RUMOUR - Tommy Smith

[Rawlie19]

This post was made by Snowball who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

[CMRoyal]

Yeah you do...

Now which offer is "derisory"
(a) Here is a million or so, actual money
(b) Here is a pretend 1.8 million.

Mike, where, in the above, did I use the word "Reading"?

Under (a) above, you and others ASSUME (or is it presume) that:

(a) Here is a million or so, actual money

refers to Reading FC.


Yet nowhere do I say a sentence which begins "Reading FC have made a formal offer of "a million or so"

I'm a professional writer. I make my living from it. Have done so for 17 years.

Too often people read something and answer something else.

All my "derisory" post was really about was saying that Sheffield's "offer"
like their alleged January offer for Lita, doesn't appear to have substance.

The logical conclusion to be drawn from your quoting the specific word the Watford chairman used to describe Reading's offer for Smith (ie "derisory") as a pretext for your comparison is that you were referring to our offer. If that's not the case, there are three explanations for what has happened here:-

1. You are a poor writer - I don't believe that is the case
2. You deliberately set a rather cumbersome trap in order to provoke a flame war - I don't believe that is the case
3. You exaggerated your initial point, and when picked up on it decided to spin your way out of it rather than concede ground to a poster who winds you up a bit

[IMAMATEOFJOVSKY]

From Getreading

http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/football/readingfc/s/2054335_ryan_bertrand_set_for_a_loan_switch

Negotiations for Watford striker Tommy Smith have all but stopped as the club have not gone back with an improved offer after their bid of £750,000 was flatly rejected.

So no £1M ish bid then.

Don't do £1m pounders anymore - Chairmans hand shakes too much when pen hovers over cheque - amazingly its quite controlled when writing cheques for £300k players or £5m statues

[(.)Boobies(.)]

From Getreading

http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/football/readingfc/s/2054335_ryan_bertrand_set_for_a_loan_switch

Negotiations for Watford striker Tommy Smith have all but stopped as the club have not gone back with an improved offer after their bid of £750,000 was flatly rejected.

So no £1M ish bid then.

Don't do £1m pounders anymore - Chairmans hand shakes too much when pen hovers over cheque - amazingly its quite controlled when writing cheques for £300k players or £5m statues

I had heard we went back with a new bid, this was apparently accepted on Monday, but Watford have been haggling for more in the add ons side of the deal. (no idea if there has been a conclusion on that yet) Smith, I'm told, has held talks with Reading - no idea how long for or how they're going though. I haven't heard anything about the what the new transfer fee is, but the £1.2m you say does seem about right, with a little cherry on top if we earn promotion.

My post was based on a very reliable source and good friend.
This is Reading playing hard ball and us upping the anti as Russo continues to mess us about. Watford have a player that wants out, there is good money on the table, but the chairman wants to be as awkward as he possibly can be.

[Ian Royal]

The logical conclusion to be drawn from your quoting the specific word the Watford chairman used to describe Reading's offer for Smith (ie "derisory") as a pretext for your comparison is that you were referring to our offer. If that's not the case, there are three explanations for what has happened here:-

1. You are a poor writer - I don't believe that is the case
2. You deliberately set a rather cumbersome trap in order to provoke a flame war - I don't believe that is the case
3. You exaggerated your initial point, and when picked up on it decided to spin your way out of it rather than concede ground to a poster who winds you up a bit

I'm glad someone said what I wanted to, but avoided to try and end the arguing.

[Royal Rother]

The logical conclusion is to accept that his meaning of "a million or so" is different to most other people's.

Why do we choose not to accept others' statements about their own beliefs / values / interpretations etc.? It would truly be a bizarre thing to lie about - far better just to accept it and move on imho.

[Ian Royal]

The logical conclusion is to accept that his meaning of "a million or so" is different to most other people's.

Why do we choose not to accept others' statements about their own beliefs / values / interpretations etc.? It would truly be a bizarre thing to lie about - far better just to accept it and move on imho.

I have accepted that snowball believes a million or so = £750k/£800k - £1.something million.

Hence why I said if he'd just explained that, to my honest (if slightly barbed) question, all of this could have been avoided. He'd still be wrong about that interpretation, as evidenced by just about everyone disagreeing with his interpretation, but his post would have made much more sense.

Instead he went off on one trying to spin what he'd said as it was handily vague, to get at me.

I'm happy to leave it there as I've said several times already. I just don't feel like I should step back and allow others to misinterpret me, like you appear to me, to have just done.

[CMRoyal]

The logical conclusion is to accept that his meaning of "a million or so" is different to most other people's.

Why do we choose not to accept others' statements about their own beliefs / values / interpretations etc.? It would truly be a bizarre thing to lie about - far better just to accept it and move on imho.

