WILL THE JACKS

If the jacks are having a shit season, then what are we having? It's difficult to laugh at someone sitting 6 points better-off having conceded 20-odd goals less!

We shouldn't expect any favours and I'm not going to pin any hopes on them rescuing our season should their result at Sunderland have any bearing on where we finish.

Who's laughing? Of course we are having a worse season, but they aren't so far ahead of us or the teams around us. I'm just quoting facts.
Besides this wasn't about us it was whether they have it in them to beat sunderland should there be something on the game. I doubt the jacks will have enough to beat them.

Not so different from last season. 23 pts from the last 23 games, carried through into this season.
Your making excuses for why you haven't been very good this season which is exactly the point I'm making and why even at full strength you will be unlikely to beat Sunderland if they have something to play for.

The table supports this, or is 9 wins all season, inc 4 away, wrong?

An excuse?

It is an obvious reason.

If Mo Farah ran the London marathon and was then asked to run it again - would it be an excuse after he explained why the second one wasnt ran as comfortably as the first? Or would it be a clear reasoning from Mo?

Last season we achieved everything we needed to come Jan/Feb which coincided with a dip in form (which kept us in 9th place lets nit forget)

Yes, it would be an excuse for not being particularly good in the 2nd marathon
May not explain why he faded so badly in the last 2/3rds of the first though.

an excuse is given in order to lessen liability or remove liability altogether. A reason is an explanation given to an event or series of events.

You wont find many people denying the series of events, however of you want to find out why - to which you do hence your using it - then you must realise the reasoning

If the jacks are having a shit season, then what are we having? It's difficult to laugh at someone sitting 6 points better-off having conceded 20-odd goals less!

We shouldn't expect any favours and I'm not going to pin any hopes on them rescuing our season should their result at Sunderland have any bearing on where we finish.

Who's laughing? Of course we are having a worse season, but they aren't so far ahead of us or the teams around us. I'm just quoting facts.
Besides this wasn't about us it was whether they have it in them to beat sunderland should there be something on the game. I doubt the jacks will have enough to beat them.

keep telling yourself that and you may believe it one day.

How ling would it take you to become a mid table/top half side 3 consecutive years, win a major trophy, get to the last 32 of Europe, be debt free and partially owned by fans?

That is how far ahead we are of you

an excuse is given in order to lessen liability or remove liability altogether. A reason is an explanation given to an event or series of events.

You wont find many people denying the series of events, however of you want to find out why - to which you do hence your using it - then you must realise the reasoning

An excuse can also mean "to serve as justification for" or "to explain (a fault or an offense) in the hope of being understood".

Therefore you're making excuses which is fine as it simply means you agree with me that the jacks aren't particularly good. The fact you have excuses (or even reasons if it means getting value from your thesaurus) for this supports my thinking that you won't have enough to beat Sunderland if they need something from the game. As I've said I hope I'm wrong if it benefits us.

Not sure why you're arguing, it's not like ive said you're shit or a poor team.

an excuse is given in order to lessen liability or remove liability altogether. A reason is an explanation given to an event or series of events.

You wont find many people denying the series of events, however of you want to find out why - to which you do hence your using it - then you must realise the reasoning

An excuse can also mean "to serve as justification for" or "to explain (a fault or an offense) in the hope of being understood".

Therefore you're making excuses which is fine as it simply means you agree with me that the jacks aren't particularly good. The fact you have excuses (or even reasons if it means getting value from your thesaurus) for this supports my thinking that you won't have enough to beat Sunderland if they need something from the game. As I've said I hope I'm wrong if it benefits us.

Not sure why you're arguing, it's not like ive said you're shit or a poor team.

Does it?

Does that mean that going by my example, Mo Farah is not a particularly good long distance runner then?

Im not arguing im pulling you up on your guff .... and you dont half talk some guff Carps

an excuse is given in order to lessen liability or remove liability altogether. A reason is an explanation given to an event or series of events.

You wont find many people denying the series of events, however of you want to find out why - to which you do hence your using it - then you must realise the reasoning

An excuse can also mean "to serve as justification for" or "to explain (a fault or an offense) in the hope of being understood".

Therefore you're making excuses which is fine as it simply means you agree with me that the jacks aren't particularly good. The fact you have excuses (or even reasons if it means getting value from your thesaurus) for this supports my thinking that you won't have enough to beat Sunderland if they need something from the game. As I've said I hope I'm wrong if it benefits us.

Not sure why you're arguing, it's not like ive said you're shit or a poor team.

