by bigmick » Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:43 pm
If I might be permitted, I'd like to come back on my concept of "dogma" which was mentioned on another thread (now closed) and in which I probably didn't explain myself regarding Alonso too well.
After the thread was closed, Lando not unreasonably took the view that as I had mentioned him a couple of times in the topic starter, there were was a point or two he'd like to raise with me. This he did via PM very well but I do think it was a slight shame that we weren't able to have our (very reasonable I might add) discussion out in the open but there it is. I explained to Lando that what constituted dogma on the thread for me, was the dispute which still raged on about whether or not Xabi's form had dipped.
Now, so clearly is he playing better this season than the last two, and by such a distance (I actually think he is close to being at his very best at the moment) that I cannot for the life of see why anybody would dispute the obvious. The only concieveable reason that any poster would dispute that he is now playing better, is it seems to me because they disputed the fact previously.
Anyway, once we accept that, then the door opens within the debate to a whole new garden. We begin to discuss compatibility, where Gerrard should play, whether a move for barry is still a good move (it isn't in my opinion) etc etc. If we can also discuss Kuyt without some of the silliness which has gone on over there, you get to the point where you can discuss football again.
That's where dogma spoils the forum. I bring it up because I noted that Sabes mentioned it previously in the thread. I didn't explain it terribly well the first time, I hope this time it is clearer.
"se e in una bottigla ed e bianco, e latte".