Targett still looks very good

[Statto]

I merely stated that it is (at least most of the time) easy to be an arm chair expert. I may also add that one of the reasons that it is easy is that you can always choose to criticize something in isolation, and rarely have to address to full picture.

Again, this sounds like something that applies to any criticism of anyone, ever.
By your reasoning, the only person who could criticise a person's performance in anything would be the person themselves, because only they can really "address the full picture" 

[Sting of the North]

I merely stated that it is (at least most of the time) easy to be an arm chair expert. I may also add that one of the reasons that it is easy is that you can always choose to criticize something in isolation, and rarely have to address to full picture.

Again, this sounds like something that applies to any criticism of anyone, ever.
By your reasoning, the only person who could criticise a person's performance in anything would be the person themselves, because only they can really "address the full picture"

I am very confused by your posts. I never said that I was against people voicing their criticism (quite the contrary actually, explicitly even). My original post was in response to another posters statement that he thought that several posters on here would do a better job (than TK). I merely said that I was not so sure about that, and pointed out that in my opinion it is easier to criticize than to actually perform. I then also added one of the reasons that, in my opinion, makes it easier. I don't know if you agree or disagree with what I am actually stating, since you are addressing something I am not claiming (for the second post in a row, one might add). No disrespect meant, but I am not sure how I can be any clearer on this.

[Statto]

I merely stated that it is (at least most of the time) easy to be an arm chair expert. I may also add that one of the reasons that it is easy is that you can always choose to criticize something in isolation, and rarely have to address to full picture.

Again, this sounds like something that applies to any criticism of anyone, ever.
By your reasoning, the only person who could criticise a person's performance in anything would be the person themselves, because only they can really "address the full picture"

I am very confused by your posts. I never said that I was against people voicing their criticism (quite the contrary actually, explicitly even). My original post was in response to another posters statement that he thought that several posters on here would do a better job (than TK). I merely said that I was not so sure about that, and pointed out that in my opinion it is easier to criticize than to actually perform. I then also added one of the reasons that, in my opinion, makes it easier. I don't know if you agree or disagree with what I am actually stating, since you are addressing something I am not claiming (for the second post in a row, one might add). No disrespect meant, but I am not sure how I can be any clearer on this.

Well you could just not bother posting mate. You seem to have 2-3 of these long-winded, circular and ultimately pointless arguments with someone on here every day, about semantics or what you did or didn't say. So evidently you're just not articulate enough to communicate the points you want to make... well, either that or you're just a WUM

[Sting of the North]

I merely stated that it is (at least most of the time) easy to be an arm chair expert. I may also add that one of the reasons that it is easy is that you can always choose to criticize something in isolation, and rarely have to address to full picture.

Again, this sounds like something that applies to any criticism of anyone, ever.
By your reasoning, the only person who could criticise a person's performance in anything would be the person themselves, because only they can really "address the full picture"

I am very confused by your posts. I never said that I was against people voicing their criticism (quite the contrary actually, explicitly even). My original post was in response to another posters statement that he thought that several posters on here would do a better job (than TK). I merely said that I was not so sure about that, and pointed out that in my opinion it is easier to criticize than to actually perform. I then also added one of the reasons that, in my opinion, makes it easier. I don't know if you agree or disagree with what I am actually stating, since you are addressing something I am not claiming (for the second post in a row, one might add). No disrespect meant, but I am not sure how I can be any clearer on this.

Well you could just not bother posting mate. You seem to have 2-3 of these long-winded, circular and ultimately pointless arguments with someone on here every day, about semantics or what you did or didn't say. So evidently you're just not articulate enough to communicate the points you want to make... well, either that or you're just a WUM

Or, you could at least try to address my posts in a constructive manner and not being rude. Sorry that you don't appreciate my posts, but in what way do you believe that asking a fellow poster to stop posting just because you either don't agree or don't understand their posts is ok from your end?

I have these "long-winded, circular and ultimately pointless arguments" because many people have a problem to actually address the points made. It may be me not being articulate enough, although in the case at hand I am surprised that you fail to understand since you strike me as an, albeit fairly often unnecessarily rude, but also otherwise intelligent person, and the point was very short and very clear.  Instead try to argue why I am wrong, or why what I wrote should be interpreted differently. Or for that matter address what you believe is circular about my argument? Why do you bother to respond to me if you cannot even bother to read my posts?

