DELANEY OUT

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

The world outside you and Berbaslug probably seems quite unhappy with the appointment of Roy Keane as assistant manager for a myriad of rational reasons already well-explained on this thread. The supposed 'agenda' is very much pro-Roy one from the pair of you and that you would even begin to suggest that more questions should be asked about the manager than the assistant is one of the very many examples of this.

The world outside of us is fucking delighted at this appointment, and judging by the press conference yesterday is deliriously excited about the whole thing. It's the most exciting and widely welcomed thing to happen in irish football since the appointment of brian kerr.

But, you know don't let that get in the way of anything you'd like to say on the subject, or accusing other posters of being loosely connected to reality.

also, I'm very curious. Bryan has just pointed out that Keane is only the assistant manager. He's suggested that perhaps we focus less on the assistant and more on the manager himself, since the manager is considerably more important, and you're using this to accuse him of being obsessed with the assistant manager?

God love us all.

Well, one lost nine matches in a row and the other didn't.

Twice. He did it twice, with two entirely different squads of players. The second one of his own creation.

[Auntie Beryl]

DELANEY OUT

Ten years of this.

[Borracho]

DELANEY OUT

The world outside of us is fucking delighted at this appointment, and judging by the press conference yesterday is deliriously excited about the whole thing. It's the most exciting and widely welcomed thing to happen in irish football since the appointment of brian kerr.

Really? Since last weekend I've encountered loads of people who have major misgivings about it, and not too many who have reacted with unqualified delight. And lest we forget, the most thrilling moment of the Kerr era was that delirious press conference at the Shelbourne Hotel.

Berb, can you give a good reason why Roy Keane should be involved with this other than being called Roy Keane? Other than mere name appeal? Other than that John Delaney hopes it might compel a few more people to trudge along to Lansdowne and fork out €60 for the privilege of seeing us play some unglamorous outfit from the wilds of the former USSR?

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

But Berbaslug, I didn't say you wanted Keane to be Ireland manager. And as I said, it doesn't matter that you're not making a direct comparison between Keane and McCarthy. The comparison is mine, and everyone elses (and one that you've then chosen to engage with).

but if the comparison is yours then take issue with yourself, and stop bothering me. and stop putting words in my mouth. any such external comparison would only be valid if I thought that Roy keane wasn't a pretty bad manager

I'm sure you are only trying to analyse Keane's situation at Sunderland, but it looks very generous, a generosity that you apply to almost no-one in football.

But I'm not being generous to keane, I'm just pointing out that you're kind of talking through your arse when you compare him to harry redknapp. You're attributing structural factors to the personality of the manager. When Keane became manager of Ipswich, a different club with a different board, and different approach, he signed four players a year. When the structural factors changed, he changed.

In that instance, I'm not saying that the players keane signed were good or bad. I'm not saying that he's a good or bad judge of player, I'm not saying that he's a good or bad manager. It's not because I'm trying to defend him. It's simply because it's irrelevant to the point I was making which was simply that you're wrong to say that he's like harry redknapp.

Under these circumstances, pointing out how as a club they could probably have gone about their business in a more efficient and sustainable manner is not making excuses for keane. Rather a continuation of the same point, and a criticism of a chaotic and stupid board who were intent on wasting a lot of money. A model that has been all too common throughout english football, and has always ended badly.

But you chose to characterize this as me saying "the mean board forced him to get promoted too quickly."

Again that's down to you so if you have a problem with that, I suggest you have a meaningful conversation with yourself and see if you can resolve your issues with the voices in your head. They may have more appetite for the discussion than me.

And, to repeat, this is where McCarthy comes in: most people can see that they've been equally successful (you deny this, although you're not comparing the two), but the difference in which you treat the two is incredibly glaring.

No they're not equally 'successful'. Successful doesn't come into it. They're both completely different types of bad manager. Mick is a vastly more dangerous and damaging figure because of their radically differing personalities.

Keane is immensely volatile and only likely to stay at a club for a short period of time before he falls out with everyone. He's not able to do too much damage as a result, and will struggle to find another job in club management as a result. However he gets fired while there is still time to repair whatever damage he's done. He's like a flash fire that rips through an area, burning some of the things it comes into contact with and it's gone.

