Marcus McGuane - Signed from Oxford Official

[Bazooka Joe]

50 minutes ago, Severn Beach Pigeon said:

The person Mr P responded to didn't suggest MM is worse than TGH though, just a replacement for the squad player/backup role that TGH had.

That can be a downgrade, can be equivalent quality or can be an upgrade.

Automatically assuming the worst case about everything is a cynical (therefore not rational) view to take- as would be the opposite stance.

 

Do I need to chuck in a pointless emoji too, or can a conversation be had sensibly?

A good emoji for "pointless" would be the Rovers crest.

[Natchfever]

7 minutes ago, Harry said:

It’s not about age either. I’m also not comparing like for like in terms of talent, ability, technique, goals/assists columns etc. I’m simply coming from the point of view of a player fitting a specific style. 
Hickman doesn’t fit Manning. McGuane does. Based on evidence of both players playing under the manager. 
If a manager can say “player A fits my style better than player B” then it’s an upgrade. 

Be interesting to see if the skills he displayed under Manning are transferable to the higher level.

Doesnt apper to be an expensive signing so seems worth the outlay.

[Winterstokeone]

What shirt number has he been given?

also see he qualifies for Rep Ireland we could provide half the team to play England.

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

36 minutes ago, Porto Red said:

Likewise.

It is a grey area and grammatically an argument can be made for either, but these things are properly determined by historical usage, and in British English it's always been "are" and not "is". The latter is basically an Americanism now, but as it seems to be increasingly used by younger people (such as our media team, at a guess!), no doubt it will become the usage in time. Disappointingly.

I'm no longer young (67 now) and I like to think that in most instances I'm grammatically correct but I suspect I've used both is and are in this context. I will strive to do better. 

My personal pet peeve both grammatically and in speech are people who qualify the word Unique. 

[redkev]

5 hours ago, pigeon said:

Remember, Sammie Szmodics couldn’t get a game here and now look… One man’s trash is another man’s treasure.

 

 

Looking forward to seeing how this one works out, given it’s a true LM player we’re bringing in.

 

Spot on , you never know 

some on here seemed to have poo poo the signing already , 

[Porto Red]

8 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I'm no longer young (67 now) and I like to think that in most instances I'm grammatically correct but I suspect I've used both is and are in this context. I will strive to do better. 

My personal pet peeve both grammatically and in speech are people who qualify the word Unique. 

Thank you for your very unique reply to my post (sorry)

[Spike]

20 hours ago, Lew-T said:

The players in the building are not good enough to push on without some form of financial help. I think that’s obvious, we all knew that last season. I was pro NP at the time, and how it was dealt with, it still bugs me today. But we’ve seriously got to move on and stop digging up what the club said months ago. 
 

Unfortunately if you just forgive and forget every time the people at the top do something that the fans don't want done then they'll never stop doing those things. 

I'm all for moving on but I've supported this club through two generations of my family and the Nigel Pearson is the only sacking in my time as a supporter where I feel the majority of the fanbase were happy with the direction the club was going and didn't want change. 

Once it was done many fans were happy to move on but the pure volume of outrage was also clear and still I stand by that the fans to be outraged were correct to be so. We may be on a healthy position now but I still remain firmly in the opinion that we're here despite Pearson being sacked, not because. Pearson made some great signings and did so on a shoestring and was never backed. I feel like the club used him and when he no longer served a purpose they disposed of him in a really unprofessional manner, making excuses and lying to the fanbase as with hindsight you can see it was clearly lies that we were fed. 

I will never forgive the board for that decision, it's on them, not Manning and whilst we move on and Manning has earned his respect from the fans I still feel he lacks that spark to elevate us. I won't hold that against him but I certainly will judge him fairly and by that I mean as one of the most backed managers we've had other than LJ. 

I don't think any fan should be begrudge for not looking the board or holding NPs sacking against them, they definitely shouldn't forgive to being lied to and deceived. 

20 hours ago, Lew-T said:

Football is not a forgiving business. Goals/targets can change, depending if certain players are available. A case of striking while the iron is hot comes to mind.

