| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan 18:32 - Nov 29 with 6964 views | stainrods_elbow |
'We’ve done lots of travelling this week, but I don't want to use that as excuse. It’s probably part of the explanation when you come back at four o'clock in the night between Wednesday and Thursday, and you have to travel again for four hours.'
QED! Again!
It's a funny way to talk about not using something as an excuse then presenting it, in detail, as an excuse - sorry, 'explanation'!
If I weren't a Francophile and a hater of Republican America, I might call JS a cheese-eating surrender monkey.
It's clear that it's now thought acceptable in Champ football to incorporate reference to a two-day turnaround for an away game as a factor in a flaccid defeat.
Not to me it isn't.
Why even turn up if that's the attitude coming down from the top?
I'd like to hear from some of the fantastic fans who went today. Aren't they feeling at least a little bit cheated? I live in Ireland and watched on a stream, so apparently that doesn't count as being a supporter/having a view according to some, but, unfortunately for them, I have one anyway.
In two words, (to which I'd append two fingers) - ça pue!
PS Since when does it take 4 hours to drive 120m from HQ to Norwich? Tw*t! [Post edited 29 Nov 18:49]
|  |
| |  |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 16:42 - Dec 3 with 789 views | FDC |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 08:41 - Dec 3 by Northernr |
Ah yes, of course, this routine again... I am but a man, of flesh and bone, not machine, a poet not a scientist, I am a fan, a fanatic, my only consistency is my inconsistency, I will not apologise for my yearning soul...
i.e. you've been caught out talking contradictory nonsense again. |
I've actually managed to hack into the Stainrod code base, written in Matlab surprisingly. I found this function for deciding how to refer to bullshit.
function response = bullshit_analyst_matlab(is_self_bullshit, bullshit_topic)
% BULLSHIT_ANALYST_MATLAB Determines response strategy based on source.
%
% This function implements a highly subjective decision matrix:
% - If is_self_bullshit is true, the strategy is Poetic Embellishment.
% - If is_self_bullshit is false, the strategy is Harsh Criticism.
%
% INPUTS:
% is_self_bullshit - Boolean (true/false or 1/0). True if the claim is self-generated.
% bullshit_topic - String describing the content to be analyzed.
%
% OUTPUT:
% response - A string detailing the recommended response action.
%
% Example Usage (Run the code block below the function definition):
% analyze_example = bullshit_analyst_matlab(true, 'The grand theory of celestial hedgehogs');
% --- THE CORE DECISION MATRIX ---
if is_self_bullshit == true
% Scenario 1: Self-Generated Bullshit (The 'Poetic Frivolity' Branch)
% We elevate and embellish our own glorious, poorly-researched,
% but deeply felt artistic expression.
response = sprintf([...
'STRATEGY: POETIC EMBELLISHMENT.n' ...
'Topic: ''%s''.n' ...
'Action: Adopt the rhetoric of the sublime. Transmute the raw ' ...
'fluff into a baroque ode. Mention ''the ineffable vastness'' and ' ...
'''the silent, spiraling void'' at least twice. The goal is to ' ...
'create an aesthetic experience so dazzling that no one notices ' ...
'the lack of empirical grounding.'], bullshit_topic);
else
% Scenario 2: Other-Generated Bullshit (The 'Harsh Criticism' Branch)
% When it comes from an external source, it is an intellectual threat.
% It must be met with the surgical precision of a pedantic scholar.
response = sprintf([...
'STRATEGY: HARSH CRITICISM (Under the guise of Socratic dialogue).n' ...
'Topic: ''%s''.n' ...
'Action: Immediately demand primary sources, a bibliography in Chicago style, ' ...
'and a formal logical proof. Use phrases like ''While your sentiment is charming, ' ...
'it is thermodynamically unsound'' or ''The conclusion does not follow ' ...
'from the premises, creating a curious narrative fallacy.'' Focus on dismantling ' ...
'the structure, not the content.'], bullshit_topic);
end
end |  | | |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 16:54 - Dec 3 with 746 views | TK1 |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 16:14 - Dec 2 by stainrods_elbow |
Allegedly headbutted a player - unless you're simply swallowing the propaganda of the rich lunatics who were hiring and firing on a virtually monthly basis at the time.
