Well then you aren't reading all my posts. I have made numerous comments about positives regarding the Bath match, about individuals players, the team as a whole and coaching. That you choose to only reply to my less positive comments is not a reflection of my mentality.Cagey Tiger wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 4:08 pmThe problem I have with what you say is that you come across as the glass is totally empty when we lose. Irrespective of what the performance was like. At times it has been, but recently there have been things which others on here see as positives and steps on the road to getting wins. In other words the glass is now maybe one third full. And if we keep improving it could soon be half full/empty. But no. A loss is a loss. End of. Nothing good to take from it. And anyone who thinks there is, is...Tiglon wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:48 pmI'm not saying they are. Others are saying they should, I'm saying they should not.
I hope that helps.
I'm not saying the players should swear at the referee either.
When the question is "is the glass half full or half empty?" The answer can be both or neither. It can't be one but not the other.
Teams don't go from zero to hero in one step. Some never make it, but the ones that do, do it in stages.
Which brings me on to this post...
..again, if you think I only focus on the negative then you haven't read a lot of my posts.ay2oh wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 3:07 pmI don’t think you are quite grasping the meaning of half full/half empty. Let’s phrase it another way. On a scale of 1 to 10 with 1 being negative and 10 being positive where would you place yourself. Looking at the majority of your. Posts I would say 3.Tiglon wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:48 pmI'm not saying they are. Others are saying they should, I'm saying they should not.
I hope that helps.
I'm not saying the players should swear at the referee either.
When the question is "is the glass half full or half empty?" The answer can be both or neither. It can't be one but not the other.
We are all fans on here and we all want the team to do well but certain posters seem to only focus on the negative aspects of the team and take great joy in criticising those of us that can see small shoots of improvement
You have also misunderstood my point about the glass. Literally speaking, if the glass is half full it must also be half empty. This is pretty simple, but there's a deeper meaning. If you choose one or the other on a philosophical level then you are ignoring half the story and your view will be unbalanced.
My negative posts are a response to the posts which ignore the negatives and therefore would benefit from them being added. If you tell me Tigers are completely awful and are doomed to failure, I will tell you 5 reasons why they are not awful and may have a bright future. If you tell me Tigers are brilliant and assured of being back at the top of the game in the near future, I will tell you 5 reasons why they are not brilliant and may not have a bright future. Why? Because there are two sides to every story and too many members of this forum only ever see one, whether it be the positive or negative - the discussion needs balance. If the discussion is all "Tigers are brilliant" and I post "Tigers a brilliant" what have I added? Nothing. If I post "Tigers are not entirely brilliant and this is the reason why" what have I added? Balance.
I realise I'm probably not explaining it very well, and even if I am it will probably be ignored regardless and the response will be something about my glass, but it's worth a try.