Search results

Grendel - any chance you can answer that question of mine? Starting to look weird now. Why do you think the CT's editorial policy is to destabilise the club and lower fan morale?

Because you still haven't answered my question, and I've asked four times now. Are you OK?

How about you stop arguing semantics and answer the real question here (third time of asking!) - why does the CT have an agenda to destabilise the club and lower morale?

We could print a major story in a local newspaper claiming he is and see if he denies it. That would at least give us a good idea.

I believe the article.

There's a difference between sensationalist language and "spurious bullshit" though, isn't there? You seem confused as to whether it's the coverage itself or the reaction to the coverage that you're upset about. And you still haven't explained to me why the Telegraph is taking this bizarre new...

No story? Really? Strange that it got such a big reaction then. By the way, I can't even see the original thread on the first page of this forum, so fair play for having it on speed dial - hope you'll continue to keep tabs on the number of replies for us. Out of interest, what do you think the...

I don't much fancy trawling through 200+ posts (Did you really check?! Cute) of drivel, but I'm still not sure as to why the Telegraph is to blame for that. Are they obliged to make their stories as dull as possible?

I read the opening post again. I don't see any allusion to anyone other than the Telegraph (cool new nickname!) and its "spurious bullshit".

Wait, am I supposed to be angry at the CT, or people on here who misunderstood their (entirely factual) article? My outrage is going completely to waste here.

So now it's OK to be needlessly negative when things are looking up, so long as we're factually accurate? Or is it only the CT who are banned from being a buzzkill?

I thought it was common knowledge that if you win a penalty (i.e. you're fouled) which is subsequently scored then you get an assist?

I can't believe that a) I watched that highlight reel and b) His only goal for us was a header. Football is a strange game.

Genuinely wouldn't be surprised if this story was put out just to try and discredit Les Reid's own, ahem, scoop earlier this month. The animosity runs deep.

Fair play to Les Reid for trying to keep up momentum on an important story he obviously cares about, but his act is wearing thin now - his headlines seem to be rooted more and more in his own personal activism than any genuine scoops. The fact he was allowed to co-sign that open letter and then...

Well, if you class Tom Hicks, George Gillett and the Glazers as oligarchs, then perhaps.

It's not quite that straightforward. The nature of the financing deals they made meant there was an obvious short-term impact on their transfer budget. Long term, it's a big net benefit, but it's come at a cost. And if we're cherry picking stats about Arsenal here - if you just focus on the...

Isn't that what we're talking about though? There are tons of people in this thread who didn't believe the CT were right to say there was any interest (there are some who still don't!)

Haha literally impossible to argue with that! Best of luck with your sub-editing career fella.

It wasn't clickbait, it was accurate and timely reporting. It's clear you have an axe to grind with the Telegraph, and you've had your fun with it in this thread, but maybe admitting you were wrong this time and having a laugh about it might be better at this point, rather than insisting they're...