The hughes Thread

[Original Dub]

Anyone who thinks that it was CLEARLY said that Mark Hughes is the best manager in the world is a fucking retard.
Anyone who is saying this happened purely to wind up other posters should be ashamed of themselves.

I hate WUMs. I don't hate retards because its not their fault. Pick a side Raggers ;)

You didn't say it then.
Was somebody else typing for you

You seem to have only highlighted the second half of that sentence - allow me to highlight what was actually said

Anyone who thinks that it was CLEARLY said that Mark Hughes is the best manager in the world is a fucking retard

You're showing yourself in an especially bad light today mate.

[Im_Spartacus]

Anyone who thinks that it was CLEARLY said that Mark Hughes is the best manager in the world is a fucking retard.
Anyone who is saying this happened purely to wind up other posters should be ashamed of themselves.

I hate WUMs. I don't hate retards because its not their fault. Pick a side Raggers ;)

You didn't say it then.
Was somebody else typing for you

You seem to have only highlighted the second half of that sentence - allow me to highlight what was actually said

Anyone who thinks that it was CLEARLY said that Mark Hughes is the best manager in the world is a fucking retard

You're showing yourself in an especially bad light today mate.

pah, context. What of it lol

[john68]

Rag Hater,
You are not a WUM. You are in fact an evil lying scumbag of the worst kind.
What was actually said, the timing and the conditions set around any statement are inconsequential to my point that you are an evil liar.

The point is that you take PART of a statement, ignore and omit any qualifying conditions and then accuse someone (and it could be anyone) of saying what they patently did not say. By doing so knowingly, you are lying.

You are also a coward...The original statement is actually unimportant. What is important is that posters on here are made fully aware that you an evil lying scumbag and not simply an innocent WUM having a bit of fun...so they are warned about your behaviour and are aware of what you are.

[Rag_hater]

Anyone who thinks that it was CLEARLY said that Mark Hughes is the best manager in the world is a fucking retard.
Anyone who is saying this happened purely to wind up other posters should be ashamed of themselves.

I hate WUMs. I don't hate retards because its not their fault. Pick a side Raggers ;)

You didn't say it then.
Was somebody else typing for you

You seem to have only highlighted the second half of that sentence - allow me to highlight what was actually said

Anyone who thinks that it was CLEARLY said that Mark Hughes is the best manager in the world is a fucking retard

You're showing yourself in an especially bad light today mate.

Why? because I dare to question the sense of what some of the more established members say and point out some of the things I think you say might be wrong IMO.

Go and look for it yourself.

spineless.

you attack someone for something they are supposed to have said, but when challenged to provide evidence you say "look for it yourself"? fucking hell man sort your head out.

you will not find is because you know you have made up bullshit, twisted someones words to fit your own arguments. now people have called your bluff you dont have a fucking clue what to do.

i say again: find me the exact quote of what you are alledging john to have said.

I can't be arsed searching for it either but John did say it, along the lines of "Hughes is the best manager in the world for Manchester City at this time"

That sounds about right to me and there it states what Mr.68 said.
And as I've said I think there were other managers out there who would have been better for us at the time(lets say Jose for the sake of the argument)and had more of a claim to being the best manager in the world and the best manager for us at that time.

[Rag_hater]

Rag Hater,
You are not a WUM. You are in fact an evil lying scumbag of the worst kind.
What was actually said, the timing and the conditions set around any statement are inconsequential to my point that you are an evil liar.

The point is that you take PART of a statement, ignore and omit any qualifying conditions and then accuse someone (and it could be anyone) of saying what they patently did not say. By doing so knowingly, you are lying.

You are also a coward...The original statement is actually unimportant. What is important is that posters on here are made fully aware that you an evil lying scumbag and not simply an innocent WUM having a bit of fun...so they are warned about your behaviour and are aware of what you are.