No, it quite clearly isn't as we get these issues regularly, and in my opinion they can be nipped in the bud with a bit of reasoned discussion over where the misunderstandings arise. snowball, bless him, is a stickler for accuracy, and we all love and appreciate him for that. He's also a professional writer. As such, I'd be amazed if he didn't appreciate someone explaining how they feel that his combination of (accidentally misleading) language and...let's call it application of an uncharacteristically generous statistical margin, led to people missing the point of what he was trying to say.

[Royal Rother]

Not sure where I have misinterpreted you Ian, but hey ho...

Snowball posts like a jerk much of the time, because he is all about point-scoring and bickering of the most banal level, but I just don't know why anyone would bother getting dragged into it.

His stats are interesting and useful, but he rarely if ever, to my memory, draws an interpretative conclusion from those stats - i.e. he doesn't say "this proves that Long is a better footballer than Doyle" - in fact he has said quite the opposite which was based on his pure observations in the same way the rest of us will do.

Others choose to pull the stats apart assuming he has drawn conslusions which he hasn't actually done. I just find it all a bit bizarre when it descends into virtual farce.

[Dirk Gently]

I just get frustrated at the whole concept of him thinking that the game which I love, which is a game of multiple subtleties and nuances, can be accurately represented by numbers - especially numbers which are just a few selected factors of this multi-layered, multi-facetted sport.

[Royal Lady]

I just get frustrated at the whole concept of him thinking that the game which I love, which is a game of multiple subtleties and nuances, can be accurately represented by numbers - especially numbers which are just a few selected factors of this multi-layered, multi-facetted sport.

Ooh. Get you!

[Geekins]

I don't want Tommy Smith so i'm pleased.

[Snowball]

Not sure where I have misinterpreted you Ian, but hey ho...

Snowball posts like a jerk much of the time, because he is all about point-scoring and bickering of the most banal level, but I just don't know why anyone would bother getting dragged into it.

His stats are interesting and useful, but he rarely if ever, to my memory, draws an interpretative conclusion from those stats - i.e. he doesn't say "this proves that Long is a better footballer than Doyle" - in fact he has said quite the opposite which was based on his pure observations in the same way the rest of us will do.

Others choose to pull the stats apart assuming he has drawn conslusions which he hasn't actually done. I just find it all a bit bizarre when it descends into virtual farce.

Exactly. I am on record, was on record, time after time after time as saying NO WAY would I pick Shane Long over the Doyle-Hunt partnership. The original stats were NOT about saying he should be picked, merely that he was better than the general (not HNA Universal) opinion. I have also said that I think there's a good chance he won't fit Rodger's systems and that in 433-451 Henry, then Church MIGHT work better.

But let's get one thing absolutely clear. The "derisory" post WAS NOT ABOUT TREADING FC.

The "derisory post" was a post taking the piss out of SHEFFIELD and whether the amount I had posted said "750K" (the alleged figure floating around Reading) "800K" (the figure posted by Watford) OR "£1,000,000" OR "something approaching a million" OR "a million or so.."

is IRRELEVANT.


I wasn't discussing OUR bid, or Wolves' bid or a bid by another club. The Watford site said they had TWO one million plus bids other than Sheffield's, ALL I was discussing was Sheffield's tossing numbers around (like they did with their ALLEGED offer in January for Lita) and making the point that at least the other offers were real ones and not the football version of "Of course I'll love you in the morning."

[Royal Rother]

I just get frustrated at the whole concept of him thinking that the game which I love, which is a game of multiple subtleties and nuances, can be accurately represented by numbers - especially numbers which are just a few selected factors of this multi-layered, multi-facetted sport.

But football can be far more accurately represented by numbers than any form of observation.

It will always come down to how the numbers are used / interpreted but the numbers themselves are largely accurate - everything else is just opinion.

[Snowball]

The logical conclusion is to accept that his meaning of "a million or so" is different to most other people's.

Why do we choose not to accept others' statements about their own beliefs / values / interpretations etc.? It would truly be a bizarre thing to lie about - far better just to accept it and move on imho.

I have accepted that snowball believes a million or so = £750k/£800k - £1.something million.

Hence why I said if he'd just explained that, to my honest (if slightly barbed) question, all of this could have been avoided. He'd still be wrong about that interpretation, as evidenced by just about everyone disagreeing with his interpretation, but his post would have made much more sense.

Instead he went off on one trying to spin what he'd said as it was handily vague, to get at me.

I'm happy to leave it there as I've said several times already. I just don't feel like I should step back and allow others to misinterpret me, like you appear to me, to have just done.

I didn't "spin" anything. I just repeated my personal beliefs. YOU are the stalker.

