David Weir...

[calscot 0]

It's ironic that you like to deal with facts... Which the above are... But conveniently ignore the subjective...

 

Yes my point is to strip back some of the subject that ignores the objective.

 

Which is that McCoist was dealing with a budget 1,000 times larger (and maybe more) of his competition. I can make McCoist the manager look a world beater too... But the reality is that he was a terrible football manager, no matter how any times you try to beat our collective head off the wall.

 

I don't think he was a that good manager, and conceded that in his first season, but I see evidence that does not make it compelling that he was "useless" as is the meme. What I don't get is why people like yourself get so agitated when that point of view is put across.

 

Speak about McCoist the manager when comparing him to a like set of situations... oh wait... he couldn't get out of the championship with at least 10 times the budget of anyone else.....

 

Funny, once again you question my use of facts, and you state something that is PURE CONJECTURE AS FACT. He couldn't possibly get out because he wasn't the manager for the season. Or is resigning just another failure? I also don't think he had 10 times the budget, and it ignores a lot of other issues that makes the efficiency our budget less than effective no matter who is the manager.

 

And before you start on the "he had extenuating circumstances" line.....Hearts worked on the exact same circumstances... And wiped the floor with McCoist !!!

 

I don't believe that for a second. Hearts did NOT have the same circumstances. We had similar circumstances to them this year but NOT the year before. I really shouldn't have to explain why and it's alluded to in previous posts in this thread. Also they did not "wipe the floor" in my opinion.

 

It seems I think differently from you as you seem to ignore certain variables - as is your prerogative, but without acknowledging them, your opinion is missing something.

[calscot 0]

Honestly Cal... If it wasn't for the fact that I am on my iPad, in a training course and with spotty Internet.... I would poke a number of holes through your post above.

 

Judging by your previous effort, your poking would be full of its own holes...

 

The more I read it the less I believe that you have witnessed McCoists "leadership" of our team during his tenure

 

I can't say I can really comment on his leadership except to what I have seen and heard. It's probably not been great but then leadership is a tenuous quality and different people react differently to different styles. How is Mourinho's leadership this season?

 

Again it's ignoring what's happened behind the scenes, and my first concession that McCoist wasn't the man for the job, was in the first season during administration, when I said that while I don't know if there was someone available who could have risen above the turmoil, McCoist showed that that was not something he had in him.

 

But the point is that at the end of the day, it's the results that count.

[calscot 0]

A lot of words defending the indefensible. Utter garbage IS apt. It isn't a Tim vs Bear philosophy, it is called realism.

 

"Realism" has always been an excuse for trashing your own, and also used extensively by pessimists - and funnily enough they have been shown in scholarly articles to be less realistic than optimists. But it also ignores certain boundaries of decency, not in just the words but in the venomous way it's delivered - I think that itself shows a deficiency in rationality. Are you so brutally "realistic" with your son's ability at everything?

 

I'm also trying to be real myself here - by taking everything into account - the high probability that you laugh at that, could show your reality is severely lacking. Just because you see your reality in your way, doesn't make it definitive. I don't think some of the stuff is realistic at all, it's just far too extreme and likes to ignore facts, mitigation and counter arguments. In fact it's so extreme, it laughs in the face of it...

 

You continue to defend McCoists tenure when it cannot be legitimately defended.

 

Again your realism falls off the rails and I infer from that you think only your view or those like them can be legitimate. I'm not defending his tenure as such, which is the big mistake you and others make. I'm defending him and the team against what I see, after some extensive deliberation, a very overly extreme and negative viewpoint that seems not only harsh on McCoist, but also the team and club.

 

1,000 times the budget of many teams yet in footballing terms "outplayed".

 

I probably didn't see as much as yourself as I didn't have BT sport as I do now and was boycotting Rangers TV, but I watch games and available highlights. I do remember full games where people were saying we were outplayed and the opposite looked true, as did the highlights and results. It didn't make sense to me at the time, so forgive me for not giving such stuff much credence when I didn't see the game.

 

The only thing his teams did was be fitter and beat teams to death...

 

That seems to differ with the meme that McCoist's teams were less fit than the opposition...

 

Think back on his tenure and, quickly, name me a team that he and his players defeated handsome,y in terms of play...... Yep, you can't.