Mick on the other hand is one of those people who masks his inadequacies, by pretending to be decent and by sucking up to his bosses, and the media, lowering expectations and failing to meet them. therefore he gets to spend a lot of time in his job, doing real damage and actively getting everyone else to blame it entirely on factors outside his control.

he's more like the gradually heating pot of water that the frog is in. the situation gradually gets worse and worse and worse, for the frog without ever becoming intolerable, until it becomes clear that the frog is going to die. You can turn off the heat by firing him, but the frog will still stay bubbling away and will remain dead until you replace it with an entirely new frog.

The scale of mcCarthy's failures are epic. A shattered world cup, a poisoned international landscape for 10 years. Enormous and incredible streaks of consecutive losses that no-one else will ever match because they'll always be fired long before they hit 9 games in a row. Two clubs that he had effectively relegated by december.

His personality is what enables him to reach the heights of epic failure that no other manager can achieve.

No other manager will ever lose 92 out of 138 premier league games, because one season of that would be enough to finish the top flight careers of any other manager. But mick is a great lad, and it's not his fault. Sure isn't he trying his best god love him.

So Keane gets "I'm just trying to take an objective look at the circumstances, yeah? Guys?", whereas McCarthy's much harder circumstances get short shrift, and you focus entirely on the bad.

Again, Keane doesn't get anything. I'm just pointing out the problems with your terrible analogy. Keane is not like harry redknapp. You think I'm saying Keane is this, and mcCarthy is terrible, therefore I'm comparing the two. Whereas I'm actually saying, Your analogy is terrible, and on a separate issue, in a separate strand of discussion, Mick McCarthy is also terrible.

you're the one completely misunderstanding the point of part A, and using this misunderstanding to create a false comparison. Once again, I'm not defending roy keane when I'm saying that he's not like harry redknapp, I'm just pointing out that you're talking nonsense, and giving you reasons why. Keane is his own kind of bad manager.

Keane gets due credit for his achievements, McCarthy's are dismissed.

Where do I give 'due credit' to keane for his achievement. I'm not particularly impressed by keane getting promoted with sunderland any more than I'm impressed with mick getting promoted with wolves or sunderland. I don't see these things as different. Someone else on this threat may have given keane 'due credit' for getting promoted, but it wasn't me.

I had forgotten that one of the joys of threads about roy keane was the tendency of people who don't particularly like him to treat all of the people on the other side of the argument as the same poster posting under different names, and acting as though poster B said what poster A did, because they're really the same person.

McCarthy gets blamed for other people's failures, based on the most outlandish reasoning.

No, Mccarthy gets blamed for over time creating a culture and a squad that make it massively difficult for the manager who follows him to clean up the mess. He doesn't get the blame for the mistakes that the person who follows him, just for making their position really really difficult.

It didn't just happen with wolves. It happened with Ireland, and the only reason that it didn't happen with sunderland was because they changed the board, the backroom staff, and signed 17 players.

That's the problem - you say something outlandish, deny it when you're pulled up on it, then say the same thing in the next paragraph.

Again there's nothing I can do about you making a mistake, refusing to accept it when it's pointed out to you, and you then making the same mistake again. I really can't be held responsible for that.

I could go over to your house, and we could print it out, and I could hold your hand so that your fingers are under the words, as you read them out loud, and then I could get a big white board and use diagrams, and if you eventually get it right, I could give you a sweetie.

But I don't think I'll do that.

At this stage, I reckon it only has a 30% chance of working, and I don't have the energy. but here's a picture to illustrate how I think the whole thing would have gone. You're the one on the right.

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

Really? Since last weekend I've encountered loads of people who have major misgivings about it, and not too many who have reacted with unqualified delight. And lest we forget, the most thrilling moment of the Kerr era was that delirious press conference at the Shelbourne Hotel.

well I did rather deliberately say, the appointment of Brian kerr. It's not been a good decade. And most people seem able to see this as the appointment of two people rather than just focusing on roy keane. The people who are just focusing on roy keane aren't going to like anything he does ever.

Berb, can you give a good reason why Roy Keane should be involved with this other than being called Roy Keane? Other than mere name appeal? Other than that John Delaney hopes it might compel a few more people to trudge along to Lansdowne and fork out €60 for the privilege of seeing us play some unglamorous outfit from the wilds of the former USSR?

