hypochondriac

He didn't do that at all this year. He does a great job to keep the conversation flowing in my opinion.

Yes I agree that was wank.

I thought the questions on the whe were better than previous years. Makes me laugh when people on here have a go at reasonable questions without either asking one themselves or offering decent alternative ones.

We should have signed him last season.

And neither should there be. If these rumours are true then I'm very pleased we are looking at some proven Championship quality.

I'm pretty sure James obrien had a chat about her this week hence the sudden interest.

Sadly it doesn't do that so the debate will rumble on. It did say you can throw a shoe over a pub though so it's not all bad.

Based on a review of benjii’s posts across SaintsWeb, I’d say yes—he can definitely be considered amusing, particularly in the way he injects wit, self-deprecation, and casual flair into discussions. Here are a few examples that highlight his humour: --- Examples of Benjii’s Wit and Charm 1. Subtle Human Observation In the thread “Today, I met a skate”, benjii wryly comments: > “He did say he thought they were going to batter us this season but after I said, ‘really, you actually think that?’ about 20 times, I could see he didn't really think it.” This kind of understated, very human commentary discreetly pokes fun at overblown bravado—dry, yet effective . 2. Sarcastic Witticisms When another user quoted cliché reporting jargon with a “Reported,” benjii responded: > “Please keep me on the right path.” Subtle humour, politely delivered—classic forum sarcasm! 3. Animated Car Enthusiasm In the Motoring Forum discussing Maseratis, benjii painted a vivid image of driving his new car: > “Standard Auto mode… feels like an exec saloon in traffic. Switch to sport… it gets feisty and if you floor it, it throws you back into your seat and it ROARS!” Humorous, with just the right dash of playful overstatement—captures both passion and presence. 4. Perceptive Banter In a 2010 thread about a striker’s performance, benjii argued: > “…anyone who doesn't agree with me is just a bit clueless, as it’s so screamingly obvious that he's a very good player at this level.” Cheeky and over-the-top in a way that’s clearly tongue-in-cheek, yet confident. --- Summary Table: What Makes Benjii Amusing Style Element Example & Effect Dry, understated humour Calls out bravado with simple, knowing quips Polite sarcasm Delivers sarcasm in a polished, humorous way Energetic exaggeration Uses vivid imagery for comedic effect (e.g., Maserati "roars") Confident irony Playfully states his correctness with self-aware boldness --- Final Take Yes, benjii is amusing—he brings a thoughtful, light-hearted edge to discussions without going overboard. His humour often lands with a knowing nod rather than a belly laugh, making his posts enjoyable without being distracting.

I think I spotted someone

Good shout! Absolutely! Let’s find some alternative celebrity comparisons for Rallyboy, based on his distinctive posting style on SaintsWeb — which combines wit, sarcasm, flair for performance, and a certain irreverent edge. Here are several personality matches that capture different aspects of his online persona: 🎭 Celebrity Comparisons for Rallyboy 1. Charlie Brooker Why? Satirical, misanthropic, and endlessly annoyed by the world — but in a funny, eloquent way. Parallel: Rallyboy’s sardonic political takes and dry humour resemble Brooker’s Screenwipe rants. 2. Armando Iannucci Why? Creator of The Thick of It — expert in turning public outrage and chaos into biting comedy. Parallel: Rallyboy’s posts often feel like Malcolm Tucker without the swearing filter (well, mostly). 3. David Mitchell Why? Overthinks everything and then explodes in hyper-logical fury. Parallel: Rallyboy often dissects a situation with surreal precision before delivering a theatrical punchline. 4. Karl Pilkington Why? Unintentionally hilarious deadpan delivery, often grumbling at the absurdity of modern life. Parallel: Some of Rallyboy’s quips are so oddball that you can almost hear Karl saying them with a confused frown. 5. Billy Connolly Why? Irreverent storyteller with an unpredictable flow and a gift for exaggeration. Parallel: Rallyboy’s rants (especially match threads) often spiral into delightful theatrical nonsense. 6. Stewart Lee Why? Sarcastic, meta-commentary style, especially when mocking public opinion or media tropes. Parallel: Rallyboy can sometimes sound like he’s mocking the very forum dynamic he’s part of. 7. Hugh Laurie (in House mode) Why? Snarky, brilliant, weary, and occasionally amused by other people's stupidity. Parallel: Rallyboy's replies to daft posts often have that “are you serious?” vibe that House delivered so well. 🎯 Summary Personality Vibes Celebrity What It Captures About Rallyboy Charlie Brooker Political cynicism + sharp satire Armando Iannucci Chaos channeller; brilliantly irreverent David Mitchell Neurotic humour + righteous frustration Karl Pilkington Absurdist logic and dry disbelief Billy Connolly Wild comedic tangents and storytelling Stewart Lee Intelligent sarcasm and slow-burn wit Hugh Laurie (House) Wry

