Kronke has caused a Twitter meltdown by describing the fans as rabid :hehe:

[Monty92]

We are both being entirely logical, as far as I can tell. We are simply hard-wired (and probably socially conditioned) to want slightly different things for slightly different reasons.

You attitude is akin to telling someone they are being illogical for ordering something different to you in a restaurant.

I don't know where to start with that nonsense, so I won't.

You're a creative type, I'm a logical type, let's leave it there.

[World's End Stella]

Not logical enough to stop shelling out for a product you clearly consider unsatisfactory, though

I haven't given a penny to Arsenal in years.

And if I did, it would be because even if I consider the product unsatisfactory, that wouldn't stop me from enjoying a day out.

Which isn't in any way illogical.

[World's End Stella]

We are both being entirely logical, as far as I can tell. We are simply hard-wired (and probably socially conditioned) to want slightly different things for slightly different reasons.

You attitude is akin to telling someone they are being illogical for ordering something different to you in a restaurant.

The illogical bit was your (long proved) inability to follow the argument through in a logical manner. We disagreed on what it was easier for the board to have done. You somehow morphed the discussion into a point about the board only finding it difficult to be objective and rational, which didn't really follow. It is a valid point, it simply has nothing to do with our different points of view nor why we hold them.

[Monty92]

Your argument was that keeping Wenger was the easiest decision because the stakes were low.

I believe this to be an overly simplistic analysis that disregards how difficult it is to make rational decisions - particularly in the face of pressure.

The illogical bit was your (long proved) inability to follow the argument through in a logical manner. We disagreed on what it was easier for the board to have done. You somehow morphed the discussion into a point about the board only finding it difficult to be objective and rational, which didn't really follow. It is a valid point, it simply has nothing to do with our different points of view nor why we hold them.

[World's End Stella]

Your argument was that keeping Wenger was the easiest decision because the stakes were low.

I believe this to be an overly simplistic analysis that disregards how difficult it is to make rational decisions - particularly in the face of pressure.

So you believe that the rational decision was to keep Wenger. I got that. And I sort of thought you might explain the rationale behind that statement rather than point out that making rational decisions can be difficult in the face of pressure.

Actually, don't bother. I'm bored now. It was a simple disagreement that we were probably aware of prior to your post. And I have no interest in a discussion on the difficulty of making rational decisions under pressure.

I'm more interested in lunch, now.

[Monty92]

The rationale is that, in my view, on balance he’s doing ok and his replacement might do worse (something I know you would concede is entirely possible).

You think he’s not doing ok. We could thrash that one out too, but as I said before the difference between our positions would be negligible.

So you believe that the rational decision was to keep Wenger. I got that. And I sort of thought you might explain the rationale behind that statement rather than point out that making rational decisions can be difficult in the face of pressure.

Actually, don't bother. I'm bored now. It was a simple disagreement that we were probably aware of prior to your post. And I have no interest in a discussion on the difficulty of making rational decisions under pressure.

I'm more interested in lunch, now.

[SWv2]

What's your beef?

A splendid performance from you of looking down your nose at the common fan or supporter of the club. Quite in character.

Mouth breather indeed.



Pat on the head, well done.

[Burney]

A splendid performance from you of looking down your nose at the common fan or supporter of the club. Quite in character.

Mouth breather indeed.



Pat on the head, well done.

To be fair, though, sw, some of them are pretty grotesque.

[World's End Stella]

The rationale is that, in my view, on balance he’s doing ok and his replacement might do worse (something I know you would concede is entirely possible).

You think he’s not doing ok. We could thrash that one out too, but as I said before the difference between our positions would be negligible.

You think he should be kept on and is doing ok, I think he should be sacked and the club has been seriously under performing for at least 6 or 7 years because of his stubbornness and arrogance.

The difference between those positions is hardly negligible.

We are one of the top 10 richest clubs in the world, we are 5th in our domestic league, we are 1 point ahead of Watford, 2 points ahead of Newcastle and 3 points ahead of Burnley, we are 9 points behind the league leaders after 9 games, using linear extrapolation this would lead to us ending up 38 points behind the league leaders, we have not meaningfully challenged for the PL or CL in almost 10 years.

Explain to me how this is 'OK'. Now, you see, this is the way a logical argument/discussion is conducted.

[Monty92]

Well, we both agree he’s been underperforming. So on that point the difference is only a matter of degree.

You believe the cause of this has been his arrogance and stubbornness. I would counter that both traits are essential in a successful manager and without them we’d very likely be doing even worse.

So I maintain, we are more alligned than you may like to think.

You think he should be kept on and is doing ok, I think he should be sacked and the club has been seriously under performing for at least 6 or 7 years because of his stubbornness and arrogance.

The difference between those positions is hardly negligible.

We are one of the top 10 richest clubs in the world, we are 5th in our domestic league, we are 1 point ahead of Watford, 2 points ahead of Newcastle and 3 points ahead of Burnley, we are 9 points behind the league leaders after 9 games, using linear extrapolation this would lead to us ending up 38 points behind the league leaders, we have not meaningfully challenged for the PL or CL in almost 10 years.

Explain to me how this is 'OK'. Now, you see, this is the way a logical argument/discussion is conducted.