Chelsea messageboard on 25th may 3643

nutrimat

We're agreed then. Sorted :) Although that is the impression you were giving with your disregard of what you term LFCs trump card: 18-5

Whether they choose to accept it or not is imaterial in terms of the success of the club. We, as football fans, have to adhere to some set of rules that trasncend our own particular bias. We can argue until the cows come home, but at the end of the day the results are what defines the relative success of our teams, be it in a game, or over the period of an entire season (as you have agreed). I could argue all day about why Man U didn't deserve to win this competition or that, but I aknowledge, for example, that they DID win the Champions League, and respect them for it, regardless of my appraisal of whether they "deserved" to win it. Incidentally, I was glad that you won it at the time; I like to see English teams do well in Europe. I know already I'm going to regret having admitted that...

As I have stated that "fairness" is a subjective judgement, but the result is accepted by all (and as such is the "objective" we choose to use to define success in our game). I think we're actually agreeing here, and talking across each other! :)

You opinion means as much as mine in the context of this NG. My opinion means nothing in the context of footballing success. Results do. Your team is successful over the periods of our histories, my team is more so :)

No value in the context of defining success of our clubs. Your opinion is of value in terms of this thread; indeed I've enjoyed this discussion, it's punctuated a lacklustre weekend. Cheers!

"Truth" and "worthiness" are subjective. Your truth is different to mine. You'd maybe worship Cantona as your Messiah, I'd worship.. oh, there are so many to choose from..... I'll get back to you on that one ;-)

Relativist "bullpoo"? Wash your mouth out Sir!

Better to be an ostrich than a platonic shadow worshiper.. at least the sand's "real" ;-)

At last..... my work here is done!

lol.. have you tried puffa fish? 1 out of 10 chance of popping yer clogs, so I hear.. give it a bash, let me know how it pans out. Or are you too pussy? :-)

Stodyness absorbs pressure and evolves with circumstance. A rigid structure, however, shatters on impact. Don't cut yer feet on those shards... ;-)

Good Lord.. if that's not the pot calling the kettle... lol

Also good for the heart, so they say. True Reds have always expressed healthy heart, that goes without saying :-)

Your "backpeddling" is my honest admission of a mistake committed during a hastily drafted and therefore unintendedly misleading comment.

Depends on the criteria by which you wish to judge validity.

They define the "truth" of the the relative success of a club, within the context of footballing achivement as defined within the rules of the game. Which is what we're chatting about.

Oh, you agree! Genuine shock!

Well if there's "no absolute truth" as you've just admitted, then how does one get "closer to" something that does not exist? :)

Coz that would be boring.

Coz it's fun. Kinda ;-)

In the interests of NG peace and harmony, I'll overlook that comment...

Logic and reason are contextually dependent.

Exactly. But appearances result from your perceptual lens. And guess what? They can be deceptive.. bet you've never heard that before?! :) Shadows on your Platonic wall fella.

Absolutely wrong. You misunderstood my point entirely.

Nope. If I had said that I was telling you "the truth" of the matter, then I'd be concerned for my sanity. You want the "truth"? Try your local priest mate! You'd at least get a goblet of red and a biscuit from the trip :)

Well don't say I didn't offer.. there's just no pleasing some people. Pagans, the lot of yers.

Ah, Enlightenment rhetoric of progression. Thing is.. there's more than one way to "reason". History aint a straight line. Linear progression is a myth. Again, a reading list will be winging it's way to you if you just say the word... ;-)

What "truth"? I though you had agreed that it doesn't actually exist...

Precisely! Plato was sometimes a bit of a plonker! ;-) But he did introduce some interesting concepts...

We all have different conclusions. The result is agreed by all.

Nope, coz it's ifs and buts. That decision, had it gone the other way, may have resulted in the team that was punished ending up in an even worse predicament, due to a change in the pbuttage of play. There is no way of knowing.

The decisions made by the red affect the game during the course of the game. But the result itself is an objectively recognised measure of success.

We'll agree to disagree on that one. Although I do have reservations about certain NG posters who claim allegiance to our club.. naming no names ;-)

-- Dan