Martin O Neill wants him? Do you think he'd accept having an assistant forced on him? I mean it's not as though he needs the job or the money. I can't help feeling that the kaiser and silvio have something to do with it. i sincerely doubt that delaney has much to do with it, other than have to accept it because of the way he's fucked up the associations finances.

[anton pulisov]

DELANEY OUT

Yeah, Martin O'Neill chose his own backroom staff. He wants Roy Keane. It was clear that this was going on a couple of weeks after Trap was fired, when Keane was asked if he wanted to be the next Ireland manager, and Keane said no (in his own special, no holds barred way) and then backed O'Neill for the job. O'Neill had already sounded him out back then.

So yeah, dalliance, if you want to know why Roy Keane should be assistant manager, ask Martin O'Neill, or just watch his press conference, where people already asked him for you.

[garcia]

DELANEY OUT

OTF old-timers will know i might not be the most impartial observer here. i agree with a lot of what berbaslug says about mick mccarthy and the cult of defeat that eventually seems to engulf all his teams. i mean, i don't believe mccarthy deliberately sets out to lose matches. but he's a bit too comfortable with losing, i think. and i dislike some aspects of his persona. his "straight-talking" image which is not actually straight-talking, his playing-to-the-gallery one-liners which are always so safe and anodyne... it seems to me his priority is to be thought of as a decent skin, and he almost uses himself as a human shield. a typically misbegotten defensive strategy. when i see mccarthy doing his decent skin thing after another defeat, i imagine him standing there in drag, shouting "hit me now, with the child in my arms." i accept this reflects more on me than on him.

i don't get the roy keane / harry redknapp analogy either. is it based only on the fact that they both have a high turnover of players and well-known dogs? i suppose they also have the reputation of not doing much work on the training ground. and they both sometimes say funny things in interviews. but when you look beyond these similarities, you notice differences between them so profound as to render the analogy ridiculous.

harry redknapp is a people person. he likes to chat and tell funny stories. he has an ironic attitude towards principle and he doesn't take anything seriously except money (and possibly his wife, to whom he does seem genuinely devoted). it's all a bit of a blag to harry. he is a chancer and a trickster and he doesn't really mind if you know it (except perhaps if you bring it up in the middle of a live interview on sky, which you should have the good manners not to do). harry redknapp will answer his phone and happily blab away to anybody who calls even if he hasn't got the faintest idea who they are.

roy keane won't even answer his phone to his fucking chairman. he broods over perceived slights (and perceives slights everywhere). he flies into a rage at the slightest provocation and can sometimes work himself up into a rage even in the absence of provocation. he takes himself extremely seriously and has an absolute commitment to principle - even if those principles sometimes appear confused and contradictory. he nurses and nurtures grudges like he was their mother. i love the way delaney is claiming all the stuff between them is water under the bridge. this is roy keane, who still occasionally seethes about not getting a game for ireland U15s in the mid-1980s.

i think harry redknapp is much more suited to the job of being a football manager than roy keane. keane's problem as a manager was that he would turn criticism of players' behaviour into criticism of their character. for instance, you arrive late for the team bus. the problem is not simply that you have fucked up. the problem is that you're a cunt. it doesn't leave you with anywhere to go. keane's attitude seemed to be that if players couldn't take that kind of... challenging criticism, then they didn't have what it takes to be a player. which is essentially that old "if she floats..." witch-finding philosophy.

you have to show the players some respect or they have no reason to give you any back. if you treat them too harshly, you make it easy for them to decide that in fact, YOU, the manager, are a cunt: any other conclusion on their part creates too much cognitive dissonance.

keane was used to being hard on his team-mates at man united and they won a lot while he was there, so he probably had the idea that this was how a proper team worked. of course, as a player, he could cunt off his team-mates during the week but then show his respect for them on the field, and what he gave back on the field made the thing sustainable. when he was standing on the sideline as a manager he couldn't give the players anything to compensate for all the judgment and harshness he would heap upon them during the week.

nevertheless there is a lot to love about keane (maybe he's easier to love from a distance). he might be verging on crazy but he has a lot of integrity. i love that he lost respect for ferguson once fergie started palling up with billionaires and horse-racing people. now that was a seriously self-destructive commitment to personal principle. and there's something very attractive about that.

