And how did all that end.

If you don't actually work for someone that is called feedback where I come from.

Not panic time and really too early to start the conversation but I have a knot in my stomach about the possibility of City going undefeated and doing in it with a far better record than we did. Maybe we can help our own cause if it comes to that.

Just smalltalk in Queensland really.

What's good though is that with the cricket and all, us arrogant whinging Poms will soon be getting a lesson in grace and magnanimity from the Aussies. I expect all their usual subtlety and delicacy of thought to be on full display.

Probably a safe bet that went by the wayside when Ritchie Benaud hung up his pads .

All those snarling tetosterone filled Okkkers Lillie , Thomson , Brett Lee , the Chapells , Mitchell Johnson don't take prisoners these days .

Our poxy little warriors gave the West Indies a tune up today .... won the first test by an innings and 67 runs .

Can't fathom why they aren't still turning out the likes of Richards , Sobers , Lloyd , Lara , Ambrose , Weekes , Walsh , Walcott , Worrell

Bit hypercritical to smile sweetly , then backstab the bloke .

Saw another bloke from the museum today , they've solved the problem
... going to get a permit to use the downstairs only , the upstairs will be sealed off forever

Has the consultant been sacked then?

Not true.

Daz: no group is more worthy of cynicism than EPL players.
Decaf: provides off-the-cuff list of groups more worthy of cynicism. Wasn't being serious.
Daz: a) splits hairs about one or two of these groups, b) makes unconnected but equally silly remarks about Left politics in Britain and elsewhere.
Decaf: a) objects to hair-splitting b) as an entirely separate matter, disagrees with silly remarks about politics.
Daz: Abandons hair splitting strategy and has a stab at misdirecting by conflating a) and b). Won't give up.
Decaf: whatever.
Daz: rewrites history.

Perfectly setting up the prequel?

But you decided to start it anyway.

I'm surprised he is so late with that one this year. He usually starts on about about this almost as soon as the season starts.

Not far off the mark. I tried to be a consultant once, using my knowledge of finance to help small businesses via a couple of councils. Scheme was well intentioned, and I got good feedback from my 'clients' who said that my help was 'clear, down to earth and at a level which makes sense to me'. However, according to the consultant in charge of the project (from one of the giants), my feedback was neither 'technical enough' nor did it 'fit the criteria of the scheme or the standards which are expected of consultants', and so I was denied payment. Despite the fact that I saved each client at least £500 (a not insignificant sum for a small business), and saved one nearly £3000.

There may be an element of sour grapes in my thinking, but I prefer to dwell on the fact that of the 6 clients I dealt with, 5 still phone me for advice and I count 4 of them as friends.

The whole consultancy industry is too far back up its own backside to be the practical help that many small businesses need - too much emphasis on theory and technical stuff, and not enough on the practical stuff that gets the job done, or solves the day to day issues that holds them up from progressing.

Actually, I think the the Venn diagram would show a substantial overlap. More than the one of 'anti-semitists' and 'anti-zionists', anyway.

It's very strange repetitive behaviour, but I guess that's 'normal' for AG.

Actually, one of the sillier things about leftist politics in general is terms like Zionists which has practically lost all significant meaning since it can be applied both to Netanyahu and anybody who believes in a Jewish homeland and which IS used as code by anti-semites of the right and left. But if you're happy using such sloppy and loaded terms then I'm quite prepared to stick a pin in that one.

I get that you weren't being entirely serious to begin with - nor was I particularly - although you still used it as an opportunity to flag up your predictable right-on campus credentials with an attack on the usual suspects in a way that can only fairly be described as hyperbolic so, you know, physician - heal thyself and all that.

But more importantly you were still taking the debate well away from its original one which was what we were being cynical about ie the motivations of the professional footballer. Bringing in Trump and Zionism might have given you a moment of self-righteous amusement but let's be honest it was a colossal non-sequitur.

If you needed proof that AW is mad he has actually said according to SSN that we are not out of the title race.

Can't we get him certified and locked up?

Hmmm ... but you yourself think you have the 'correct attitude' on Zionism and you will not hear any argument on the matter. Someone who criticises Zionism, even mildly, is beyond the pale--either a despicable anti-semite, or a sloppy fool, or a parody with "predictable right-on campus credentials", or some combination.

At another level, I don't understand why you think that Zionism deserves this immunity from criticism. Why does it warrant sacred-cow status ahead of say, transgender toilets? My understanding is that Zionism (as an ideology) has a lot to answer for, and is still a powerful force, especially in the US. The relationship between Zionism, position on the Israel/Palestine question, and antisemitism, is complicated to say the least.

And I am not going to be drawn on your attempt to make the debate about the motives of footballers. What you originally said and what I responded to was "Call me a cynic but if there's one group of people it is IMPOSSIBLE to be too cynical about it's PL footballers and I am afraid Mesut Özil is not my top candidate to buck that trend."

Finally, I have enjoyed our little chat but must move on to other things. Merry Xmas, God Bless the Queen, and all that. Cheers.

