ouch Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Fairy tales, ask ouch. The only person admitting to posting fairy tales is you. I'll leave you to argue with yourself as you have differing views on play off team Wolverhampton and the likely crowd figures. "Any supposed increased crowds at Wolves would have dwindled after Monday when they were knocked out of contention for a title win, the reality is after Monday no one at Wolverhampton would care less about a league win and thus their crowds would dwindle and tail off". So as well as more tracks retaining a slightly higher and slightly more stable attendance they tracks (Swindon, Wolves and Lakeside) will also have a Play Off meetings likely attended by 2/3/4,000 people (at least) on top of a higher average weekly attendance, you are talking deficits and differences in attendances of the best part of 5,000 people if you work that out to an average of even £10 a person thats a cash difference of £50,000.00 that Wolves, Swindon or Lakeside will make that they probably wouldnt without Play Offs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) No different to this - it is what someone thinks would happen, their thoughts on events, by the logic used by ouch it's total fairy tale, nothing to back it up, no validity, no tangible, no actuality, no evidence, events that have not actually taken place a "this is what would happen, honestly, really, seriously it would, I will post it loads so it means it's true" nope - a fairytale, there is as much to suggest it wouldn't happen than there is to suggest it would. Events of 15/20/30 years ago don't validate because the landscape of culture and entertainment has shifted massively since the 90s. No doubt it will be referenced what used to happen 15 years or so ago, yeah 15 years now, things have changed people have so much more to do now than they did during "league seasons" to attempt to place the blame of decreased crowds on Play Offs is comical, more so when you consider the sports that have also introduced the system in an attempt to generate further interest and boost crowds, media interest and sponsorship - all wrong though because, well honestly really, it would happen like Fred say's, those events wold play out exactly like that, expect they wouldn't. P.S I assume it is just total coincidence that fred, follows ouch, follows fred, follows ouch, follows fred? In a proper league as the season progress beyond halfway the top teams get bigger and bigger gates as they push for the title and the also-rans just get the die hards and look on enviously with no hope for the rest of the season.With the qualifier and cup format the lower teams and their die hard fans have the chance to race for the top 4 so their season is extended but its still only the die hards that go.In the meantime the top teams who have already qualified don't benefit from the steady increase in crowds a normal title push generates.Add in the lack of a proper cup with usually poor attendances for the first round but the quarter final, then the semi and obviously the final itself generates more and more interest and not just die hards go to the cup semi final and final do they?Therefore it is not financially better for speedway overall, the money is spread out more evenly but the total receipts when compared to a proper league championship and proper cup competition is almost certainly less, particularly in a closely fought season.. The only person admitting to posting fairy tales is you.I'll leave you to argue with yourself as you have differing views on play off team Wolverhampton and the likely crowd figures."Any supposed increased crowds at Wolves would have dwindled after Monday when they were knocked out of contention for a title win, the reality is after Monday no one at Wolverhampton would care less about a league win and thus their crowds would dwindle and tail off".So as well as more tracks retaining a slightly higher and slightly more stable attendance they tracks (Swindon, Wolves and Lakeside) will also have a Play Off meetings likely attended by 2/3/4,000 people (at least) on top of a higher average weekly attendance, you are talking deficits and differences in attendances of the best part of 5,000 people if you work that out to an average of even £10 a person thats a cash difference of £50,000.00 that Wolves, Swindon or Lakeside will make that they probably wouldnt without Play Offs. No Wolves in league system after Belle Vue defeat, crowds tail off. Woves in Play Off system after Belle Vue defeat, crowds remain/increase, there is no arguing with self. Edited August 16, 2016 by The Mockingjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Are you saying wolves crowds would go down even with the world champion coming back just because they are 10 points behind top with 19 points to race for? That’s a fairy-tale scenario, hasn’t happened so forget about it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 You want a link from a meeting in 2007? Good luck with that. What I posted was close to not only the gist of it when taken in context with how Swindon managed to fit ward in but, I asked if rossiter admitted to losing qualifiers 'to fit Darcy in' and he actually admitted to losing qualifiers because "it was in the period when we were changing before Darcy came along" and you described my post as