You're right, it's not forgiving and goals and targets can change, what cannot be allowed is for the fans to be lied to and for them to just "get over it" so to speak. If my dog pisses on the carpet and I don't make it clear that it's not ok to do that then that carpet is getting pissed on again. Our board are pissing on the club's carpets and of we don't hold them accountable then they will keep doing it if they think they can get away with it. 

Honestly I'm happy with what LM has managed, but Jon and Co still deserved their noses to be rubbed in piss. 

[MythikRobins]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Your claim was challenging the point that he wasn't. You think it was more of a like for like?

Wilbraham although older had done it at a higher level...I remember the name from Stockport in the early 2000s. This is a guy approaching peak years albeit a strong Academy background, has served much of his career in League 1.

We are supposedly going for it from a very competitive League..let's hope McGuane knits it together well or is a strong a shrewd first reserve when called upon.

We shall see, although I'll take your word at this juncture. Ultimately if Manning wants 2 and a pure 10, I'm not sure we succeed at this level but that's on Manning.

TGH 2-3 years younger too so we're not really comparing like with like.

A double pivot and a 10 has succeeded at all levels for decades, I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this?

[Mr Popodopolous]

18 minutes ago, MythikRobins said:

A double pivot and a 10 has succeeded at all levels for decades, I’m not sure I understand what you mean by this?

I think the way the game is going, you need 3 genuine CMs or a 10 who is better out of possession. Pure and Classical 10s, there are less of them around than 2 decades ago say. Even 10-15 years.

It depends what we mean by 10 as well, there are various different types.

I suppose all I mean there is that the manager chooses the tactics, if it proves flawed and we persist then it'll be open to question.

Edited August 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

https://www.coachesvoice.com/cv/number-10-football-tactics-explained-bruno-fernandes-ozil-dybala-muller/

[joe jordans teeth]

56 minutes ago, Ashtongreight said:

I understand your point, it does feel a bit like Groundhog Day, over spend, a period of consolidation, then followed by throwing the kitchen sink at it again. 
 

It does feel slightly different this time, as it seems the amount spent is less than previously. 
 

I’ve no problem with them backing their manager, what I’m more concerned about is if we are successful I’m not sure LM will stay the course. Then where does that leave us. At least with LJ I had the sense he wanted to be successful with US, with LM I don’t have that feeling. 

So do you want him to be successful or not,if he is who do we replace him with and if he’s not who do we replace him with 

[chinapig]

44 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I'm no longer young (67 now) and I like to think that in most instances I'm grammatically correct but I suspect I've used both is and are in this context. I will strive to do better. 

My personal pet peeve both grammatically and in speech are people who qualify the word Unique. 

Like me you may have been taught to use the collective singular when referring to an entity. The club is an entity so "Bristol City is..." would be correct. Similarly, it would be "the team is playing well" not "the team are playing well".

@Porto Redis right though, these days it's regarded as American usage.

[CiderHider]

Welcome lad! 

If he's struggling to find a natural position and role i'd say model yourself on Josh Brownhill  

[pillred]

1 hour ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I'm no longer young (67 now) and I like to think that in most instances I'm grammatically correct but I suspect I've used both is and are in this context. I will strive to do better. 

My personal pet peeve both grammatically and in speech are people who qualify the word Unique. 

Mine is people who use loose on here when they mean lose.

[steviestevieneville]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks, that makes sense.

I look forward to seeing what MM can do when called upon.

I see a fair bit in your posts how I saw players , squads,  a year or so ago. I grew up when everyone played 442 . Every player was pigeon holed. It’s a completely different sport in some aspect since then. 
a massive difference is the change to 5 subs imo . So where fringe players were “ squad players “ they’re not now. Just to look at the midfield as an example . You want the least drop off in quality from someone coming off the bench . Difficult at our level granted but ( and I’ve never watched the new lad ) but if he dovetails with any of the other three in a way TGH didn’t then as @Harry says , then it’s a upgrade.

I think us as fans need to forget formations , as now it’s very in / out possession defined . Forget best starting 11 nonsense because it’s horses for courses , plus so many games played  that the teams need to rotate to keep them fresh . Hense the stronger squad overall to hopefully keep us as consistent in performance as possible. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

8 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said:

I see a fair bit in your posts how I saw players , squads,  a year or so ago. I grew up when everyone played 442 . Every player was pigeon holed. It’s a completely different sport in some aspect since then. 
a massive difference is the change to 5 subs imo . So where fringe players were “ squad players “ they’re not now. Just to look at the midfield as an example . You want the least drop off in quality from someone coming off the bench . Difficult at our level granted but ( and I’ve never watched the new lad ) but if he dovetails with any of the other three in a way TGH didn’t then as @Harry says , then it’s a upgrade.

