Mikel Arteta: Aston La Vista To The Title?

[drippin]

How is a geezer who attacks someone’s English skills trusted on here btw?

He has done nothing but attacked my understanding or English skills.

He could have done it better in so many ways, explaining what meant or how he wrote it wrong etc. to save his post. But no, he did all the wrong things, and people spur him on. It's weird.

Then I'm the one who has the problem when the argument becomes long, because the other person can't behave properly. And it's not even rare when this happens.

And notice again how I'm not going to insults, because I don't have to. I do it quite rarely, but people claim I'm "obnoxious" or a bad poster.

 

[jones]

How is a geezer who attacks someone’s English skills trusted on here btw?

Same reason you are allowed to post here

 

[jones]

All you can do is resort to insults, while not being a native English speaker yourself.

It's pitiful mate. You could discuss this normally, but no, you make argumentation mistakes non-stop as your first post was such nonsense. But that makes it understandable, so you do you.

I did not insult you, I gave you the benefit of the doubt by thinking you didn't understand what I wrote.

You keep doubling down while ignoring that I said about five times none of the posts were about Arteta. Don't think there's much to discuss here but enlighten me if there is

 

[drippin]

I did not insult you, I gave you the benefit of the doubt by thinking you didn't understand what I wrote.

You keep doubling down while ignoring that I said about five times none of the posts were about Arteta. Don't think there's much to discuss here but enlighten me if there is

I already explained why your comment about not rating people if someone "canonises" them makes no sense at all.

Paraphrased: "No normal person would rate Arteta after these over-the-top praising articles that were written about him."

Let's say Messi. If someone "canonises" him by writing praising articles about his success, it means you would not rate Messi anymore? I'm absolutely sure you're not this stupid. But somehow this is so difficult.

Explain it to me like I was 7 years old, but without insulting me. Or you can insult me, I don't really care.

 

[jones]

I already explained why your comment about not rating people if someone "canonises" them makes no sense at all.

Let's say Messi. If someone "canonises" him by writing praising articles about his success, it means you would not rate Messi anymore? I'm absolutely sure you're not this stupid. But somehow this is so difficult.

I'm absolutely sure you're not dumb enough to make this comparison.

Messi is at the end of a long career and universally known as the greatest football player ever, he doesn't need canonising. Is he really the only person you could think of to replace the "someone" in that sentence?

 

[drippin]

I'm absolutely sure you're not dumb enough to make this comparison.

Messi is at the end of a long career and universally known as the greatest football player ever, he doesn't need canonising. Is he really the only person you could think of to replace the "someone" in that sentence?

Ffs. It was just an example.

You can imagine any player you want instead of him.

Someone writing praising articles about Messi, Arteta, Saka, Bowen, Kudus or whoever, doesn't affect at all how much I rate them. I have my own rating system.

Why does it affect me being "a normal person", if my personal rating of players is not affected if some journalists praise them?

Imagine if all professional people around football would stop rating a player because someone praises them over the top in media. It would be very easy to sabotage other clubs by doing propaganda in the media.

This is such a simple thing I would assume all of us agree upon, but no, this is a multipage argument now with you.

 

[jones]

Ffs. It was just an example.

You can imagine any player you want instead of him.

Someone writing praising articles about Messi, Arteta, Saka, Bowen, Kudus or whoever, doesn't affect at all how much I rate them. I have my own rating system.

Why does it affect me being "a normal person", if my personal rating of players is not affected if some journalists praise them?

Imagine if all professional people around football would stop rating a player because someone praises them over the top in media. It would be very easy to sabotage other clubs by doing propaganda in the media.

This is such a simple thing I would assume all of us agree upon, but no, this is a multipage argument now with you.

You're the only one who struggles with the concept. And I was the one to originally explain to you that it's not important which person it is, why are you writing paragraphs to explain it back to me?

 

[drippin]

You're the only one who struggles with the concept. And I was the one to originally explain to you that it's not important which person it is, why are you writing paragraphs to explain it back to me?

You really are not able to discuss the issue I raise with your sentence.

You claimed those who still rate Arteta after those praising/canonising articles, are not "normal persons".

It's really weird, but we can leave this here. I'm perfectly happy to be "abnormal", especially in your view if that's the case.

 

[jones]

You really are not able to discuss the issue I raise with your sentence.

You claimed those who still rate Arteta after those praising/canonising articles, are not "normal persons".

It's really weird, but we can leave this here.

Back to talking about Arteta it's physically impossible for you to keep him out of your thoughts for even a minute isn't it.

 

[drippin]

Back to talking about Arteta it's physically impossible for you to keep him out of your thoughts for even a minute isn't it.

No, you just said "Arteta" can be anyone. So just explain better what you meant, or don't.

You keep going in circles to avoid admitting that your sentence didn't make sense.

 

[jones]

No, you just said "Arteta" can be anyone. So just explain what you meant, or don't.

If you click on the upwards pointing arrows next to a quoted post's username it jumps to the quoted post. Do that like 15-20 times and you might find the answers you seek.

Hope this helps.

 

[drippin]

If you click on the upwards pointing arrows next to a quoted post's username it jumps to the quoted post. Do that like 15-20 times and you might find the answers you seek.

