'm not allowed to comment on Gareth McAuleys ability as a striker, as a footballer etc etc. While because they witnessed it for all of five minutes, they were the offical experts on the matter.

I remember that

[Mark]

The fact is, that everyone has opinions on things they haven't witnessed in life. Everyone is free to voice there opinion whether eye witnessed or not on here, Daggers is just going to have to deal with it.

[Daggers]

Daggers is just going to have to deal with it.

I believe that I am free to **** the pomposity and arrogance of those who hold strident opinions on a subject they know nothing about. Thracian managed to rack up in excess of 70 posts during Saturday, a load of them essay-like, and his sole source of information was Barber. It was tedious having to plough through the nonsense and in the end he went on block. To argue against people that had actually been to the game was crass and stupid.

I don't put myself on a pedestal - I have never claimed to hold better opinions about City, whatever that could mean, in fact I regularly highlight my own ignorance and stupidity. If I've seen a match after necking a few in the pub I'll normally add that as an addenda to a post in some self-deprecating manner.

[Thracian]

Yeah, it's like getting an idiot to read Shakespeare and then explain to an informed expert on the matter, what is going on.

One "informed expert" who attended the game concerned said Fryatt shouldn't have been sent off the other week but I don't remember the decision being contested.

People, including myself, forever make mistakes in describing what they think they see at a match, just as referees make mistakes and dramatically bad ones as well (ask Kisnorbo).

Other times attending fans make judgements without knowing the reasons why something happened any more than anyone else - like whether a guy is substituted because he's injured or as a tactical ploy. Sometimes they even know LESS than the commentary team who might have had chance to make enquiries.

Your trouble, at least one of many, is that you let your supposed but to my mind well-hidden intelligence get over-ridden by your in-built antagonism towards people like me.

Quite apart from the hypocrisy considering you yourself forever comment on players you've never seen or didn't see when a comment you referred to was made.

[The People's Hero]

I disagree.

[Thracian]

"To argue against people that had actually been to the game was crass and stupid."

You might think so and you didn't HAVE to read a word.

But in hindsight and on reading most other comment I don't think Barber gave a bad impression of events.

And by arguing with people who attended I am now 100% sure that Laczko was given a sympathetic rating based, not on his actual performance, but on the fact that he was injured and new to the club.

The arguing revealed various other things too which I think have given me a far more vivid picture of the game than I'd otherwise have.

I'd actually imagine more than 4/5ths of comment made on here is from people who have not attended an event referred to or have no first hand knowledge of the situation they are discussing.

The Kaebi monologues were a recent point in question.

Doesn't mean a fairly accurate picture doesn't emerge in the end though.

[Mark]

I believe that I am free to **** the pomposity and arrogance of those who hold strident opinions on a subject they know nothing about. Thracian managed to rack up in excess of 70 posts during Saturday, a load of them essay-like, and his sole source of information was Barber. It was tedious having to plough through the nonsense and in the end he went on block. To argue against people that had actually been to the game was crass and stupid.

I don't put myself on a pedestal - I have never claimed to hold better opinions about City, whatever that could mean, in fact I regularly highlight my own ignorance and stupidity. If I've seen a match after necking a few in the pub I'll normally add that as an addenda to a post in some self-deprecating manner.

Ok so basically this is just another thread dedicated to Thracian, obviously there were not enough round to keep everyone happy.

[Daggers]

Ok so basically this is just another thread dedicated to Thracian, obviously there were not enough round to keep everyone happy.

If that is your interpretation then I'm glad you enjoyed it and I'm delighted that I have helped to increase the chance of forum-wide happiness.

You'll need to point out the other one's to me though as I seem to have missed them and probably have a viewpoint worth expressing

[Trav Le Bleu]

I believe that I am free to **** the pomposity and arrogance of those who hold strident opinions on a subject they know nothing about. Thracian managed to rack up in excess of 70 posts during Saturday, a load of them essay-like, and his sole source of information was Barber. It was tedious having to plough through the nonsense and in the end he went on block. To argue against people that had actually been to the game was crass and stupid.

I don't put myself on a pedestal - I have never claimed to hold better opinions about City, whatever that could mean, in fact I regularly highlight my own ignorance and stupidity. If I've seen a match after necking a few in the pub I'll normally add that as an addenda to a post in some self-deprecating manner.

Awww, you spoilsport Daggers... and what are we supposed to do in the meantime?

[Hullfox]

Ok so basically this is just another thread dedicated to Thracian, obviously there were not enough round to keep everyone happy.

I don't believe that many threads start out intentionally to be dedicated to Thracian but unfortunately quite a few turn out that way because of what/how he posts.

[davieG]

I don't believe that many threads start out intentionally to be dedicated to Thracian but unfortunately quite a few turn out that way because of what/how he posts.

Or because how some people respond to his posts

[Manwell Pablo]

Or because how some people respond to his posts

He provokes and you know it.

[Fez of Mahrez]

Or because how some people respond to his posts

I like to think of myself as a Jedi fighting against the forces of evil.