I think us as fans need to forget formations , as now it’s very in / out possession defined . Forget best starting 11 nonsense because it’s horses for courses , plus so many games played  that the teams need to rotate to keep them fresh . Hense the stronger squad overall to hopefully keep us as consistent in performance as possible. 

I definitely agree it isn't just a First 11 game.

Pigeon holing though, Idk..some players are inherently just IMO better suited to certain setups, shapes than others. E.g. Tanner at Wingback Idk, McCrorie moreso.

While Naismith can drop beyween the deepest defender and back 3 but who else is a natural fit..?

TGH was shunted here and there, check the positions he played. Transfermarkt will show individual Games, positions and filter by this..if McGuane as better defensively frees up Knight and Bird e.g. that could work.

[Mr Hankey]

Extremely impressive background, got a feeling (not really based on any knowledge of him!) that this could be a very good signing.

[ExiledAjax]

41 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Like me you may have been taught to use the collective singular when referring to an entity. The club is an entity so "Bristol City is..." would be correct. Similarly, it would be "the team is playing well" not "the team are playing well".

@Porto Redis right though, these days it's regarded as American usage.

Yep. It's a grammatical technicality Vs a grammatical generality.

1 hour ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

My personal pet peeve both grammatically and in speech are people who qualify the word Unique. 

An impeccable choice of pet peeve.

[chinapig]

14 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

An impeccable choice of pet peeve.

Very impeccable in fact.

[Rob k]

1 hour ago, joe jordans teeth said:

So do you want him to be successful or not,if he is who do we replace him with and if he’s not who do we replace him with 

We haven’t even spent that much have we when we take in to account what we get back for Tommy?

[ExiledAjax]

23 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Very impeccable in fact.

I'll set 'em up...

[citywest30]

Quick question. 2 actually-

How is his surname pronounced?

In his interview, it was mentioned he knows a few players from previous clubs. Anyone know who?

[Porto Red]

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

Like me you may have been taught to use the collective singular when referring to an entity. The club is an entity so "Bristol City is..." would be correct. Similarly, it would be "the team is playing well" not "the team are playing well".

@Porto Redis right though, these days it's regarded as American usage.

This is interesting. Are you of a similar vintage to @RoystonFoote'snephew by any chance? I'm 49 and a half and to my recollection it's always been "are", but maybe just a short time before me it was taught and accepted as "is".

1 hour ago, pillred said:

Mine is people who use loose on here when they mean lose.

My daughter when she was around 10 tried to call me a loser and make the corresponding L sign with thumb and forefinger. In doing so, she stabbed herself in the eye with her thumb. My, how we laughed.

[chinapig]

3 minutes ago, Porto Red said:

Are you of a similar vintage to @RoystonFoote'snephew by any chance? I'm 49 and a half and to my recollection it's always been "are", but maybe just a short time before me it was taught and accepted as "is".

Yep, now 70, so I was taught in the 60s. We studied English Language and English Literature separately and the former was heavy on grammar, naturally.

[joe jordans teeth]

39 minutes ago, Rob k said:

We haven’t even spent that much have we when we take in to account what we get back for Tommy?

Depends what you call much

[Porto Red]

5 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Yep, now 70, so I was taught in the 60s. We studied English Language and English Literature separately and the former was heavy on grammar, naturally.

Also studied them separately, in both state and private education. Went on to do a degree in Eng Lit (so utterly useless that I almost left the autocorrect "lite" in situ). Will have to try to find records of usage from the 60s. 

[Rob k]

1 minute ago, joe jordans teeth said:

Depends what you call much

Well people are comparing it to the LJ period, I’m yet to see a signing of a single player of 5 or 8m. In fact we have 7 new players for that much give or take!

[joe jordans teeth]

1 minute ago, Rob k said:

Well people are comparing it to the LJ period, I’m yet to see a signing of a single player of 5 or 8m. In fact we have 7 new players for that much give or take!