A (presumably player) source in the dressing room later denied any head-butt happened, as did Marc Bircham, and at the time John Gorman and the reserve manager walked out in support of the manager (who also denied it). It was discussed on a thread on this very messageboard on 9 October.
https://www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/general/qpr-fans/16858-did-buz-embelis
I suspect what happened is that the player concerned, and probably some of the rest of them, didn't like a bit of managerial passion going up against their lack of it, and the twunts running the show wanted to flex their scrawny muscles once again.
PS Re Magilton's CV, he and the IFA might disagree with your assessment that his managing the Irish U-21 set-up for three years isn't a 'pwoper job'. [Post edited 2 Dec 16:34]
|
"I suspect what happened is that the player concerned, and probably some of the rest of them, didn't like a bit of managerial passion going up against their lack of it, and the twunts running the show wanted to flex their scrawny muscles once again."
A year later, that well-known softy and low-talker Neil Warnock took the best of that same squad - including Buzsaky, the player who'd been headbutted - up as champions. So that option was open to Magilton, if he'd been half the manager (he might have got another significant job elsewhere too since 2009).
PS. the story you linked to says Magilton put his head against Akos and then it got a bit heated. Not exactly a watertight rebuttal. |  | | |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 16:56 - Dec 3 with 736 views | nick_hammersmith |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 21:35 - Dec 1 by bosh67 |
They're professional footballers. They're meant to be able to do this. The teams we are playing are more or less in the same boat and they seem to be able to do a 3 game week. I go back to times when we played 3 times a week on churned mud with one sub. It's also on the players to say, I'm not sure I can do 90 gaffer. But, they should be able to play 3 times a week. That's the job. It's hardly a mad surprise on them. |
I'm pretty confident we have more than one player in this current squad who wouldn't be afraid to let the powers be know that they don't quite fancy it at the weekend!
Maybe not to Joel "Dubai" Lynch levels... |  | | |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 17:01 - Dec 3 with 707 views | nick_hammersmith |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 08:37 - Dec 3 by francisbowles |
I despair, that you cannot see that your list is made up with numerous reasons why the intensity of the game (when the ball is in play) has increased over the years.
This list directly contributes to fatigue and injuries. It also seems to be more, as you put it, "threatening to life and limb" as per the stats posted by KensalT.
Do you ever look back at old matches from the 70's. They are almost pedestrian in comparison. They might have been more entertaining, and defenders might have been trying to kick lumps out of 'the mavericks' but they pale into insignificance, when compared to, the sheer force of todays challenges, fair and foul (a fine margin, sometimes). |
Don't forget the backpass to GK, which gave everyone a breather! | | | |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 17:26 - Dec 3 with 651 views | stainrods_elbow |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 08:41 - Dec 3 by Northernr |
Ah yes, of course, this routine again... I am but a man, of flesh and bone, not machine, a poet not a scientist, I am a fan, a fanatic, my only consistency is my inconsistency, I will not apologise for my yearning soul...
i.e. you've been caught out talking contradictory nonsense again. |
If you can't see the value between making a distinction between human inconsistency/ contradictoriness and talking 'nonsense', so be it! It doesn't change the fact that I wasn't talking nonsense, just expressing a view you happen not to agree with. Perhaps engaging self-critically with my content rather than always trying to 'catch me out' might even turn out to be both more humane and more interesting. Just a thought. [Post edited 3 Dec 20:54]
| |
| |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 17:29 - Dec 3 with 641 views | stainrods_elbow |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 16:54 - Dec 3 by TK1 |
"I suspect what happened is that the player concerned, and probably some of the rest of them, didn't like a bit of managerial passion going up against their lack of it, and the twunts running the show wanted to flex their scrawny muscles once again."
A year later, that well-known softy and low-talker Neil Warnock took the best of that same squad - including Buzsaky, the player who'd been headbutted - up as champions. So that option was open to Magilton, if he'd been half the manager (he might have got another significant job elsewhere too since 2009).