Berb, can you give a good reason why Roy Keane should be involved with this other than being called Roy Keane? Other than mere name appeal? Other than that John Delaney hopes it might compel a few more people to trudge along to Lansdowne and fork out €60 for the privilege of seeing us play some unglamorous outfit from the wilds of the former USSR?

delaney has nothing to do with the appointment of keane. his problem was that if o'neill insisted on keane as a condition of taking the job, who else was he going to get? mick mccarthy. and that would probably have meant a half-empty stadium and non-qualification. so delaney reckons accepting keane along with o'neill is the lesser gamble.

[dalliance]

DELANEY OUT

also, I'm very curious. Bryan has just pointed out that Keane is only the assistant manager. He's suggested that perhaps we focus less on the assistant and more on the manager himself, since the manager is considerably more important, and you're using this to accuse him of being obsessed with the assistant manager?

You really are a tedious parody of a parody. Read the sodding post he made and it resembled absolutely nothing like what you are suggesting it did above.

Brian was suggesting that the appointment of O'Neill as manager based upon his record was potentially more contentious than the appointment of Keane as his assistant. Which is plainly utter bollocks.

[Borracho]

DELANEY OUT

garcia wrote: who else was he going to get? mick mccarthy.

. . . Or, alternatively, a good manager who was willing to work for €1.2 million a year.

[garcia]

DELANEY OUT

and no doubt there are good managers out there who'll work for a big salary like that, but who is delaney going to get?

[anton pulisov]

DELANEY OUT

dalliance wrote:

also, I'm very curious. Bryan has just pointed out that Keane is only the assistant manager. He's suggested that perhaps we focus less on the assistant and more on the manager himself, since the manager is considerably more important, and you're using this to accuse him of being obsessed with the assistant manager?

You really are a tedious parody of a parody. Read the sodding post he made and it resembled absolutely nothing like what you are suggesting it did above.

Brian was suggesting that the appointment of O'Neill as manager based upon his record was potentially more contentious than the appointment of Keane as his assistant. Which is plainly utter bollocks.

No, I said his recent record at similar clubs is similar. So it depends on how you define recent. If you are taking recent to mean the last 20 years, then yes, in that case I can imagine you thought I was talking utter bollocks.

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

What dalliance says bryaniek said:

Brian was suggesting that the appointment of O'Neill as manager based upon his record was potentially more contentious than the appointment of Keane as his assistant. Which is plainly utter bollocks.

What Bryaniek actually said.

The reason Roy Keane is being talked about on this thread is because he has been appointed assistant manager of a team and there are a load of people with an axe to grind who want to stick the boot in.

Meanwhile, nobody seems interested in talking about the actual manager, Martin O'Neill, who has a quite a shit recent record in management at similar clubs.

Yet it is the people who are obsessed about talking about O'Neill's assistant manager who accuse other people about being obsessed with O'Neill's assistant manager.

And you wonder why I complain about you misrepresenting people. Those two quotes are completely unrelated to each other. either you struggle to read and understand simple, straightforward sentences, or you have substantially the meaning of what he said to make it easier to argue with.

Either way, I don't see where you get off slagging off people when that's the best you can manage.

[dalliance]

DELANEY OUT

Are you drunk?

He points out that O'Neill should be questioned more about his dodgy recent managerial record while refusing to acknowledge that Keane - a simple victim of agenda driven bad-minding meanies - should not be open to the same performance related scrutiny?

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

no dalliance, he doesn't say that at all. try again.

i'll give you a hint. the focus of his post isn't martin o'neill, or roy keane.

[dalliance]

DELANEY OUT

No, I said his recent record at similar clubs is similar. So it depends on how you define recent. If you are taking recent to mean the last 20 years, then yes, in that case I can imagine you thought I was talking utter bollocks.

Well you appoint managers, especially international ones, on their body of work rather than just what they did in their last job. But even on the basis that O'Neill certainly most recently failed at Sunderland, at least he was an active manager at a high level until the early part of this year.

But if you are going to question the value of this then fair enough. Why would you not extend that logic equally to a man who has sat on an ITV couch for the past nearly 3 years?

[dalliance]

DELANEY OUT

I don't need to try again. He is trying to turn the focus off the questionable appointment of Keane to the eminently justifiable appointment of O'Neill.

There's nothing else to it. Once the football starts then this will be forgotten but hey, they haven't played any football yet so their appointments are all we have to argue about.