 

Most games I saw, I would say we had the upper hand, and I can't recall the exact ones but there were quite a few where we were dominant and played some ok stuff. Name a game where throughout, we couldn't string three passes together, or where every third pass was a hoof forward? Yep, you can't.

 

Worse...... You try to compare his and his results to Warburton . That's an absolute joke !!!! You should be embarrassed.

 

That really does you no favours... just makes you sound like you find it impossible to see it from another point of view - that you could respectfully disagree with.

 

Which season are you comparing McCoist and his results to Warburton.... Because it certainly isnt in the Championship..... Which is the only apples vs apples comparison that can be made of the two.

 

In YOUR opinion. There is NO apples vs apples. Not one, sometimes you have to look at the circumstances and make adjustments. Surely you can see that? But I think you've shown you can't. Even then, before Ashley really started stirring things up, even though there was a huge cloud over the club compared to now, up until the early November, McCoist had something like 17 wins, 1 draw and 2 losses in all competitions. MW something like 17 wins and 2 losses. The year before it was something like 17 wins 1 loss.

 

And what you are doing is comparing apples in a season with a cold, wet summer and an early autumn frost, with one with ideal weather conditions. As I keep saying, with an extreme opinion it's up to you to show extreme differences, even if the comparison is possibly dipped in McCoist's favour. It's like claiming you are a good runner and your rival is utter shit and then complaining as he pips you at the post, that he had a slight head start. Perhaps McCoist had easier games but it shouldn't matter a jot with the "black and white" (as in high contrast) metaphor put forward.

[forlanssister 3,050]

It's hard to believe that when you blame him for absolutely everything. Reality factor says that can't possibly be true.

 

Where do I blame him for everything? I blame him for what he was culpable for.

 

If you don't believe there was an effect due to the board, Llambias, the fan boycott, and the media crap, then that's your opinion, not fact. It is not unreasonable to think it has a large effect especially when you look at the coincidental results.

 

Yet it's simply not possible that McCoist's own ineptitude sealed his own fate eh?

 

FFS grow up and man up.

 

Physician heal thyself.

 

People have different views and share views, it doesn't make one view the only valid one. You seem to struggle with that.

 

Yet here we are where you think only your opinion counts, those of us who think the football under McCoist was "utter shite virtually without exception", "garbage" and "some of the worst I've seen from a Rangers team" are all wrong eh?

 

You just can't help the weirdo crap can you? Man up and deal with the fact that not everyone agrees with you.

 

I don't have the slightest problem with people not agreeing with me (save the wife!) otherwise I'd have kept my own counsel during the Whyte and Green shenanigans. Try looking in the mirror.

 

Shit happens, happened to Celtic. Wasn't good but it also again wasn't as extreme as people like you like to think - also McCoist did NOT have the full backing of Whyte.

 

Why are you constantly bringing up Celtic in an attempt to excuse McCoist's failings?

 

McCoist had the tools at his disposal to beat both Malmo and Maribor but was incapable of using them, ignored the advice of the fitness team and opted for a sunshine break in the Algarve instead.

 

You really think that's a worthy argument. What was that about the bogeyman again?

 

So did McCoist spunk more on Templeton than Warburton did to strengthen the squad?

 

You really don't think he's the bogeyman? Try to avoid the straw man fallacy.

 

It's hard to avoid the straw man fallacy when so many of your posts contain it.

 

 

No, that's called "an opinion".

 

Indeed it is but one based on fact nonetheless.

 

Not all of it in my opinion. Like I say, there are plenty of teams who play worse and don't win much. Their fans don't tend to act like you.

 

Act like me lol try opening your eyes. Other teams are a concern for other teams fans and have absolutely nothing to do with McCoist and his failings.

 

That is pure speculation. He was in second place and had already defeated Hibs and SP teams. The results went downhill after Llambias arrived and it was noticeable. That's when McCoist resigned. It went far worse after he left, and about the most successful Scottish Manager in the country available, actually did worse - AFTER Ashley and Llambias were ousted. It was his successors who failed a promotion through the play-offs. They had enough tools to do it.

 

It's not speculation it's a fact if McCoist was doing "just enough" then we would have been promoted not finished third 24 points behind the winners. McCoist had done eough damage prior to Llambias's arrival, it's not as if Hearts went on a winning streak and knocked us off our perch is it? McCall was supposed to make a silk purse from McCoist's pigs ear how did he possibly fail? The fact that so many of McCoist's players were simply allowed to leave at the expiry of their contracts tells it's own story.

