Jason Roberts idiot

[Ghost Royal]

I've studied history so I can explain the historical reasons and the political context that led to the Holocaust. Does that mean I support it or justify it?

Godwin's Law comes to HNA!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

[ZacNaloen]

Took long enough

[FiNeRaIn]

[rhroyal]

I've studied history so I can explain the historical reasons and the political context that led to the Holocaust. Does that mean I support it or justify it?

Godwin's Law comes to HNA!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Never heard of that before. Entirely true.

[Svlad Cjelli]

I've studied history so I can explain the historical reasons and the political context that led to the Holocaust. Does that mean I support it or justify it?

Godwin's Law comes to HNA!!!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

I was waiting for that from someone - the big difference here is that Godwin's Law refers to a poster making the comparison that someone's stated views are equivalent to those of the Nazis' views. I n this case I've referred to them in a completely different way simply as an historical event - but without referencing anyone's views as required by Godwin's Law. So I'm afraid you've fallen for the knee-jerk "quote Godwin's Law as soon as WW2 is mentioned" reaction without actually understanding it.

Oh, and I notice that was your first post - oxf*rd off, newbie.

[ZacNaloen]

I think you mean "trying to mock" me - none of the punches have even vaguely got past the defences .... I will concede it's a lovely sidestep you've made in avoiding the direct question I asked you - presumably a Wenger-esque "I did not see ze question" will follow .....

Put your glasses on Dirk. I answered your question in the second sentence

If you explain something you are therefore also justifying it? Really?? I've studied history so I can explain the historical reasons and the political context that led to the Holocaust. Does that mean I support it or justify it?

That's the thing though isn't it?

You aren't just explaining why Collison got angry.We know why Collison got angry and kicked Kebe. It's because he lost his temper and didn't take the time to think and calm down. It doesn't need explaining. But why then do pundits and you feel the need to explain why kebe got the challenge that he did? The punditry should end with "You just don't tackle like that". But, no we get this instead

"You just don't do that in English football, we have RULES dontcha know". That's where you cross the line from an explanation to shifting the blame.

[Maguire]

For you to be citing these unwritten rules as an explanation, also means that you are citing them as a justification

Wrong

[ZacNaloen]

It's shifting the blame and you know it, the code doesn't explain the tackle. They might explain why he got angry, but that's it.

[Extended-Phenotype]

(to melonhead) You're thinking like a fan

You're thinking like a lego-arsed prick. It isn't understandable, it isn't condonable, and featureless thumb-headed sob-w&nks like Steve "looks like a chewed peice of gum" Claridge should be struck off if they (a) are struggling to remain impartial (b) can't stop themselves making unsupported xenophobic remarks and (c) think like Weatherspoon 2-for-1 daydrunk thugs like yourself who "understand" assault in response to harmless fun.

Replace your pathetic "respect" and "unwritten rules" with "adults" and "real world", then f// off and "understand" something a bit more useful like how to f//k without thinking of your mother taking a shower.

[rhroyal]

(to melonhead) You're thinking like a fan

You're thinking like a lego-arsed prick. It isn't understandable, it isn't condonable, and featureless thumb-headed sob-w&nks like Steve "looks like a chewed peice of gum" Claridge should be struck off if they (a) are struggling to remain impartial (b) can't stop themselves making unsupported xenophobic remarks and (c) think like Weatherspoon 2-for-1 daydrunk thugs like yourself who "understand" assault in response to harmless fun.

Replace your pathetic "respect" and "unwritten rules" with "adults" and "real world", then f// off and "understand" something a bit more useful like how to f//k without thinking of your mother taking a shower.

[Svlad Cjelli]

(to melonhead) You're thinking like a fan

You're thinking like a lego-arsed prick. It isn't understandable, it isn't condonable, and featureless thumb-headed sob-w&nks like Steve "looks like a chewed peice of gum" Claridge should be struck off if they (a) are struggling to remain impartial (b) can't stop themselves making unsupported xenophobic remarks and (c) think like Weatherspoon 2-for-1 daydrunk thugs like yourself who "understand" assault in response to harmless fun.

Replace your pathetic "respect" and "unwritten rules" with "adults" and "real world", then f// off and "understand" something a bit more useful like how to f//k without thinking of your mother taking a shower.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some time earlier

[Svlad Cjelli]

It's shifting the blame and you know it, the code doesn't explain the tackle. They might explain why he got angry, but that's it.

Once he's got angry what esle is there to explain? Or what else has anyone tried to assert. From that point anything can happen.

[ZacNaloen]

So why did you bother explaining it?

That's the whole oxf*rd point

[TFF]

This was posted elsewhere but is a perfect example from abroad : http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/video/08122011/58/showboating-leads-brawl.html

Claridge was right. That fella's not English either.

[Svlad Cjelli]

If you explain something you are therefore also justifying it? Really?? I've studied history so I can explain the historical reasons and the political context that led to the Holocaust. Does that mean I support it or justify it?

That's the thing though isn't it?

You aren't just explaining why Collison got angry.We know why Collison got angry and kicked Kebe. It's because he lost his temper and didn't take the time to think and calm down. It doesn't need explaining. But why then do pundits and you feel the need to explain why kebe got the challenge that he did? The punditry should end with "You just don't tackle like that". But, no we get this instead

"You just don't do that in English football, we have RULES dontcha know". That's where you cross the line from an explanation to shifting the blame.

Read back and you'll find I've said throughout that Collison was stupid and wrong and even that I think he'll receive an additional punishment because this was clearly intentional and malicious. I think I've also explicitly stated that there was no excuse for his behaviour - and I'd be stupified if you could show otherwise. Any suggestion that I've ever tried to defend, condone or do anything other than explain his behaviour is entirely in your own mind.

By taking the piss Kebe made himself more likely to be clattered; he was clattered, quickly and unsubtly; the offender was sent off and will be properly punished. I honestly don't see what point you're trying to argue here.

[Rex]

Amir Khan bouncing back off the ropes.

[Casino_Royal]

I can see exactly what Svlad is trying to say.


I just don't know why he's bothering

[ZacNaloen]

I know exactly what Dirk is trying to say as well, if he just said and stopped quoting imaginary laws of the game that only hinder his point he'd actually get somewhere.

Collison got angry because he didn't like being taken the mick out of. I understand that.

Collison got angry because he didn't like being taken the mick out and understandablly kicked Kebe and pushed him over.

[Svlad Cjelli]

I know exactly what Dirk is trying to say as well, if he just said and stopped quoting imaginary laws of the game that only hinder his point he'd actually get somewhere.

Collison got angry because he didn't like being taken the mick out of. I understand that.

Collison got angry because he didn't like being taken the mick out and understandablly kicked Kebe and pushed him over.

"Understandably" is entirely your word, not mine.

[Casino_Royal]

To an outsider it looks a bit like you're violently agreeing with one another.