He seems to have a plan where LJ didn’t let’s be honest,my original point was someone moaning about if he is successful which means the club will be then he might leave,no pleasing some 

[Ashtongreight]

2 hours ago, joe jordans teeth said:

So do you want him to be successful or not,if he is who do we replace him with and if he’s not who do we replace him with 

Of course I want him to be successful, I want all City managers to be successful. 

[joe jordans teeth]

1 hour ago, pillred said:

Mine is people who use loose on here when they mean lose.

I think that is sometimes just what comes out whilst typing and people can’t be bothered to change it however I can’t forgive their or there

[joe jordans teeth]

3 minutes ago, Ashtongreight said:

Of course I want him to be successful, I want all City managers to be successful. 

So we will all be happy if he is successful and moves on 

[Malago]

3 hours ago, Porto Red said:

Likewise.

It is a grey area and grammatically an argument can be made for either, but these things are properly determined by historical usage, and in British English it's always been "are" and not "is". The latter is basically an Americanism now, but as it seems to be increasingly used by younger people (such as our media team, at a guess!), no doubt it will become the usage in time. Disappointingly.

I’m no grammatical expert, but Bristol City is singular, therefore I believe “Bristol City is” is correct.    The team is confident of winning tomorrow.  The players are confident of winning tomorrow.

[PHILINFRANCE]

8 hours ago, Northern Red said:

"Bristol City is delighted to announce the signing of Marcus McGuane...."

This is an irrational hate of mine.

Along with 'batters' instead of batsmen!

[Redtucks]

11 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Along with 'batters' instead of batsmen!

Totally agree, sounds like something from the chip shop!

[chinapig]

25 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Along with 'batters' instead of batsmen!

The MCC changed the wording of the laws of the game a few years ago to replace batsman with batter, reflecting the growth of the women's game. So it is now the correct term.

Third man remains a bit of a problem though.

[Porto Red]

1 hour ago, joe jordans teeth said:

I think that is sometimes just what comes out whilst typing and people can’t be bothered to change it however I can’t forgive their or there

Never had you down as a fellow grammar nazi JJT, but welcome to the club

1 hour ago, Malago said:

I’m no grammatical expert, but Bristol City is singular, therefore I believe “Bristol City is” is correct.    The team is confident of winning tomorrow.  The players are confident of winning tomorrow.

Funny ain't it, I agree with "the team is" and "the players are" but for me it's "Bristol City are". It appears this whole thing is more nuanced than I thought.

[joe jordans teeth]

5 minutes ago, Porto Red said:

Never had you down as a fellow grammar nazi JJT, but welcome to the club

Funny ain't it, I agree with "the team is" and "the players are" but for me it's "Bristol City are". It appears this whole thing is more nuanced than I thought.

Far from it tbh I’m just a irritable git and the littlest things seem to wind me up

Edited August 23 by joe jordans teeth

[Ashtongreight]

1 hour ago, joe jordans teeth said:

So we will all be happy if he is successful and moves on 

Depends how successful, and when he leaves. I’d prefer if he’s successful that he stays, 

[joe jordans teeth]

2 minutes ago, Ashtongreight said:

Depends how successful, and when he leaves. I’d prefer if he’s successful that he stays, 

How successful do you want him to be and will that success have bigger clubs sniffing about 

[Rudolf Hucker]

4 hours ago, Porto Red said:

It is a grey area and grammatically an argument can be made for either, but these things are properly determined by historical usage, and in British spoken English it's always been "are" and not "is"

I think that this is the root cause of the issue. 

[Porto Red]

11 minutes ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

I think that this is the root cause of the issue. 

Well you're the expert on rooting 

[PHILINFRANCE]

59 minutes ago, chinapig said:

The MCC changed the wording of the laws of the game a few years ago to replace batsman with batter, reflecting the growth of the women's game. So it is now the correct term.

Third man remains a bit of a problem though.

Oh, absolutely, and I am not suggesting the new term is incorrect, just that it grates (with me).

For the record, whilst I am aware we now have female officials in football - and Well Done to them, they have my full support - I can't help myself shouting at the linesman to stick his bloody flag up, or to keep it down depending on the circumstances.

And, whilst we are on the subject, what on earth happened to Abysinnia?   

