The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
comment by Liverpoolwhoelse17 (U16825)
posted 2 hours, 58 minutes ago
Brains, brain is damaged
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely literate. It's a shame that the the epitome of intellectual failure, the emoji, is the most coherent element of your 'sentence'.
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely literate. It's a shame that the the epitome of intellectual failure, the emoji, is the most coherent element of your 'sentence'.
___________________________________________
piece of sh|t
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the opinion was based on a rational view and thought process. I hate to dumb it down for you, but most of the content of this kind of forum is based on opinion, that's the point of it - that's the nature of football discussion.
comment by Liverpoolwhoelse17 (U16825)
posted 8 hours, 54 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely literate. It's a shame that the the epitome of intellectual failure, the emoji, is the most coherent element of your 'sentence'.
___________________________________________
piece of sh|t
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, that is probably a better description than 'sentence '.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
You can make a "good premise" for pretty much any player failing after a move. It became apparent very early on that you were wrong and that he was going to have the sort of impact many predicted. You tool an awful long time accepting and admitting that.
I would go so far as to say he has had the greatest single impact of any purchase for any team in the premier league are.
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 10 hours, 33 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the opinion was based on a rational view and thought process. I hate to dumb it down for you, but most of the content of this kind of forum is based on opinion, that's the point of it - that's the nature of football discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was your opinion which was proven incorrect. If you want to hold on to the view that at some stage that opinion was correct, then certainly let us know that rational view and thought process were.
ie.. wtf were you thinking knocking out this article?
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 12 hours, 47 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 10 hours, 33 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the opinion was based on a rational view and thought process. I hate to dumb it down for you, but most of the content of this kind of forum is based on opinion, that's the point of it - that's the nature of football discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was your opinion which was proven incorrect. If you want to hold on to the view that at some stage that opinion was correct, then certainly let us know that rational view and thought process were.
ie.. wtf were you thinking knocking out this article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is that the premise was based on a reasonable basis. Events subsequent to that are as has happened, but there was nothing unreasonable about the initial proposition - if you think there was, I'd be happy for you to show me the parts you are referring to? Specifically.
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 20 hours, 51 minutes ago
You can make a "good premise" for pretty much any player failing after a move.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly my point
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you're expressing an opinion there, and I thought that you didn't think comments were valid if they were based only on opinion?
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you're expressing an opinion there, and I thought that you didn't think comments were valid if they were based only on opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're getting me confused with somebody else. Of course opinions are valid. What I'm saying is that your opinion now looks very silly. To most, it was already very silly and has now been proven.
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you're expressing an opinion there, and I thought that you didn't think comments were valid if they were based only on opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're getting me confused with somebody else. Of course opinions are valid. What I'm saying is that your opinion now looks very silly. To most, it was already very silly and has now been proven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes, apologies, you are correct. I did think your comment was from somebody else. With regards to your comment, I'd agree my prediction proved incorrect, though at the outset I don't think it was unreasonable.
Obviously stringing it out for.for so long was mostly for my own amusement though.
Indeed, after having re-read my article again, Ive actually realised that I was correct, so I retract my suggestion that I was wrong.
I suggested that VVD would not flourish while playing in the team setup that Klopp operated (obviously at the time), i.e. very attacking and inviting a lot of pressure on the defence. I think that this is also something that he himself realised, which is why he enacted the well-documented switch to a much less all out attacking style in order to optimise defensive solidity and thus get the most from VVD and ultimately the team.
Far from being wrong, I've concluded that not only am I correct, but also Klopp probably shared my view as well - though as he probably doesn't read this, I can't really take credit. Either way though, you're welcome.
Yeah, I think since you've already admitted to realising your error and just continuing for the amusement, I'm not going to fall for it now. Your fun is over. You'll have to create a new one.
As I said above though, I.I don't actually think it was an error after all, I'd just forgotten some of the nuance of my post.
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 5 minutes ago
As I said above though, I.I don't actually think it was an error after all, I'd just forgotten some of the nuance of my post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's nice.
Sign in if you want to comment
Van Dijk won't improve Liverpool significan
Page 47 of 65
48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52
posted on 29/12/18
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
posted on 29/12/18
brian u mug
posted on 29/12/18
Brains, brain is damaged
posted on 29/12/18
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
posted on 29/12/18
comment by Liverpoolwhoelse17 (U16825)
posted 2 hours, 58 minutes ago
Brains, brain is damaged
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely literate. It's a shame that the the epitome of intellectual failure, the emoji, is the most coherent element of your 'sentence'.
posted on 29/12/18
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
posted on 29/12/18
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely literate. It's a shame that the the epitome of intellectual failure, the emoji, is the most coherent element of your 'sentence'.
