Re: The Hock Influence
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:38 pm
Think the word you are both looking for is "naive"

A site for fans of Wigan Warriors RLFC. News, views, statistics, profiles and more all contributed by supporters of Wigan RL.
https://www.wiganwarriorsfans.com/
weststand-rich wrote:I need a spullchocker Josie.
To be fair WR I completely understand what your saying, but the point of the original thread or debate was simply about Hock and his influence on the team and how the rest of the lads perceived him and like I have already said from the game Saturday it looks like they all (well at least the other 16 on duty) had nothing but open arms for him, which at the end of the day can only be good for WIGAN WARRIORS and that is all that matters to us all.weststand-rich wrote:I need a spullchocker Josie.
To be fair to the players and Hocky they all did seem genuinely pleased when he came on the pitch, so I do actually believe the players sentiments here. But I know that when he was banned a specific player was not impressed. He thought Hock had let them all down, dropped them in the sh*te at a key point in the season and was trouble. Do you read, or are you likely to read a player from our team making a quoted comment like that? No. Because it deviates from the clubs position which is to concede and move on.
What aggrevates me beyond belief is the constant ghost-written nothingness that gets spouted out as press releses from sports clubs. Wigan are no worse than any other club, but the bland vanilla, fencesitting of media-trained players hitting straight bats gets me down. Watch an end of match interview? Find one without the phrases:
- The lads worked hard in training all week
- We dug deep
- We showed a lot of character
- (For aussies) I'm just loving my footie at the minute.
Take this from Man Utd when Wayne Rooney told the TV cameras to F off:
Speaking to ManUtd.com, Wayne said: "I want to apologise for any offence that may have been caused by my goal celebration, especially to any parents or children that were watching.
"Emotions were running high and on reflection my heat of the moment reaction was inappropriate, it was not aimed at anyone in particular."
It's meaningless. He doesn't speak like that, doesn't have the vocabulary and was obviuously written by someone in the PR office. He can barely read half of it let alone write any of it.![]()
Oi behave Josie, I know how to spell naive and that is why I spelt it the same as WR, with the smiley after it but I know you won't believe that!!josie andrews wrote:Think the word you are both looking for is "naive"![]()
If you're going to nitpick, allow me to join in.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Oi behave Josie, I know how to spell naive and that is why I spelt it the same as WR, with the smiley after it but I know you won't believe that!!josie andrews wrote:Think the word you are both looking for is "naive"![]()
And to jump to the defence of WR, I think you made a mistake on this forum not so long back hmmmmmmm? Lol!!
Oooooooooh get you KW!Kittwazzer wrote:If you're going to nitpick, allow me to join in.TrueBlueWarrior wrote:Oi behave Josie, I know how to spell naive and that is why I spelt it the same as WR, with the smiley after it but I know you won't believe that!!josie andrews wrote:Think the word you are both looking for is "naive"![]()
And to jump to the defence of WR, I think you made a mistake on this forum not so long back hmmmmmmm? Lol!!
The correct spelling is actually naïve (with dieresis over the "i" to indicate separate vowel pronunciation)!![]()
Well I hadn't got diaeresis & as we are not in France (thank God) I don't think it actually mattersTrueBlueWarrior wrote:Oooooooooh get you KW!Kittwazzer wrote:If you're going to nitpick, allow me to join in.TrueBlueWarrior wrote: Oi behave Josie, I know how to spell naive and that is why I spelt it the same as WR, with the smiley after it but I know you won't believe that!!
And to jump to the defence of WR, I think you made a mistake on this forum not so long back hmmmmmmm? Lol!!
The correct spelling is actually naïve (with dieresis over the "i" to indicate separate vowel pronunciation)!![]()