Vynal Seven Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Vandalay bossing Dion here. He's clearly the Messi to Dion's Ronaldo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vandalay Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 It's not technically valid at all that's the stupidest thing in this thread and the entire thread is a big stupid troll in itself. Which is quite the effort. It absolutely is. Look up paraprosdokian. You know the Groucho Marx line "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read"? What you posted is the equivalent of saying "Actually Groucho, the first sentence implies that you're using "outside of" in an idiomatic sense to mean "apart from", meaning the second makes no sense" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vynal Seven Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Destroyed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 It absolutely is. Look up paraprosdokian. You know the Groucho Marx line "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read"? What you posted is the equivalent of saying "Actually Groucho, the first sentence implies that you're using "outside of" in an idiomatic sense to mean "apart from", meaning the second makes no sense" No it's not. It's the equivalent of saying "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend." and then having someone reply "Nope, inside of a dog a book is a man's best friend ;)". You're talking absolute nonsense, it's not twisting something when you flat out just ignore the word you're supposed to be twisting. Paraprosdokian is when the first part of something is redefined by the second, but it still has to make sense. "I've had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it." is poaraprosdokian "I've had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this is a morning" isn't. Now this is all very silly to be debating in this forum, but if you're going to be a dullard at least be right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnterUsernameHere Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 Riveting stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 I will say this about Messi, his beard has gotten a lot better recently. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vandalay Posted July 12, 2016 Share Posted July 12, 2016 No it's not. It's the equivalent of saying "Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend." and then having someone reply "Nope, inside of a dog a book is a man's best friend ;)". You're talking absolute nonsense, it's not twisting something when you flat out just ignore the word you're supposed to be twisting.Paraprosdokian is when the first part of something is redefined by the second, but it still has to make sense. "I've had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this wasn't it." is poaraprosdokian "I've had a perfectly wonderful evening, but this is a morning" isn't. Now this is all very silly to be debating in this forum, but if you're going to be a dullard at least be right. It's obvious we're going round in circles here, but you're flatly wrong. "Up there with" means "roughly on the same level as". Vynal was inverting the implications of last part of your post, while retaining the literal meaning, by saying that Messi isn't "up there with" those mentioned because he's above them. Hence paraprosdokian. I don't know to make that any clearer, and obviously this isn't the place for this discussion. So there you go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vynal Seven Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Oh god when is the ref going to stop this, Dion's out on his feet! The lads got heart though you've gotta give him that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 It's obvious we're going round in circles here, but you're flatly wrong. "Up there with" means "roughly on the same level as". Vynal was inverting the implications of last part of your post, while retaining the literal meaning, by saying that Messi isn't "up there with" those mentioned because he's above them. Hence paraprosdokian.I don't know to make that any clearer, and obviously this isn't the place for this discussion. So there you go. You're still talking nonsense, you've just misunderstood the initial statement completely. "Messi doesn't deserve to be up there with Pele and Maradona" doesn't twist to he deserves to be above them, it's nonsensical because the original statement comes with not only direction (i.e up), but a relative starting position too which you can't just flat out ignore. At the point it becomes nonsensical (as opposed to whimsical) it defeats one of the key principles of what makes something paraprosdokian. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vandalay Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 You're still talking nonsense, you've just misunderstood the initial statement completely. "Messi doesn't deserve to be up there with Pele and Maradona" doesn't twist to he deserves to be above them, it's nonsensical because the original statement comes with not only direction (i.e up), but a relative starting position too which you can't just flat out ignore. At the point it becomes nonsensical (as opposed to whimsical) it defeats one of the key principles of what makes something paraprosdokian. Last post, I promise: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/be-up-there-with-sb "Up there with" clearly means equal to. Therefore, if x is above y, x is not "up there with" y. Therefore, "Messi doesn't deserve to be up there with Pele and Maradona" can, strictly speaking, be read as "Messi is above them"., even if that clearly isn't the implication of the sentence. It's therefore acceptable to twist the sentence this way for comic effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vynal Seven Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 That's a 10-7 round. I'll be amazed if Dion's corner let him back out for the 6th. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lermon Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 No one carried anyone. They simply worked extremely well as a team and played for each other. They played some great football and won. Ronaldo had 3 goals and 3 assists, I don't get the myth in that he played badly. He played well and he inspired his teammates and they as a team were the most impressive team of the tournament. A team that drew matches. I never hear of a team in the premiership persistently drawing matches as an impressive team. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid1984 Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 A team that drew matches. I never hear of a team in the premiership persistently drawing matches as an impressive team. You seem like you are new to football. Tournament football is not the same as the premier league. It is not about winning in 90 mins. It is about either winning in 90, 120 or pens. It is also important not to peak too early and then bomb out. Portugal were poor in the group stages but they knew that was enough to go through and they progressively got better after that. In all 4 knockout matches, they were superior to the opposition and that is what is required. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Last post, I promise:http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/be-up-there-with-sb "Up there with" clearly means equal to. Therefore, if x is above y, x is not "up there with" y. Therefore, "Messi doesn't deserve to be up there with Pele and Maradona" can, strictly speaking, be read as "Messi is above them"., even if that clearly isn't the implication of the sentence. It's therefore acceptable to twist the sentence this way for comic effect. Except it totally can not, because the phrases are similar but different. I don't know how many times this needed explaining but read the initial post again. The phrase 'up there with' has two aspects, directional and positional and you've got to flat out ignore both to make the twist. It's nice that you finally admit your initial post was wrong however, shame you followed it up with this gibberish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waria Ahmed Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 That's a 10-7 round. I'll be amazed if Dion's corner let him back out for the 6th. You remind me off the kids in school that would shout "OHHHHHHH SH!!!T" at every your mum joke to cause a fight :D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldeniro Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 has anyone ever read that bodybuilding bro forum where these jocks have an argument about how many days of the week there are? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 You remind me off the kids in school that would shout "OHHHHHHH SH!!!T" at every your mum joke to cause a fight :D I doubt anyone who has ever had a debate about what constitutes paraprosdokia has ever been in a fight tbf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waria Ahmed Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 I doubt anyone who has ever had a debate about what constitutes paraprosdokia has ever been in a fight tbf. or ever had a gf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vynal Seven Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 or ever had a gf Shots fired! Waria Ahmed takes down Dion with ease! How will he come back from this? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 or ever had a gf Jokes on you, I've got one at the moment She's a real non-related human and consenting and everything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waria Ahmed Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Jokes on you, I've got one at the moment She's a real non-related human and consenting and everything. Is she 19? has Icelander verified? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Is she 19? has Icelander verified? Oh lord no, I'd never be able to attract anyone that young. It's all about wooing them with financial security at this stage, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georginho_juventusygr Posted July 13, 2016 Author Share Posted July 13, 2016 This thread is to praise Cristiano Ronaldo and what he has done for his national team and all the Portuguese people. He wins titles for his clubs AND his country. Club AND country. For those who are salty, please keep your comments to yourself and out of my thread. Thanks. Cristiano Ronaldo also pays his taxes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lermon Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 You seem like you are new to football. Tournament football is not the same as the premier league. It is not about winning in 90 mins. It is about either winning in 90, 120 or pens. It is also important not to peak too early and then bomb out. Portugal were poor in the group stages but they knew that was enough to go through and they progressively got better after that. In all 4 knockout matches, they were superior to the opposition and that is what is required. Football is primarily about offence and defence in 90 mins. The extra time is when nothing can be decided between two sides and extra time is given as an opportunity to get an edge over the other. But you are a fan of Portugal, and I won't deride that. I just have a far different opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid1984 Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 Football is primarily about offence and defence in 90 mins. The extra time is when nothing can be decided between two sides and extra time is given as an opportunity to get an edge over the other. But you are a fan of Portugal, and I won't deride that. I just have a far different opinion. League is about 90 mins. Knockout stages in cups is certainly not just about 90 mins. It is about being better than the opposition team during the course of the ENTIRE match. I'm not a Portugal fan, I just admire their brilliant football. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
given1legend Posted July 13, 2016 Share Posted July 13, 2016 League is about 90 mins. Knockout stages in cups is certainly not just about 90 mins. It is about being better than the opposition team during the course of the ENTIRE match. I'm not a Portugal fan, I just admire their brilliant football. And the group stage is a league format. A league in which they failed to win a game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddidiodion Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 And the group stage is a league format. A league in which they failed to win a game. Saving themselves, nobody wants to run a world record in the heats do they? More tactical genius from Ronaldo that sets him above the little one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Real Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 And the group stage is a league format. A league in which they failed to win a game. I don't understand why that actually matters. The goal of the group stages is to acquire enough points to proceed to the next round, which they succesfully did. There seems to be this weird obsession with some English users on this forum that somehow you need to win the match within 90 minutes otherwise the result is deemed invalid, set by the rules determined in this time and place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid1984 Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 I don't understand why that actually matters. The goal of the group stages is to acquire enough points to proceed to the next round, which they succesfully did.There seems to be this weird obsession with some English users on this forum that somehow you need to win the match within 90 minutes otherwise the result is deemed invalid, set by the rules determined in this time and place. Cos they don't understand the concept of international major tournaments, much like Roy hodgson. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
