The Real Football Thread

[BigMac]

I see, thanks.

If it was written without Mourinho's ''consent'' I expect a preface by Juan Mata. It'd be glorious.

 

[jsem94]

Mou is a legend nonetheless. I sense he might be finished as a coach now. Not as many people respect him anymore and much fewer are going to be willing to die for him and the dressing room at Utd seems to be a losing battle already. The only place where he could really go and command a dressing room would be Porto or Inter. Maybe as a national coach too.

We'll see how he handles this crisis...

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

I detest the man.

That's always a good starting point when you want to make a correct assessment of reality. In fact first rule of rational thinking is:

Always let your sentiment get in the way of your thoughts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationality_101

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Second rule, of course, is tabloid sourcing. What better way to understand the world than reading the Daily Mail?

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

I detest the man.

That's always a good starting point when you want to make a correct assessment of reality. In fact first rule of rational thinking is:

Always let your sentiment get in the way of your thoughts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationality_101

Judgments can be made on facts and past actions, because listening to and reading the facts is what drives discussion to the form of eventually coming to an opinion on something.

Oh and my opinion is a correct assessment of reality. This adds further to it, if I already needed anymore based on his past history.

You make it sound like this is the first time he crossed the line and that I had this opinion in the absence of anything prior.

 

[gooner]

Re:

Second rule, of course, is tabloid sourcing. What better way to understand the world than reading the Daily Mail?

Here we go again.

Beasley is a great friend of Mourinho. This is well-known right from his first spell at Chelsea.

This is credible.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

Second rule, of course, is tabloid sourcing. What better way to understand the world than reading the Daily Mail?

Here we go again.

Beasley is a great friend of Mourinho. This is well-known right from his first spell at Chelsea.

This is credible.

So, you don't understand how tabloids function. That's ok. Tell me, in your world view, would you consider the daily mail capable of quoting out of context to portray some subject in a certain light, stuff like that?

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Rob Beasley, definitely not making an effort to sell his book:

https://twitter.com/1RobBeasley

To order book outside the UK: FRANCE
France – WH Smith in Paris

To order book outside UK: INDONESIA
Indonesia - Periplus - http://www.periplus.com/

To order José book outside UK: SOUTH AFRICA
South Africa - http://www.exclus1ves.co.za/

To order José book outside UK:
Canada - Indigo - https://www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/

To order book outside UK:
New Zealand - Whitcoulls - http://www.whitcoulls.co.nz/

To order book outside UK:
Australia - Dymocks - https://www.dymocks.com.au/

To buy José book outside UK:
Hong Kong - Bookazine - http://bookazine.com.hk/eshop/

That's in the last hour. There's more, I got tired of copy/pasting. Sorry about that.

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

Second rule, of course, is tabloid sourcing. What better way to understand the world than reading the Daily Mail?

Here we go again.

Beasley is a great friend of Mourinho. This is well-known right from his first spell at Chelsea.

This is credible.

So, you don't understand how tabloids function. That's ok. Tell me, in your world view, would you consider the daily mail capable of quoting out of context to portray some subject in a certain light, stuff like that?

How can it be quoted out of context when it's a direct extract from a book. The extract provided context around the quote.

This book isn't done on the part by the Daily Mail.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

I detest the man.

That's always a good starting point when you want to make a correct assessment of reality. In fact first rule of rational thinking is:

Always let your sentiment get in the way of your thoughts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationality_101

Judgments can be made on facts and past actions, because listening to and reading the facts is what drives discussion to the form of eventually coming to an opinion on something.

Yes, when you are aware of the facts. Reading/Quoting tabloids, though, is not a good start. It doesn't speak well of your ability of distiguishing reality. Trust me on this one.

Oh and my opinion is a correct assessment of reality. This adds further to it, if I already needed anymore based on his past history.

Oh, so you do know Mourinho? Care to share that story?

You make it sound like this is the first time he crossed the line and that I had this opinion in the absence of anything prior.

[/quote]
What line? What are you talking about? Do tell us your "The way I got to know Mourinho" story.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

How can it be quoted out of context when it's a direct extract from a book. The extract provided context around the quote.

This book isn't done on the part by the Daily Mail.

You're not being clear. You don't understand the meaning of context?

You think a quote being "a direct extract from a book" makes the quote to be in context?

the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.

 

[gooner]

Poking Tito in the eye
Calling Wenger a voyeur, specialist in failure
Brought a toxic nature to the Barca/Real rivalry
Mocked Ranieri's record, age and grasp of English
Said Carvalho needed an IQ test
His rant on UEFA, Barca, Unicef,
Eva Caneiro

Now this book.

Do I need to go on?

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

How can it be quoted out of context when it's a direct extract from a book. The extract provided context around the quote.

This book isn't done on the part by the Daily Mail.

You're not being clear. You don't understand the meaning of context?

You think a quote being "a direct extract from a book" makes the quote to be in context?

the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.