fantasy! And then proceeded to lie about what I posted, twice, to try and justify it! Oh and a hypocrite as well! You expect to be able to take my post in context and apply your own meaning but you can't take my post in the context of how swindon cheated to fit ward in, double standards or what. A hypocrite and a liar, good work. More day dreaming I see. "What I posted was close to the gist of it". Quote of the week so far. Nearly as good as your ask Sam Masters one. Teehee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) You do have a strange way of discussing things. You question posts on the basis of 'club statements' but when your post is questioned in the same way you glibly admit No, hence why I didn't claim they had! Having asked for examples of meetings or statements several are dutifully trotted out and you say they don't count? And now you make use of what you call a fairy tale scenario to make a point and when the same scenario is referred to in the very next post you just dismiss it and say it should be forgotten! Lol! I've just realised you were the one who would have picked Woofinden, Harris, Harris and Harris for Lambert and more specifically Cook and King should have been nowhere the team for the swc, ha ha! Yes, because I didn’t make a post where I said “clubs often say” or claim “clubs often say” the things I had said……if I was going to say “clubs often say” I would provide validation to back that up. To post “clubs often say” isn’t opinion, it is a fact which should be simple to back up, as of yet it still hasn’t been, and thus I haven’t “ignored” the post but instead dismissed said post and quotes as utter folly and confirmation of someone’s perception rather than things clubs have actually said....really that isn't that hard to work out.... Yes, that’s correct, if the rule of “fairy tale scenario” applies in one instance when someone imposes their thoughts on a situation it applies in all instances (fair logic right, same being used by you with the idea that every post needs a club statement no matter what is actually said)….just going with the thought process of ouch, so I will use that logic given its stunning nature and dismiss your fanciful idea re what crowds would be with Woffinden in a league scenario as “fairy tale scenarios”. And I have just realised your posting style is the exact same as ouch….inability to read, interpret or digest points, twisting scenarios, imposing own thoughts on people, merging posts and conversations getting in a muddle about posts and responses, assuming a reply to a specific post actually relates to a different post and in the case of Rossiter just a flat out misunderstanding of what he was saying and instead deciding what he said… there is zero chance two folks are that silly.... I am sure he will be along in a minute though. Edited August 16, 2016 by The Mockingjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) So because you didn't claim you had anything to back up what you posted, the fact there isn't anything to back it up is okay? I can see where you're coming from but I think its a bit of a weak position if I'm honest. What was the point you were making here? The vast majority of what is posted on here is things people think “I think Poole have a good team” “I think Belle Vue might win the league” “I think Team Gb should have been”. Your posts about what you feel attendances would be in a league system are what you think, they aren’t an actuality, they are a “fairy tale scenarios” or a “weak position if you are being honest” that aren't "backed up" if you apply your own logic to your own post that is being applied to other peoples posts. Re the point I was making in that post, it is literally in black and white I don’t know how I can make it much clearer. Edited August 16, 2016 by The Mockingjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) Yes, because I didnt make a post where I said clubs often say or claim clubs often say the things I had saidif I was going to say clubs often say I would provide validation to back that up. To post clubs often say isnt opinion, it is a fact which should be simple to back up, as of yet it still hasnt been, and thus I havent ignored the post but instead dismissed said post and quotes as utter folly and confirmation of someones perception rather than things clubs have actually said....really that isn't that hard to work out.... I did t post clubs often say. I said..... These days we often get statements like it's not crucial we win this as we can still get a mid table finish and qualify or we've no chance of qualifying so it's a nothing fixture or we've qualified so we're not concerned about the result we'll just do some testing. http://m.plymouthherald.co.uk/mike-bowden-devils-real-future-plymouth/story-23040318-detail/story.html http://www.eadt.co.uk/sport/dead_rubber_against_peterborough_panthers_the_perfect_opportunity_for_ipswich_witches_to_work_on_set_ups_says_danny_king_1_4543831 Please don't misquote me to help further your argument, you shouldnt need to,facts will do. Edited August 16, 2016 by ouch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) I did t post clubs often say. I said..... These days we often get statements like it's not crucial we win this as we can still get a mid table finish and qualify or we've no chance of qualifying so it's a nothing fixture