I have a "Special Relationship" with my other half, it means I can F*ck her whenever I want to.
Any Similarities.........
1) Not in the least little bit. I am often amused. Sometimes aroused. Frequently perplexed. Hell, I am often enraged (I do have something of a temper - think Sopranos, and not Withnail and I.
2) That would be where you claimed that:
No one knew what it involved? - as per my original response, yes, they do. I have enough of an idea, as do many, it has been discussed on here several times, there have been club announcements on it, there have been many articles, easily accessible, on the Interwebs. I answered that part of your query. You still came back with a rehashed repeat of the same question making me reach the conclusion that despite me taking the time to search threads, read through them to ensure the content I remembered was still there, and posting the links, with one full text announcement, you just hadn't actually bothered to appreciate the time I took to do this, read the threads, or understand that there is a hierarchy of knowledge starting with Daniel Levy and descending, finally, to us. We know that it, basically, the same as our other club partnerships (perhaps if you did some research on them), we know that it involves financial and coaching best practice exchange. We know that we are not going to be given day-by-day accounts or footage of coaching exchanges - why the hell would we? Over-reaching yourself, much!
No one from the club has explained it? - as per my original response, I provided you with a club announcement (there have been others). I answered this query with full cognizance of the wording and apparent purport of the query. You said Yes. That's the statement and then rehashed your objection to be surrounding its vagueness. Well, I'm sorry (or lawdy, lawdy, woe is me), but you, to all intents and purposes claimed there had been no information whatsoever form the club, prompting me to take the time to search and re-read threads to provide that and then you displayed knowledge of it (you just imagine it is too vague for a fan of your pre-eminence, who should be privy to, well, all the workings of the Privy Council). Can you not see how that may be somewhat vexing and colour my subsequent response?
No evidence of cooperation at any level? - I've provided you with that, apocryphal as it may be (parent seeing RM coach teaching skills handed down from Zidane). I then asked just what evidence you seem to believe you should be provided. Myself and plenty of others have understood enough to know that this club agreement is basically the same as the others we have and do not involve a specific agreement to hand our best player over, nor that RM's actions this Summer would require any justification from such agreements.
So, you see, I understood fully, with no confusion whatsoever, just the tangent you had taken the conversation which, believe me, was nowhere near as original of astounding as you seem to think it was, and I answered it fully.
3) There's a remedy for that. You must get very tired, then. I, myself, almost as a continuous process, face accusations that I never criticise Daniel Levy, despite every time this is stated posting up critiques I have made of him and critiques that were original/not the concensus view. That is tiresome and an incorrect inference. Join the tired club
4) You shouldn't feign intellectualism (oozing out of every pore of your response if you can't follow complex arguments and categorise them as long-winded)!
5) Ooooh, big word...had to look that one up
6) As explained in 2, above, perhaps there is an explanation for my condescending manner. Maybe the origins, in general, lie in the number of times the club partnerships have been explained, followed by repeats of the bizarre rantings answered at length. More locally to yourself, in that I took the time to search for threads and post the links, and add the text of a club announcement, followed by your acknowledgment that you were, actually, aware of the announcement, not only making you claim that the club hadn't informed us at all a lie (or an oversight, if I am being kind), and meaning I had wasted a considerable amount of time to kindly provide you with something you already knew. Another alternative is that you were not aware of this announcement, you are just pretending you were. Maybe, also, it stemmed form the fact that you seem to have a bizarre notion that you should have all the information to hand that the club chairman does. Yeah, like said, I have something of a temper and when someone does this I may come across as condescending - probably because I believe it warrants condescension
7) No problem...won't be interacting with you again. Gives me immense pleasure to grant this wish
8) I did - have just provided copious evidence demonstrating that I read both of your posts fully (wish the same could be said in reverse, unfortunately, don't see the evidence)
9) Patience and a placid temperament ain't my strong suit...understanding is
10) Won't happen again
11) My response wasn't misguided, just your faculty for comprehension
12) One person's non sequitor is another person's fair inference. In this instance, the thread is specifically a whinge concerning the club agreement and relating it directly to RM's pursuit of Bale. You were responding to a poster who stated that it was bizarre to link them, by claiming that it is the lack of information that is causing this. I answered that effectively (taking some time and effort to do so). You then showed that you were aware of the announcement (yeah, ta for that) but still demanded more and more and more information on it until you have all the evidence in the World and are the doyen of club partnerships (your elevated view of your own importance is astounding). does it really take that much of a leap of imagination to view you as a petulant little child, taking a negative view of the club partnerships (you hardly seemed to be being positive about them, did you?). I believe it is a fair inference, then, that you are either imputing a causal link between club partnership with RM and the way they tapped-up and unsettled Bale, or justifying the same - but that there is zero evidence of this and plenty enough knowledge of what the club partnerships entail to dismiss this.
13) I didn't need any - see 2 above (thanks for insulting my intelligence, again).
14) Didn't need any reminders (thanks for insulting my intelligence, again).
15) Yes, we've established that, and I comprehended it fully.
16) No, but the fact that you were still worrying it like a bone even though I had provided copious information for you and suggested you did more research, even when a flat club announcement of what the club partnerships entail is enough for plenty of us), and still suggesting that there is sufficient scope to believe that they entailed a gift of Bale clause (especially when there is no reason whatoever for RM to needed that to do what they did) does make the inference that you are nay-saying the club partnership a reasonable one.
17) Oh, were you. See, from here it looks as though you are suggesting that that misunderstanding was a reasonable one when quite clearly, for all the reasons given, it just simply flat isn't, based on the information we have.
18) No, it didn't - plenty of us, based on what we know of the club partnerships and the club announcement, understand fully what is and isn't involved, and also see that there is no need whatsoever for RM to even need a club partnership to do what they did (just as, rather than seeing it as the disaster of all disasters, can see it in the context of being a higher level whoring than being United's 'ho). And if you had paid my original response the respect it was due, for having taken the time to search and post for you, you would be aware of just how often these rantings about club agreements in general, and the one with RM in particular, have arisen - hence the vexation some of us feel at answering the same things over and over again. Instead, you chose to ignore that by shifting the emphasis of your questions, inadvertently revealing a deceit and continuing to attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
19) Yeah...well...er...that's a bit of high sounding cod philosophy. Unfortunately, it is also nonsense. Certain members of the board continue to fill their ire at the possibility, and then reality, of losing Bale with all manner of conspiracy and conjecture because they refuse to read the explanations provided as to how there is plenty enough to not draw the same mistaken causal relationship over and again, especially when it doesn't need to be made at all/of!
20) That is all
21) I hope that is finally sufficient explanation for you
)
.
