Gerrard - we'll pay for the lost points later!

[Vermilion]

Well Gerrard went and started something here didn't he, why can't he keep his big gob shut...

[Neil Young]

But surely beating United and Chelsea (arguably worth 12pts if you believe Sky) was brilliant - realists view, not positive.

I think the problem is that the idea of 'realism' is ultimately subjective. You qualify as a realist to yourself as your view coincides with your own view of reality (somewhat unsurprisingly). The fact that you value this as somehow superior to other people's world view is, I believe, what Neil is objecting to.

Would you be so annoyed/defensive if the term pessimist was used in the place of negative?

Exactly.

[Woobus]

Definition of a realist: Realists view the world in terms of what is (ie. Dropping 6 points at home against relegation fodder is ****...that's the realist view, not negative)

That is using negative points to try and sound like a realist. The reality is we are top of the league and if continue to get the same amount of points as United and Chelsea then we will finish above them.

[rage]

come on we really should have beat stoke and fulham at home. anyone who thinks different is a head in the sandist

[Woobus]

come on we really should have beat stoke and fulham at home. anyone who thinks different is a head in the sandist

Who is saying we shouldnt have beat them?

[Reece]

Who is saying we shouldnt have beat them?

Beat me to it.

[bobbyfallon]

fact of the matter is that if we match the teams in and around us for the rest of the year and only drop points when they do we win the league

simple really, dont know what you girls are argueing about

[Guest]

come on we really should have beat stoke and fulham at home. anyone who thinks different is a head in the sandist

yeah

[rage]

Who is saying we shouldnt have beat them?

well its not us realists

[JohnDoe]

He says all those things like the big man he is and then puts out another half arsed performance on the pitch.

Time for him to step up.

[Guest]

He says all those things like the big man he is and then puts out another half arsed performance on the pitch.

Time for him to step up.

Eh. Do'h.

[Craig_H]

I'm pretty sure that Neil has agreed that we have had a tendency to drop points at home, but is saying this doesn't necessarily mean that we will continue to do so. Unless I've read his posts wrong

I'd be shocked if at least one or two more ****e sides dont take a point from anfield this season.

Nobody can know for sure obviously mate, but all i was talking about was probabilities. I think it's fairly likely but Neil doesnt seem to think it's likely at all (he can correct me if i'm mistaken there) and that's fine if he thinks it's very unlikely to happen. All i was asking for was his reasons for thinking that (if he does indeed think that), so that maybe i could find something in his reasoning to make me feel more confident that Anfield will turn into a fortress. Unless i've missed it, i dont think he's answered that, but fair play.

To Neil - apologies for coming across in an arsey way, i wasnt meaning to.

I perceived your posts to mean that you dont think we're likely to drop silly home points too often this season, and i was keen to hear what you were basing that on, that's all.

Apologies again.

[Craig_H]

But surely beating United and Chelsea (arguably worth 12pts if you believe Sky) was brilliant - realists view, not positive.

I think the problem is that the idea of 'realism' is ultimately subjective. You qualify as a realist to yourself as your view coincides with your own view of reality (somewhat unsurprisingly). The fact that you value this as somehow superior to other people's world view is, I believe, what Neil is objecting to.

Would you be so annoyed/defensive if the term pessimist was used in the place of negative?

Just out of curiosity mate, regardless of who views themselves as what, do you personally think it's realistic for us to be beating the likes of Fulham, Stoke and West Ham at Anfield? Or do you feel that us expecting ourselves to win those games is taking a positive outlook?

I'm genuinely unsure as to how you conclude that we've valued our views as being 'superior', because we feel it's realistic to expect to win those kind of home games, it certainly wasnt a conscious intention. If anyone feels i've elavated myself to a 'superior' position and treated them or their views as inferior to mine, i offer sincere apologies.

[Craig_H]

Eh. Do'h.

Great ammunition for you, that last goal

In truth mate, Gerrard was poor and sloppy today, much like many of his team mates. Too many wayward passes but he wasnt alone, especially in the first half. He's at the stage where the kind of mistakes that every human can make, arent expected of him. Which is a credit to how superhuman he's seemed over the years.

[dww]

Just out of curiosity mate, regardless of who views themselves as what, do you personally think it's realistic for us to be beating the likes of Fulham, Stoke and West Ham at Anfield? Or do you feel that us expecting ourselves to win those games is taking a positive outlook?

I'm genuinely unsure as to how you conclude that we've valued our views as being 'superior', because we feel it's realistic to expect to win those kind of home games, it certainly wasnt a conscious intention. If anyone feels i've elavated myself to a 'superior' position and treated them or their views as inferior to mine, i offer sincere apologies.

I never said it was unrealistic for us to win any individual game. The problem comes when someone says that their extrapolation from the current evidence is 'realistic' as opposed to everyone elses. I feel that a number of different predictions can reasonable be made from the same data (not to mention that people select the data from which to extrapolate). What riles me (and it would appear Neil) is that people who take the more pessimistic end of these reasonable models say that they are being 'realistic' as opposed to others who are positive. Drawing this dichotomy is in the eyes of myself (and I would suggest Neil) asserting that those who disagree are being 'unrealistic' which I would suggest is slightly arrogant and/or patronising in context.

You only became embroiled in this argument as you took Sarbs side I suspect.

To answer your question it is obviously reasonable to expect us to beat those teams. However it is not reasonable to expect us to win all our home games against midtable teams or that a run of bad form at home should be the sole data taken in to assess our chances in the future.