or we've qualified so we're not concerned about the result we'll just do some testing. http://m.plymouthherald.co.uk/mike-bowden-devils-real-future-plymouth/story-23040318-detail/story.html http://www.eadt.co.uk/sport/dead_rubber_against_peterborough_panthers_the_perfect_opportunity_for_ipswich_witches_to_work_on_set_ups_says_danny_king_1_4543831 Please don't misquote me to help further your argument, you shouldnt need to,facts will do. Yeah you said that sure, and even though this post appears to be your thought that you are hammering home how correct you are, it isn’t - as I have said a few times, you can’t validate what you have said. Often means frequent, many times….you were wrong in your post, it is ok to admit it, you said something to try and justify your dislike of the Play Offs, but what you said was utter nonsense. to further show that in one of the links you have posted this comment is literally said by King “It’s a dead rubber but, given the form we’ve been in every fixture is important to us,” Edited August 16, 2016 by The Mockingjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Well Sam Masters was there? Otherwise not sure what you mean. Did I forget to mention he did a selfie as well (not to mention the ones with his mum and dad, lol!)https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/t31.0-0/p480x480/13988174_10208571865726126_6946544412824031169_o.jpg It was a fun night, you should try it sometime Seen many selfies with loads of riders, none brag and make claims like you do tho. Have plenty of fun thanks, which is the opposite of reading your jackanory stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 No, I always back up my posts with an explanation or an example and in most cases its just commonsense anyway. How anyone would dispute that a team closing in on the league title in a proper league championship format attracts bigger and bigger gates is very odd indeed, but you call that fairy tale? No, it’s what you feel and think is common sense and relatable explanations or examples, nothing more, nothing less. I don’t think anyone has disputed the idea that crowds closing in on a league title would have increased crowds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebrum Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Brag? Lol! You keep going on about my content as though it never happened, as you know I've always got something to back it up but you think its bragging? Just because someone has mentioned that they had a good time isn't bragging, you must have a very sad life if that is bragging. I'd call someone always trying to be in the right and personal attacks sad, so each to their own. I have no time for a sad life, travelling the country with sport and watching my club kids winning competitions under my guidance. No time for self loving selfies tho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) That's what I said? I always back up my posts (feelings if you like?) with examples and in most cases its just common sense, you've even gone to the trouble of giving an example. Less than 40 minutes before the quoted post you posted Now you are saying 'I dont think anyone has disputed the idea that crowds closing in on a league title would have increased crowds.', I agree! Wow! That was easier than I expected. Yes, what you think is correct, it doesn't mean it then is correct or any more or less a "fairy tale" then when others make posts with what they think. It would be a fallacy to say a side going for a title wouldn't have an increased crowd, I don't know what you are getting with that? It again, like another posts neither proves nor disproves any kind of point for or against Play Offs. I assume then you are ouch as well...... Edited August 16, 2016 by The Mockingjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Sorry you're not making sense again. I assume then that you are onion as well...... Aucht it is fine just make up what I have said, seems it works better for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 I quoted what you said? Ok, odd, but em cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 I know first you say its fairy tale then you say nobody disputes it. #youlitterallypostedit The only thing I have learned here is the art of conversation has passed you by, you hear a thing then simply decide what you have heard, as proven with the Rossiter comments. The post I made saying “Your posts about what you feel attendances would be in a league system are what you think, they aren’t an actuality, they are a “fairy tale scenarios” or a “weak position if you are being honest” that aren't "backed up" if you apply your own logic to your own post that is being applied to other peoples posts” was in relation to earlier claims you had made on the thread re attendances they came before you said “How anyone would dispute that a team closing in on the league title in a proper league championship format attracts bigger and bigger gates is very odd indeed, but you call that fairy tale?” See the point re increased attendances for a crowd going for a title is fair, but that isn't the only point you have made on the thread, you have said other things that do have an element of fairy tale to them. These are different things, different points, different stages of a conversation, attempts to be and smart and obtuse but instead