Bellamy's Reaction

[Guest alex]

*round in circles*

35936[/snapback]

[Guest Sima]

*applauds*

Edited September 20, 2005 by Sima

[Guest alex]

*Sings 'We Are The Champions' by Queen*

[ChocChip 0]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

[manc-mag 1]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

 

You want the truth...YOU WANT THE TRUTH???

 

YOU CAYN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!!!

 

[ChocChip 0]

i think he's making it up

[Guest alex]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

[zico martin 89]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

[Guest alex]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

36076[/snapback]

I agree with choc chip tbh, unless of course you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet ffs jesus wept

[zico martin 89]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

36076[/snapback]

I agree with choc chip tbh, unless of course you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet ffs jesus wept

36080[/snapback]

 

you calling me mad?

[Guest alex]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

36076[/snapback]

I agree with choc chip tbh, unless of course you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet ffs jesus wept

36080[/snapback]

 

you calling me mad?

36083[/snapback]

No, getting responses to questions you haven't asked yourself yet is Sima's definition of the first sign of madness. I would seek clarifcation from him.

[zico martin 89]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

36076[/snapback]

I agree with choc chip tbh, unless of course you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet ffs jesus wept

36080[/snapback]

 

you calling me mad?

36083[/snapback]

No, getting responses to questions you haven't asked yourself yet is Sima's definition of the first sign of madness. I would seek clarifcation from him.

36088[/snapback]

 

 

yes i know, i have been paying attention you know

[Guest alex]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

36076[/snapback]

I agree with choc chip tbh, unless of course you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet ffs jesus wept

36080[/snapback]

 

you calling me mad?

36083[/snapback]

No, getting responses to questions you haven't asked yourself yet is Sima's definition of the first sign of madness. I would seek clarifcation from him.

36088[/snapback]

 

 

yes i know, i have been paying attention you know

36116[/snapback]

In that case maybe you can explain how you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet. And I want a proper explanation, 'Because you're mad' won't cut it I'm afraid

[zico martin 89]

I don't get it. If we're talking split personalities here, one side asks a question, the other side replies. There's a sequence there, to ask, to be told. Asking would be weird, hearing a reply would be mental.

 

However, if you mean someone receiving answers to questions they hadn't even thought of asking..............i don't know a term for that one.

 

Elaborate please.

36041[/snapback]

Careful, you'll be accused of joining the anti-Sima bandwagon

36047[/snapback]

 

 

think sima has you beaten this time alex

 

tbh? sorry

36076[/snapback]

I agree with choc chip tbh, unless of course you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet ffs jesus wept

36080[/snapback]

 

you calling me mad?

36083[/snapback]

No, getting responses to questions you haven't asked yourself yet is Sima's definition of the first sign of madness. I would seek clarifcation from him.

36088[/snapback]

 

 

yes i know, i have been paying attention you know

36116[/snapback]

In that case maybe you can explain how you can get an answer to a question you haven't asked yourself yet. And I want a proper explanation, 'Because you're mad' won't cut it I'm afraid

36120[/snapback]

 

but isnt that the whole point. you wont really get an answer to a question you havent asked but you may think that you can hear the answer to a question you have only thought of, most likely if you were going slightly doolally. It's not that complicated surely??

[Guest alex]

Clear as mud

[zico martin 89]

Clear as mud

36123[/snapback]

 

 

if you wink at me again i really will get mad!

[Guest alex]

Clear as mud

36123[/snapback]

 

 

if you wink at me again i really will get mad!

36125[/snapback]

I'm unconvinced by your answer. Is that better?

[zico martin 89]

Clear as mud

36123[/snapback]

 

 

if you wink at me again i really will get mad!

36125[/snapback]

I'm unconvinced by your answer. Is that better?

36128[/snapback]

 

sorry mate but I dont get what's hard to understand. The idea of the first sign of madness being answering a question you havent yet asked is quite funny, and although impossible it's to do with the recognition of what is really happening and what isn't. Madness?