[Rudolf Hucker]

3 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

And, whilst we are on the subject, what on earth happened to Abysinnia?   

Still makes the heart grow fonder

[slartibartfast]

10 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Oh, absolutely, and I am not suggesting the new term is incorrect, just that it grates (with me).

For the record, whilst I am aware we now have female officials in football - and Well Done to them, they have my full support - I can't help myself shouting at the linesman to stick his bloody flag up, or to keep it down depending on the circumstances.

And, whilst we are on the subject, what on earth happened to Abysinnia?   

Abysinnia Henry.................one of the best episodes of MASH  !

[PHILINFRANCE]

5 hours ago, Porto Red said:

Likewise.

It is a grey area and grammatically an argument can be made for either, but these things are properly determined by historical usage, and in British English it's always been "are" and not "is". The latter is basically an Americanism now, but as it seems to be increasingly used by younger people (such as our media team, at a guess!), no doubt it will become the usage in time. Disappointingly.

Would you agree that City looked better when it played in an all red kit, or when the commentator shouts that City is really putting on the pressure now and is looking like scoring any time now?

Ah Yes, City is definitely looking stronger this season.

Technically correct or not - Please don't comment on this Mr Tinnion - it just doesn't sound right.

 

[Severn Beach Pigeon]

3 hours ago, pillred said:

Mine is people who use loose on here when they mean lose.

Can't expect perfection.

You win some, you loose some.

[PHILINFRANCE]

10 minutes ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

Still makes the heart grow fonder

I thought that was Absynthe.

[slartibartfast]

6 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

I thought that was Absynthe.

or Aberystwyth .

[PHILINFRANCE]

1 minute ago, slartibartfast said:

I thought that was Absynthe.

or Aberystwyth .

It could well be, but after a few glasses of The Green Fairy I tend to forget these things.

[slartibartfast]

Just now, PHILINFRANCE said:

It could well be, but after a few glasses of The Green Fairy I tend to forget these things.

I won't bore you with the full "shaggy dog story".....suffice it to say the punch line is Absinthe makes the Fart go Honda !     

[AppyDAZE]

1 hour ago, joe jordans teeth said:

Far from it tbh I’m just a irritable git and the littlest things seem to wind me up

AN irritable git.

[Porto Red]

25 minutes ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

Would you agree that City looked better when it played in an all red kit, or when the commentator shouts that City is really putting on the pressure now and is looking like scoring any time now?

Ah Yes, City is definitely looking stronger this season.

Technically correct or not - Please don't comment on this Mr Tinnion - it just doesn't sound right.

 

As always on such matters Phil, you and I are (is?) aligned 

15 minutes ago, slartibartfast said:

or Aberystwyth .

As someone who independently coined the phrase "absinthe makes the heart grow fonder" in a pub in Lampeter not a million miles from Aberystwyth in 1994, I still lay claim to this phrase (despite several later disprovals, the miserable sods)

[eardun]

3 hours ago, citywest30 said:

In his interview, it was mentioned he knows a few players from previous clubs. Anyone know who?

Oxford contingent - Sykes & Atkinson definitely. Possibly Dickie although he may have left for QPR just before he joined. 

[CliftonCliff]

9 hours ago, Porto Red said:

Never had you down as a fellow grammar nazi JJT, but welcome to the club

Funny ain't it, I agree with "the team is" and "the players are" but for me it's "Bristol City are". It appears this whole thing is more nuanced than I thought.

If this turns out to be the trickiest issue we have to struggle with this season, I think I can live with it…

[redsquirrel]

9 hours ago, PHILINFRANCE said:

It could well be, but after a few glasses of The Green Fairy I tend to forget these things.

does it make you blow bubbles when you burp?? my mrs prefers the blue anti-bacterial

[Red Billy]

Thought I’d take a look at the Oxford forum to get the fans view. All seem to rate him but the general opinion is he’s either great or awful. I have to say when you look at other clubs forums it reminds you how class OTIB is. Not littered with adverts and pop ups and very easy to use. Thanks from me

[Port Said Red]

3 minutes ago, Red Billy said:

Thought I’d take a look at the Oxford forum to get the fans view. All seem to rate him but the general opinion is he’s either great or awful. I have to say when you look at other clubs forums it reminds you how class OTIB is. Not littered with adverts and pop ups and very easy to use. Thanks from me

Yes it is and (puts on salesman's hat and persuasive voice) I believe the lack of adverts is due to the membership subscriptions, which we are both up to date with. Incredibly in this day and age, is still only £5 for the year, steadfastly ignoring the ravages of inflation across the years, and is available here.

