Falling out with other fans over the rebrand

Never fallen out with anyone over it.

So this person has fallen out with her butcher because he won't do what she says and has an opinion.
If people want to sign it they will without pressure.

From the dialogue given, it sounds like the butcher instigated the "fall out", not the administsrator.

So to say "he won't do as she says" is quite unfair, as she never demanded it from him.

Never fallen out with anyone over it.

So this person has fallen out with her butcher because he won't do what she says and has an opinion.
If people want to sign it they will without pressure.

From the dialogue given, it sounds like the butcher instigated the "fall out", not the administsrator.

So to say "he won't do as she says" is quite unfair, as she never demanded it from him.

Message also said

" has fallen out with her butcher who refused to sign her petition. He said '60 years"
OK its not quoted in the convo but its mentioned. I don't see why mentioned.

Hope I'm wrong but seems like this group or some in it are getting to big for there boots. That would be sad as its the first decent attempt anyone has had.
Poor point scoring like talking about the debt to equity is cringworthy as well as everyone knows that's once Langston is paid off. It's not about point scoring.

Yes, fallen out because the butcher instigated the fall out.

I think you are right, in some cases, some people are getting a bit too big for their boots etc.. but all this bad press and people constantly twisting/wording things to make it look like they are in the wrong, is also wrong.

From the dialogue and passage given, it seems quite clear that this was instigated by her butcher & not her.

Yes, fallen out because the butcher instigated the fall out.

I think you are right, in some cases, some people are getting a bit too big for their boots etc.. but all this bad press and people constantly twisting/wording things to make it look like they are in the wrong, is also wrong.

From the dialogue and passage given, it seems quite clear that this was instigated by her butcher & not her.

Was this a word of word dialogue? Tbh I don't care. Not sure why it was ever mentioned. He didn't agree and didn't want to sign it. End of, buy a pie move on and focus on positives instead of making a fuss of people who don't Agee.

Yes, fallen out because the butcher instigated the fall out.

I think you are right, in some cases, some people are getting a bit too big for their boots etc.. but all this bad press and people constantly twisting/wording things to make it look like they are in the wrong, is also wrong.

From the dialogue and passage given, it seems quite clear that this was instigated by her butcher & not her.

Was this a word of word dialogue? Tbh I don't care. Not sure why it was ever mentioned. He didn't agree and didn't want to sign it. End of, buy a pie move on and focus on positives instead of making a fuss of people who don't Agee.

I wasn't there, but as I said in my previous post; FROM THE DIALOGUE GIVEN, it seems quite clear to me. (The dialogue could be biased, but seeing as neither of us were there, we are just going to have to trust it.)

It was mentioned because the butcher seemingly brought it up.

havent really read the thread, but is the short story; she fell out with her butcher because he wouldnt sign or agree with her petition?

No, actually, the butcher started the "spat" with her.

Which is why you shouldn't assume.

Well baz you shouldnt assume that i have assumed.

key part of my comment-"but is the short story; she fell out with her butcher because he wouldnt sign or agree with her petition?"

Thats a question,not an assumption.

Yes, fallen out because the butcher instigated the fall out.

I think you are right, in some cases, some people are getting a bit too big for their boots etc.. but all this bad press and people constantly twisting/wording things to make it look like they are in the wrong, is also wrong.

From the dialogue and passage given, it seems quite clear that this was instigated by her butcher & not her.

Was this a word of word dialogue? Tbh I don't care. Not sure why it was ever mentioned. He didn't agree and didn't want to sign it. End of, buy a pie move on and focus on positives instead of making a fuss of people who don't Agee.

I wasn't there, but as I said in my previous post; FROM THE DIALOGUE GIVEN, it seems quite clear to me. (The dialogue could be biased, but seeing as neither of us were there, we are just going to have to trust it.)

It was mentioned because the butcher seemingly brought it up.

II appreciate that and haven't said otherwise.

I just don't see the point in this. I haven't read loads on this group. It seemed s good group at the start but now seems more about point scoring.

Who do you think you are telling people what to think/do?

A Cardiff City fan with an opinion who's fed up of hearing the same old rubbish and piss in the wind rhetoric.

If you don't agree with that particular group, fine. SUGGEST ideas, offer constructive criticism, maybe.