Youre a twisted old fool with your head so far up your own arse its suprising you get time to type anything

[MaineRoadMemories]

When Mark Hughes gets another job I think we should all join that team's forum and continue our running battles on there, the site's owners wouldn't know what's hit them :-D

[The Man In Blue]

I can't be arsed searching for it either but John did say it, along the lines of "Hughes is the best manager in the world for Manchester City at this time"

i know what was said, and i understand the context of john's usage. let me explain for old man RH AGAIN.....

j68 thought in his opinion that "mark hughes was the best man for the MCFC job at the time". RH states that j68 said "mark hughes is the best manager in the world"

i'm pretty sure anyone with an ounce of sense can see the difference in those two meanings, can you?

thing is, if you want to be a complete twat and slag someone off for something they a) did not say and b) most certainly did not mean then you most probably do not have an ounce of sense, as has been ably demonstrated by RH in this and many other threads.

oh and RH, i'll get involved in whatever the fuck i want on this board, if the lads want to pull me up on something i've said then fine.

[john68]

John,
My original post some time ago was posted as an opinion and not a fact, it was qualified by certain conditions that defined that opinion.
Because it was posted as an opinion and not a fact, I was quite aware that it was open for discussion, debate and even ridicule.

My view of debate is maybe slightly different to many on here. I see it as a learning process, not as a competition and have learnt many things from other posters' opinions on here. On many occasions another poster's compelling argument has caused me to change my view of an issue. It is called a learning process.
I have no problem with my opinions being ripped to pieces, though if i feel i am correct, I will attempt to assert my own view. Sometimes successfully and sometime not.

Had rag hater taken my opinion as it was posted and fully explained to him at the time, I would have no problem, rag hater id perfectly entitled to his opinions whether good or not.
What rag hater has done on this occasion and a number of time in the past is to knowingly take only a part of a post, deliberately twist its meaning and use it to oppose something that was neither said nor meant....and to do so in the full knowledge of what he is doing.

It is a strategy that rag hater has used in the past against myself and others and he has been asked several times to stop.

[Im_Spartacus]

John,
My original post some time ago was posted as an opinion and not a fact, it was qualified by certain conditions that defined that opinion.
Because it was posted as an opinion and not a fact, I was quite aware that it was open for discussion, debate and even ridicule.

My view of debate is maybe slightly different to many on here. I see it as a learning process, not as a competition and have learnt many things from other posters' opinions on here. On many occasions another poster's compelling argument has caused me to change my view of an issue. It is called a learning process.
I have no problem with my opinions being ripped to pieces, though if i feel i am correct, I will attempt to assert my own view. Sometimes successfully and sometime not.

Had rag hater taken my opinion as it was posted and fully explained to him at the time, I would have no problem, rag hater id perfectly entitled to his opinions whether good or not.
What rag hater has done on this occasion and a number of time in the past is to knowingly take only a part of a post, deliberately twist its meaning and use it to oppose something that was neither said nor meant....and to do so in the full knowledge of what he is doing.

It is a strategy that rag hater has used in the past against myself and others and he has been asked several times to stop.

I know the context you wrote it in, and what was written, which is why I confirmed it was suffixed by "at this time" seeing as he couldnt be arsed finding it.

I didnt really agree with you at the time but nonetheless, I understood where you were coming from and I understood what you meant by it.

[john68]

Cheers John.

[carl_feedthegoat]

Cheers John.

IS THAT THE END OF THE DEBATE THEN?

I HOPE NOT AS I HAD SAT DOWN WITH A CUPPA AND A BACON SARNIE AND WAS HOPING FOR SOME MORE ENTERTAINMENT.

[john68]

Cheers John.

IS THAT THE END OF THE DEBATE THEN?

I HOPE NOT AS I HAD SAT DOWN WITH A CUPPA AND A BACON SARNIE AND WAS HOPING FOR SOME MORE ENTERTAINMENT.

...follwed by a meat and potato pie in a barm cake for afters, perchance?

[Rag_hater]

John,
My original post some time ago was posted as an opinion and not a fact, it was qualified by certain conditions that defined that opinion.
Because it was posted as an opinion and not a fact, I was quite aware that it was open for discussion, debate and even ridicule.