To respond to your last point, I am not a WUM since the intention of my posts are not to wind people up. Normally I post because I either don't agree with the post, or because I cannot understand the reasoning behind the conclusions. I have noticed that many don't like to be questioned, but that is actually their problem.

I would appreciate if you refrain from being rude going forward, since it should be possible to keep the discussions on a decent level.

[Statto]

I merely stated that it is (at least most of the time) easy to be an arm chair expert. I may also add that one of the reasons that it is easy is that you can always choose to criticize something in isolation, and rarely have to address to full picture.

Again, this sounds like something that applies to any criticism of anyone, ever.
By your reasoning, the only person who could criticise a person's performance in anything would be the person themselves, because only they can really "address the full picture"

I am very confused by your posts. I never said that I was against people voicing their criticism (quite the contrary actually, explicitly even). My original post was in response to another posters statement that he thought that several posters on here would do a better job (than TK). I merely said that I was not so sure about that, and pointed out that in my opinion it is easier to criticize than to actually perform. I then also added one of the reasons that, in my opinion, makes it easier. I don't know if you agree or disagree with what I am actually stating, since you are addressing something I am not claiming (for the second post in a row, one might add). No disrespect meant, but I am not sure how I can be any clearer on this.

Well you could just not bother posting mate. You seem to have 2-3 of these long-winded, circular and ultimately pointless arguments with someone on here every day, about semantics or what you did or didn't say. So evidently you're just not articulate enough to communicate the points you want to make... well, either that or you're just a WUM

Or, you could at least try to address my posts in a constructive manner and not being rude. Sorry that you don't appreciate my posts, but in what way do you believe that asking a fellow poster to stop posting just because you either don't agree or don't understand their posts is ok from your end?

I have these "long-winded, circular and ultimately pointless arguments" because many people have a problem to actually address the points made. It may be me not being articulate enough, although in the case at hand I am surprised that you fail to understand since you strike me as an, albeit fairly often unnecessarily rude, but also otherwise intelligent person, and the point was very short and very clear.  Instead try to argue why I am wrong, or why what I wrote should be interpreted differently. Or for that matter address what you believe is circular about my argument? Why do you bother to respond to me if you cannot even bother to read my posts?

To respond to your last point, I am not a WUM since the intention of my posts are not to wind people up. Normally I post because I either don't agree with the post, or because I cannot understand the reasoning behind the conclusions. I have noticed that many don't like to be questioned, but that is actually their problem.

I would appreciate if you refrain from being rude going forward, since it should be possible to keep the discussions on a decent level.

I'll give you the courtesy of a reply but would otherwise prefer to avoid giving this debate oxygen that would be better given to a debate about football or some other substantial matter.

Despite being an "otherwise intelligent person" (not sure how being rude detracts from one's intelligence, but anyway...) I still have no idea what meaning you intended your original post to have, but even I wouldn't claim to know another person's intent better than they know it themselves, so I'll concede that whatever you say was your intention, was indeed your intention. If it makes you feel better you can treat that as a small victory.

However, I'm sorry to say it should be an entirely Pyrrhic victory, because the normal, reasonable interpretation of any comment referring to another person as an "armchair expert" is that it was designed to undermine the other person's criticism or their right to criticise. That was how I interpreted your original post and whilst I may have been wrong to do so, this whole exchange has just demonstrated that you either don't know, or don't have regard to, the normal, reasonable interpretation of what you write.

Since the primary purpose of writing is to communicate a message to another person, I suggest that in future you familiarise yourself with, and have regard to, the way the things you write to another person are likely to be interpreted by them.

[Sting of the North]

I'll give you the courtesy of a reply but would otherwise prefer to avoid giving this debate oxygen that would be better given to a debate about football or some other substantial matter.

Despite being an "otherwise intelligent person" (not sure how being rude detracts from one's intelligence, but anyway...) I still have no idea what meaning you intended your original post to have, but even I wouldn't claim to know another person's intent better than they know it themselves, so I'll concede that whatever you say was your intention, was indeed your intention. If it makes you feel better you can treat that as a small victory.