I have done. I suggested a no attend event to BU as that will show Tan more if ST holders dont show up in protest. A normal match day goer cant take their seats can they? or will the lure of PL football be too much for their cause? I have also offered constructive criticism. Either follow your convictions and want blue back and Tan out or put up and shut up. Us reluctantly accepting are fed up of your boring rhetoric.

The way you are talking to people on here, telling them what they should think/believe etc, is bloody nonsense.

Im not telling them what they should believe. Tan told them. Either you're with him and accepting the red or you're against him and want blue. There are 2 clear options. Which one you choose is down to you. All there is to it. Alfie Sherwood, TLG, etc. walked i believe. They are against Tan. They'd happily see him walk tomorrow to get the true identity back. That is an opinion I respect and admire. They'd drive Tan to the airport to get the blue kit back.

That utopian bullshit of Tan staying and turning us back to blue ain't happening. A realistic aim would be more respectable.

It would appear by the side of the story we have been told that the Butcher was indeed the instigator in the Fall out.

But there are always two sides of the story.

Not gonna lie, fair play to her but does she just go round telling everyone she has a petition? Imagine being checked for a sexually transmitted disease and going oh yeah, sign my petition will you

Not gonna lie, fair play to her but does she just go round telling everyone she has a petition? Imagine being checked for a sexually transmitted disease and going oh yeah, sign my petition will you

Not gonna lie, fair play to her but does she just go round telling everyone she has a petition? Imagine being checked for a sexually transmitted disease and going oh yeah, sign my petition will you

Where did you get that brilliant piece of fiction? The bloke as a Cardiff fan obviously has heard about the petition (most have by now) and knows she's in charge of it, and also knows her in real life.

Also I wish people would stop seeing the rebrand issue as black and white. BU want blue back but don't necessarily want Tan to leave because he's got a shit ton of money. The point is to make Tan realise how much people care about it rather than forcing him out, that's the point.

Of course the pro-red argument (or excuse) for not wanting to get involved is that "Tan will never go back to blue". This is a made up way of saying "I want premier league football at any expense and am too lazy to fight for my club's identity". Unless you know the man personally you can't say that he'll never go back to blue. Everyone has their opinions and everyone's opinions can be swayed.

"It's just my opinion" isn't a sufficient way of defending your stance, because everyone's opinions are up for criticism and ridicule if they're that ridiculous in the first place. A lot of City fans lack the backbone to see this work and that's the problem in the first place.

Not gonna lie, fair play to her but does she just go round telling everyone she has a petition? Imagine being checked for a sexually transmitted disease and going oh yeah, sign my petition will you

Where did you get that brilliant piece of fiction? The bloke as a Cardiff fan obviously has heard about the petition (most have by now) and knows she's in charge of it, and also knows her in real life.

Also I wish people would stop seeing the rebrand issue as black and white. BU want blue back but don't necessarily want Tan to leave because he's got a shit ton of money. The point is to make Tan realise how much people care about it rather than forcing him out, that's the point.

Of course the pro-red argument (or excuse) for not wanting to get involved is that "Tan will never go back to blue". This is a made up way of saying "I want premier league football at any expense and am too lazy to fight for my club's identity". Unless you know the man personally you can't say that he'll never go back to blue. Everyone has their opinions and everyone's opinions can be swayed.

"It's just my opinion" isn't a sufficient way of defending your stance, because everyone's opinions are up for criticism and ridicule if they're that ridiculous in the first place. A lot of City fans lack the backbone to see this work and that's the problem in the first place.

Listen here who the hell are you to say some fans are to lazy and some have no back bone

None of us like this colour change but we support the club and we are still Cardiff city! At the end of the day I go to watch my local team and to get away from my busy working week and enjoy the football with my son. It's a chance to relax and spend quality time with the family whilst watching CCFC! I ain't got the time to worry about a colour change!

I am far to busy with my working life aswell as spending time with my family to worry about a fooking rebrand and protesting. There are far more productive and important things to be doing in life than constantly whining about our colour and having digs at each other. Some of the fans on here seem to think they are above other fans just because they have supported the team for 30-40 years and call people glory hunters or plastics just because they reluctantly accept the rebrand. Call me what you like but we don't own the club, we are customers and have a football team and manager to be proud of,so embrace it!

Some of the nonsense I've read on here over the moths has been shocking, yes I will enjoy CCFC in the premier League and I will be proud knowing my son will be going to school telling his Liverpool and Chelsea friends that he is a CCFC fan who are also in the premier league!