Does it?

Does that mean that going by my example, Mo Farah is not a particularly good long distance runner then?

Im not arguing im pulling you up on your guff .... and you dont half talk some guff Carps

Irony alert

It was a crap analogy. But if he ran 2 marathons then in sure he would use the first as an excuse for not running it as fast as the first. And if he came well down the field then it would mean he wasn't particularly good.

Now back on football, I always thought it was about points and the jacks record for the last 1 2/3rds season means they are not a particularly good side. I can't see why you're getting so precious about what is fact.

Irony alert

no irony there.

It was a crap analogy. But if he ran 2 marathons then in sure he would use the first as an excuse for not running it as fast as the first. And if he came well down the field then it would mean he wasn't particularly good.

it was a perfect analogy. Performance gets affected negatively when the body is over exerted and will not show a normal result. It would certainly not mean he wasnt particularly good, it would mean he didnt run a particularly good race.

Major difference.

Now back on football, I always thought it was about points and the jacks record for the last 1 2/3rds season means they are not a particularly good side. I can't see why you're getting so precious about what is fact.

you always thought what was about points? Since we have been in the premiership we have averaged points to give us a finish you could only dream of - and that includes this squiffed points tally due to the above mentioned

Mow stop being so bitter and taste reality, then you can maybe move forward as a fan and in time - as a club.

This isn't about Cardiff though is it

You average a point a game this season and the majority of last. That means you're not particularly good, fact. Yes you've made excuses why and they may be valid, but it doesn't change the table or how many games you've won. This was about your ability to beat Sunderland which I doubt. Dry your eyes fella, it's not life or death.

It was a crap analogy. An individual running 2 back to back marathons that he will never do versus a squad of 23 players playing c60 league games over 16 months isn't even close. Besides it only served to highlight that you were making excuses for why the jacks aren't particularly good


You're right it wasn't irony, I should have written hypocrisy alert

This isn't about Cardiff though is it

nope, however you are a fantastic point of reference.

You average a point a game this season and the majority of last. That means you're not particularly good, fact. Yes you've made excuses why and they may be valid, but it doesn't change the table or how many games you've won. This was about your ability to beat Sunderland which I doubt. Dry your eyes fella, it's not life or death.

last season we were the 9th best club in the country and won a major trophy, our excellence allowed us to take our foot off the gas - hence why we still finished 9th.

It was a crap analogy. An individual running 2 back to back marathons that he will never do versus a squad of 23 players playing c60 league games over 16 months isn't even close. Besides it only served to highlight that you were making excuses for why the jacks aren't particularly good

it was a superb analogy, we have a squad more jaded than the others outside the top 6 in the league by quite some distance. Our second string naturally arent as good as our first team and we have had to play many second string players far more often than we would have liked which as common sense tells us - will effect results. But you said "at full strength" didnt you.....

So basing our full strength side on the results we have picked up largely from not being full strength is quite idiotic wouldnt you say?


You're right it wasn't irony, I should have written hypocrisy alert

both would have been wrong but a perfect start to what continues to be a ridiculous opinion

Your deluded if you think you can explain away the last c60 games averaging a point a game by not being full strength. Name me a team that is full strength every game.

More excuses from you only serving to support my opinion that you aren't particularly good. Why the tears, I'm not saying you're shit

Your analogy was rubbish. You love reeling them off but you're not very good at them are you?

Your deluded if you think you can explain away the last c60 games averaging a point a game by not being full strength. Name me a team that is full strength every game.

your deluded if you think we arent a good side

The more you play the more you must rotate, we have played more than anyone which means we have had to rotate more than anyone.

Simple really.

More excuses from you only serving to support my opinion that you aren't particularly good. Why the tears, I'm not saying you're shit

more references to tears? that doesnt get you off the hook carps.

Im trying to educate you that not having a good domestic season and not being a good side when at full strength are completely differing things - yet you are attributing one to the other.

Your analogy was rubbish. You love reeling them off but you're not very good at them are you?

my analogy was perfect as usual. A worse performance due to over exertion doesnt mean the performer isnt good just that the performance wasnt good due to understandable factors. You dont do common sense though carps

I don't think you're a particularly good team. The last c60 league games proves it. You making excuses why you haven't been particularly good over that period only serves to you agreeing with me that you're, err, not particularly good.

In your analogy terms it's like me saying I would have beaten Mo Farrah in the marathon if only I was better than him.

Seems like common sense to me.