The circumstances are laid out by Beasley around each quote. Context is given why he said all this. You can choose to ignore if you want.

I don't think you realise how close Beasley is to Mourinho.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Poking Tito in the eye

What about it? Maybe he it had it coming? either way, it seems pretty common stuff like that happening during a football match.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcK8SMlGfdU

It's sort of a viril game, in case you hadn't notice it. Don't watch it if can't take it, that's my suggestion.

Finally, it appears everything was sorted out between the two involved, which is what one expects from civilized people regarding private matters.

Picture:
http://www.fcbarcelonaclan.com/actu/fc-barcelone-3-2-real-madrid-satisfaisant-mais-att/9898.html

When he pokes your eye, then you can complain.

Calling Wenger a voyeur, specialist in failure

Yes? Which is true. A correct assessment.

Brought a toxic nature to the Barca/Real rivalry

Actually it's a historic rivalry. He brought RM into the fight, from which they had been away for years then, unable to win Barcelona: that's the reason he was brought in. When he left, Barcelona was unable to win Real Madrid.

Mocked Ranieri's record, age and grasp of English

I don't know, show me the video. He's a witty fellow, that's what people do, they mock each other.

Ranieiri is not upset with Mourinho (video from yesterday)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WXrzb80a9Q

Again, try to listen to the people involved before acting like the moralist king. It makes you look, well, daily-mailyesque.

Said Carvalho needed an IQ test

I don't know this one. Not one of his wittiest, I guess: to me it looks a rather banal way to say someone is not very smart.

His rant on UEFA, Barca, Unicef,

What about it? You think he wasn't right then? Barcelona not been helped by referee decisions over the years? We have a lot to discuss, I see.

Eva Caneiro

Who?

Now this book.

You read it then?

Do I need to go on?

[/quote]
You need to present something with credibility/value to make your case. Present people (not trying to sell a book) that know him and that say he's an awful person, or whatever it is you think. Go on, then. You already started badly with Ranieri and Vilanova.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

How can it be quoted out of context when it's a direct extract from a book. The extract provided context around the quote.

This book isn't done on the part by the Daily Mail.

You're not being clear. You don't understand the meaning of context?

You think a quote being "a direct extract from a book" makes the quote to be in context?

the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.

The circumstances are laid out by Beasley around each quote. Context is given why he said all this. You can choose to ignore if you want.

I don't think you realise how close Beasley is to Mourinho.

I see no context provided. All I see is someone trying really hard to sell a book. And the daily mail eager to help him/get some clicks in the process.

Again, check his twitter.

https://twitter.com/1RobBeasley

 

[gooner]

Re: Re:

How can it be quoted out of context when it's a direct extract from a book. The extract provided context around the quote.

This book isn't done on the part by the Daily Mail.

You're not being clear. You don't understand the meaning of context?

You think a quote being "a direct extract from a book" makes the quote to be in context?

the circumstances that form the setting for an event, statement, or idea, and in terms of which it can be fully understood.

The circumstances are laid out by Beasley around each quote. Context is given why he said all this. You can choose to ignore if you want.

I don't think you realise how close Beasley is to Mourinho.

I see no context provided. All I see is someone trying really hard to sell a book. And the daily mail eager to help him/get some clicks in the process.

Again, check his twitter.

https://twitter.com/1RobBeasley

Yes, isn't he supposed to promote it? BTW, no fan of Beasley. He's one of the most arrogant sports journalists you would see. He's full of himself. Nevertheless, he's close to Mourinho. That is a fact that can't be denied. Ever watch the Sunday Supplement, you would see that when he speaks about him.

The context is in the extract. He provides the nature of the conversation and the back and forth between himself and Mourinho.

 

[gooner]

Re:

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

From someone who comments on the Fancy Bears hack and hasn't met the athletes, you ain't short of an opinion on that.

Absurd then to use that logic to say I should stay quiet.

I heard Mourinho call Wenger a specialist in failure and voyeur. I seen the rant about Barca, UEFA and Unicef in the press conference after the Champions League game. The death threats to Anders Frisk were real. I saw the poke in Tito's eye. I heard his comments about Eva Caneiro running on to the pitch to do her job.

I can make a compelling judgment on these instances. They aren't twisted by the media and are matter of facts. They weren't some camera act either making up the words coming out of his mouth.

Keep digging

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

From someone who comments on the Fancy Bears hack and hasn't met the athletes, you ain't short of an opinion on that.

Absurd then to use that logic to say I should stay quiet.

You're confused, man. Where did I make such personal judgements of any athlete? Go search for the quote and provide the link, please. That's the least you can do before making accusations.

I heard Mourinho call Wenger a specialist in failure and voyeur.

Yes, like I said, it sounded like a witty response. Arsene said Mourinho was afraid of failing. Mourinho replied he's not a specialist in failure, Arsene is. Which is true. What about it, really?

I seen the rant about Barca, UEFA and Unicef in the press conference after the Champions League game.