 

In your opinion. You are really stretching it now.

 

"Hey Grandad why were Rangers in the second tier of Scottish football for 2 seasons in a row?"

 

"Doesn't matter one iota son because they went undefeated in the league the season before."

 

Aye right!

 

Again with this weird shit. You are obsessed and so, so ironic on many levels. Really, read things back and look at the difference in style. Can you not just deal with actual debate? At worst I'll disagree with, at best you might be able to persuade me otherwise - although that's impossible to do without actually seeing other's viewpoint. Just keep saying it and maybe you can make it stick...

 

You may manage to fool yourself but you don't fool any the rest of us, you don't want a debate you want a platform to pontificate your posts are absolutely riddled with pontification.

 

As I recall you responded to me. Where's the "virtually without exception" that was soooo important? As said that's your opinion, live with the fact that not everyone will agree. Not many people who win all the time think they are utter shite - you are being absolute you all the, "he had more money" is irrelevant in that context.

 

Oh I can do live with the fact my opinion may differ from someone elses, this thread merely demonstrates that you with your hard-on for Mccoist don't.

 

I really don't know what your motivation is to be so agitated on your soap box. My motivation is that I see some stuff as overly extreme and disparaging to Rangers, I think it's reasonable in that context to defend the club against anything derogatory that seems to me to deny the facts.

 

My views on McCoist's football are far, far from extreme in fact they're pretty mainstream.

 

Disparaging to Rangers that bullshit you keep peddling is simply bizarre and a figment of your extremely vivid imagination.

 

Denying the facts is what you've done consistently throughout this thread

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

If Calscot had been watching any of the games he might hold a differing view. Funnily enough I don't recall him ever saying McCoist wasn't a good manager during his tenure, as he claims he did now. I seem to remember him quite vehemently defending the man against me on an almost daily basis. History has shown Calscot was wrong about everything. You win some, you lose some.

[calscot 0]

Where do I blame him for everything? I blame him for what he was culpable for.

 

Which you seem to think is everything. Show me where you have conceded some blame to anyone else?

 

 

Yet it's simply not possible that McCoist's own ineptitude sealed his own fate eh?

 

There you go, you do it here. I accepted from the poor results during administration that he wasn't the level we desired, but that it was hard to blame the manager under the circumstances, his failure was not to be the exceptional man to overcome the situation, and I couldn't see anyone we could attract that could.

 

Physician heal thyself.

 

Of what? I don't do your childish stuff like, "aw diddums". Have some awareness of yourself instead of promoting on to others...

 

Yet here we are where you think only your opinion counts, those of us who think the football under McCoist was "utter shite virtually without exception", "garbage" and "some of the worst I've seen from a Rangers team" are all wrong eh?

 

Have you actually read my posts? You probably don't even get the irony in the statement above. Like I say, stop projecting.

 

You're saying I think only my opinion counts while asserting you can't be wrong...

 

For me it's not about who's right, there is no such thing. But opinions are as valuable as the amount of thought put in to the whole picture. I'm not sure what your trying to achieve apart from repeating that you are right, I see the point as being able to justify your opinion with rationale, and reason, taking all the factors into account, and as such being compelling, perhaps persuading others that there is more to think about or at least understanding that you've considered everything and have come to a different conclusion.

 

You continually ignore arguments and facts that differ from your viewpoint. I have shown repeatedly, that I don't do that by conceding points and explained counter arguments to others.

 

I can't see where you've done that.

 

I don't have the slightest problem with people not agreeing with me (save the wife!) otherwise I'd have kept my own counsel during the Whyte and Green shenanigans. Try looking in the mirror.

 

Then why all the anger and insults? Why not just give a persuasive argument without it. As for the Whyte thing I remember saying at the time that your style of delivery wasn't helping you. You took that badly and didn't have the decency to keep a private message private. I look in mirror often and can demonstrate that, I don't think you can.

 

Why are you constantly bringing up Celtic in an attempt to excuse McCoist's failings?

 

I think that would be obvious. You can't judge any performance without comparison. Your opinion constantly loses validity as when applied universally, everyone ends up being shite. Surely there must be some sort of scale?

 

McCoist had the tools at his disposal to beat both Malmo and Maribor but was incapable of using them, ignored the advice of the fitness team and opted for a sunshine break in the Algarve instead.

