Antony the latest wrong un on the wing

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by TopForm (U15726)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 12 minutes ago
There will be endless examples of this in professional sport.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There's professional sports in which the entire object is to knock somebody out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s controlled aggression though. The ones who can’t control their aggression are usually the ones that lose.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dare you to say that to Mike Tyson's face

comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 9 minutes ago
I stopped reading, you’re just contradicting yourself over and over, and don’t even know it.

It’s painful to read.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's 100% right. You are talking rubbish.

Good to see a causal link between on and off pitch behaviour has been established by a football fan who works in marketing. I look forwards to the subsequent journal publication and conference talk.

comment by TopForm (U15726)
posted 42 minutes ago
The law sees what happens on and off the pitch differently and that's a fact. This is why Suarez was dealt with by the FA and not a court of law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So why was John Terry dealt with by a court of law?

I can't be bothered to get dragged into this, Elvis, my point isn't able to be negated by a counterexample of the law being applied in one instance and not another, it only has to be not applied in one instance for my point to be valid which I've shown.

This is just as usual someone finding multiple different ways I'm right without providing a shred of evidence for their views. The point at which someone shows actual evidence of a causal link between on and off pitch behaviour (that's not a single example, it's an entire study) is the point at which this becomes a debate.

Otherwise Terminator is correct, if there's absence of evidence, the point can be dismissed without any evidence, it's one of the well established razor's.

comment by TopForm (U15726)
posted 15 minutes ago
Good to see a causal link between on and off pitch behaviour has been established by a football fan who works in marketing. I look forwards to the subsequent journal publication and conference talk.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Says the guy whose strongest opinion so far has been about which toilets transsexuals should be permitted to use.

We’re allowed opinions on things outside our profession, you utter cretin.

Now, back to your trolling.

comment by TopForm (U15726)
posted 5 minutes ago
I can't be bothered to get dragged into this, Elvis, my point isn't able to be negated by a counterexample of the law being applied in one instance and not another, it only has to be not applied in one instance for my point to be valid which I've shown.

This is just as usual someone finding multiple different ways I'm right without providing a shred of evidence for their views. The point at which someone shows actual evidence of a causal link between on and off pitch behaviour (that's not a single example, it's an entire study) is the point at which this becomes a debate.

Otherwise Terminator is correct, if there's absence of evidence, the point can be dismissed without any evidence, it's one of the well established razor's.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's a lot of words to admit you were wrong. Again.

Well at least you kept it short and sweet this time. You're getting better, just reduce it to "I'm right" though and you'll have found your level.

And you could go with "I'm wrong again". You could add something about being pretentious if you like.

The causal link between on and off pitch behaviour has been well established [Winston,2023] using the anyone who disagrees with me is a moron method. In that groundbreaking paper, it was shown that the pursuit of knowledge in human ethology is not worthwhile in an idiocracy, leading to thousands of job losses, and several Nobel prizes being rescinded.