PS. the story you linked to says Magilton put his head against Akos and then it got a bit heated. Not exactly a watertight rebuttal. |
I didn't say it was watertight, and, yes, Warnock showed himself to be a better man-manager than Magilton, I guess. Though I still think he (JM) was set up, which was no doubt why he was talking about taking the club to a tribunal. | |
| |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 17:31 - Dec 3 with 630 views | stainrods_elbow |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 16:42 - Dec 3 by FDC |
I've actually managed to hack into the Stainrod code base, written in Matlab surprisingly. I found this function for deciding how to refer to bullshit.
function response = bullshit_analyst_matlab(is_self_bullshit, bullshit_topic)
% BULLSHIT_ANALYST_MATLAB Determines response strategy based on source.
%
% This function implements a highly subjective decision matrix:
% - If is_self_bullshit is true, the strategy is Poetic Embellishment.
% - If is_self_bullshit is false, the strategy is Harsh Criticism.
%
% INPUTS:
% is_self_bullshit - Boolean (true/false or 1/0). True if the claim is self-generated.
% bullshit_topic - String describing the content to be analyzed.
%
% OUTPUT:
% response - A string detailing the recommended response action.
%
% Example Usage (Run the code block below the function definition):
% analyze_example = bullshit_analyst_matlab(true, 'The grand theory of celestial hedgehogs');
% --- THE CORE DECISION MATRIX ---
if is_self_bullshit == true
% Scenario 1: Self-Generated Bullshit (The 'Poetic Frivolity' Branch)
% We elevate and embellish our own glorious, poorly-researched,
% but deeply felt artistic expression.
response = sprintf([...
'STRATEGY: POETIC EMBELLISHMENT.n' ...
'Topic: ''%s''.n' ...
'Action: Adopt the rhetoric of the sublime. Transmute the raw ' ...
'fluff into a baroque ode. Mention ''the ineffable vastness'' and ' ...
'''the silent, spiraling void'' at least twice. The goal is to ' ...
'create an aesthetic experience so dazzling that no one notices ' ...
'the lack of empirical grounding.'], bullshit_topic);
else
% Scenario 2: Other-Generated Bullshit (The 'Harsh Criticism' Branch)
% When it comes from an external source, it is an intellectual threat.
% It must be met with the surgical precision of a pedantic scholar.
response = sprintf([...
'STRATEGY: HARSH CRITICISM (Under the guise of Socratic dialogue).n' ...
'Topic: ''%s''.n' ...
'Action: Immediately demand primary sources, a bibliography in Chicago style, ' ...
'and a formal logical proof. Use phrases like ''While your sentiment is charming, ' ...
'it is thermodynamically unsound'' or ''The conclusion does not follow ' ...
'from the premises, creating a curious narrative fallacy.'' Focus on dismantling ' ...
'the structure, not the content.'], bullshit_topic);
end
end |
God, you're tedious. Anything but actually deal with actual content/argument - man and not ball every time. Why not just make a big effort to grow up? | |
| |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 18:05 - Dec 3 with 547 views | francisbowles |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 17:29 - Dec 3 by stainrods_elbow |
I didn't say it was watertight, and, yes, Warnock showed himself to be a better man-manager than Magilton, I guess. Though I still think he (JM) was set up, which was no doubt why he was talking about taking the club to a tribunal. |
Talking about but.......never did? | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 21:14 - Dec 3 with 351 views | Mr_Beef |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 17:26 - Dec 3 by stainrods_elbow |
If you can't see the value between making a distinction between human inconsistency/ contradictoriness and talking 'nonsense', so be it! It doesn't change the fact that I wasn't talking nonsense, just expressing a view you happen not to agree with. Perhaps engaging self-critically with my content rather than always trying to 'catch me out' might even turn out to be both more humane and more interesting. Just a thought. [Post edited 3 Dec 20:54]
|
Oh, the irony. |  | | |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 22:04 - Dec 3 with 278 views | stainrods_elbow |
| the (not so) bons mots of Julien Stephan on 21:14 - Dec 3 by Mr_Beef |
Oh, the irony. |
If you say so. Thanks for the stimulating contribution to my thread. [Post edited 4 Dec 14:19]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