 

Ah a case in point - that must be the only reason we lost... For me it's a bit more complicated than that.

 

So did McCoist spunk more on Templeton than Warburton did to strengthen the squad?

 

With undisclosed fees I've no idea but don't see the relevance here. It's a different topic. But I'm of the opinion that you don't judge a manager's spending on one purchase. I'm of the opinion that we bought him as an investment that didn't pay off. I await your blame on McCoist for that.

 

It's hard to avoid the straw man fallacy when so many of your posts contain it.

 

More of the, "no, you are" stuff. Please point real ones out and I'll be willing to use other examples for my argument.

 

 

Indeed it is but one based on fact nonetheless.

 

Based on one fact? But not all the facts. But if it's true then debate it genuinely.

 

 

Act like me lol try opening your eyes. Other teams are a concern for other teams fans and have absolutely nothing to do with McCoist and his failings.

 

 

You're opening your eyes by closing them to the rest of the world? I see McCoist's failings, I also see other factors which you ignore - can you not see the difference?

 

 

It's not speculation it's a fact if McCoist was doing "just enough" then we would have been promoted not finished third 24 points behind the winners.

 

Do you read your own writing? That is NOT a fact, it is conjecture, plain as day! As well as dismissing all other factors including not being the manager for the whole season. Yet you can't see why I don't suddenly convert to your way of thinking?

 

McCoist had done eough damage prior to Llambias's arrival, it's not as if Hearts went on a winning streak and knocked us off our perch is it?

 

As I said. I like to look at the bigger picture. Hearts were on a high while we were in depression and having the heart ripped out of the club. Isn't it ironic that you have highlighted how bad the boards have been and yet continue to forget about that aspect when it doesn't suit your view?

There are plenty of Rangers sides who have fallen behind a team on form, it does not make every manager completely inept. As I have maintained, I thought Mccoist was mediocre and I can't see how being the nearest challenger to a team on fire suits your view better than mine especially when you factor in the club being ripped apart and a miserable support many of whom were boycotting. I have no idea if my opinion is right (please read several times and understand this) but there is certainly a basis of validity. If you can't even acknowledge what I say, how the Hell am I going to be convinced?

 

McCall was supposed to make a silk purse from McCoist's pigs ear how did he possibly fail? The fact that so many of McCoist's players were simply allowed to leave at the expiry of their contracts tells it's own story.

 

You can't think of a president - say Le Guen and Smith? The fact is that I was one of the few that predicted that results probably wouldn't improve much based on my views...

 

"Hey Grandad why were Rangers in the second tier of Scottish football for 2 seasons in a row?"

 

"Doesn't matter one iota son because they went undefeated in the league the season before."

 

Aye right!

 

Well for me the sp. Vs and Ashley would probably be the villains of the piece. Without them, I am convinced that the results would be better, we'd easily have finished second, and had a better chance for the playoffs. In fact I reckon if McCoist had stayed our chances of promotion would have been high. Again there's plenty to back that up as a valid opinion even if you disagree with it.

 

You may manage to fool yourself but you don't fool any the rest of us, you don't want a debate you want a platform to pontificate your posts are absolutely riddled with pontification.

 

Maybe you should read them objectively first. Your current post is full of that and I've pointed it out. My posts are there for all to see. I'm happy to give reasoning behind anything I say. The tone may get weary when someone like you cannot take an opposing viewpoint. You then get insulting and bullying, and then project that onto me for merely not putting up with it.

 

If you can debate openly and respectfully then show, don't tell, and don't accuse. Just do it. Walk the walk.

 

 

Oh I can do live with the fact my opinion may differ from someone elses, this thread merely demonstrates that you with your hard-on for Mccoist don't.

 

If you think that's my opinion then you've demonstrated your huge problem. You're arguing against a viewpoint that doesn't exist, even though I've reiterated it many times. You've just shown your whole premis is a poor joke.

 

You give the impression of understanding complex documents, but can't understand my posts in the slightest. It explains a lot...

 

 

My views on McCoist's football are far, far from extreme in fact they're pretty mainstream.

 

And yet you can't calmly deal with counter arguments. But as you've just demonstrated a characteristic of an extremist in that when someone disagrees with you, you can only see it to be the opposite extreme, no matter where it lies on the spectrum.