[Hullfox]

Or because how some people respond to his posts

What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

Would the response come without the how/what?

[davieG]

He provokes and you know it.

Maybe, but people can choose to bite and many do and then complain about his apparent excessive posting

[Steven]

For the record I have not listened to one second of BBC Radio Leicester commentary this season because it is so crap. I would rather spit blood for 90 minutes.

However my not being able to attend due my geographical location is used against me and others when other criteria are used to develop an opinion such as other trusted poster opinions, listening to the other teams radio commentary, watching games on TV, highlights, newspapers (not the Mockery), recent managerial records and the League table. In other words, the attendance champions are using attendance as a means of marginalising all opinion no matter how reasonably, given limited resources, it has been arrived at.

It is true that if you don't go to a game and have not seen it live via another channel your ability to comment rationally on that game is non existent. After all when we finish in mid table (which is where I expect us to be) at the end of season, do I need to go to every game to know we are a mid table side.

[The People's Hero]

Maybe, but people can choose to bite and many do and then complain about his apparent excessive posting

For the record, I've never complained about his excessive posting.

I complain about the way he takes everything to a personal and unnecessary level and then gets on his high horse about it when someone gives him some back.

I wasn't online at the weekend, but since I've seen he made about TEN comments about me!!

Tell me - is that reasonable behaviour?

What pis ses me off is all his sh it about me is allowed to remain, but if I even mention his name (which you'll note, I haven't) - it's deleted within a minute or so.

Anyway he's on ignore now, along with a few other cretins who post a lot but say very little of any note.

[Manwell Pablo]

For the record I have not listened to one second of BBC Radio Leicester commentary this season because it is so crap. I would rather spit blood for 90 minutes.

However my not being able to attend due my geographical location is used against me and others when other criteria are used to develop an opinion such as other trusted poster opinions, listening to the other teams radio commentary, watching games on TV, highlights, newspapers (not the Mockery), recent managerial records and the League table. In other words, the attendance champions are using attendance as a means of marginalising all opinion no matter how reasonably, given limited resources, it has been arrived at.

It is true that if you don't go to a game and have not seen it live via another channel your ability to comment rationally on that game is non existent. After all when we finish in mid table (which is where I expect us to be) at the end of season, do I need to go to every game to know we are a mid table side.

No, I don't think thats the point though, I think you'd need to go to a few games to understand why we are a mid table side, which is what people are saying.

[Fez of Mahrez]

For the record I have not listened to one second of BBC Radio Leicester commentary this season because it is so crap. I would rather spit blood for 90 minutes.

However my not being able to attend due my geographical location is used against me and others when other criteria are used to develop an opinion such as other trusted poster opinions, listening to the other teams radio commentary, watching games on TV, highlights, newspapers (not the Mockery), recent managerial records and the League table. In other words, the attendance champions are using attendance as a means of marginalising all opinion no matter how reasonably, given limited resources, it has been arrived at.

It is true that if you don't go to a game and have not seen it live via another channel your ability to comment rationally on that game is non existent. After all when we finish in mid table (which is where I expect us to be) at the end of season, do I need to go to every game to know we are a mid table side.

I think there's a line that can be drawn between the validity of someone's opinion based on going to the games as opposed to basing something on those criteria (i.e. I've sat at home and listened to this, it doesn't sound like we've played very well, I'm annoyed that we've drawn/lost). I've been in both boats and there's only so much you can tell and indeed feel without seeing the game. It tends to lead to people simplifying problems and being overly negative when they try and form a full opinion by listening to radio coverage (particularly related to substitutions).

[Steven]

No, I don't think thats the point though, I think you'd need to go to a few games to understand why we are a mid table side, which is what people are saying.

I think there's a line that can be drawn between the validity of someone's opinion based on going to the games as opposed to basing something on those criteria (i.e. I've sat at home and listened to this, it doesn't sound like we've played very well, I'm annoyed that we've drawn/lost). I've been in both boats and there's only so much you can tell and indeed feel without seeing the game. It tends to lead to people simplifying problems and being overly negative when they try and form a full opinion by listening to radio coverage (particularly related to substitutions).

The two of the most polite and considered opinions I have read on this topic.

[Thracian]

For the record, I've never complained about his excessive posting.

I complain about the way he takes everything to a personal and unnecessary level and then gets on his high horse about it when someone gives him some back.

I wasn't online at the weekend, but since I've seen he made about TEN comments about me!!

Tell me - is that reasonable behaviour?

What pis ses me off is all his sh it about me is allowed to remain, but if I even mention his name (which you'll note, I haven't) - it's deleted within a minute or so.

Anyway he's on ignore now, along with a few other cretins who post a lot but say very little of any note.

After the sort of scurrilous and deeply offensive remarks that you're allowed to get away I'll be a long time yet expressing everything I feel about you.

[Guest]

One "informed expert" who attended the game concerned said Fryatt shouldn't have been sent off the other week but I don't remember the decision being contested.

From what I remember, it was contested, and the appeal thrown out before any argument could be made. Hence why it was probably not reported on as much as it deserved.