___________________________________________
piece of sh|t
posted on 30/12/18
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the opinion was based on a rational view and thought process. I hate to dumb it down for you, but most of the content of this kind of forum is based on opinion, that's the point of it - that's the nature of football discussion.
posted on 30/12/18
comment by Liverpoolwhoelse17 (U16825)
posted 8 hours, 54 minutes ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barely literate. It's a shame that the the epitome of intellectual failure, the emoji, is the most coherent element of your 'sentence'.
___________________________________________
piece of sh|t
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Indeed, that is probably a better description than 'sentence '.
posted on 30/12/18
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 30/12/18
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
posted on 30/12/18
You can make a "good premise" for pretty much any player failing after a move. It became apparent very early on that you were wrong and that he was going to have the sort of impact many predicted. You tool an awful long time accepting and admitting that.
I would go so far as to say he has had the greatest single impact of any purchase for any team in the premier league are.
posted on 30/12/18
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 10 hours, 33 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the opinion was based on a rational view and thought process. I hate to dumb it down for you, but most of the content of this kind of forum is based on opinion, that's the point of it - that's the nature of football discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was your opinion which was proven incorrect. If you want to hold on to the view that at some stage that opinion was correct, then certainly let us know that rational view and thought process were.
ie.. wtf were you thinking knocking out this article?
posted on 31/12/18
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 12 hours, 47 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 10 hours, 33 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 8 hours, 59 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 hours, 1 minute ago
The premise was not sound, it was your own opinion. Based on what you understood.
It was incorrect and you’ve been able to admit it, belatedly.
Good for you, VVD, and all of us!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The premise was entirely sound, irrespective of how events unfolded.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
why do you insist it was sound when it was only based on your opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the opinion was based on a rational view and thought process. I hate to dumb it down for you, but most of the content of this kind of forum is based on opinion, that's the point of it - that's the nature of football discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It was your opinion which was proven incorrect. If you want to hold on to the view that at some stage that opinion was correct, then certainly let us know that rational view and thought process were.
ie.. wtf were you thinking knocking out this article?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is that the premise was based on a reasonable basis. Events subsequent to that are as has happened, but there was nothing unreasonable about the initial proposition - if you think there was, I'd be happy for you to show me the parts you are referring to? Specifically.
posted on 31/12/18
comment by KingKenny (U1961)
posted 20 hours, 51 minutes ago
You can make a "good premise" for pretty much any player failing after a move.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly my point
posted on 31/12/18
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
posted on 31/12/18
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
posted on 31/12/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you're expressing an opinion there, and I thought that you didn't think comments were valid if they were based only on opinion?
posted on 31/12/18
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you're expressing an opinion there, and I thought that you didn't think comments were valid if they were based only on opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're getting me confused with somebody else. Of course opinions are valid. What I'm saying is that your opinion now looks very silly. To most, it was already very silly and has now been proven.
posted on 31/12/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 25 minutes ago
comment by No Look (U1282)
posted 22 hours, 12 minutes ago
I think describing your own opinion, which is not even shared by the majority, as a good premise for this article is a bit of a stretch.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot make an article speculating about future events, without it being based on opinion. I don't know why you don't understand this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's fine. However you made a prediction that now looks very silly indeed, despite everybody else having an opposite opinion. I'm sure you would have been very modest if you were proven correct and the gloating kept to a minimum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sounds like you're expressing an opinion there, and I thought that you didn't think comments were valid if they were based only on opinion?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're getting me confused with somebody else. Of course opinions are valid. What I'm saying is that your opinion now looks very silly. To most, it was already very silly and has now been proven.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes, apologies, you are correct. I did think your comment was from somebody else. With regards to your comment, I'd agree my prediction proved incorrect, though at the outset I don't think it was unreasonable.
Obviously stringing it out for.for so long was mostly for my own amusement though.
posted on 31/12/18
Indeed, after having re-read my article again, Ive actually realised that I was correct, so I retract my suggestion that I was wrong.
I suggested that VVD would not flourish while playing in the team setup that Klopp operated (obviously at the time), i.e. very attacking and inviting a lot of pressure on the defence. I think that this is also something that he himself realised, which is why he enacted the well-documented switch to a much less all out attacking style in order to optimise defensive solidity and thus get the most from VVD and ultimately the team.
Far from being wrong, I've concluded that not only am I correct, but also Klopp probably shared my view as well - though as he probably doesn't read this, I can't really take credit. Either way though, you're welcome.
posted on 31/12/18
Yeah, I think since you've already admitted to realising your error and just continuing for the amusement, I'm not going to fall for it now. Your fun is over. You'll have to create a new one.
posted on 31/12/18
As I said above though, I.I don't actually think it was an error after all, I'd just forgotten some of the nuance of my post.
posted on 31/12/18
comment by Brain (U18701)
posted 5 minutes ago
As I said above though, I.I don't actually think it was an error after all, I'd just forgotten some of the nuance of my post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's nice.
posted on 31/12/18
Page 47 of 65
48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52