TWar

One game. OK. That's form I guess.

Broja was definitely not on form in January and February when we were flying. He scored like 2 goals.

Obviously doesn't help, but doesn't explain him misplacing so many passes, his stupid attempt to dribble, his weak closing etc.

Maybe because we conceded 4 goals in the opening 30 mins? Not the best situation for a striker.

Salisus worst game. Our best cb but today might be the worst cb display I've seen all season. How is this the same guy who looks so incredible against city?

It's not an easy cop out, they were competing with the likes of Watford, Norwich, and Burnley for the relegation spot and they spent more in one january window than either of those teams likely have in their last 10 windows, spending 30m to specifically weaken one of those teams. Sorry for not giving them a round of applause for pulling away from trouble. Trippier was their best playier when he played, and Bruno has been playing a lot recently, scoring against us. Also, what's this about reddit? It's just a different forum for discussion, why does it bother you?

Howe? No I think they spent the most money in europe in January and have performed accordingly. Same point of view I had last time it was discussed, and at that point they hadn't lost to Everton or been battered by spurs so the point is more relevant now than it was then... If you are talking about Broja, he's had a good first season for a young player. Not the £40m+, CL certainty which some made him out to be, so I stand by he is overrated, but he's been pretty good. Still would be happy to sign him.

I hate neither, don't be childish.

Weird to pick out Wood and Burn and not Trippier and Bruno who were both linked to champions league sides before Newcastle got them.

Yeah I don't want him that much anymore, has had a dire season. Henderson should be our focus imo.

You used the sun as an example. Feel free to sub in infowars or breitbart or your fake news outlet of choice.

If you are bored then why respond?

All media biased, some inaccurate. Read accurate, regardless of bias, come to conclusions based on range of accurate media. Argue online with people who parrot inaccurate media or worse, in this case, Russian propaganda. Regardless of how good they are at football.

I use the reliability of outlets as a shortcut to fact checking. Also if an outlet is big enough I assume any glaring falsehoods would be widely called out enough that I would have seen it, like what happens to the sun pretty often. I have no interest in googling it btw, BLM rallies from ages ago aren't something I'm really that bothered about. Plus it would raise further questions regarding the reliability of the police etc.

Sorry bud, I am with most. Just don't particularly respect you. On basically every matter you are either pretty stupid or pretty contrarian, you don't argue in good faith, and honestly I still struggle to work out if you are actually as dim as you present yourself as or if you play it up as a means of trolling, which is arguably more embarrassing. I stopped engaging with you a while back, but then I realised I don't have to respect you to enjoy dismantling your piss poor views, so I do that occassionally, usually on the train. It does have a shelf life though, normally when you bring out the reaction gifs and I get embarrassed, and this is quickly reaching that territory yet again.

I'd need sources to exactly which articles you are referring to as well as aforementioned met numbers. Couldn't comment on articles you are half describing. Fact checking is usually a long process and requires actually reading the articles in question.

And the emojis too. You truly are a timecapsule to a different era. It would be endearing if your politics and media literacy weren't also so out of date.

The reaction gifs are back! And it immediately feels like 2004 all over again.

Amusing Turkish enjoyed this comment, given Murdoch owns the sun.

Who were the other outlets, did either use crime statistics to back up their argument, did either define what they ment by "largely" peaceful or "mass" arrests? Arrests are recorded so should be pretty easy to decide how many happened. It's then up to you decide if those are high or not in your opinion. The job of the outlets is not to outright lie about the numbers, the BBC wouldn't do so as it would be easily fact checked and they'd be hung out to dry, sites like infowars, not so much.

I never said anything close to that. I'm amazed you got that from what I said. The other two things aren't mutually exclusive, consume a wide range of reliable sources. Don't consume bollocks to widen the range.

Yes, it is your personal choice who you believe. If you choose to believe a magic 8 ball, a dream you once had, or worse the sun newspaper it is other people's person choice to dismiss you as a fool. MLT found this by not believing "the media" and retweeting obvious Russian propaganda. That is his choice, and it is the choice of the world to call him a bellend. Its all choices.

Just answered other question. Again, you decide by using your brain, and if you can't use your brain to decide the sun is a bad source then people will take that as a reflection on the credibility of your opinion. Like if I cited Dave down the pub, or your star sign.