given1legend Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 I don't understand why that actually matters. The goal of the group stages is to acquire enough points to proceed to the next round, which they succesfully did.There seems to be this weird obsession with some English users on this forum that somehow you need to win the match within 90 minutes otherwise the result is deemed invalid, set by the rules determined in this time and place. Rubbish. No team attempts to draw all 3 games. They scraped through the group, relying on the results of other teams. Every team wants to win in 90 minutes. Portugal obviously didn't set up to draw and win on penalties. Did Ronaldo purposefully miss 50 opportunities because he didn't want to score against certain teams in case it meant winning? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangaea Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 They actually played well in the group though, at least offensively. Tons of chances. But they were messy at the back, so the manager then decided if they were going to get much farther, they needed to tighten things up. Worked well enough. It's a bit odd how they can both have been parking the bus, and Ronaldo wasting 50 chances. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Real Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 Rubbish. No team attempts to draw all 3 games. They scraped through the group, relying on the results of other teams. Every team wants to win in 90 minutes. Portugal obviously didn't set up to draw and win on penalties. Did Ronaldo purposefully miss 50 opportunities because he didn't want to score against certain teams in case it meant winning? I hear what you're saying, I just don't understand it. Are you saying they didn't deserve to go through because they didn't play as well as they wanted? Or are you saying purpose is the keyword here? So a team that goes through after a cross ending up in the nets does not deserve to be in the next round? Because basically that would exclude pretty much every team. Every team aims for 3 wins and every chance resulting in a goal. But that's just not happenng. And in the end they relied on the the rules of the tournament which said the best top 3 teams were through to the next round. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid1984 Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 Rubbish. No team attempts to draw all 3 games. They scraped through the group, relying on the results of other teams. Every team wants to win in 90 minutes. Portugal obviously didn't set up to draw and win on penalties. Did Ronaldo purposefully miss 50 opportunities because he didn't want to score against certain teams in case it meant winning? You must think Usain Bolt is pretty rubbish too. In the olympics he has finished 2nd or 3rd in the heats in order to qualify where he turns it on when it matters. Portugal did not rely on results of others. It was all in their own hands. With 20 mins to go against Hungary they knew a draw was enough and a note was handed to Ronaldo to tell him this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lermon Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 I'm with you given1legend. On the draws thing, it should probably be pointed England almost drew all 3. Had they drawn all 3, I think it would be not be a stretch of the imagination to say most people would say they deserved to be out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid1984 Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 I'm with you given1legend. On the draws thing, it should probably be pointed England almost drew all 3. Had they drawn all 3, I think it would be not be a stretch of the imagination to say most people would say they deserved to be out. no, they deserved to be out cos they got played off the park by Iceland and couldn't even scrape a draw against them. If you get enough points to go through, you deserve to go through. Then in the knockouts, if you are superior to your opponent then you deserve to win. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebs Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 I still don't think Portugal were the best team in the tournament, I don't really think any team was head and shoulders above anyone else...I'd put Portugal in the group just below the most impressive teams...but some of those most impressive teams did go out earlier than the likes of Portugal of course. I suppose if you just take the fact that Portugal won as being the supreme factor then you could say they were the best team...but I don't really think like that and overall I still think Portugal were a bit pony. They did play well in the final though, or at least better than France. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
given1legend Posted July 14, 2016 Share Posted July 14, 2016 I hear what you're saying, I just don't understand it. Are you saying they didn't deserve to go through because they didn't play as well as they wanted? Or are you saying purpose is the keyword here? So a team that goes through after a cross ending up in the nets does not deserve to be in the next round?Because basically that would exclude pretty much every team. Every team aims for 3 wins and every chance resulting in a goal. But that's just not happenng. And in the end they relied on the the rules of the tournament which said the best top 3 teams were through to the next round. I don't think they deserved to go through. Normally the team that finishes 3rd goes out. Stupid format. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baptista_8 Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 If that's the format and everyone knew that beforehand...how do they not deserve it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andyh21 Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 Also don't you think Portugal would have "gone for it" a bit more at 3-3 v hungary if they knew they would go out by getting 3rd. I mean the luckiest bit was actually knowing what they had to do i.e. draw would have sent them through. I mean suppose they and Hungary etc was group A, I bet then they would try to win at 3-3 as of course it would be more of a risk settling for 3 pts in total and 0 gd. I mean for me that has been main problem of tournament, everyone knew what Albania did and took it from there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sid1984 Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 I don't think they deserved to go through. Normally the team that finishes 3rd goes out. Stupid format. Blame the format all you want but don't criticise the team who played to what the format required and was very impressive in doing so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icondacarver Posted July 15, 2016 Share Posted July 15, 2016 If that's the format and everyone knew that beforehand...how do they not deserve it? This a thousand times. They knew what the criteria was and how the format worked. Any team that succeeds deserved it and is not lucky. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lermon Posted July 16, 2016 Share Posted July 16, 2016 Most of the 3rd based teams got through on 4 points, 3 points was always a gamble, just perhaps fortunate Portugal was in the later groups to see which teams were worse and going out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hungoth Posted July 17, 2016 Share Posted July 17, 2016 so Ronaldo going off with injury ensured a title for Portugal, huh? how ironic Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.