pants v selwyn: a brief case note

selwyn, as is well known, takes a gloomy view of the prospects of Norwich City Football Club. He is less than impressed by its executive management, by its footballing management and by the current playing staff. he regualrly bemoans these failings in language which can only be described as colourful and is sometimes extreme. selwyn adheres to the belief that many of his fellow fans do not make sufficient use of their critical faculties and are far too inclined to be passive in the face of what he himself sees as potential catastrophe.

pants does not appreciate selwyn's contribution to the communal life of this board. He is of the view that selwyn's outlook is perpetually and unnecessarily negative, that his remarks about the club and his fellow supporters are uncalled for, and that selwyn should exercise more restraint in his postings. He believes that selwyn should show a more balanced outlook.

That is the essence of the disagreement between them, and as usual there is some truth on both sides.

Unfortunately, this relatively simple disagreement on philosophical outlook has descended into one of those boundary disputes between neighbours which occasionally enliven the tabloid press. Thus neither see a post by the other without feeling the urge to post something critical or insulting back, just as Mrs Jones at number 84 will hurl insults at Mr Smith at number 86 because he planted a hedge which shades her roses. It is not wise to try to unpick the minutiae of their rows, because to do so would be to descend into a maelstrom of "but he said ... but that was because he said ... I never said that" besides which the Arab/Isreali conflict would look like solving the mysteries of Spot Goes to the Park.

Posted By: Old Git, Nov 10, 17:52:04