hypochondriac

I agree with you. I just noted with interest once I got back that when he scored, a host of posters were quick to start pouring scorn on those who had expressed their frustration at him in recent weeks, as if scoring a couple of goals somehow negated previous poor performances or rendered them less poor somehow. It's a really odd attitude.

Odd that Adkins played him today if he thinks like you do. I think if you are looking for clowns you should look a bit closer to home.

I see de ridder had a god game today (as he has done a few times this season.) Any comment to make my friend?

The people not giving Guly the credit for two very well taken goals are idiots. Equally, the people having a go at those who think he was dreadful last week and didn't do much except the goals this week are also idiots.

Come on crabs, I think you're a pretty good poster. I know you don't want to lower yourself to this kind of idiocy. You're better than that.

Worst atmosphere this year by a long way. We won though so I don't care.

Nice to see some more balanced opinions about guly rather than 'he was sh1t' or 'those people who slagged guly off are pr1cks'.

There is no way guly was sh1t today. He wasn't amazing but he did what was asked of him and I'm happy for him to be like that every week! All I'm saying is that one scoring performance has nothing to do with previous performances in previous games. Scoring today doesn't make last weeks performance against Portsmouth any less frustrating.

There is no way guly was our best player. Two well taken goals which I thank him for but there were also quite a few of his usual traits like wasting possession, giving the ball away easily and looking like he is on a different wavelength to the other players. It's why he is the most frustrating player ever. One minute he will do something sublime and the next something atrocious. He is so unpredictable but I suppose when it falls into place it works really well.

I hate posts like this. Guly was awful last week and scored two good goals this week whilst still being poor in patches. Getting two goals this week doesn't make any of his previous poor performances any better, just as playing poor last week doesn't take anything away from the two well taken goals today.

Erm buy thats not exactly medieval levels of poverty is it? Or the poverty you see in the likes of Kenya?

How is anyone moaning? They are just saying they disagree with the decision.

He was banned for posting silly comments on every single thread. When he confined his 'humour' to one or two threads then it was tolerable and sometimes even faintly amusing. Some people like this jonnyboy or whatever his name is have no personality of their own on here so still use his old display picture in the hope that they can be a bit like him. That is infinitely more tragic than deppo ever was. Happy Christmas.

On a separate note, one of the girls from downton abbey is on it Laura Carmichael. She is from Southampton and a friend of mine. Went to Bristol old vic and has done really well for herself. So it's not all bad.

He's got a square head he's got a square heeead.

There you go again. How can you be sure that there is not someone on here with infinitely more knowledge than you about Kipling? Why do you deal in these absolutes? It makes you look silly.

Yeah but it's the other guys 20th birthday.

I don't expect you to agree with everything, I just think you would change your view on quite a few things with a bit of life experience. I think you need to accept the diversity in life and that everyone doesn't fit into the neat little boxes you give them .

The best English player of his generation and a real example for others to follow.

So when you say 'no young person would use the word coloured.' What you actually mean is 'My mates and I don't use the word.' Fair enough.

Totally this. Threads like this suggest that Andy has not had much life experience or I think he would think differently about quite a few things.

I have absolutely no problem with someone who believes that the term coloured is patronising or that it isn't used among young people. The problem I have is when you act as the voice of the younger generation based on your relatively narrow experiences. The difference is that I am not pretending that my view is the view of all older people, nor am I pretending to speak for all of those over a certain age. I know some of the younger generation who use the term coloured (just asked a relative of mine in fact who said she uses it) so there you go. Don't make the mistake of thinking that what you and your mates believe is the definitive beliefs of 'the young generation.'

I'm quite happy to leave it there. You make an even handed comment as always trousers.

So no one below 25 uses the term coloured?

So because you have never met someone of your age who uses the term, it now becomes fact that no one of your age uses it and therefor you are the voice of 'young people'. You are extremely strange. At your age I never felt like I was the voice of young people or that I represented the opinion of anyone other than myself.