 

And thats my final word as its not even my argument!

[Meenzer 15524]

Howay man Alex, it was only meant to be a lighthearted and somewhat surreal comment. Do you watch Monty Python films and criticise all the non sequiturs?

[snakehips 0]

What we would like to know is, what it is classed as when you get an answer to a completely different question before you have even thought about the differing question you were about to ask yourselves ?

[snakehips 0]

What we would like to know is, what it is classed as when you get an answer to a completely different question before you have even thought about the differing question you were about to ask yourselves ?  

36145[/snapback]

 

Iv'e already told you the answer to that two hours ago ffs!!

[Guest alex]

Howay man Alex, it was only meant to be a lighthearted and somewhat surreal comment. Do you watch Monty Python films and criticise all the non sequiturs?

36134[/snapback]

Fair enough tbh son.

[Lou 0]

Edit: I liked the little shit and thats that 

35865[/snapback]

I like you

 

And I hated seeing him playing for the other side. But, I guess there's no surprise there. I'm not even going to get into the bellamy argument, because despite everything, I'm still biased... *hopeless*

[Papa Lazaru 0]

i wasnt saying Bellars v Owen. I was saying id rather we had Bellars aswell.

35786[/snapback]

 

If we still had Bellamy, we never would have had Owen - simple as that...

35790[/snapback]

 

You keep saying that in any Bellamy thread as if its a fact when its categorically wrong.

 

Souness on his own admission (and rightly) bought Owen to replace Shearer, hence him pointing out that Owen was one of onle a handful of people who could ever fill Shearers boots.

 

Souness also knows we are still short up front, which is why he intends using Dyer often as a striker and Luque giving that option as well. It also shows he ackowledges pace up front is useful! If he and Bellamy hadn;t fallen out he'd still be here in the second striker Role (either in the team or fighting to get in) and Owen would be number one when Shearer left.

 

The money we got for Bellamy was negligeable when you consider Fat Fred had always been saving this money up for the time when it came to replace Big Al, if he'd had to he'd have went over £20m to get Shearers replacement.

 

If you hate Bellamy, fair enough, plenty of people agree with you! But to say we couldnt have Owen without losing Bellamy is 100% nonsense and seems like the sort of agenda i am accused of having against Souness.

 

Which to be fair i do, i want him out.

[Craig 6682]

i wasnt saying Bellars v Owen. I was saying id rather we had Bellars aswell.

35786[/snapback]

 

If we still had Bellamy, we never would have had Owen - simple as that...

35790[/snapback]

 

You keep saying that in any Bellamy thread as if its a fact when its categorically wrong.

 

Souness on his own admission (and rightly) bought Owen to replace Shearer, hence him pointing out that Owen was one of onle a handful of people who could ever fill Shearers boots.

36207[/snapback]

 

All a matter of interpretation. When Souness said that, I interpreted it in the sense of replacing Shearer as an iconic status rather than a direct replacement.

 

Souness also knows we are still short up front, which is why he intends using Dyer often as a striker and Luque giving that option as well. It also shows he ackowledges pace up front is useful! If he and Bellamy hadn;t fallen out he'd still be here in the second striker Role (either in the team or fighting to get in) and Owen would be number one when Shearer left.

 

The money we got for Bellamy was negligeable when you consider Fat Fred had always been saving this money up for the time when it came to replace Big Al, if he'd had to he'd have went over £20m to get Shearers replacement.

 

If you hate Bellamy, fair enough, plenty of people agree with you! But to say we couldnt have Owen without losing Bellamy is 100% nonsense and seems like the sort of agenda i am accused of having against Souness.   

 

Which to be fair i do, i want him out.

36207[/snapback]

 

Really?? 100% nonesense??

 

So you say that without a shadow of a doubt, if Craig Bellamy was still here, we'd have still have signed Michael Owen? That's gotta be one of the most ridiculous statements I've seen in a long, long while....