Has everyone calmed down now?

User avatar
brendywendy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12060
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 15:29
Location: coming straight outa crowthorne

by brendywendy » 05 Sep 2007 10:02

Behindu I can never see the point of seeing the 'blackest' option. Sonks has always had the end of September as his return target, the 'official'
updates have pretty consistently supported that and so has unoffical news. There is no reason to claim that 'realistically' it's 4-6 weeks away, any more than it's 'realistic' to say Little is a couple of months away.

I know we've seen situations before where recovery has taken longer than expected and players have set backs but why claim wild guesses are 'realistic' when they quite clearly aren't !

I'd be a little worried if Sonks did return against Liverpool - woul dmuch rather he had a reserve game first !

People will be picking figures out of the air to prove the club is making a huge profit / loss next !!!


racist

User avatar
knights_1990
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 15:27
Location: Reading

by knights_1990 » 05 Sep 2007 10:18

When is sonks expected back then

User avatar
Franchise FC
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11697
Joined: 22 May 2007 16:24
Location: Relocated to LA

by Franchise FC » 05 Sep 2007 13:27

Behindu People will be picking figures out of the air to prove the club is making a huge profit / loss next !!!


Err.......£10m

User avatar
zac naloen
Member
Posts: 852
Joined: 16 Jul 2006 16:27
Location: Woodley

by zac naloen » 05 Sep 2007 13:36

knights_1990 When is sonks expected back then


He's training now, so as soon as he's match fit and pushed himself far enough up the pecking order I suspect.

User avatar
RoyalBlue
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 11779
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:39
Location: Developed a pathological hatred of snakes on 14/10/19

by RoyalBlue » 05 Sep 2007 14:35

Behindu I can never see the point of seeing the 'blackest' option. Sonks has always had the end of September as his return target, the 'official'
updates have pretty consistently supported that and so has unoffical news. There is no reason to claim that 'realistically' it's 4-6 weeks away, any more than it's 'realistic' to say Little is a couple of months away.

I know we've seen situations before where recovery has taken longer than expected and players have set backs but why claim wild guesses are 'realistic' when they quite clearly aren't !

I'd be a little worried if Sonks did return against Liverpool - woul dmuch rather he had a reserve game first !

People will be picking figures out of the air to prove the club is making a huge profit / loss next !!!


So what constitutes 'a few weeks'? Two would be a couple. Presumably that makes 'a few' three or four, at which point he will be 'back in full training'.

So saying 'realistically 4-6' weeks from a return to first team football has nothing to do with taking a wild guess, being unrealistic or taking the blackest option. It is merely making a deduction based on the proper meaning of the words used in the original statement.

Likewise Little is only expected to be getting into a position over the 'next few weeks' where he can start running . Assuming that Little isn't even able to start running for a few weeks, is it really unrealistic or taking a really pessimistic view to suggest that he won't be back into first team football for at least a couple of months?

Now leaving aside the actual meaning of the words used, there have been plenty of occasions when predicted returns to first team football have proved to have been over-optimistic. Kitson has been a serial offender! and Little himself has suffered from this with his current injury.

So you eternal optimists can continue to 'Always look on the bright side of life' (and don't forget those who sang that were crucified), whilst I will stick to what I regard as realistic and my interpretation of the English used in the statements.


User avatar
brendywendy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12060
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 15:29
Location: coming straight outa crowthorne

by brendywendy » 05 Sep 2007 15:07


Behindu
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1970
Joined: 01 Mar 2007 15:05

by Behindu » 05 Sep 2007 15:31

RB there are more holes in your 'assumptions' than there were in our defence on Saturday !
This could easily descend into gross pedantry but i would certainly question the point that 'few' must be 3 or 4 and the follow on from that which suggests he'll be back in 6 weeks.
Defining 'few' as 3 or 4 isn;t using the 'proper' meaning of the word - the proper meaning is 'a very small number', it's bad logic to have a conclusion then make your evidence fit it !


You keep to your interpetation of words but i'll stick to reality ! On the other hand it's quite possible that the returns may be delayed, your interpretation is not correctly defined as 'realistic' though !

This correspondance deserves to die at this point !! As ever I'm sure we can agree to differ ....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 265 guests

It is currently 26 Nov 2024 07:49