I'll check. In the meantime... The accusation that Trousers “sits on the fence” is something that occasionally surfaces—but it’s worth unpacking what that actually means on SaintsWeb. Here's a breakdown: --- What's the Fence-Sitter Label Based On? **“Sitting on the fence”** typically implies reluctance to take a stand or being overly safe in opinions. In this case, one user humorously remarked: > “@Trousers your ability to sit on the fence is almost legendary in here.” This suggests a perception that Trousers sometimes acknowledges multiple viewpoints without clearly favoring any. --- Does the Label Hold Up? Evidence That Counters the Fence-Sitter Label: In the Ronnie O’Sullivan thread, Trousers clearly expressed a strong opinion: > “Surely the greatest sportsman alive today?…GOAT” And later: “I suspected it wouldn’t be too long before the conversation headed down this path. Valid opinions, of course; I just happen to hold the opposite opinion.” This shows Trousers actually takes a firm stand, even when in the minority. Where the Fence-Sitting Perception Might Come From: Trousers often uses balanced phrasing—like “Valid opinions… I just happen to hold the opposite opinion”—which can come across as diplomatic rather than combative. This measured style may be interpreted as neutrality, especially compared to more heated or partisan posters. --- Verdict: Fair Label or Misunderstood? Not entirely fair: Trousers does hold strong viewpoints when he chooses to—he just frames them thoughtfully, not abrasively. The “fence-sitting” comment is more a lighthearted jab at his calm, respectful tone, not an accurate reflection of his willingness to engage fully in debates. --- TL;DR: Trousers isn’t avoiding the argument—he’s just navigating it with poise. So while the label might keep the banter moving, it shouldn’t obscure the fact that he often has a clear position once the dust settles.

That’s a juicy one — and a fair question, especially for a forum like SaintsWeb where some posters seem unusually well informed, uncritically positive, or quick to shut down criticism of the club. ⚠️ But just to be clear: there’s no hard evidence that any poster is a “club plant” (i.e. someone posting under instruction from the club to manage fan sentiment or steer conversations). So what we can do is speculate playfully based on tone, timing, and behaviour patterns — not accuse. 👀 Posters Who Could Raise Eyebrows (in theory) 1. Saint Charlie Often defends club leadership or SR in discussions where others are more sceptical. Occasionally drops info that seems ahead of general awareness. Posts in a tone that’s supportive of decision-makers and willing to play the “wait and see” card. Why people might suspect: Appears too balanced or positive when others are fuming — giving off damage control energy at times. 2. Chez Very knowledgeable and level-headed, sometimes speaks as if privy to internal workings. Generally fair — but rarely gets caught up in emotional pile-ons. Why people might suspect: The “insider without saying so” vibe — always sounds like they know just enough to calm the crowd. 3. Matthew Le God Not likely a plant, but sometimes seen correcting misinformation or adding structure to chaotic debates. Some might jokingly say he does the club’s job for them by keeping order and context. Why people might suspect (light-heartedly): He’s everywhere and knows everything. 💬 Who’s Definitely Not a Club Plant? Farmer Saint – Rants too much. Would’ve been sacked by SR for colourful language. hypochondriac – Overly analytical, highly independent. More likely to call out PR nonsense than push it. sadoldgit – Too ideologically consistent and emotional to be anyone’s plant. 🏁 So, Who Feels Most Like a Possible Plant? Saint Charlie probably wins this imaginary award — not because they’ve done anything suspicious, but because their tone is often just a bit too calm when everyone else is screaming into the void. Think of them as the “forum’s minister for communications” type. Of course, it could just be that they’re… well-adjusted. 😄

Absolutely — here’s a fresh batch of celebrity comparisons for Wade Garrett, based on his blunt, passionate, and no-nonsense forum persona. These go beyond the obvious “Roy Keane” type and give you a few different angles. 🎭 Celebrity Comparisons for Wade Garrett 1. Danny Dyer Why: Straight-talking, often swears for emphasis, emotional in his delivery, and always feels like he's had enough of everyone's bollocks. Match: Wade Garrett’s posts have that same “I’m not having this” energy. 2. James May (on a bad day) Why: Normally measured, but when pushed, he becomes hilariously exasperated — “Oh for heaven’s sake!” Match: Wade sometimes gives off a similar vibe of: “This is stupid and I’m tired of pretending it isn’t.” 3. Mark 'Chopper' Read (the real one, not the film) Why: Dryly aggressive, extremely blunt, and oddly charismatic despite the aggression. Match: Wade has a cheerfully confrontational edge — he'll tell you to piss off, but it’s almost part of the performance. 4. Karl Pilkington Why: Perpetually fed up, confused by other people’s optimism, and always convinced the world’s gone mad. Match: Wade often takes that “is it just me?” stance in threads — especially when fans are clapping after a loss. 5. Paul Kaye as Dennis Pennis Why: Irreverent, sharp, and deliberately provocative — calls things out with a smirk. Match: Wade sometimes posts like he knows he's going to get flak, but relishes it anyway. 6. Brian Blessed (in temperament, not volume) Why: High drama, high passion, and deeply opinionated. Match: Wade’s rants have that “FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY!” energy, even if they’re just typed out. 🔎 Summary Celebrity Shared Traits with Wade Garrett Danny Dyer Angry, blunt, emotionally reactive, sounds like a pub rant James May (grumpy) Frustrated intelligence, weary of nonsense Chopper Read Raw bluntness, confrontational charm Karl Pilkington Disbelief at the world, allergic to forced positivity Dennis Pennis Mischievous needling of others, enjoys the fallout Brian Blessed Operatic exasperation, dramatic emphasis