Hope this helps.

You're hopeless, it's a very simple argument and explanation from you. But you won't do it, because I was right that your sentence makes no sense.

It's a common theme it seems.

 

[db10_therza]

Yeah, so it was BS, just trying to trigger others. While you claim I'm the one who causes problems here. The mirror is in your house, use it.

Boy shut the hell up, just because I’m nice to you now and again doesn’t mean I will hesitate to put you back in your box if you start mouthing off for no reason. For example:

My estimation is that Arteta might have affected 10-15% of Pep's success at City.

You cannot quantitatively define something that is inherently qualitative. This doesn’t work. By definition. Not even as an estimate. Hence my 99% was clearly hyperbole.

If there was no Pep and just rookie Arteta would there be a 10-15% chance of City managing their three-peat? And of course standard Drippin you just move the goalposts and conveniently postulate that they won the treble because of the groundwork that Arteta put in there smh. It’s just ridiculous man. Wake up out from whatever spell you’re under honestly.

Arteta knew next to nothing when he joined Pep. That doesn’t mean one day the apprentice can’t go beyond his master but to deny the obvious teacher/student relationship they had is stretching credibility to the n’th degree.

The silliest thing here is that I have consistently sung Arteta’s praises here as being an excellent manager (apart from the not playing academy kids ever thing - that gets under my skin). And yet you still man, just, wow.

 

[drippin]

Boy shut the hell up, just because I’m nice to you now and again doesn’t mean I will hesitate to put you back in your box if you start mouthing off for no reason. For example:

You seem triggered because I showed your own faults in this forum, while claiming in the other thread that I do such things. I understand.

You cannot quantitatively define something that is inherently qualitative. This doesn’t work. By definition. Not even as an estimate. Hence my 99% was clearly hyperbole.

If there was no Pep and just rookie Arteta would there be a 10-15% chance of City managing their three-peat? And of course standard Drippin you just move the goalposts and conveniently postulate that they won the treble because of the groundwork that Arteta put in there smh. It’s just ridiculous man. Wake up out from whatever spell you’re under honestly.

The silliest thing here is that I have consistently sung Arteta’s praises here as being an excellent manager (apart from the not playing academy kids ever thing - that gets under my skin). And yet you still man, just, wow.

It's good you can admit it was hyperbole. I just gave my view of your hyperbole. And you can see that I don't rate Arteta as some superman, because I think Stuivenberg is also a big part, just like Arteta was for Pep.

 

[jones]

You're hopeless, it's a very simple argument and explanation from you. But you won't do it, because I was right that your sentence makes no sense.

It's a common theme it seems.

Why don't you try to read the stuff I posted before you ask me to explain it again. You repeat your claim that I don't make sense while ignoring the point I made.

What you're doing instead is trying to change the topic at hand. The original posts were all referring to the author of that article while you keep circling back to Arteta because in your weird little mind you feel you have to defend him when no one even attacked him.

You need help.

 

[db10_therza]

You seem triggered because I showed your own faults in this forum, while claiming in the other thread that I do such things. I understand.

No I’m triggered because I was labouring under the false impression that there was some chance of redemption for you. My bad.

As you were

 

[drippin]

Why don't you try to read the stuff I posted before you ask me to explain it again. You repeat your claim that I don't make sense while ignoring the point I made.

What you're doing instead is trying to change the topic at hand. The original posts were all referring to the author of that article while you keep circling back to Arteta because in your weird little mind you feel you have to defend him when no one even attacked him.

You need help.

We go back, like I said, to the "who is being canonised". Read your own comment. You said someone is being canonised and should not be rated because of it, and those rating him are not normal people. This is all your own doing.

Arteta is the only one who could be that, not the journalist. The journalists don't canonise themselves when writing about other people?

You wrote it wrong if you meant it that way, and started insulting my English skills because of it.

 

[drippin]

No I’m triggered because I was labouring under the false impression that there was some chance of redemption for you. My bad.

As you were

That's not a way out of your own mistakes in these arguments, but you're free to think so. The evidence is all there.

 

[jones]

We go back, like I said, to the "who is being canonised". Read your own comment. You said someone is being canonised and should not be rated because of it, and those rating him are not normal people.

Arteta is the only one who could be that, not the journalist. The journalists don't canonise themselves when writing about other people?

You wrote it wrong if you meant it that way, and started insulting my English skills because of it.

My initial post was replying to hairspray who responded to a post criticising the article "can we just appreciate how great Mikel is". That's when I responded:

No normal person rates someone who's being so blatantly canonised.

There's not a single mention of what anyone "should" do despite you several times now lying for no reason claiming I did.

 

[LookingForEric]

I did not insult you, I gave you the benefit of the doubt by thinking you didn't understand what I wrote.

You keep doubling down while ignoring that I said about five times none of the posts were about Arteta. Don't think there's much to discuss here but enlighten me if there is

Your attacks on Arteta don’t help when trying to converse with someone who is quite clearly heavily believing in Arteta.

You can’t lambast someone, expect a certain response, attack someone’s English language from said response, and then expect them to be nice to you?

Anyway, pretty pointless convo now given how well Mikel’s doing.