All the above are enough for me to accept the rebrand and thank Vincent tan for stepping in when he did! People have way to much time on their hands the amount of time they spend constantly having digs at VT and the so called plastics.

Fair play to the butcher for being honest and not signing for the sake of it! There's to many things going on the world than to worry about our colour and for some of the fans to have so much hate towards VT who saved us from winding up orders and has kept us going!

I've managed not to log in for months but seeing all this nonsense about fans having no backbone and fans being plastic just had to get it off my chest! If there's problems with my grammar or spelling sorry I ain't got time to check over it!

Not gonna lie, fair play to her but does she just go round telling everyone she has a petition? Imagine being checked for a sexually transmitted disease and going oh yeah, sign my petition will you

Jesus Christ, are you able to read?!

The dialogue in the OP shows quite clearly that the BUTCHER initiated the conversation regarding it, rather then forcing it on strangers.

Stop making things up.

Not gonna lie, fair play to her but does she just go round telling everyone she has a petition? Imagine being checked for a sexually transmitted disease and going oh yeah, sign my petition will you

Jesus Christ, are you able to read?!

The dialogue in the OP shows quite clearly that the BUTCHER initiated the conversation regarding it, rather then forcing it on strangers.

Stop making things up.

The butcher was just giving his own opinion! As you and many others on here have said we are all allowed an opinion and freedom of speech!

It's not a post that based on opinions though.

It is a post that had been written on an actual happening. Going by the dialogue it is a FACT that the butcher started the disagreement, so to say that it was the other way round is FACTUALLY incorrect, based on the dialogue given.

It's not a post that based on opinions though.

It is a post that had been written on an actual happening. Going by the dialogue it is a FACT that the butcher started the disagreement, so to say that it was the other way round is FACTUALLY incorrect, based on the dialogue given.

Yes we know this is a real event but again the butcher gave his own opinion on the rebrand! He is entitled to it surely ?

Let's be honest nobody knows if this is the actual dialogue, anyone can twist a conversation and change wording to make it look like the butcher instigated it! I wouldn't be surprised if she approached her local butcher to sign the petition( this is what I would do to gather more signatures if I was involved in a petition!) but he probably declined and gave his opinion!!

He's entitled to that, but I "Bleed blue" was just talking rubbish!

Somebody DOES know if this is the real dialogue. The original author. It MAY have been twisted, but unless you were there, you will have to take the OP as fact, because otherwise you are just assuming without facts & that would make you look very silly.

So much missing from this event. What about the way things were said - the tone used, body language etc.?
Simply stating words can be flawed as she could have had a right sarcastic or arrogant head on that wound the butcher up from the off. I'm not saying she did, just life is rarely as simple as portrayed. We also don't know their previous encounters with each other.

Pretty much pointless arguments going on here IMO

Last edited by Carpe Diem on Sat Jun 08, 2013 7:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

So much missing from this event. What about the way things were said - the tone used, body language etc.?
Simply stating words can be flawed as she could have had a right sarcastic head on that wound the butcher up from the off. I'm not saying she did, just life is rarely as simple as portrayed.

Pretty much pointless arguments going on here IMO

More assuming rubbish

It could have gone the other way too, yet you fail to mention this?! . a butcher being rude to a customer because she was sarcastic? That's not the way to get customers!

So much missing from this event. What about the way things were said - the tone used, body language etc.?
Simply stating words can be flawed as she could have had a right sarcastic head on that wound the butcher up from the off. I'm not saying she did, just life is rarely as simple as portrayed.

Pretty much pointless arguments going on here IMO

More assuming rubbish

It could have gone the other way too, yet you fail to mention this?! . a butcher being rude to a customer because she was sarcastic? That's not the way to get customers!

Totally missed my point. I did say "I'm not saying she did" and my point was that there could me a lot more too it than taking words simply as read. So I wasn't assuming anything you arrogant fool.

Funny how you preach on about opinion yet when you read something you don't like its rubbish. Oh the irony in calling others hypocrites.

Oh and using a thumbs up smiley every post doesn't make you right. Grow up ffs

He's entitled to that, but I "Bleed blue" was just talking rubbish!

Somebody DOES know if this is the real dialogue. The original author. It MAY have been twisted, but unless you were there, you will have to take the OP as fact, because otherwise you are just assuming without facts & that would make you look very silly.

