I think it’s clear by now that there isn’t a single person regularly posting that can claim to be ITK. I would also go as far to say that if posters were acting in good faith and simply passing on information then their source of that information is equally incapable of claiming to being ITK.

Im not sure we need to ask people if they are ITK. We should all know better than that by now.

Clyne or no Clyne...it’s one of those transfers that will perhaps little to no impact on our season either way.

I was at the match when Clyne made his debut and it was immediately apparent that he had something special.

Come on Willo, I did know him really. If anything you should have derided me for my fairweather knowledge, or lack thereof, of the glorious and illustrious Eagles. But thanks for the info. I remember Clyne as a youngster - before all the silly tattoos and big time Charlie lifestyle. He was great and an asset to Liverpool too. He's not the same player but suspect he could act as cover for Ward. I also suspect we are probably the best fit for him personally.

With the greatest of respect, I had the decency to provide a considered and respectful response whilst being somewhat regretful that I entered the debate.

In the final analysis I am not someone who seeks to give the impression of any superiority and despite brickbats I always seek to respond with dignity and humility.

I really believe that the debate should return to 'Nathaniel Clyne' and not be side-tracked by matters outside the parameters of the subject matter.

In this respect it is probably judicious that I refrain from passing any comment on so called 'Targets' on HOL in the manner which I did, resulting in the debate disintegrating into personal vilification.

Edited by Willo (12 Oct 2020 9.04am)

So sadly you don’t have the decency to give a straight answer, despite being given the opportunity to do so on numerous occasions.

Is it really soooo hard for you to bring yourself to admit you were just expressing an opinion and nothing more?!

No one has suggested there is any ‘superiority’ by being ITK, it is only ever YOU who refers to it as such. It is however important when someone makes an ‘absolute statement’ about something to establish upon what basis that statement is made i.e. is it just an opinion or is it based on a known fact or some other inside knowledge. If someone is in the know it puts a completely different context on the information supplied, as opposed to someone simply expressing an opinion.....Hence my perfectly reasonable question in response to your statement about the signing of Benrahma.

You have now completely avoided the issue three times and however often you say ‘With the greatest of respect’ you repeatedly demonstrate the complete opposite in your refusal to say which one it is. I haven’t asked for a source or for any other details whatsoever, merely to understand either way.

You now express a desire to return the conversation to Clyne with the usual qualification that you will no longer be passing any further comment on the subject you have been called out on (Quelle Surprise!) This again shows nothing but utter contempt for those genuinely wondering on what basis you made the original statement.

What ever the outcome with Benrahma, one can only conclude from your continued reluctance to give an answer, that you are most definitely NOT in the know and were merely expressing an opinion but, for whatever reason, cannot bring yourself to say so.

Phil's Barber...sorry to tell you, you've got issues mate : )

Willo has made decent and reasonably well informed comments, I'd say. You come across as somewhere between a crazy stalker and someone who secretly wants to get a room with him. Bizarre