Yes but I'm not a student who can be seen off with a bit of lofty condescension followed by pronouncing the topic closed (after you've had your own lengthy say on it).

I think it is very clear that the nature of the debate and the use of the word "cynical" (as opposed to "contemptible" or "dangerous") was not supposed to imply that I considered them the worst or most vicious people in the world but was referring to our understanding of what drives their decision making.processes. In the case of PL footballers money and status are, it doesn't seem too outrageous to suggest, primary factors and loyalty pretty low on the scale of things. It was OF COURSE this to which I was referring and only stubbornness of Bernardian levels allied to a slight chippiness at being questioned would prevent you from acknowledging that. From cynicism over their motivations to their worth as human beings was an elision you introduced and, as if half aware of the discordant note of such hyperbole, threw in "estate agents". This would have been legitimate and indeed the joke for which you may have been striving but obviously you couldn't resist passing up the opportunity to also have a swipe at your betes noires - Zionists (ben-Gurion? Netanyahu?) , conservatives, white supremacists, and all Americans who voted in the last election - a blatant category error.

The tendency to withdraw into rebarbative truculence when challenged (while whinging about how argumentative the other person is being and shouting "have the last word") is one with which I am very familiar but by this stage of the game nooses, sheep and lambs come into play.

Just as a final point (albeit one I am more than happy to discuss further because, while busy, I think it's rude to assume you may not wish to reply or have an argument worth consideration), my Venn diagram with gunfire probably contains more overlap than with those inspired by Lenin. It would include not treating human beings as dispensable units in violent ideological fantasies of human perfectibility.

As a complete side-note I have moved house a lot over the course of the years and have often wondered why estate agents get SUCH a bad rep. Sure there are some pirates as with all professions but most of the ones with whom I have worked have always seemed decent and likeable young people with a cheerful sense of humour who work hard for their living.

They're not the Khmer Rouge!

He didn't meet his PKIs, so one way ticket to Palookaville, I'm afraid. They still talk about him, though.

Actually, I was enjoying the conversation, and my only concern is frittering away time when there are summery things to do. But I'm still here so let me try to bring this to an amicable end. What we are arguing about rhetoric as well as other matters. I agree with you that hyperbole, hair-splitting, throwing big words around, deliberate conflation and other cheap tricks (including the silent treatment) are not good ways of making a point, unless preaching to the converted. I plead guilty to using some of those tactics on this forum. But, since you keep raising the issue, I would like to assure you that one of the lessons I have learned in life is not to use such tricks in the classroom/lecture hall.

Gosh!

But some are Purple Bricks.

"I would have been at the encounter but I was being entranced by the Christmas Oratorio tra la la...."

I thought that was yer cockney rhyming slang for a moment until I discovered they really are an estate agents!

Nothing wrong with big words though. I chose 'rebarbative' carefully. Not because I wanted to look clever or superior - that's a given, right - but because it is an excellent word.

Indeed.

The Benevento v Milan match and the story behind Benevento is what keeps me drawn to football despite my seeing it changed before my eyes since I become a fan a little over 20 years ago. The top division in many ways looks nothing like the game and league that I fell totally in love with.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLwG0PltZBM

https://www.google.ie/amp/www.bbc.co.uk ... l/42219327

So Clattenburg essentially admitted that he didn't enforce the rules of the game to avoid the potential negative reaction from Tottenham.

so?

Truly disappointing and something a lot of refs do for matches day in day out.

Otherwise why would they not penalise all the niggly tackles made on our skilful players for example.

Why do they allow all the snidey things that Mourinho has brought to the game. Did noone look again at the straight arm tackle on Lacazette in the early part of the game on Saturday. Why don't he FA punish all the other things they and other players do out of sight of the ref. The game needs cleaning up or we should start doing the same.

Little words can be equally excellent of course...

It's just unbelievable isn't it?

That wasn't his call to make and who cares about the headlines. In fact I remember the astonishment that Tottenham did not have at least two players sent off.

They serve no purpose what so ever. Why not just advertise your house online like auto trader or something and when a price is agreed instruct solicitors.


I know people who have had estate agents refuse to tell them about higher offers for their properties because it wasn't the winning horse the particular estate agent wanted to back for a quick sale.

They are just a nothing self serving industry that could be dropped in 5 minutes with numerous viable alternatives.

Sibelius on Thursday. Finlandia; Violin Concerto and the Lemminkainen Suite. As much as I love The Gunners I can't miss the amazing soloist that is Vilde Frang. Enjoy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UClqsv91f_I

FA Cup draw imminent.....................

Forest Away

Beautiful ....... ...... can't wait to slip those into the general hub bub of conversation at the upcoming Op Shop Xmas party .....blah blah blah blah

"Well yes that maybe so but I think most of you women have a tendency to withdraw into rebarbative truculence " .... ...... GASP ...

" ... in the main you are dispensable units in violent ideologoical fantasies of human perfectibility "