Choi, Au Yeung, or the Admins - who's the target? | Page 4 | Vital Football

Choi, Au Yeung, or the Admins - who's the target?

Hampton said:
Think your being a little unbalanced in your approach here Moonay
Can't have it one way and not the other.
Anyrode sure Lisas statement will clear it all up one way or the other 😁
Click to expand...

No it is you, as always, who is unbalanced, so it's OK in some instances to make a statement that has no basis, without any prove whatsoever and its up to someone else to prove the opposite but, yet you don't have to disprove the allegations he has leveled against you, why ?
 
Hampton, the way it works is that if someone makes an allegation then they should be able to show the evidence to back it up. Otherwise it is just a false allegation. As shown by Moonay people can come out with any old crap and wait to be proved wrong. But it doesn't mean they are right.

If Bickymon is so convinced that Lisa Nandy was In cahoots with Lenegan and wanted him to take over it shouldn't be too hard to prove unless it really is a false statement.
 
Hampton said:
Think your being a little unbalanced in your approach here Moonay
Can't have it one way and not the other.
Anyrode sure Lisas statement will clear it all up one way or the other 😁
Click to expand...
Hampton, I think you know that I only posted that stuff to illustrate a point.

LMB and Coddenchips are both right though. In any scenario, it should be the one making an allegation, or assertion to offer the evidence to back up their claim. To suggest that the accused, or the defenders of the accused should prove their innocence is just daft.

There's no doubt that initially, she hoped for a local solution .... as did most of us. After all, it's been posted on here that foreigners aren't to be trusted ... any of them, and to many Wiganers, someone from further south of Crewe can be classed as a foreigner !

I'm not sure which way you're accusing me of wanting it ... I just think that if someone's going to come in for some criticism of some kind, then there should be some reasonable justification for it, that's all.

By the way, I don't think you are any of those things ... but what do I know?
;)
 
moonay said:
Hampton, I think you know that I only posted that stuff to illustrate a point.

LMB and Coddenchips are both right though. In any scenario, it should be the one making an allegation, or assertion to offer the evidence to back up their claim. To suggest that the accused, or the defenders of the accused should prove their innocence is just daft.

There's no doubt that initially, she hoped for a local solution .... as did most of us. After all, it's been posted on here that foreigners aren't to be trusted ... any of them, and to many Wiganers, someone from further south of Crewe can be classed as a foreigner !

I'm not sure which way you're accusing me of wanting it ... I just think that if someone's going to come in for some criticism of some kind, then there should be some reasonable justification for it, that's all.

By the way, I don't think you are any of those things ... but what do I know?
;)
Click to expand...
I don't actually disagree Moonay - and to confirm I am none of thise things 😉.
Let's not forget though we are on a forum not in front of judge Rinder.
Those who consistently howl prove it / show me the evidence really need to comprehend this and understand that challenge can be made either way.
If folk believe Nandy has done right by the club fair enough, if others think the opposite again fair enough.
As I said the much anticipated parliamentary statement when or if it happens will clear it all up. 😁
 
Coddenchips said:
Hampton, the way it works is that if someone makes an allegation then they should be able to show the evidence to back it up. Otherwise it is just a false allegation. As shown by Moonay people can come out with any old crap and wait to be proved wrong. But it doesn't mean they are right.

If Bickymon is so convinced that Lisa Nandy was In cahoots with Lenegan and wanted him to take over it shouldn't be too hard to prove unless it really is a false statement.
Click to expand...
Agreed and on the other side of the coin those who vehemently deny it should also prove it when requsted on the same basis - no ?
 
loudmouthblue said:
No it is you, as always, who is unbalanced, so it's OK in some instances to make a statement that has no basis, without any prove whatsoever and its up to someone else to prove the opposite but, yet you don't have to disprove the allegations he has leveled against you, why ?
Click to expand...
What you mean like a deal done when it wasn't 🤫
 
Hampton said:
Agreed and on the other side of the coin those who vehemently deny it should also prove it when requsted on the same basis - no ?
Click to expand...

No. Not at all. The onus has to be on someone making an accusation to provide evidence. If people have no proof or evidence then they shouldn't make the claim.
 
Coddenchips said:
No. Not at all. The onus has to be on someone making an accusation to provide evidence. If people have no proof or evidence then they shouldn't make the claim.
Click to expand...
I will refer you to the point in my response to Moonay
Its a forum FFS for rumours and opinions not crown court.
If you had to present evidence to back up owt said on here it would be a very empty place
 
Hampton said:
Agreed and on the other side of the coin those who vehemently deny it should also prove it when requsted on the same basis - no ?
Click to expand...

Is it not enough to say that they deny (or rather, can't support) the allegation because they haven't seen any evidence of it ?
 
Hampton said:
I will refer you to the point in my response to Moonay
Its a forum FFS for rumours and opinions not crown court.
If you had to present evidence to back up owt said on here it would be a very empty place
Click to expand...

You're describing an opinion there Hampton. No more.
;)
 
Hampton said:
What you mean like a deal done when it wasn't 🤫
Click to expand...

It was a done deal a week before announced, if you are still acting like the idiot you are and referring to the Frampton deal, I never said it was a done deal, I said their bid had been accepted, and it had.
 
Hampton said:
I will refer you to the point in my response to Moonay
Its a forum FFS for rumours and opinions not crown court.
If you had to present evidence to back up owt said on here it would be a very empty place
Click to expand...

Totally agree. It's a forum for opinions. But saying Nandy was trying to work with Lenegan to buy the club isn't an opinion. It's an accusation. Totally different thing and accusation should be able to be backed up.
 
Ps. you have not given us any proof that you are not any of the things moonay accused you of, are we we to assume that he is right ?
 
Last edited:
loudmouthblue said:
It was a done deal a week before announced, if you are still acting like the idiot you are and referring to the Frampton deal, I never said it was a done deal, I said their bid had been accepted, and it had.
Click to expand...
Re Frampton - You did, you know it 😁
Interesting you always resort to personal abuse as a response when on dodgy ground 🤔
Might phase some folk - others not so much.
Don't chuck stones from a greenhouse eh !
 
Hampton said:
Re Frampton - You did, you know it 😁
Interesting you always resort to personal abuse as a response when on dodgy ground 🤔
Might phase some folk - others not so much.
Don't chuck stones from a greenhouse eh !
Click to expand...
Is this enough proof for you

Screenshot_20210403-170430_Chrome.jpg
 
Is that not your post where you said,

" you posted bid accepted"

Now can you prove what moonay said about you is false.
 
loudmouthblue said:
Is that not your post where you said,

" you posted bid accepted"

Now can you prove what moonay said about you is false.
Click to expand...
Semantics as usual and you are clearly squirming here 😂 - only 2 bids were "accepted" not "acceptable" and you posted bid accepted (it wasn't) for once in your life accept you are wrong and move on.
As for Moonays claims - he clearly as stated he was not being serious - just do one.
On the other hand you have no need to prove you are what your self proclaimed user name states, or an abusive, politically toadying psudeo bully as you demonstrate these attributes regularly on here for all to see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.