My view of debate is maybe slightly different to many on here. I see it as a learning process, not as a competition and have learnt many things from other posters' opinions on here. On many occasions another poster's compelling argument has caused me to change my view of an issue. It is called a learning process.
I have no problem with my opinions being ripped to pieces, though if i feel i am correct, I will attempt to assert my own view. Sometimes successfully and sometime not.

Had rag hater taken my opinion as it was posted and fully explained to him at the time, I would have no problem, rag hater id perfectly entitled to his opinions whether good or not.
What rag hater has done on this occasion and a number of time in the past is to knowingly take only a part of a post, deliberately twist its meaning and use it to oppose something that was neither said nor meant....and to do so in the full knowledge of what he is doing.

It is a strategy that rag hater has used in the past against myself and others and he has been asked several times to stop.

You dont get it do you thick old stick .I dont give a fuck about the reasons you give for thinking clueless was the best manager for us at that time.The point is you said the clueless was the best manager in the world.Which whatever shit you want to coat it with the fact remains the same,thats what you thought.Dont deny the fact saying you meant at the time the point is you thought he was the best.

[carl_feedthegoat]

Cheers John.

IS THAT THE END OF THE DEBATE THEN?

I HOPE NOT AS I HAD SAT DOWN WITH A CUPPA AND A BACON SARNIE AND WAS HOPING FOR SOME MORE ENTERTAINMENT.

...follwed by a meat and potato pie in a barm cake for afters, perchance?

SHOCKING.
AND HERE,S ME THINKING THAT YOU WERE A BACON SARNIE MAN.,,,HOW WRONG AM I!

[john68]

nurse...nurse...nurse...nurse....nurse

Rag hater hasn't taken his tablets again.

[Rag_hater]

nurse...nurse...nurse...nurse....nurse

Rag hater hasn't taken his tablets again.

Didn't make me laugh.Try harder.Get back to abusing me please I found that quite entertaining.

[The Man In Blue]

The point is you said the clueless was the best manager in the world.

no he did not. i am straight up calling you a liar.

what did he really say? if you can find the quote and it says exactly "i think Hughes is the best manager in the world" as you suggest, with no corollaries, i will apologise.

[Rag_hater]

The point is you said the clueless was the best manager in the world.

no he did not. i am straight up calling you a liar.

what did he really say? if you can find the quote and it says exactly "i think Hughes is the best manager in the world" as you suggest, with no corollaries, i will apologise.

Do I give a fuck.
I know what was said and how it read to ME

[Im_Spartacus]

nurse...nurse...nurse...nurse....nurse

Rag hater hasn't taken his tablets again.

Didn't make me laugh.Try harder.Get back to abusing me please I found that quite entertaining.

But he didnt say that. I remember exactly what he said. He didnt ever say Hughes was the best manager in the world, he said what I quoted on page 5 of the thread, which are two entirely different things. He might have been wrong, he might even have been deluded in your eyes, but stick to what he said rather than making stuff up.

I hope John doesnt mind me mentioning this, but a while ago, I objected to the way he had spoken to people, I think I may even have accused his approach as bullying and belittling - in particularly towards you on a thread - come to think of it, it was highly likely the same thread that all this argument is about now.

I wonder why I fucking bothered, because you really don't help yourself one bit with all this - lets just see how long will the lads put up with it before you're off to bluemong

John, I unreservedly apologise now for attempting to sticking up for RH

[The Man In Blue]

The point is you said the clueless was the best manager in the world.

no he did not. i am straight up calling you a liar.

what did he really say? if you can find the quote and it says exactly "i think Hughes is the best manager in the world" as you suggest, with no corollaries, i will apologise.

Do I give a fuck.
I know what was said and how it read to ME

i knew you would shitbag out of it. you cannot back up your words, and you have (yet again) shown yourself up grandad.

you are a liar with the spine of a pureed jellyfish and the credibility of an mp's expenses claim.