Football: chock full of liars?

[rangersbitch]

Various QPR-related matters have given me cause to wonder whether it's ever a good idea to take at face value anything said by anyone connected with football. Cue a long piece that will doubtless be considered a rant. So, that's fair warning, right? You may well not like this damn piece:

http://thisismyengland.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/football-trust-no-one.html

[QPRDave]

Christ ........war & peace is shorter......can't be bothered.....could you outline the main grumbles?

[Buffalo]

It basically says that you can't really trust anything that the clubs or the press say so we may as well just concentrate on the 90 minutes of football and ignore the rest.

Truly inciteful and my missus could have used fewer words frankly.

[vblockranger]

It basically says that you can't really trust anything that the clubs or the press say so we may as well just concentrate on the 90 minutes of football and ignore the rest.

Truly inciteful and my missus could have used fewer words frankly.

the blogger need not quit their day job :-)

[QPRDave]

It basically says that you can't really trust anything that the clubs or the press say so we may as well just concentrate on the 90 minutes of football and ignore the rest.

Truly inciteful and my missus could have used fewer words frankly.

Cheers Buffalo

[rangersbitch]

the blogger need not quit their day job :-)

No danger of that all. My wife and son both have expensive tastes.

[Gipper]

It may be long winded but welcome to modern football and the EPL?

[dsqpr]

Unfortunately, the world is chock full of liars, but that doesn't mean that everybody is a liar. The past will tell you who you can believe.

[W12hoops]

Various QPR-related matters have given me cause to wonder whether it's ever a good idea to take at face value anything said by anyone connected with football. Cue a long piece that will doubtless be considered a rant. So, that's fair warning, right? You may well not like this damn piece:

http://thisismyengland.blogspot.co.u...st-no-one.html

Excellent.

Glad I can inspire you mate. But I am still wondering about how you were able to search for tweets mentioning Tony Fernandes back in January? I gave it a try yesterday and when I searched for 'all' tweets it took me 1 minute to get to the 12h mark. I am doubtful that you scrolled until you found the tweets from january..

[rodman]

I have always believed there are two types of people in this World - Liars and w@ n kers.

And anybody who says they dont w@ nk is a Liar !!

[Kirill]

I have always believed there are two types of people in this World - Liars and w@ n kers.

And anybody who says they dont w@ nk is a Liar !!

And if I say that I don't lie?
I probably shouldn't have asked this.

[rangersbitch]

Excellent.

Glad I can inspire you mate. But I am still wondering about how you were able to search for tweets mentioning Tony Fernandes back in January? I gave it a try yesterday and when I searched for 'all' tweets it took me 1 minute to get to the 12h mark. I am doubtful that you scrolled until you found the tweets from january..

No, I searched at the time, i.e, on the day concerned (Jan 28th, I think) and found nothing too strong. I also asked around that day. Nobody else seemed to have found anything truly objectionable.

[W12hoops]

No, I searched at the time, i.e, on the day concerned (Jan 28th, I think) and found nothing too strong. I also asked around that day. Nobody else seemed to have found anything truly objectionable.

How did you manage to do that? tried the advanced search on twitter and found no search tool of such kind. Basically my memory against your twitter feed atm.

[rangersbitch]

How did you manage to do that? tried the advanced search on twitter and found no search tool of such kind. Basically my memory against your twitter feed atm.

At any given moment, if you search on someone's Twitter account name minus the "@" (in this case @tonyfernandes) you will see a stream of recent tweets in which other uses have tweeted directly to that person. Here are the first few results from doing that a few minutes ago today.

FERNANDES03_zpse8eb6a1a.jpg

When I read Fernandes's tweet about "fans attacking" him, I ran that search and genuinely saw nothing which you could really call an attack. I didn't screen cap and save the results so you either take my word for it or choose not to believe me. Again, I did also ask if anyone else had seen any "attacks" and a number of people replied that they had not. Nobody said they had. I have no reason to lie about any of this.

[W12hoops]

At any given moment, if you search on someone's Twitter account name minus the "@" (in this case @tonyfernandes) you will see a stream of recent tweets in which other uses have tweeted directly to that person. Here are the first few results from doing that a few minutes ago today.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1785[/ATTACH]

When I read Fernandes's tweet about "fans attacking" him, I ran that search and genuinely saw nothing which you could really call an attack. I didn't screen cap and save the results so you either take my word for it or choose not to believe me. Again, I did also ask if anyone else had seen any "attacks" and a number of people replied that they had not. Nobody said they had. I have no reason to lie about any of this.

Yeah, I tried the exact same thing and you know with 200k+ followers he's getting a fair share of mentions a day. So I, as mentioned before, scrolled for a while and realised that I had only scrolled 12 hours back or so. I am not stating that you're lying, why would you do that? I don't consider this as a beef, just a disagreement about the definition of the phrase 'attack'.

About the tweets once again, I figured you had only searched for the 'top' results for tweets mentioning tony fernandes. And by doing that, you won't find any 'attacks'.