 

https://www.otib.co.uk/subscriptions/

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

12 hours ago, Malago said:

I’m no grammatical expert, but Bristol City is singular, therefore I believe “Bristol City is” is correct.    The team is confident of winning tomorrow.  The players are confident of winning tomorrow.

I think you could argue that the term ‘Bristol City’ is collective and therefore ‘are’ is more appropriate.  However, if you refer to ‘the Bristol City team’, then it’s singular, so use ‘is’.

Don’t blame everything on the yanks.  It still irritates me that ‘soccer’, a 19th century English abbreviation of ‘Association Football’, is often regarded as an Americanisation.  However I will never EVER forgive them for ‘player in’ and ‘player out’!

[maxjak]

On 22/08/2024 at 12:18, ashton_fan said:

I suspect the main driver to this deal is financial gain as much as improving the squad, we'll see.

LM isn't interested in the finances of this deal,,    he is stats obsessive, with our side being constantly analysed and studied for options and improvements.   He has signed someone with an immaculate background, who he knows inside and out, re: his strengths and weaknesses, he is always forward planning, and obviously sees a need for this type of midfielder.  Finances?  Blah-Nances!  This is all about strengthening our midfield options.  In LM i trust!

[RedRock]

15 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

I think you could argue that the term ‘Bristol City’ is collective and therefore ‘are’ is more appropriate.  However, if you refer to ‘the Bristol City team’, then it’s singular, so use ‘is’.

Don’t blame everything on the yanks.  It still irritates me that ‘soccer’, a 19th century English abbreviation of ‘Association Football’, is often regarded as an Americanisation.  However I will never EVER forgive them for ‘player in’ and ‘player out’!

I’m with you on the ‘collective’ and ‘are’ argument for Bristol City … although  ‘the team is’ seems to fit, so not that straightforward. No wonder I failed my English Lit! 

The one that trips quite a few up is the complimentary and complementary. Saw even on the recent Villa Hospitality advert posted on here that they’d got it wrong. Easy check, does it relate to praise for me/i, or not. …learnt this rule the hard way via a public humiliation! 

[Fordy62]

14 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Yep. It's a grammatical technicality Vs a grammatical generality.

An impeccable choice of pet peeve.

Interesting one at work yesterday… a girl was talking about having watched the jousting at Warwick Castle to another girl who was going this weekend. 

She said, “Don’t forget to bring some flowers”. 

It didn’t sit right with me, but I couldn’t immediately work out why. 

It feels to me that you can only “bring” something to somewhere where someone already is, otherwise it’s “take”. 

Anyway, I’m boring myself.  

[Roger Red Hat]

1 minute ago, Fordy62 said:

Anyway, I’m boring myself.  

Not just yourself..........

[Port Said Red]

27 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

I think you could argue that the term ‘Bristol City’ is collective and therefore ‘are’ is more appropriate.  However, if you refer to ‘the Bristol City team’, then it’s singular, so use ‘is’.

Don’t blame everything on the yanks.  It still irritates me that ‘soccer’, a 19th century English abbreviation of ‘Association Football’, is often regarded as an Americanisation.  However I will never EVER forgive them for ‘player in’ and ‘player out’!

Lots of things they get blamed for in language, are probably more correct/original English. For example, Fall was the accepted term in Britain well before the first settlers went over, Autumn is an adopted French term. 

The origin of many things over there is often forgotten though, I remember having a discussion with a couple in a bar, who were shocked to find that we didn't celebrate "Thanksgiving" in the UK. Even after I pointed out the origins of the celebration, they still seemed nonplussed about it.

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, RedRock said:

I’m with you on the ‘collective’ and ‘are’ argument for Bristol City … although  ‘the team is’ seems to fit, so not that straightforward. No wonder I failed my English Lit! 

The one that trips quite a few up is the complimentary and complementary. Saw even on the recent Villa Hospitality advert posted on here that they’d got it wrong. Easy check, does it relate to praise for me/i, or not. …learnt this rule the hard way via a public humiliation! 