However, I'm sorry to say it should be an entirely Pyrrhic victory, because the normal, reasonable interpretation of any comment referring to another person as an "armchair expert" is that it was designed to undermine the other person's criticism or their right to criticise. That was how I interpreted your original post and whilst I may have been wrong to do so, this whole exchange has just demonstrated that you either don't know, or don't have regard to, the normal, reasonable interpretation of what you write.

Since the primary purpose of writing is to communicate a message to another person, I suggest that in future you familiarise yourself with, and have regard to, the way the things you write to another person are likely to be interpreted by them.

I am not the least interested in winning against you in any way. I was merely trying to understand what your problem was.

Thank you for at least trying to explain why you had a problem with my posts instead of arguing against something I didn't say. Just to address a few of your points.

Firstly, the part about intelligence referred first and foremost to your failure to even acknowledge what I outright stated in my second post (namely that I didn't in any way mean that anyone should not voice their opinions), but also to my view that the people that feel the need to resort to being rude more often than not have a distinct lack of decent arguments (which could be a sign of not being overly bright). That is how I feel rudeness may (don't have to) have something to do with intelligence. As I stated, I don't think this is the case for you. I think you just resort to being rude when someone don't agree with you, but not because you lack the skill to put forward a well constructed argument.

If the word armchair expert in this context is seen as derogatory I apologize, since that is not at all how I meant it (maybe it is my relative unfamiliarity with the English language). I simply meant anyone that is not doing something professionally, and therefore most likely do not really know what it is all about. I see myself as an armchair expert when it comes to football matters, and even more so when it comes to running a professional football club since at best my opinions are decent guesses based on more often than not fairly limited information. I also believe that most, if not all here should be seen as armchair experts to at least some degree when discussing Fulham. The remark was also not initially (nor later for that matter) directed at someone in particular, but more a general remark about whether anyone would be likely to be successful at anything because they post about it on a forum on the internet.

Lastly, I don't know why you have to make this into something bigger than it is by attacking me as a poster in general because of your interpretation of one of my posts. In any case, I am sure that it is meant at least partly as an insult since I am sure that you are very well aware of how people would interpret what you write.

In any case, sorry if my general use of the term armchair expert was seen as insulting to someone.

   

[Statto]

SotN - as I say, I interpreted your comment as seeking to undermine my criticism of, or right to criticise, the club, which is why I replied, but FWIW I didn't consider that "insulting", "derogatory" or unusual for an online forum discussion and I've no hard feelings about this little exchange.  :54:

[ffcne]

I merely stated that it is (at least most of the time) easy to be an arm chair expert. I may also add that one of the reasons that it is easy is that you can always choose to criticize something in isolation, and rarely have to address to full picture.

Again, this sounds like something that applies to any criticism of anyone, ever.
By your reasoning, the only person who could criticise a person's performance in anything would be the person themselves, because only they can really "address the full picture"

I am very confused by your posts. I never said that I was against people voicing their criticism (quite the contrary actually, explicitly even). My original post was in response to another posters statement that he thought that several posters on here would do a better job (than TK). I merely said that I was not so sure about that, and pointed out that in my opinion it is easier to criticize than to actually perform. I then also added one of the reasons that, in my opinion, makes it easier. I don't know if you agree or disagree with what I am actually stating, since you are addressing something I am not claiming (for the second post in a row, one might add). No disrespect meant, but I am not sure how I can be any clearer on this.

Well you could just not bother posting mate. You seem to have 2-3 of these long-winded, circular and ultimately pointless arguments with someone on here every day, about semantics or what you did or didn't say. So evidently you're just not articulate enough to communicate the points you want to make... well, either that or you're just a WUM

:plus one:

[Sting of the North]

SotN - as I say, I interpreted your comment as seeking to undermine my criticism of, or right to criticise, the club, which is why I replied, but FWIW I didn't consider that "insulting", "derogatory" or unusual for an online forum discussion and I've no hard feelings about this little exchange.  :54:

Fair enough, no hard feelings. I know that it is easy to interpret what others post in different ways. I may rub some posters the wrong way, but it is never my intention to do so. Nor would I ever intentionally question someone's right to share their thoughts on a subject. I do appreciate many of your posts, whereas some not so much which I believe is the way it almost inevitably has to be on a forum.

Let's hope for a win tonight, so that we have something uplifting to discuss for once! 049:gif