 

Disparaging to Rangers that bullshit you keep peddling is simply bizarre and a figment of your extremely vivid imagination.

 

Like I've said before, substitute the results to someone's son's team, apply your opinion to the father and see if no one is insulted. But again you are obviously showing your anger and intolerance against an opposing opinion.

 

 

Denying the facts is what you've done consistently throughout this thread

 

You do realise that posts hang around? Just read them back for God sake.

 

I've acknowledged all facts, and my opinion takes them into account. I can show how you have not. I've also shown that many of YOUR facts are just opinion or conjecture, there's a good example in this post I'm replying to.

[calscot 0]

Where do I blame him for everything? I blame him for what he was culpable for.

 

Which you seem to think is everything. Show me where you have conceded some blame to anyone else?

 

 

Yet it's simply not possible that McCoist's own ineptitude sealed his own fate eh?

 

There you go, you do it here. I accepted from the poor results during administration that he wasn't the level we desired, but that it was hard to blame the manager under the circumstances, his failure was not to be the exceptional man to overcome the situation, and I couldn't see anyone we could attract that could.

 

Physician heal thyself.

 

Of what? I don't do your childish stuff like, "aw diddums". Have some awareness of yourself instead of promoting on to others...

 

Yet here we are where you think only your opinion counts, those of us who think the football under McCoist was "utter shite virtually without exception", "garbage" and "some of the worst I've seen from a Rangers team" are all wrong eh?

 

Have you actually read my posts? You probably don't even get the irony in the statement above. Like I say, stop projecting.

 

You're saying I think only my opinion counts while asserting you can't be wrong...

 

For me it's not about who's right, there is no such thing. But opinions are as valuable as the amount of thought put in to the whole picture. I'm not sure what your trying to achieve apart from repeating that you are right, I see the point as being able to justify your opinion with rationale, and reason, taking all the factors into account, and as such being compelling, perhaps persuading others that there is more to think about or at least understanding that you've considered everything and have come to a different conclusion.

 

You continually ignore arguments and facts that differ from your viewpoint. I have shown repeatedly, that I don't do that by conceding points and explained counter arguments to others.

 

I can't see where you've done that.

 

I don't have the slightest problem with people not agreeing with me (save the wife!) otherwise I'd have kept my own counsel during the Whyte and Green shenanigans. Try looking in the mirror.

 

Then why all the anger and insults? Why not just give a persuasive argument without it. As for the Whyte thing I remember saying at the time that your style of delivery wasn't helping you. You took that badly and didn't have the decency to keep a private message private. I look in mirror often and can demonstrate that, I don't think you can.

 

Why are you constantly bringing up Celtic in an attempt to excuse McCoist's failings?

 

I think that would be obvious. You can't judge any performance without comparison. Your opinion constantly loses validity as when applied universally, everyone ends up being shite. Surely there must be some sort of scale?

 

McCoist had the tools at his disposal to beat both Malmo and Maribor but was incapable of using them, ignored the advice of the fitness team and opted for a sunshine break in the Algarve instead.

 

Ah a case in point - that must be the only reason we lost... For me it's a bit more complicated than that.

 

So did McCoist spunk more on Templeton than Warburton did to strengthen the squad?

 

With undisclosed fees I've no idea but don't see the relevance here. It's a different topic. But I'm of the opinion that you don't judge a manager's spending on one purchase. I'm of the opinion that we bought him as an investment that didn't pay off. I await your blame on McCoist for that.

 

It's hard to avoid the straw man fallacy when so many of your posts contain it.

 

More of the, "no, you are" stuff. Please point real ones out and I'll be willing to use other examples for my argument.

 

 

Indeed it is but one based on fact nonetheless.

 

Based on one fact? But not all the facts. But if it's true then debate it genuinely.

 

 

Act like me lol try opening your eyes. Other teams are a concern for other teams fans and have absolutely nothing to do with McCoist and his failings.

 

 

You're opening your eyes by closing them to the rest of the world? I see McCoist's failings, I also see other factors which you ignore - can you not see the difference?

 

 

It's not speculation it's a fact if McCoist was doing "just enough" then we would have been promoted not finished third 24 points behind the winners.

 

Do you read your own writing? That is NOT a fact, it is conjecture, plain as day! As well as dismissing all other factors including not being the manager for the whole season. Yet you can't see why I don't suddenly convert to your way of thinking?