With all this grammar stuff, I’m gonna stick to pics and vizzes…you’ve all been warned!

[italian dave]

17 hours ago, Harry said:

As I posted last night, I’m not entirely sure why this particular signing seems to have sent a few posters to a place where they claim there is now “too much churn”. 
We have carried a pretty small squad over the past 2 years. Last year we basically had 21 senior first team players. 
 

We’ve lost 5 those in Conway, James, King, Weimann and Hickman. 
We’ve added 7 in Fally, Armstrong, Bird, Twine, McGuane, Earthy and Yu. 
Cornick is also transfer listed, so if he does attract interest then we are only 1 senior player up on last season. I wouldn’t say that’s huge or unnecessary churn. 
 

McGuane is clearly a 1 in 1 out situation that presented itself. 
Hickman (as was clear from day 1) is not a player that will fit the way Manning wants to play. McGuane (as evidenced by his form under Manning at Oxford) is someone who fits the required style. 
 

Whichever player anyone thinks is better is regardless. He simply fits better. So that, for me, is an upgrade. We have signed a player who the manager thinks (no, knows), can better play his way, and moved out someone he knows can’t. = upgrade. 

Sometimes, in amongst all the bickering and argument and hindsight and foresight and point scoring of a six page thread, there's just one post that says all that really needs saying.........

[Port Said Red]

12 hours ago, chinapig said:

The MCC changed the wording of the laws of the game a few years ago to replace batsman with batter, reflecting the growth of the women's game. So it is now the correct term.

Third man remains a bit of a problem though.

That depends whether you consider Third Man to be the name of the position on the pitch, or the player that fills that position.

If it's the former, you could easily say "she is in position at Third Man".

Edited August 24 by Port Said Red

[ExiledAjax]

54 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

Interesting one at work yesterday… a girl was talking about having watched the jousting at Warwick Castle to another girl who was going this weekend. 

She said, “Don’t forget to bring some flowers”. 

It didn’t sit right with me, but I couldn’t immediately work out why. 

It feels to me that you can only “bring” something to somewhere where someone already is, otherwise it’s “take”. 

Anyway, I’m boring myself.  

I'm honestly not sure I can bring myself to take this post seriously.

[TBW]

22 hours ago, Northern Red said:

"Bristol City is delighted to announce the signing of Marcus McGuane...."

This is an irrational hate of mine.

I'm on your side here.

Using is is very impersonal. I would tend to use is when a company is saying something, like, "Samsung is proud to announce the new S26".

For me, though, when a collection of people are doing something, as a team, which is what sports are all about, then it should be are, as in "we are all working towards a common goal, so we are proud to announce...", NOT "we is all working towards a common goal, so we is proud to announce..."

[spudski]

1 hour ago, Fordy62 said:

Interesting one at work yesterday… a girl was talking about having watched the jousting at Warwick Castle to another girl who was going this weekend. 

She said, “Don’t forget to bring some flowers”. 

It didn’t sit right with me, but I couldn’t immediately work out why. 

It feels to me that you can only “bring” something to somewhere where someone already is, otherwise it’s “take”. 

Anyway, I’m boring myself.  

You've now planted a seed as to why you need to take flowers to a jousting event?

[Porto Red]

1 hour ago, Fordy62 said:

Interesting one at work yesterday… a girl was talking about having watched the jousting at Warwick Castle to another girl who was going this weekend. 

She said, “Don’t forget to bring some flowers”. 

It didn’t sit right with me, but I couldn’t immediately work out why. 

It feels to me that you can only “bring” something to somewhere where someone already is, otherwise it’s “take”. 

Anyway, I’m boring myself.  

Quite so, bring it here, take it there, easy one 

1 hour ago, Port Said Red said:

Lots of things they get blamed for in language, are probably more correct/original English. For example, Fall was the accepted term in Britain well before the first settlers went over, Autumn is an adopted French term. 

The origin of many things over there is often forgotten though, I remember having a discussion with a couple in a bar, who were shocked to find that we didn't celebrate "Thanksgiving" in the UK. Even after I pointed out the origins of the celebration, they still seemed nonplussed about it.

Also "sidewalk" I believe