Welcome Connor

[beyond our ken]

15 hours ago, TPAFKA Jersey 2 said:

Isn’t it amazing some peoples’ aptitude for not making it clear what point they are trying to make or what the f**k they are on about. 

Guy makes post a year ago about the form of a particular player. 

Strange wee man comes along a year later and quotes said posts because the player played well a year later. 

Absolutely clueless as to the point you are trying to make.  What was the positive story a year ago that I was trying to put a negative spin on?

That was your own post  and I was having a bit of fun with it

Obviously not appreciated, ah well!

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

4 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

That was your own post  and I was having a bit of fun with it

Obviously not appreciated, ah well!

🤷‍♂️

Mate, trust me, if I’d fallen for some clever “bit of fun” or whimsical play on words, I’d be the first to applaud it. I think my posting history on here will testify to that. 

But I’m still absolutely clueless as to what the f**k you’re on about. 

[beyond our ken]

Well

I added my comment  to the thread the other day and had a look at the previous page and saw that there was some mention of me being negative by speculating that Connor's acceptance of less money than he originally asked for was a sign that he had added a clause to go if the right money came in.  A far as i know, this isn't unusual for saints (and actually made sense to me).

I thought it was funny to show other people being more negative than me about him, alongside praise for one really good display.  So the comments I quoted happened to be all yours.

So no play on words, actually just celebrating his contribution to a win, but in the interests of not upsetting anyone I will refrain from commenting on or answering anything you post now, just in case

 

eta, i have been just as critical of some of Connor's performances in his first year at saints as you were, so no-one was getting singled out

Edited November 13, 2024 by beyond our ken

[WeeBud]

5 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

Well

I added my comment  to the thread the other day and had a look at the previous page and saw that there was some mention of me being negative by speculating that Connor's acceptance of less money than he originally asked for was a sign that he had added a clause to go if the right money came in.  A far as i know, this isn't unusual for saints (and actually made sense to me).

I thought it was funny to show other people being more negative than me about him, alongside praise for one really good display.  So the comments I quoted happened to be all yours.

So no play on words, actually just celebrating his contribution to a win, but in the interests of not upsetting anyone I will refrain from commenting on or answering anything you post now, just in case

 

eta, i have been just as critical of some of Connor's performances in his first year at saints as you were, so no-one was getting singled out

As far as I’ve read you were the only person suggesting this, for certain in this instance……I agree with much of what you post (generally) but there is a tendency to try to be clever and paint a “Black” picture ( no pun intended), even your profile name may suggest as much.

All of that said here’s hoping that Conor is starting to show his true worth and justifying SR’s faith in him.

Edited November 13, 2024 by WeeBud

[beyond our ken]

14 hours ago, WeeBud said:

As far as I’ve read you were the only person suggesting this, for certain in this instance……I agree with much of what you post (generally) but there is a tendency to try to be clever and paint a “Black” picture ( no pun intended), even your profile name may suggest as much.

All of that said here’s hoping that Conor is starting to show his true worth and justifying SR’s faith in him.

It's obvious my sense of humour ain't appreciated in some quarters, the profile name was a wee pun based on the hysteria around Ken McGeoch's proposed takeover.  Some people actually thought I was McGeoch.

Players have had release clauses built in to contracts before, such as the infamous "gentleman's agreement" with Kenny McLean that got us stung by Aberdeen and i would have thought lessons were learned there.  And Connor's onboarding was a slightly protracted negotiation, in any such discussion it is normal that when something is given up then something else is offered to balance things for both and I honestly believe that Connor came to Paisley to try and build a profile that would take him beyond saints and onto better paydays.  That is supposedly part of our recruitment policy.

 

I don't to try and be clever, when it happens-it happens

[TPAFKA Jersey 2]

21 hours ago, beyond our ken said:

Well

I added my comment  to the thread the other day and had a look at the previous page and saw that there was some mention of me being negative by speculating that Connor's acceptance of less money than he originally asked for was a sign that he had added a clause to go if the right money came in.  A far as i know, this isn't unusual for saints (and actually made sense to me).

I thought it was funny to show other people being more negative than me about him, alongside praise for one really good display.  So the comments I quoted happened to be all yours.

So no play on words, actually just celebrating his contribution to a win, but in the interests of not upsetting anyone I will refrain from commenting on or answering anything you post now, just in case

 

eta, i have been just as critical of some of Connor's performances in his first year at saints as you were, so no-one was getting singled out

You being negative about something made up or that at the very least have no knowledge of, is not the same as someone being negative about his on field performances that are there for all to see. 
Tried to be clever. Failed miserably. 
We’ll leave it at that.