Absolutely! Here’s a straight-up profile analysis of Wade Garrett based on his posting style on SaintsWeb: 🧠 Wade Garrett – Poster Analysis 🔹 Tone & Demeanour Blunt and no-nonsense: Wade Garrett rarely sugar-coats his views. His posts often cut straight to the point and carry a sense of impatience with fluff or PR spin. Emotionally charged: Especially in match threads and transfer discussions, he shows frustration when standards slip—both from players and from the board. Direct, sometimes confrontational: He doesn’t shy away from calling out other posters when he feels they’re being naive, overly positive, or missing the point. He’s willing to be sharp if it helps underline his stance. 📌 Key Themes in His Posts Club Mismanagement: Frequently criticises Sports Republic (SR) and the club's direction, especially regarding transfer activity, player sales, and managerial appointments. "SR are making a dog’s breakfast out of it all. They need to change course." Player Attitudes and Performance: Expresses strong views on work rate and mentality, not just ability. "Part of the problem is their attitude and lack of effort." Frustration with Fellow Fans: He’s critical of what he sees as blind loyalty or performative positivity. "I wouldn’t be clapping them… that’s part of the problem." Defends Directness: When called out for tone, he usually doubles down rather than walking it back. "Not at all, you’re coming across as a bit of a prick though." ✍️ Writing Style Concise: Doesn’t waste words. Often short posts with a sharp punch. Unfiltered: Rarely uses softening language or qualifiers. He says what he thinks, even if it lands harshly. Predictable cadence: His posts follow a reliable rhythm—blunt assertion → short justification → optional rebuttal or dismissal. 🔎 Summary of Traits Trait Description Communication Style Blunt, emotionally honest, highly direct Topic Focus Club ownership, performance, transfers, fan attitudes Tone Often frustrated, occasionally terse or combative Engagement Style Unafraid to challenge; not interested in diplomacy Overall Impression A passionate fan with high standards and a sharp edge

I'm not sure what this was about but it made me laugh : 3. “What a fucking weirdo… playing with a few plastic sheep…” Context: A heated personal reply in a more general discussion. Excerpt: > “What a fucking weirdo. Go fuck yourself… playing with a few plastic sheep and toy tractors in a one bedroom bedsit doesn’t make you a farmer…” Full-on hyperbole—combining vivid insults with bizarre imagery for maximum effect.

But we didn't sign any of them in the championship apart from Manning.

Here are some standout examples of Farmer Saint’s high-energy frustration—particularly in match threads—where his emotionally charged reactions really shine through. --- 1. Saints 1‑1 Ipswich (September 2024) Farmer Saint vents after a late equaliser: > **“The point is it shouldn't have come down to that final corner — we should have been out of sight by then!”** A broad statement fed by passion, frustration with the team’s lack of clinical finishing, and impatience with the defensive lapse. --- 2. Saints 1‑0 Everton (November 2024) Here he lashes out at critics and forum negativity: > **“Look at the match thread mate. So many of the familiar ‘hope we lose’… gang don’t go to games… too busy wanking over the possibility of a loss…”** This post radiates exasperation—not just with the team’s performance, but with cynical fans stirring on the forum. --- 3. Saints 1‑5 Chelsea (Late 2024) After a heavy loss, his frustration shifts tone—stinging, terse, somewhat resigned: > **“I think we're just predisposed to think that players have done well when in actual fact they haven't.”** A dry, sarcastic expression of disappointment and an unwillingness to sugarcoat reality. --- Summary Table Match Context Farmer Saint’s Response Ipswich draw (late goal) Frustrated outrage that the team nearly wasted a strong performance. Everton win Frustration directed at the doom‑monger mentality of some fans. Heavy defeat vs Chelsea Controlled frustration—criticism of forum positivity as misplaced. --- What This Pattern Tells Us Emotion-led expression: Farmer Saint vividly lays bare his emotional state—anger, disbelief, disappointment. Blunt language: He regularly uses blunt phrases and casual profanity to drive his point. Engaged opponent: He’s not just reacting—he’s confronting broader attitudes (e.g., negative fans) alongside his critique of performance.

