Christian Eriksen

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Did you read that fully before you Googled it and pasted it in?

Joe Clash said:
reasonnoun
UK /ˈriː.zən/ US /ˈriː.zən/
[ C or U ] the cause of an event or situation or something that provides an excuse or explanation
Click to expand...
CJJ said:
a reason is an explanation made using rational and/or logical thinking.
Click to expand...

Also, from Oxford Dictionary:

"A premise of an argument in support of a belief, especially a minor premise when given after the conclusion."


Now, stop turning the Eriksen thread into "Dictionary Corner".
 
CJJ said:
Did you read that fully before you Googled it and pasted it in?




Also, from Oxford Dictionary:

"A premise of an argument in support of a belief, especially a minor premise when given after the conclusion."


Now, stop turning the Eriksen thread into "Dictionary Corner".
Click to expand...

I know what the word means - I reasoned that you might be unwilling to take my word for it. And come off it, you presented your reasoning as fact, when it was just your opinion. You said this:

CJJ said:
Reason why Eriksen hasn't been "poached" yet, like Carrick,Bale or Modric, is because he doesn't stand out.


Reason why he doesn't stand out? He's surrounded by at least 5 or 6 other players that the biggest and richest clubs in the world would benefit from.
Click to expand...

All that's missing is the definite article. We both know what you meant - stop trying to wriggle out of it by bandying words.
 
Just to point out the reasonable man is not an equivalent of the rational man in decision-making theory (Rawls made a career on this distinction).

Anyway I don't have a command of English like you two, but I think that to reason logically entails giving your subjective opinion that this are in fact circumstances that should move one to act/refrain from acting (be reasons). whether they are the reasons is a question of objective causality, when discussing human actions we also want people's reasons for action to be reasonable not just in the causal sense.

But words have no fixed meaning so everyone's right:ap:
 
THFC-Israel said:
Just to point out the reasonable man is not an equivalent of the rational man in decision-making theory (Rawls made a career on this distinction).

Anyway I don't have a command of English like you two, but I think that to reason logically entails giving your subjective opinion that this are in fact circumstances that should move one to act/refrain from acting (be reasons). whether they are the reasons is a question of objective causality, when discussing human actions we also want people's reasons for action to be reasonable not just in the causal sense.

But words have no fixed meaning so everyone's right:ap:
Click to expand...

Ha, it sounds like I'd like Rawls. For the record CJJ and l share a (usually) cordial relationship on here (l hope so, anyway) we do fall down where CE is concerned. Sorry to have taken the thread off topic.


(Your English is impeccable)
 
Joe Clash said:
I know what the word means - I reasoned that you might be unwilling to take my word for it. And come off it, you presented your reasoning as fact, when it was just your opinion.
Click to expand...

If I meant it as fact, I'd have used the word 'fact'.

It's like you think the notion of proposing a reason relies purely on the existence of known fact, and not opinion - which it doesn't. Regardless, even though I didn't intend or state my post to be fact, you would have to assert why it isn't fact in order for any of this to have a valid point - which you haven't.

As fun as this has been, if I wanted to discuss semantics I'd be doing it on some sort of dictionary forum. I don't, so I'd prefer to get back to football.


Why is it that you think having a strong team somehow means an inferior Eriksen?
 
Totti said:
Aren't you the one wanting him sold in the summer to sign Isco instead?

Wouldn't mind you finding a quote where I've stated my dislike to Eriksen though,.Quite interested to see.
Click to expand...
You have this weird idea that Eriksen is really arrogant and rates himself as the best footballer in the whole squad
 
The Dane said:
You have this weird idea that Eriksen is really arrogant and rates himself as the best footballer in the whole squad
Click to expand...

Didn't I say this in 2015?

And I actually said I think Eriksen THINKS he's probably better than what his talent allows him to be, which could be right, could be wrong, it's an opinion. His whole game has changed though since I said that, the team has.
 
Totti said:
Didn't I say this in 2015?

And I actually said I think Eriksen THINKS he's probably better than what his talent allows him to be, which could be right, could be wrong, it's an opinion. His whole game has changed though since I said that, the team has.
Click to expand...
And you think so because he jokingly said he should have more dribbling in fifa
 
The Dane said:
And you think so because he jokingly said he should have more dribbling in fifa
Click to expand...

I brought it up whilst that was the conversation, yes. Not because of the conversation.