O'Neill is probably overpaid for what he is, what he is doing and who he is doing it for but there's probably a decent case to be made that Roy Keane is the best paid international assistant manager in the world. I'm astounded you, or Brian at least, doesn't find this scandalous.

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

no dalliance, that's still not what he said.

He is saying we're talking about roy keane because some people i.e. you and some others are obsessed with putting the boot into Roy keane. As a result the conversation is entirely about the assistant manager, rather than the actual manager, who is the important one of the duo.

what strikes him as curious is that keane and o'neill's record at sunderland is actually very similar, but for some reason you and your ilk are focused obsessively on Keane.

that's obviously not meant to be a slight on O'Neill, but instead pointing out an inconsistency in the approach of those who are so focused on attacking keane, while simultaneously attacking those they are arguing with for being obsessed with Keane.

I thought that the scottish educational system was supposed to be relatively good.

[anton pulisov]

DELANEY OUT

Well you appoint managers, especially international ones, on their body of work rather than just what they did in their last job. But even on the basis that O'Neill certainly most recently failed at Sunderland, at least he was an active manager at a high level until the early part of this year.

But if you are going to question the value of this then fair enough. Why would you not extend that logic equally to a man who has sat on an ITV couch for the past nearly 3 years?

Well, as has been alluded to by TAB, the bulk of my irritation with this dissection of Ireland's new assistant manager is that it's solely due to the fact that it is Roy Keane, and people love to have a go at Roy Keane.

I mean, where was the ultra-critical dissection of Marco Tardelli, who was paid the same money to be an Ireland assistant manager? I don't remember Tardelli's management history pre-Ireland, which is pretty shocking, being looked at or even mentioned. I also don't remember Trap being showered with questions about Tardelli, and if he expected problems with Tardelli's personality. Indeed, Tardelli and Trap spent most of their time on the sideline at matches shouting at each other and nearly coming to blows, but nobody in the media gave a shit, because, you know, Trap and Tardelli are Italians and all that. But if MON and Keane as much as blink at each other in the dugout, the media will go into self fulfilling bullshit prophecy overdrive. That's the greatest fear I have for this appointment, the media turning the tiniest spat into massive fucking Roy Keane media soap opera. This is the same media who made Roy Keane saying, "listen, the fans want to see the team win" into "KEANE CRITICISES FANS." This is why most people who want to achieve anything Ireland end up emigrating. Ireland doesn't like achievement, because it gets in the way of good craic.

[Jimmy Bignutz]

DELANEY OUT

For all you have a go at me, Berbaslug, you still don't seem to be able to grasp this.

You're only trying to be fair to Keane, I understand that. Too fair, though, would be my argument (you're only now admitting that he's a bad manager, now that you've been backed into a corner). This is fine, but you're not usually all that fair to people in football. We all know the story - 99% if people in the game get their achievements dismissed, or explained away, the negative is focused on, and no excuses are allowed. In contrast, your approach to Keane looks very generous indeed.

"But Jimmy", an observer might say, "maybe he's turned over a new leaf. Shouldn't you be trying to encourage this more open-minded Berbaslug, instead of shutting him down?". Fair enough, until Mick McCarthy gets mentioned. I can't remember who first mentioned him, but every time his name comes up you come up with a load of extraordinarily unfair criticism to him, for a record that most people can see is almost equal to Keane's.

So that's why people make this extremely obvious comparison, even if you're unable or unwilling to. It's aimed at you because it's about yours (and Bryaniek)'s approach, but particularly because you keep engaging with it, even while denying that you are.

It's a problem of tactics really. Not Mick's or Roy's, but your own. If you had any sense you'd just say "yeah I've been critical of McCarthy", and we'd all have gone home long ago but instead, every time you complain of his irrelevance, you add an incredible attack on him, that goes beyond anyone any of us would have expected. That's going to get picked up on.

Also, Bryaniek's response earlier:

Well, one lost nine matches in a row and the other didn't.

Shows about as much comprehension of the thread as if you'd asked "Who is the Ireland manager?" or "What year is the 2016 European Championships being held?" People - on both sides - have written a lot on this thread, and to just repeat something from a few pages back is really insulting. Christ, at least when Berbaslug does this he manages to be amusing.