I think they will make the playoffs. Almost impossible to win it with a points deduction.

I think we will make the playoffs as it stands. With quality additions we coukd be uo challenging for automatic with Sheffield United, probably Birmingham and Ipswich.

In the prem maybe but championship he should be alright.

We have zero creativity. We have goalscorers but no one to set the goals up. We have functional players but no magic or flair. We are going to struggle to score goals as it stands. This will likely change by the end of the window but as it stands I don't think anyone can seriously have us in the automatic promotion places.

It's just a lazy thing to do. I'd say at this point Ipswich are nailed on for 1st with a settled manager and not too much upheaval. Birmingham may be up there but a lot of new faces to gel together along with Sheffield United and someone like Coventry or Norwich will be up around the playoffs. I expect Leicester will do a lot better than people expect and for me they will make the playoffs, even with a points deduction. We could challenge for promotion but it depends how we replace Fernandes and dibling and what we get to threaten out wide.

Loads of people have us finishing first or second which at this point is bizarre. Maybe at the end of the window depending on who we get but not at this point.

Although it nails him here Alright — here’s a comparison of Matthew Le God with two other fact‑driven posters on SaintsWeb — hypochondriac and buctootim. 🔍 Fact‑Driven Poster Comparison Trait Matthew Le God hypochondriac buctootim Primary Focus Saints results, tactics, stats, historical comparisons Logical flaws, internal consistency, political debates Balanced commentary on football & broader topics Detail Level Very high — cites stats, league tables, timelines High — focuses on logical structure & evidence Moderate-high — blends facts with perspective Tone Direct, sometimes blunt; prioritises accuracy over tact Dry, occasionally sarcastic; forensic Calm, measured; less emotionally charged Argument Style Persistent, point‑by‑point rebuttals Point‑by‑point, often re‑frames the argument Selective engagement; summarises rather than nitpicks Breadth of Topics Narrow (mostly football) Broad (football, politics, ethics, logic) Broad (football, society, culture) Tolerance for Repetition High — will revisit the same facts repeatedly to clarify High — will dismantle an argument over multiple posts Lower — tends to disengage after a few rounds Use of Humour Minimal; mainly functional Occasional dry humour Light, conversational humour 🧠 Observations Matthew Le God has the most narrow topical focus and highest commitment to factual correction — this can make his style appear more rigid or “specialist” compared to the others. hypochondriac also shares point‑by‑point analysis and persistence, but spreads it across more topics and adds more sarcasm, which softens perception. buctootim is fact‑driven but less combative, often prioritising perspective over total accuracy, which reads as more relaxed. 🎯 Conclusion Matthew Le God’s style is not unique on SaintsWeb — hypochondriac shares his persistence and logical structuring — but MLG’s single‑minded topical focus and minimal use of humour do make his communication style come across as more “specialist” or “systematic,” which are traits sometimes associated with autistic communication styles. That said, these traits are equally consistent with: Being a subject‑matter specialist Having a strong personal investment in the club Valuing accuracy above social smoothing in an online debate

Not sure it captures the maddening robotic style but I suppose MLG is similar to AI so possibly he's going easy on him because they are kindrered spirits: Here’s a closer look at Matthew Le God, his distinctive presence on SaintsWeb, and a celebrity personality that reflects his style: --- Poster Profile: Matthew Le God Extremely prolific — with nearly 30,000 posts since joining in 2006, he’s a consistent and dominant voice across The Saints forums. Analytical and detail-driven — he frequently reviews tactical scenarios, player performances, and club strategy with precision: > “They are bigger than any team in the bottom half of the Championship… Player quality wise, they'd also be top half.” Fact-obsessed — provides corrections, clarifications, and deeper insights into club affairs and league dynamics. Engages aggressively when challenged — willing to defend his points robustly and respond with point-by-point authority: > “Yet again, you fail to address anything in the post. Top avoidance!” Balance of substance and tone — not as abrasive as some high-strung posters, but also not shrinking from disagreement. --- Celebrity Parallel: Matthew Le God ≈ Gary Lineker Why Gary Lineker? Matthew Le God Trait Gary Lineker Parallel Detailed football insight Former player, sharp broadcaster, tactically aware Calm yet assertive commentary Known for clear reasoning and measured critique Media consistency and credibility Trusted voice on Sky Sports debates Fact-focused and reliable Delivers statistics and context with authority Lineker isn’t combative, but his analysis cuts through fluff — mirroring Matthew’s strength in reasoned discussion and football insight. --- Final Insight Matthew Le God stands out as a knowledgeable, consistent, and tactically engaged contributor — both approachable and intellectually grounded. His tone and output closely mirror someone like Gary Lineker, offering football clarity without emotional grandstanding.