Yes, what about it? He's wondering about the help Barcelona had through the years from referees. It's puzzling to me too.

The death threats to Anders Frisk were real.

made by Mourinho, you say? Oh, that's an awful crime. Why wasn't he sent to to jail, in your view?

I saw the poke in Tito's eye.

And? None of your business, like explained before. It's between Tito and Mourinho. They seem to get along fine after the incident (see photo from before). Which to me says more about the good human qualities of both of them than anything else.

I heard his comments about Eva Caneiro running on to the pitch to do her job.

It's Carneiro. What about them? He said she had been naive and impulsive. How sensitive are you, really?
Just think about what you're saying. Do you go to the corner and cry whenever someone says you're naive?

I can make a compelling judgment on these instances.

You got it wrong, like I've explained. Or you're just way too sensitive for this world. It's none of my business, of course, but if mocking someone/calling them naive has such an effect on you, then you didn't grow enough, as a person. Which would make you not the most sensible person to have a sufficient understanding of how the world works to make the judgements you're trying to make.

They aren't twisted by the media and are matter of facts. They weren't some camera act either making up the words coming out of his mouth.

It's nothing, really. It's just mocking/saying what he thinks. Trust me, it happens a lot in the real world, and it's not a sign of awfulness, just of wit/straightforwardness. You really should go out more often.

Keep digging

[/quote][/quote]
Oh, I will.

 

[BigMac]

Re:

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

Actions define people. It's silly to suggest you need to actually know someone in order to have an opinion on their open affairs. You may need to know Mourinho so as to comment on his personal life. You don't need to know him to comment on his character and public persona. Unless you think he purposely portrays a degenerate version of his true self in the media for some reason?

 

[gooner]

Agree, BigMac.

@AlbineVespuzzio, See the Fancy Bears is relevant, you're making a judgement on the TUEs that those athletes have got. How do you know they are lying or that they are genuine? I could easily say based on your logic that you don't know the athletes personally or weren't part of their inner circle when those TUEs were applied for.

Can we really comment on any sportsperson then going by your position?

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

Actions define people. It's silly to suggest you need to actually know someone in order to have an opinion on their open affairs. You may need to know Mourinho so as to comment on his personal life. You don't need to know him to comment on his character and public persona. Unless you think he purposely portrays a degenerate version of his true self in the media for some reason?

gooner said he "detests the man". That's speaking like he knows him. Go read back, please.

 

[BigMac]

Re: Re:

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

Actions define people. It's silly to suggest you need to actually know someone in order to have an opinion on their open affairs. You may need to know Mourinho so as to comment on his personal life. You don't need to know him to comment on his character and public persona. Unless you think he purposely portrays a degenerate version of his true self in the media for some reason?

gooner said he "detests the man". That's speaking like he knows him. Go read back, please.

Can he not detest him for what he's shown himself to be? Gooner even made you a list upthread. He could have gone on so many are the reasons.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Agree, BigMac.

@AlbineVespuzzio, See the Fancy Bears is relevant, you're making a judgement on the TUEs that those athletes have got. How do you know they are lying or that they are genuine? I could easily say based on your logic that you don't know the athletes personally or weren't part of their inner circle when those TUEs were applied for.

You're confused. In no instance have I made any personal judgement over someone I don't know. Go read your own post that started this, and look for distinctions, please.

Can we really comment on any sportsperson then going by your position?

You can do whatever you want. However, when you talk about someone like you know him, you risk having that pointed out to you.

 

[AlbineVespuzzio]

Re: Re:

The problem here, gooner, I think, is that you can't distinguish reality from what is transmitted to you through media lenses.

You seem convinced that you actually know the man. Yet, you don't.

It's not an uncommon phenomenon, I get it, media today is very powerful. But that doesn't make your attitude a rational one. Think about it. Try to remember when you met Mourinho, surely you'll come up with a void, maybe realise that you have no basis on reality to make that personal judgement.

Actions define people. It's silly to suggest you need to actually know someone in order to have an opinion on their open affairs. You may need to know Mourinho so as to comment on his personal life. You don't need to know him to comment on his character and public persona. Unless you think he purposely portrays a degenerate version of his true self in the media for some reason?

gooner said he "detests the man". That's speaking like he knows him. Go read back, please.

Can he not detest him for what he's shown himself to be?

He can feel whatever he wants. Yet, it's still a sentiment not based on reality. He's trying to feel through the lenses of mass media, which is the mistake I'm pointing out. Look at him: he thinks calling someone naive is a reason for hate. lol, it's crazy!

Gooner even made you a list upthread. He could have gone on so many are the reasons.

To which I replied point by point, and he was unable to reply back. All nonsense: mocking and saying someone is naive and impulsive. He's either an over-sensitive person (beyond reasonable) or just not seeing things straight (I think it's the latter, like I said, mass media is a very powerful device, it has the power to make some people think they know people they don't).