Don't think I've ever once said we should sell him though or said he's regressed under Poch.
 
CJJ said:
If I meant it as fact, I'd have used the word 'fact'.

It's like you think the notion of proposing a reason relies purely on the existence of known fact, and not opinion - which it doesn't. Regardless, even though I didn't intend or state my post to be fact, you would have to assert why it isn't fact in order for any of this to have a valid point - which you haven't.

As fun as this has been, if I wanted to discuss semantics I'd be doing it on some sort of dictionary forum. I don't, so I'd prefer to get back to football.


Why is it that you think having a strong team somehow means an inferior Eriksen?
Click to expand...

Interesting use of the word 'purely'. That gives you some wiggle room. I'm suggesting that you weren't reasoning at all, and that you were presenting your case as pair of facts - the former, once accepted, naturally leads to the latter - both supporting each other.

Don't you see?

"Reason why Eriksen hasn't been "poached" yet, like Carrick,Bale or Modric, is because he doesn't stand out."


"Reason why he doesn't stand out? He's surrounded by at least 5 or 6 other players that the biggest and richest clubs in the world would benefit from."

These are opinions. My opinion is that he does stand out, yours is that he doesn't, as clearly stated. You're not simply musing here - you're not reasoning. The reason we're able to have this conversation is because the internet was invented, and I think it was in that sense that you made your observations about CE.

I don't think that having a strong team means an inferior Eriksen. Where did I say that? I think he's the man who pulls our team together as evidenced by our lackadaisical performances when he's out or off his game.
 
Joe Clash said:
I don't think that having a strong team means an inferior Eriksen. Where did I say that?
Click to expand...

Because you somehow took my post as some sort of major criticism of the player, dragged Totti into it too and have been making repeated references as to how we somehow have a different opinion of Eriksen.
 
For better or worse said:
1. I never said he should go smashing into players, we have others who do that but he doesn't look committed to challenge. I appreciate the 'Modric' factor and some things on the pitch are less obvious however he still needs to do a bit more - in my opinion.

2. Apologies, i've only read about a few staying back after training to work on their game and his name was never one I recall but I haven't read everything out that. I did read several things that Sherwood said but he did also have a habit of talking bollocks so I take what he said with a pinch of salt. I do however remember an article and it was a wider subject on professionalism and about how to conduct yourself on and off the pitch, not specific to extra training. Kudos to him if he does do extra, can't knock his ethic – that has never been in question but his accuracy is very poor.

3. RM bought Modric for 33m five years ago, the market has gone crazy since then. If De Bruyne is £55m then Modric would be WAY more on today's money. We've seen it time again, if a team really wants a player they will get them. Our man is clearly not what they are looking for. City took a risk on Kevin, it would have been easier and perhaps cheaper to come knocking on our door but they didn't. Their loss and our gain
Click to expand...

I agree with you slightly on the first point. There's time when you wish he would extend himself a bit more in the challenge, even with his unbelievable running.
 
For better or worse said:
I was saying he was cheap, by signing an extension at Ajax he kept his value high to ensure they got market value. Good lad but this shows his market value was only £12m. For us a bargain, but not a cheap out of contract player.

I don't want him hung out to dry but of all our players I guess he frustrates me the most but I also appreciate he hasn't cost us £30m, keeps his head down and has many other qualities. I just want him to do a little bit more and make more of an impact in the bigger games.
Click to expand...

Because he only had 1 year left and they had promised to sell him. That's why it was only £12m.

I agree with you on your latter point, but I would say it's mostly big games away from home where he's anonymous.
 
Wow just caught up on this thread what has led to this ire towards Eriksen? I think he quietly goes about his business, isn't flashy in a Ozil, Hazard or Silva sense. Yet there he is topping the assists charts. Yes his shooting boots and scoring isn't as good as past seasons. However he makes us tick a lot more than say Alli does. He's more like Modriclite but with a better scoring record. Eriksen is usually found somewhere within the creation of our attacking play.

It's not surprising when he's having an off day our performance drops.

Pat Nevin analysis: Why Christian Eriksen is crucial for Tottenham
 
Very good & important player for us.
Always wants the ball, works hard & is our go to guy to keep possession.
Don't forget he is only 25, so will be coming in to his peak when we are in the new stadium.
Seems down to earth & has a likeable personality to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom