VINCENT TAN: 'HAPPY' FOR NEIL WARNOCK TO STAY

A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: VINCENT TAN: 'HAPPY' FOR NEIL WARNOCK TO STAY

Postby FAWman » Wed May 08, 2019 1:22 pm

Sven wrote:
No heinous crime for most but a daft question because you really know the answer to that...

I was basically accusing you of being a 'multi' and I stand by that ;)

Between us (and I take my portion of blame) we have managed to de-rail what should have been a positive thread :(

My PM box is open... :thumbup:


Nothing daft about it. You accused me of “suddenly appearing” (I.e making a first post) which is something every other poster including yourself has done, it’s the whole premise of the forum.

My comment was fleeting about you in my opening gambit, you have taken it to heart though. But true to form you even took that fair and valid on topic opinion and tried to belittle it / it’s what you do.

As I said, I won’t be PMing you. But would ask that you take your feud with other posters to PM to allow football discussion to flow on here without you butting in and belittling others because you disagree. Should I see that then I may consider offering the olive branch, but until that time I just see you as a nuisance on a forum that I very rarely post on but enjoy to read.

Disclaimer - I’m sure you are a nice fella in real life, I’m simply talking about the forum Sven.
FAWman
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:50 am

Re: VINCENT TAN: 'HAPPY' FOR NEIL WARNOCK TO STAY

Advertisement

Advertisement
Login or Register to remove this ad.

Re: VINCENT TAN: 'HAPPY' FOR NEIL WARNOCK TO STAY

Postby Sven » Wed May 08, 2019 1:37 pm

FAWman wrote:
Sven wrote:
Did I say the information on Sala was incorrect? :?

Did I 'abuse' you? :?

Get your own facts right, Multi Man and keep to defending your own actions rather than picking up on other peoples; most of whom, including Dahboy, assuming you are not him, can defend themselves quite adequately and don't need crusaders like you to muddy their cause

Perhaps you're looking for some kind of sanitisation of the Forum? You know, the kind when you (as always) are the ONLY person that can have a valid opinion and woe-betide anyone who disagrees or questions it; just the same as you accuse me of doing!

I fully appreciate that my style and some of the things/ways I say what I do are not to everyones taste but then again, the same could be said the other way round

You, however, believe your own hype and are clearly frustrated; certainly as a poster (I will qualify by stating that I don't know you as a person, so as ever cannot possibly comment)

For some reason (and we both know why) I seem to have gotten to you, despite our on-line paths crossing infrequently under your 'FAWMan' name

Let's get something straight, right here and right now; you haven't 'called me out' at all and you need to read up what that actually means. You are certainly the one with the chip on your shoulder and you are the one who believes you are perpetually the only one with a valid opinion

In the interest of other users, time to take this off-Forum and you can contact me via pm, where I'll be more than happy to discuss your bitterness and some of the false comments/observations you have made above and in your previous posts :thumbright:


- Did I say that you said it was wrong? I said that you criticised me for my first post being correct, which is just weird.

- I wouldn’t say abuse, no. You have lied about me repeatedly though. The comment of abuse was more noting that you abuse others by calling them WUM’s, trolls etc all because you don’t like their views on club matters.

- I am not a crusader, I am sticking up for people on here that you tread on to fulfil whatever you are missing in your life. These guys are football fans wishing to express an opinion and don’t need the likes of your putting them down every 5 seconds simply because you don’t like it.

- you are going off on some bonkers path here, why would you have “gotten to me”. I couldn’t give a damn what you throw at me sonny, I am sticking up for other users of this forum and supporters of this club.

- I have very little interest in PMing you. I suggest in future you may be better served taking your boring and futile feuds with Dahboy to PM then? Sparing us all from reading them. How’s that for a suggestion?



Quote (FAWman): "Should I see that then I may consider offering the olive branch..."

Who on Earth do you think you are? :shock: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think one doth protest a little too much, fella and you seem to be getting more frustrated by the post but it's good to see you backing off a little now you realise you have clearly misinterpreted/mis-understood some of my comments and/or intentions

It's certainly a suggestion but I'm still confused as to what 'feud' I have with Dahboy or certain others; it's just an exchange of views that are often sprinkled with humour that shouldn't be taken too seriously (and I don't think they are)

Why you're getting involved with other people's business is still confusing, as to do so is certainly 'crusading'; unless, of course, you are them...or some of them ;)

I've had a look at your latest post (it has been noted) on another thread is a great example of you (a) stating the obvious, and (b) dressing up a clear statistical fact as your own thinking! ;) :roll:

PS: I'm certainly not your 'sonny' (he was my late uncle) and to claim such means you are quite a lot older than your limited vocabulary suggests

Last words (on this subject) from me, so feel free to have the last say (another of your traits) if you must :ayatollah:
"If you think what I say is 'offensive' to you, you should hear what I keep to myself...!"
User avatar
Sven
Moderator
 
Posts: 27462
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 6:14 pm

Re: VINCENT TAN: 'HAPPY' FOR NEIL WARNOCK TO STAY

Postby FAWman » Wed May 08, 2019 2:45 pm

Sven wrote:

Quote (FAWman): "Should I see that then I may consider offering the olive branch..."

Who on Earth do you think you are? :shock: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I think one doth protest a little too much, fella and you seem to be getting more frustrated by the post but it's good to see you backing off a little now you realise you have clearly misinterpreted/mis-understood some of my comments and/or intentions

It's certainly a suggestion but I'm still confused as to what 'feud' I have with Dahboy or certain others; it's just an exchange of views that are often sprinkled with humour that shouldn't be taken too seriously (and I don't think they are)

Why you're getting involved with other people's business is still confusing, as to do so is certainly 'crusading'; unless, of course, you are them...or some of them ;)

I've had a look at your latest post (it has been noted) on another thread is a great example of you (a) stating the obvious, and (b) dressing up a clear statistical fact as your own thinking! ;) :roll:

PS: I'm certainly not your 'sonny' (he was my late uncle) and to claim such means you are quite a lot older than your limited vocabulary suggests

Last words (on this subject) from me, so feel free to have the last say (another of your traits) if you must :ayatollah:


Who do I think I am? A bloke who is telling you why he does not want to engage privately with you after your request and one that is noting your continued poor behaviour on this forum. You may earn my respect but you certainly don’t just get handed it, especially when you act the way you do.

Protest too much? About what exactly? I have been very firm and very clear with everything I have said, nothing is a protest against anything. I have called you out (yes, I have) on what is a tedious crusade to stamp your authority on this forum by speaking down to fellow users and rubbishing their posts without offering one of your own.

You have a feud with anyone that thinks or sees things differently to you. Dahboy is one, AV is another (you called him a troll and told him he brought nothing to the forum), you were very disruptive on my first post and I have seen you do similar to many others - which bit is the humour exactly?

Everything in life is a statistical fact Sven. Seeking the relevant statistical facts out, interpreting then and teaching a logical conclusion is something absolutely worthy of debate. If you don’t like it then maybe offer something better to the forum. You don’t seem to like facts and figures, far happier making accusation, supposition and snide comments maybe?

Backing off? Me? Where? You said you were leaving it so I responded in kind. You are clearly rattled by myself calling you out hence why you have had to yet again declare yourself “out”. Not only that but make repeated clearly confused and vague accusations of multis even though you can’t seem to decide in which direction you wish to lay it.

Until you prove yourself worthy of a more fitting and grown up title, you will remain “sonny”.
FAWman
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2019 12:50 am

Re: VINCENT TAN: 'HAPPY' FOR NEIL WARNOCK TO STAY

Postby Forever Blue » Wed May 08, 2019 2:53 pm

FAWman wrote:
Forever Blue wrote:
Sven wrote:
FAWman wrote:Sven, your obsession with all things to do with the Jacks and Dahboy is getting very tedious to read. As a moderator you should be championing all views, not just churning out the same repetitive nonsense while shutting down people’s opinions that don’t fit yours, grow up man. You are not doing the forum any favours whatsoever.

Anyway, as for this news. Mixed feelings. I personally think it would be better to have a longer term plan and bring in a manager that wants his own players that he can mould into a side capable of not only going up but staying there. Yes Warnock has a very good track record in the Championship but a horrific one in the PL across numerous clubs and the style of play is, well, not very entertaining shall we say.

I don’t see much point in VT investing in a squad that the next manager will very likely want to overhaul. Neil is 72 next year (?!), so it’s pretty safe to say he isn’t here for the long term.


Fella, I don't mention the Jacks much and Dahboy knows it's banter because of his negativity and my general positivity when it comes to the club

I think you need to separate the two (poster and Moderator) and look first at your own posts, profanities and tone before you criticise others for their writing styles

Nothing else you write above (re investment and Warnock's age) is anything other than stating the obvious ;)




Sven / Chris is def not obsessed with the Jacks.

Plus as a moderator Sven is entitled to his own personal views 100% :thumbright: :thumbright: :bluebird: :bluebird:


Of course he is. Although opinion and constant droning and name calling about people who disagree with him is not really an opinion. Also accusing people of using profanities when I don’t think I ever have on a forum in my life is also unhelpful.

You are allowed your own opinion but you are not allowed your own facts. You should be behind the fight against this sort behaviour regardless of who it is from, it does quickly bring a forum down a level. We will have to agree to disagree regarding the obsession part then, I always allow the content of someone’s posts to be the deciding factor on that, and with that in mind I don’t think there is much doubt, but you are entitled to your opinion.




I know Sven/ Chris personally a very honest and likeable person and is a very fair person.

Def not obsessed with the Jacks.

And yes Sven should and is def allowed his own opinions like any other forum poster :thumbright: :ayatollah:
Annis Jnr Author and Publisher of 7 Books.

My 7th Book is Available Now "MY STORY"

http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/books/buy-books/
http://www.annisabraham.co.uk/news/

My email : annisabraham@aol.com
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/annisabraham
User avatar
Forever Blue
Admin
 
Posts: 163306
Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:30 am

Previous


Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DotBot [Bot], Facebook [Bot], Google [Bot], Grapeshot [Bot], ias [Bot] and 123 guests

Disclaimer :
The views and comments entered in these forums are personal and are not necessarily those of the management of this board.
The management of this board is not responsible for the content of any external internet sites.