[Jimmy Bignutz]

DELANEY OUT

The Harry Redknapp comparison is obviously a bit of a dig, but it's not without foundation - leaving aside Triggs and Rosie - the main parallel being a question over whether they're suited to international coaching, and, as Garcia alluded to on the podcast I was listening to this afternoon - what is he actually going to do?

I completely get the excitement about the appointment (of both) as expressed in the podcast and in AB2's post earlier, but there are big questions to be asked, which I think you both realise.

[garcia]

DELANEY OUT

there certainly are a lot of questions; i don't really understand what keane is supposed to be doing or how the partnership is going to work in practice. he seems like the type of person who gets an idea about how things should be done, and then can't tolerate them being done differently. and that doesn't seem like an ideal character trait in an assistant. so really, it has disaster written all over it. but having keane involved works on an emotional level. we're essentially like a lot of the newcastle fans when they hired shearer.

[Duncan Gardner]

DELANEY OUT

Keane's job description will include carrying a pissed Delaney out of away venue pubs and strip joints when OTF's own Once Gonzo isn't available.

[anton pulisov]

DELANEY OUT

Jimmy Bignutz wrote:
Also, Bryaniek's response earlier:

Well, one lost nine matches in a row and the other didn't.

Shows about as much comprehension of the thread as if you'd asked "Who is the Ireland manager?" or "What year is the 2016 European Championships being held?" People - on both sides - have written a lot on this thread, and to just repeat something from a few pages back is really insulting. Christ, at least when Berbaslug does this he manages to be amusing.

That's a lot you've read into one sentence there. If you found something innocuous insulting then you have a lot in common with Roy Keane!

[Jimmy Bignutz]

DELANEY OUT

I am quite similar to him when I play Football Manager.

[The Awesome Berbaslug!!!]

DELANEY OUT

For all you have a go at me, Berbaslug, you still don't seem to be able to grasp this.

You're only trying to be fair to Keane, I understand that. Too fair, though, would be my argument (you're only now admitting that he's a bad manager, now that you've been backed into a corner). This is fine, but you're not usually all that fair to people in football. We all know the story - 99% if people in the game get their achievements dismissed, or explained away, the negative is focused on, and no excuses are allowed. In contrast, your approach to Keane looks very generous indeed.

"But Jimmy", an observer might say, "maybe he's turned over a new leaf. Shouldn't you be trying to encourage this more open-minded Berbaslug, instead of shutting him down?". Fair enough, until Mick McCarthy gets mentioned. I can't remember who first mentioned him, but every time his name comes up you come up with a load of extraordinarily unfair criticism to him, for a record that most people can see is almost equal to Keane's.

So that's why people make this extremely obvious comparison, even if you're unable or unwilling to. It's aimed at you because it's about yours (and Bryaniek)'s approach, but particularly because you keep engaging with it, even while denying that you are.

It's a problem of tactics really. Not Mick's or Roy's, but your own. If you had any sense you'd just say "yeah I've been critical of McCarthy", and we'd all have gone home long ago but instead, every time you complain of his irrelevance, you add an incredible attack on him, that goes beyond anyone any of us would have expected. That's going to get picked up on

For fucks sake. Can you not get it into your fucking skull that I'm not interested in being fair or unfair to roy Keane when I said that. I was just gently pointing out that what you said was fucking spectacularly stupid, and giving you the reasons, in the hope that you'd find some more valid reason for complaining about keane. One that didn't hurt the eyes and the brain quite so much.

If you said something equally stupid, like "The problem with martin o'neill is that he's basically Jessica simpson and he's not going to be able to wear his daisy dukes on the touchline now that he's given birth" then I would have patiently explained that to you as well.

If I just said "that's fucking stupid," and left it at that we could have avoided all of this. Maybe I should adopt that attitude in the future.

And as for the rest, It's just fucking stupid. And at the risk of prolonging this further, the reason that it's just fucking stupid is that it's simply several paragraphs saying that it doesn't matter what I actually say, how carefully and deliberately I explain what I'm saying.

you've got your preconceptions and rather than pay any attention to what is written in front of you, you're going to go with them and come up with something you're more comfortable arguing with.

As I said, it's fucking stupid. And then you say it's my fault. Once Again, It's fucking stupid. Just read what is written, and don't argue with the fucking voices in your head. It's fucking stupid.

There's a common theme running through this post. I hope that the use of repetition enables you to detect what it is, and try not to feed it through your filter first. You might miss it.