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

I don't think you're a particularly good team. The last c60 league games proves it. You making excuses why you haven't been particularly good over that period only serves to you agreeinge with that you're, err, not particularly good.

no it doesnt, it proves that we are the 13th best side in the country while playing a largely rotated squad.

In your analogy terms it's like me saying I would have beaten Mo Farrah in the marathon if only I was better than him.

its nothing like that. It is saying when level exertions as his competitions then he is a much better runner, however if he has to run double the length then his results wont be as good - that doesnt make him a worse runner however.

Same applies to us,

Seems like common sense to me.

thank god for that.

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Dont bring sense into this, caprs doesnt deal in sense

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Dont bring sense into this, caprs doesnt deal in sense

So I'm right then

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Dont bring sense into this, caprs doesnt deal in sense

So I'm right then

Yeah, spot on Carps - how could we ever think we could beat Sunderland

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Hope you repeat the score line

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Dont bring sense into this, caprs doesnt deal in sense

So I'm right then

Yeah, spot on Carps - how could we ever think we could beat Sunderland

Got one of these for the 17 defeats?

Penny dropped eh?

Got one of these for the 17 defeats?

I thought this was about our ability to beat Sunderland wasn't it?

Or have you now changed it after being made to look silly as per usual

Penny dropped eh?

So one home game in October makes a difference? Seen sunderlands recent results?

Nothing changes, you aren't a particularly good team and your points over the last c60 games proves it.

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Dont bring sense into this, caprs doesnt deal in sense

So I'm right then

Yeah, spot on Carps - how could we ever think we could beat Sunderland

Got one of these for the 17 defeats?

Does it hurt that much that despite us having our worst season for years we will still finish above you? Ps I was wrong about caulker hes over rated!

Got one of these for the 17 defeats?

I thought this was about our ability to beat Sunderland wasn't it?

Or have you now changed it after being made to look silly as per usual

Or I see so you can turn it on against Sunderland away as you beat them at home 6 months ago?
Looking silly? The facts back me up, you've just been making excuses to explain them. Alas they remain facts

Penny dropped eh?

So one home game in October makes a difference? Seen sunderlands recent results?

Nothing changes, you aren't a particularly good team and your points over the last c60 games proves it.

That game shows we are good enough to not just beat sunderland but annihilate them.

Our 60 games proves we are the 13th best side in the country after playing 20% more games and being forced to rotate more than most if not all.

Yet you said full strength, not rotated. So looking at the points our rotated side has accumulated is a bit silly don't you think?

Or did you mean our rotated side isnt particularly good?

Or I see so you can turn it on against Sunderland away as you beat them at home 6 months ago?
Looking silly? The facts back me up, you've just been making excuses to explain them. Alas they remain facts

Absolutely, the fact we beat them 4-0 tells you as much you plank . You love this table too which also shows we are better than Sunderland

either way you are looking a tad ridiculous

The facts say we are still the 13th best club in the country after playing more games than anyone else.

The facts also say Mo Farah is also an excellent long distance runner regardless of his result after having to run a longer distance than his competitors.

I think the red birds are right with this. We arent good enough to beat Sunderland you only have to look at the home game earlier in the season as evidence.

Dont bring sense into this, caprs doesnt deal in sense

So I'm right then

Yeah, spot on Carps - how could we ever think we could beat Sunderland

Got one of these for the 17 defeats?

Does it hurt that much that despite us having our worst season for years we will still finish above you? Ps I was wrong about caulker hes over rated!

I'm not bothered what you do unless it affects us so hope you beat the black cats if it helps us. I suspect it will over for us after Sunday so roll on the championship

It really isn't that important you know

Been meaning to change the footer for ages, just can't be arsed. He ain't bad though

Or I see so you can turn it on against Sunderland away as you beat them at home 6 months ago?
Looking silly? The facts back me up, you've just been making excuses to explain them. Alas they remain facts

Absolutely, the fact we beat them 4-0 tells you as much you plank . You love this table too which also shows we are better than Sunderland

either way you are looking a tad ridiculous

The facts say we are still the 13th best club in the country after playing more games than anyone else.

The facts also say Mo Farah is also an excellent long distance runner regardless of his result after having to run a longer distance than his competitors.

Shit why didn't someone tell sunderland that's how it works? Surely then the man city and Chelsea results don't count?
Phew, that's a relief.

PS in my book 13th isn't particularly good. Get it slow coach?

So you aren't happy with looking at the table now?

You said "full strength" - we havent been full strength for much of the season so why are you looking at that?

God you are thick