Edwards

[SUFCFARAWAY]

Edwards Staying - But why would we loan him out anyway?

 

[Guest]

Ah, wasn't Tw@kins going on about how he wanted all these higher division players on loan despite the fact that they were all playing regularly for their current clubs - Edwards was one of the ones he mentioned....

 

[Xàbia Shrimper]

Andy Edwards has recently made a number of people very angry, including me. However, as anger serves no function in a successful rebuttal, I will simply state objectively that I hope Edwards enjoys his new distinction as one of the most lascivious centre backs who ever lived. In the first place, the tone of Edwards's ultimata is eerily reminiscent of that of disdainful mouthpieces for uninformed, brusque Dadaism of the late 1940s, in the sense that when I was a child, my clergyman told me, "The final product of Edwards's declamations will be a dysfunctional society, wherein every natural self-defense mechanism has been short-circuited in some neo-predatory effort to gain short-term financial benefits." If you think about it, you'll see his point. A central point of his belief systems is the notion that his way of life is correct and everyone else's isn't. Perhaps Edwards should take some new data into account and revisit that notion. I think he'd find that he wants us to believe that his antics provide a liberating insight into life, the universe, and everything. How stupid does he think we are? A complete answer to that question would take more space than I can afford, so I'll have to give you a simplified answer. For starters, I must admit that I've read only a small fraction of his writings. (As a well-known aphorism states, it is not necessary to eat all of an apple to learn that it is rotten.) Nevertheless, I've read enough of Edwards's writings to know that in order to answer the pesky cutthroats who prosecute, sentence, and label people as piteous, prolix flimflammers without the benefit of any evidence whatsoever, we must reinforce what is best in people. And that's just the first step. Remember, I shall not argue that Edwards's newsgroup postings are an authentic map of his plan to paint pictures of pompous worlds inhabited by surly, reckless drongos. Read them and see for yourself.

In Edwards's press releases, emotionalism is witting and unremitting, lewd and coldhearted. He revels in it, rolls in it, and uses it to stifle dissent. I am not mistaken when I say that I and Edwards part company when it comes to the issue of anarchism. He feels that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization", while I believe that like most people that have a fatuitous agenda to advocate, he wants to inflict untold misery, suffering, and distress. If you doubt this, just ask around. Now, I don't want to overwork the story about how he plans to sidetrack us, so we can't plant markers that define the limits of what is unsympathetic and what is not, so let's just say that each of us should realize after a moment's thought that society has paid a dear price for letting him gain a respectable foothold for his cold-blooded conclusions. That's pretty transparent. What's not so transparent is the answer to the following question: Why can't he value a diversity of approaches without needing to rank them as better and worse? A clue might be that I can't follow his pretzel logic. I do, however, know that Edwards says that all midfielders are poor, stupid ghetto trash. This is at best wrong. At worst, it is a lie. Although some self-pitying clowns concede that Edwards's apple-polishers are so ready to turn me, a typically mild-mannered person, into an irrational vat of absenteeism that their slurs are laughable, they invariably deny that Edwards says that his circulars are not worth getting outraged about. Wow! Isn't that like hiding the stolen goods in the cupboard and, when the rozzers come in, standing in front of the cupboard door and exclaiming, "They're not in here!"? The recent outrage at Andy Edwards's expedients may point to a brighter future. For now, however, I must leave you knowing that he carries the seeds of his own self-destruction.

A crying shame ...

WS

 

[Ron Manager]

To be honest though Mike, isn't that just stating the bledding obvious? It's what we were all already thinking surely?

 

[Xàbia Shrimper]

I know. But it really needed to be said openly on a public forum, wouldn't you agree?

WS

 

[Ron Manager]

You are right of course. If this forum isn't intended for such discussions, then what else could it's purpose possibly be?