 

McCoist had done eough damage prior to Llambias's arrival, it's not as if Hearts went on a winning streak and knocked us off our perch is it?

 

As I said. I like to look at the bigger picture. Hearts were on a high while we were in depression and having the heart ripped out of the club. Isn't it ironic that you have highlighted how bad the boards have been and yet continue to forget about that aspect when it doesn't suit your view?

There are plenty of Rangers sides who have fallen behind a team on form, it does not make every manager completely inept. As I have maintained, I thought Mccoist was mediocre and I can't see how being the nearest challenger to a team on fire suits your view better than mine especially when you factor in the club being ripped apart and a miserable support many of whom were boycotting. I have no idea if my opinion is right (please read several times and understand this) but there is certainly a basis of validity. If you can't even acknowledge what I say, how the Hell am I going to be convinced?

 

McCall was supposed to make a silk purse from McCoist's pigs ear how did he possibly fail? The fact that so many of McCoist's players were simply allowed to leave at the expiry of their contracts tells it's own story.

 

You can't think of a president - say Le Guen and Smith? The fact is that I was one of the few that predicted that results probably wouldn't improve much based on my views...

 

"Hey Grandad why were Rangers in the second tier of Scottish football for 2 seasons in a row?"

 

"Doesn't matter one iota son because they went undefeated in the league the season before."

 

Aye right!

 

Well for me the sp. Vs and Ashley would probably be the villains of the piece. Without them, I am convinced that the results would be better, we'd easily have finished second, and had a better chance for the playoffs. In fact I reckon if McCoist had stayed our chances of promotion would have been high. Again there's plenty to back that up as a valid opinion even if you disagree with it.

 

You may manage to fool yourself but you don't fool any the rest of us, you don't want a debate you want a platform to pontificate your posts are absolutely riddled with pontification.

 

Maybe you should read them objectively first. Your current post is full of that and I've pointed it out. My posts are there for all to see. I'm happy to give reasoning behind anything I say. The tone may get weary when someone like you cannot take an opposing viewpoint. You then get insulting and bullying, and then project that onto me for merely not putting up with it.

 

If you can debate openly and respectfully then show, don't tell, and don't accuse. Just do it. Walk the walk.

 

 

Oh I can do live with the fact my opinion may differ from someone elses, this thread merely demonstrates that you with your hard-on for Mccoist don't.

 

If you think that's my opinion then you've demonstrated your huge problem. You're arguing against a viewpoint that doesn't exist, even though I've reiterated it many times. You've just shown your whole premis is a poor joke.

 

You give the impression of understanding complex documents, but can't understand my posts in the slightest. It explains a lot...

 

 

My views on McCoist's football are far, far from extreme in fact they're pretty mainstream.

 

And yet you can't calmly deal with counter arguments. But as you've just demonstrated a characteristic of an extremist in that when someone disagrees with you, you can only see it to be the opposite extreme, no matter where it lies on the spectrum.

 

Disparaging to Rangers that bullshit you keep peddling is simply bizarre and a figment of your extremely vivid imagination.

 

Like I've said before, substitute the results to someone's son's team, apply your opinion to the father and see if no one is insulted. But again you are obviously showing your anger and intolerance against an opposing opinion.

 

 

Denying the facts is what you've done consistently throughout this thread

 

You do realise that posts hang around? Just read them back for God sake.

 

I've acknowledged all facts, and my opinion takes them into account. I can show how you have not. I've also shown that many of YOUR facts are just opinion or conjecture, there's a good example in this post I'm replying to.

[calscot 0]

If Calscot had been watching any of the games he might hold a differing view. Funnily enough I don't recall him ever saying McCoist wasn't a good manager during his tenure, as he claims he did now. I seem to remember him quite vehemently defending the man against me on an almost daily basis. History has shown Calscot was wrong about everything. You win some, you lose some.

 

So you're saying that if a load of UNTRUE stuff you make up WAS true, then I'd be wrong, but as it's untrue it would suggest that it follows that you think I am right!

 

Logic can be fun.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

So you're saying that if a load of UNTRUE stuff you make up WAS true, then I'd be wrong, but as it's untrue it would suggest that it follows that you think I am right!

 

Logic can be fun.

Come again?

[forlanssister 3,050]

Come again?

 

It just him stroking his ego and declaring his moral and intellectual superiority over you, fret not it occurs as regular as clockwork.