ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on Forums.Football Web


Super proud sponsors of Alex Revell IDST

Return to front page

Newest article: Re: Day 2 by WASPToday 17:08Today at 17:08:45view thread

Oldest article: Boro Fives Table by Sev26/12/2020 17:27Sat Dec 26 17:27:23 2020view thread


Next thread: University Questionnaires for Stevenage FC fans by Ed House16/2 12:44Tue Feb 16 12:44:22 2021view thread


By AgentEves22/2 21:01Mon Feb 22 21:01:28 2021In response to WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES

Views: 347

Using the term 'attacking defender' for a centre back is made up. Yes, I'm being pedantic, but there is no such thing as an attacking defender, unless you're talking about a full back. It's like how Americans call full backs 'outside backs'. It isn't a thing. It's made up.

So I'll accept I'm being pedantic, about that. And I'll accept that being pedantic is incredibly annoying, so I'll stop.

That said, I attempted to clarify when they first brought it up by saying "an attacking defender at centre back?" - which was perfectly reasonable. Given some of the posts on here, it makes you question whether the person actually watched the game. You see Joe Martin comes on, you might assume he is coming on at left back, and since he is good going forward and has a good cross, you may assume that it is an attacking substitution if he is coming on at full back. Fairly reasonable assumption, if you didn't watch the game. I can also tell from a lot of people's posts that they don't actually see the reality of what is going on. They see Joe Martin coming on, and just assume he's playing at left back, and don't watch the game closely enough to realise that he isn't.

So, like I say, I clarified how you bring on an attacking defender at centre back. I got no reply, other than from Taz.

I'm just annoyed by the fact that people are making arguments that proves my point (that Prosser's passing was shit) and trying to say that it means I was wrong. But I should care less, since it's only the internet, and there's enough people on here that I enjoy chatting with, so I'll just concentrate on chatting to them. I think I'm just fed up of all the countless times on here where people have made out I have no idea what I'm talking about for thinking the likes of Dale Gorman are shit, but never accepting that I am often right. The current examples are Coker and Norris. There's been countless before, and no doubt there will be countless in the future.

EDIT: P.S. I appreciate you calling me out on my bullshit for being pedantic, to be honest. It's an annoying trait and I should do it less, you're right.

Edited by AgentEves at 21:02:55 on 22nd February 2021
Edited by AgentEves at 21:03:10 on 22nd February 2021

reply to this article | return to the front page

Next article in this thread: Re: WARNING: DO NOT READ IF NOT AGENTEVES by Freemo23/2 10:03Tue Feb 23 10:03:52 2021

Previous thread: Newport by Copeysaurus21/2 21:04Sun Feb 21 21:04:45 2021view thread