Yes it is funny, because yours is a "sweeping statement."
The point in question is that what I said about the licence fee being effectively pay per view. For someone to come up with the exact definition of Pay per View, when it was perfectly obvious what I meant, was just being argumentative, for the sake of it.
Hence my comment "semantics."
But that's DS for you.
Thank you for coming straight back and providing a perfect example of what I was talking about.
That annoyed me too, they have, what, 3 pundits in the studio? (including Lineker), thats no more than MOTD.
Hmm.. The air fairs, hotel bills, meals out, incidental expenses etc., for "the cast and crew" would be "a bit more," than for MOD.
All that rabbit could be done from the plush new studios in Salford. Not one specially built or hired exclusively for a football competition.
I'll accept commentators actually there probably are necessary.
I record Match of the Day to avoid the pointless rabbit. With the World Cup, I just watch some matches avoid all the build up and make us a cup of tea at half time.
My point in saying BBC was effectively "pay per view" (which is a fact)..
No it's not; by any definition.
is because you have to pay for every programme you watch (and a lot more you don't). It's quite a simple explanation, but you wanted to get into semantics looking for a dictionary definition. Why?
Because if we're going to discuss stuff, I prefer facts to nonsense.
I mentioned the element of advertising costs in goods and services, to stop you coming back at me saying "you do!" when I said we don't have to pay for the commercial channels. In that respect I seem to have been successful.
Because it's a fact, which the BBC being "effectively PPV" isn't.
"Facts?"
Like the fact that you couldn't tell Saturday from Sunday?
ONCE! ONE time. I assume you're going to be mentioning that ONE SMALL THING for the next year or so? Because you've nothing else to say about the facts I post.
ONCE! ONE time. I assume you're going to be mentioning that ONE SMALL THING for the next year or so? Because you've nothing else to say about the facts I post.
More lies. I have never called you names.
Hmm..
You suggested I was an idiot on another thread to which you're putting in your daily two penn'oth.
Your problem is that you get so worked up over posts on a message board, you forget half of what you've said.
Stop going on about "facts" they're mostly just your interpretation of situations which can't be proved either way.
Can I remind you of your post #307, where you flounced off with a final "Thread finished with."
Then within twenty-four hours you were back again, copying, pasting and nit-picking?
So "not a man of your word," then. eh?
If only you were...
Err.. What does that make you?
What did you call me yesterday?
Comments
Well, I'm glad you've finally got your head around it and maybe you can now move away from pointless nit-pickng.
But I won't be holding my breath.
Hmm.. The air fairs, hotel bills, meals out, incidental expenses etc., for "the cast and crew" would be "a bit more," than for MOD.
All that rabbit could be done from the plush new studios in Salford. Not one specially built or hired exclusively for a football competition.
I'll accept commentators actually there probably are necessary.
I record Match of the Day to avoid the pointless rabbit. With the World Cup, I just watch some matches avoid all the build up and make us a cup of tea at half time.
Quotes being mixed up on again on here
It was actually me who told the poster it was back in September 😄[/QUOTE]
And I was replying to it
No it's not; by any definition.
Because if we're going to discuss stuff, I prefer facts to nonsense.
Because it's a fact, which the BBC being "effectively PPV" isn't.
Oh dear!
You don't half go on don't you?
What day of the week is it?
You weren't too sure last week.
"Facts?"
Like the fact that you couldn't tell Saturday from Sunday?
I'm too polite to say what you are.
How many times do have to say "we ain't gonna discuss stuff?"
and you're always reduced to name calling.
More lies. I have never called you names.
Hmm..
You suggested I was an idiot on another thread to which you're putting in your daily two penn'oth.
Your problem is that you get so worked up over posts on a message board, you forget half of what you've said.
Stop going on about "facts" they're mostly just your interpretation of situations which can't be proved either way.
Can I remind you of your post #307, where you flounced off with a final "Thread finished with."
Then within twenty-four hours you were back again, copying, pasting and nit-picking?
So "not a man of your word," then. eh?
If only you were...
Err.. What does that make you?
What did you call me yesterday?
Oh yes! "A hypocrite."
As I said, you just make me smile.
Not usually.
Nope. When I state facts they're facts.
Yeah. But then you wouldn't drop it and just kept on posting nonsense.
Sounded like an idiot? What a lame excuse, as usual, for your bad manners.
.
So you are a hypocrite, you haven't denied it. You can't really can you?
Now let it go, the programmes finished and no one is interested.
You wouldn't think so would you?
I thought my, ' covered that.
How many times do I have to tell him to move on, instead of constantly nit-picking?
AND ANY BETS WE WILL ALL CHECK BACK LATER TO SEE IF THEY ARE BOTH STILL BITCHING !😁