You are correct never assume anything! That's why I gave another view on the conversation they had! The conversation could have gone either way but I can see what others are saying if she was actively looking for signatures it is more than likely she approached her butcher! He is a business man and needs customers. I would be very surprised if he came out with that comment and instigated which couldpossibly offend her as one of his customers!

Totally missed my point. I did say "I'm not saying she did" and my point was that there could me a lot more too it than taking words simply as read. So I wasn't assuming anything you arrogant fool.

No I didn't. You assumed that the OP was portrayed incorrectly. We're you there to back this up with facts? If not, I'm saying that you are talking more assuming rubbish. if anyone is the fool, it's you. Taking your own made up version of events over a factual account, written by someone who was there.

Funny how you preach on about opinion yet when you read something you don't like its rubbish. Oh the irony in calling others hypocrites.

You can't have an opinion on facts! Well, actually you can.. if you want to look really silly. truth is, If you weren't there, you have to take this brief account as FACT. Otherwise, you are just guessing, which would make it total bollocks.

Oh and using a thumbs up smiley every post doesn't make you right. Grow up ffs

You are correct never assume anything! That's why I gave another view on the conversation they had! The conversation could have gone either way but I can see what others are saying if she was actively looking for signatures it is more than likely she approached her butcher! He is a business man and needs customers. I would be very surprised if he came out with that comment and instigated which couldpossibly offend her as one of his customers!

How ridiculous! Your opening sentence says "never assume anything", then write a whole paragraph based on assumptions.

You are correct never assume anything! That's why I gave another view on the conversation they had! The conversation could have gone either way but I can see what others are saying if she was actively looking for signatures it is more than likely she approached her butcher! He is a business man and needs customers. I would be very surprised if he came out with that comment and instigated which couldpossibly offend her as one of his customers!

How ridiculous! Your opening sentence says "never assume anything", then write a whole paragraph based on assumptions.

It was sarcasm! We all assume things we can't helpourselves,it's human nature ! What I am saying there are 2 sides 2 every story and to just think that the butcher instigated from the above dial

Meant to finish off by saying - taking the above dialogue as gospal would make you look quite gulable

Meant to finish off by saying - taking the above dialogue as gospal would make you look quite gulable

Totally ignoring it & making up your own events from it would make you look extremely stupid.

Totally missed my point. I did say "I'm not saying she did" and my point was that there could me a lot more too it than taking words simply as read. So I wasn't assuming anything you arrogant fool.

No I didn't. You assumed that the OP was portrayed incorrectly. We're you there to back this up with facts? If not, I'm saying that you are talking more assuming rubbish. if anyone is the fool, it's you. Taking your own made up version of events over a factual account, written by someone who was there.

Funny how you preach on about opinion yet when you read something you don't like its rubbish. Oh the irony in calling others hypocrites.

You can't have an opinion on facts! Well, actually you can.. if you want to look really silly. truth is, If you weren't there, you have to take this brief account as FACT. Otherwise, you are just guessing, which would make it total bollocks.

Oh and using a thumbs up smiley every post doesn't make you right. Grow up ffs

I didn't assume anything or offer an opinion on who was right or wrong. Where did I assume that the OP was portrayed incorrectly? I stated that there were other factors that we aren't party to that could have had a bearing on the conversation. Do you deny that tone, body language (inc facial expression) don't have a bearing on communication? You're making more assumptions than me as you've decided what was written is fact (not denied by me by the way) but all I'm offering is that there could be more to it than we think. That's an opinion but as it doesn't align with yours it's rubbish? Hypocrite.

Also, where did I say that "you can't have opinion on facts"? Where?

So I didn't guess anything and as stated twice now "I'm not saying she did". But of course you ignore this as it sinks your craving to argue the toss.

Your naivety is startling. Because you weren't there you have to take something as fact! Really! So nobody has ever twisted anything, forgotten some of what was said, misinterpreted? Even lied (no I'm not accusing her of lying before you start bleating on).

I'd rather take the version of someone who was actually there & involved in the discussion... Then take the assumptions of a stranger who was neither there or has any evidence to back up his assumptions...

Now, that, would be naive.

I'd rather take the version of someone who was actually there & involved in the discussion... Then take the assumptions of a stranger who was neither there or has any evidence to back up his assumptions...

Now, that, would be naive.

Not going to answer any of my questions then?