makes you come across slow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Yeah you said that sure, and even though this post appears to be your thought that you are hammering home how correct you are, it isnt - as I have said a few times, you cant validate what you have said. Often means frequent, many times.you were wrong in your post, it is ok to admit it, you said something to try and justify your dislike of the Play Offs, but what you said was utter nonsense. to further show that in one of the links you have posted this comment is literally said by King Its a dead rubber but, given the form weve been in every fixture is important to us, I'm baffled by the "Yeah you said that sure". I copied my original post to show what I said?? I commented that riders will use meetings to test set ups and validated it by posting an article about a rider using a meeting to test set ups. I also posted all the other articles about nothing to race for etc but you disregarded those too. I did a quick goggle search to find the validating articles as I'm not going to go through old stars to dig out more validating comments. I will be making you aware of such from now on though to validate the use of the word often. The concept of perceived dead rubbers being discussed or mentioned in the speedway world is not utter nonsense. The fact you disregarded the headline and dug deep into the King piece to validate your point of view was odd to say the least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkafag Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) I'm baffled by the "Yeah you said that sure". I copied my original post to show what I said?? I commented that riders will use meetings to test set ups and validated it by posting an article about a rider using a meeting to test set ups. I also posted all the other articles about nothing to race for etc but you disregarded those too. I did a quick goggle search to find the validating articles as I'm not going to go through old stars to dig out more validating comments. I will be making you aware of such from now on though to validate the use of the word often. The concept of perceived dead rubbers being discussed or mentioned in the speedway world is not utter nonsense. The fact you disregarded the headline and dug deep into the King piece to validate your point of view was odd to say the least. Why are you changing accounts just stay logged in as one FFS. You didn’t post other articles you posted the same thing you had said earlier, you also posted a comment saying something along the lines of some said the Elite Shield was a dead rubber, it has no context and it was about 2 years old. The fact I disregard the headline and read the actual article is odd. Yeah you do that though, you make me aware... Edited August 16, 2016 by The Mockingjay Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E I Addio Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 (edited) W . You want a link from a meeting in 2007? Good luck with that. What I posted was close to not only the gist of it when taken in context with how Swindon managed to fit ward in but, I asked if rossiter admitted to losing qualifiers 'to fit Darcy in' and he actually admitted to losing qualifiers because "it was in the period when we were changing before Darcy came along" and you described my post as fantasy! . Ah, I see now. So you are not suggesting that Rosco was saying he lost the qualifiers intentionally. The opposite of intentional is unintentional, so presumably you agree that Swindon did not intend losing any meetings last year, they just got beat by better teams on the night. Just like other clubs then. think we can probably agree on that, and move on. Edited August 16, 2016 by E I Addio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouch Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Why are you changing accounts just stay logged in as one FFS. You didnt post other articles you posted the same thing you had said earlier, you also posted a comment saying something along the lines of some said the Elite Shield was a dead rubber, it has no context and it was about 2 years old. The fact I disregard the headline and read the actual article is odd. Yeah you do that though, you make me aware... If you're saying I'm another poster then you are incorrect as this is and has for the last 12 years been my only sign in. You appear to have had an incorrect idea in your head and having made it up felt the need to share it with us. I guess at least you're consistent. The Elite shield article was from 18/6/16 so that's not two years ago and as the period of time was what you indicated made it irrelevant I take it now it is relevant or will you pick yet another reason why you don't like it now I've pointed out another error? If you read the post with an open mind you may not make these mistakes as you quickly rush to have things correspond with things in your head. We can agree on the headline dodging bit, odd as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orion Posted August 16, 2016 Report Share Posted August 16, 2016 Why does Fred keep changing to ouch ...it's never been to hard to figure out there the same people ....the same stupid logic from Freg before somehow ouch arrives saying the same stuff in the same style . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.