If the beer in a pub is £1:75 to £2:25 that, to me, is "The beer is a coupla quid or so."

[CMRoyal]

Not sure where I have misinterpreted you Ian, but hey ho...

Snowball posts like a jerk much of the time, because he is all about point-scoring and bickering of the most banal level, but I just don't know why anyone would bother getting dragged into it.

His stats are interesting and useful, but he rarely if ever, to my memory, draws an interpretative conclusion from those stats - i.e. he doesn't say "this proves that Long is a better footballer than Doyle" - in fact he has said quite the opposite which was based on his pure observations in the same way the rest of us will do.

Others choose to pull the stats apart assuming he has drawn conslusions which he hasn't actually done. I just find it all a bit bizarre when it descends into virtual farce.

Exactly. I am on record, was on record, time after time after time as saying NO WAY would I pick Shane Long over the Doyle-Hunt partnership. The original stats were NOT about saying he should be picked, merely that he was better than the general (not HNA Universal) opinion. I have also said that I think there's a good chance he won't fit Rodger's systems and that in 433-451 Henry, then Church MIGHT work better.

But let's get one thing absolutely clear. The "derisory" post WAS NOT ABOUT TREADING FC.

The "derisory post" was a post taking the piss out of SHEFFIELD and whether the amount I had posted said "750K" (the alleged figure floating around Reading) "800K" (the figure posted by Watford) OR "£1,000,000" OR "something approaching a million" OR "a million or so.."

is IRRELEVANT.


I wasn't discussing OUR bid, or Wolves' bid or a bid by another club. The Watford site said they had TWO one million plus bids other than Sheffield's, ALL I was discussing was Sheffield's tossing numbers around (like they did with their ALLEGED offer in January for Lita) and making the point that at least the other offers were real ones and not the football version of "Of course I'll love you in the morning."

Yeah, you made a good point. Ian Royal overreacted to one nebulous part of it, but really it's up to you and you alone whether you decide to strive for more clarity in future.

Case closed for me too (you'll be pleased to read!).

[Hoop Blah]

Totally agree with Dirk and to a lesser extent RR.

Snowballs stats are quite interesting at times but they have to be taken with a massive pinch of salt for two reasons, firstly they're often a little biased and innaccurate, and secondly because stats generally mean diddly squat in terms of understanding football.

I have to admit that Snowball's utter reliance and continues spouting of these stats as if they prove anything really gets my goat. He then rambles on about people not understanding the game or being knee-jerkers and getting himself embrailed in petty little squabbles and arguements.

I find it amazing that the guy is apparently of an age where he should know better or be able to deal a little more graciously with someone with a different opinion.

[Royal Rother]

Totally agree with Dirk and to a lesser extent RR.

How does that work then? I thought I was disagreeing with Dirk!!

[Royal Rother]

I have to admit that Snowball's utter reliance and continues spouting of these stats as if they prove anything really gets my goat. He then rambles on about people not understanding the game or being knee-jerkers and getting himself embrailed in petty little squabbles and arguements.

But, seriously, the only thing I can recall him claiming about the stats is that they can add extra dimensions to the assessment of players. To my recollection this has been the only real claim he has made!!

i.e. with Long - it was only ever about "Long is better than people give him credit for".

Quite how that has enabled him to reach 1500 posts (or whatever) is incredible, but as you rightly say, he is an argumentative sod!!

[Hoop Blah]

Totally agree with Dirk and to a lesser extent RR.

How does that work then? I thought I was disagreeing with Dirk!!

I was agreeing with your earlier post about Snowball being a 'jerk' and his stats interesting, whilst totally agreeing with Dirks opinion of the use of stats to try and explain the ins and outs of football.

I have to admit that Snowball's utter reliance and continues spouting of these stats as if they prove anything really gets my goat. He then rambles on about people not understanding the game or being knee-jerkers and getting himself embrailed in petty little squabbles and arguements.

But, seriously, the only thing I can recall him claiming about the stats is that they can add extra dimensions to the assessment of players. To my recollection this has been the only real claim he has made!!

i.e. with Long - it was only ever about "Long is better than people give him credit for".

Quite how that has enabled him to reach 1500 posts (or whatever) is incredible, but as you rightly say, he is an argumentative sod!!

I don't think it's so much what he says as in the way he presents it.

The Shane Long discussion is full of Snowball trying to prove that Long is better than people think because statistically he was out performing some of the better players. I think the arguement developed more into how the stats don't actually reflect the reality of the game or performance than anything else. Long was just the test case stuck in the middle.

Snowballs inability to grasp that and then his impersonation of a Schards/Woodcote failure to conceed ground just made it spiral out of control!!

Passes the time of day though I guess...