Are you telling me that Chelsea DO NOT play "at home" at least once a
fortnight? I have lived in this house for 38 years, and KNOW that what
I am writing is true.

Not at all, I am simply saying what you said was untrue.

Well if you are stating that it was untrue what I said, i.e. that Chelsea play
at home midweek at least once a fortnight, how many times are you saying they
do play midweek every fortnight?

As for not being able to leave home when there's a "home" match -
how dare you have the temerity to suggest that I cannot leave my
home.

Oh, and BTW, if was you that suggested you could not leave your home,
not me.

Exactly, and I stand by that. Why do you say this is untrue?

Are you telling me that I CAN drive or catch a bus from where I live
when Chelsea play at home?

Not at all, I am simply saying what you said was untrue.

Your lack of logic fails me.

Your arrogance in accusing me of lying is verging on the offensive.

You have fallen into the trap the rob fell into of calling me arrogant
without providing evidence, this simply being arrogant itself and thus
also labelling you a hypocrite to boot.


I have already stated, several times, that I cannot leave my home (insert the
words "for any meaningful purpose" if that makes you feel better, bt that must
be a pretty obvious given) and yet you still maintain that this is a lie. Why
do you say it is a lie?

How is providing the quotes of untruths written by yourself an inability
to substantiate my claim?

You stated I "lied often in this thread already" - you have failed to provide
any evidence that I have lied at all, let alone "often".

you now seek to suggest that only one lie matters.

Only one lie matters, I provide two (two too many). So how many lies are
you allowed in court then?

That may be so (whilst not accepting that I have lied), but your original
accusation was that I lied "often in this thred". Three times (including the
last occasion, which does not count since it could not have been included in
your original accusation because I had not written it at that stage) in a
thread that has lasted several days can hardly be said to be "often".

When confronted with the emptiness of your
own assertion, you then just move on to another one, ignoring your
error. Nice student union debating tactic, but wholly worthless.

Which assertion? The assertion that you lied?

The assertion that "I lied OFTEN in this thread".

What have I moved on to?

You have moved away from "often", being unable to substantiate it, to a
different accusation that only one lie matters. If that is what you meant to
say the first time, you should have said so. But you did not.


"I cannot leave my home whenever Chelsea play "at home"

This being clearly untrue

Why is it untrue?

you are now trying to claim you said you
cannot drive or catch a bus. Goalposts moved.

Rubbish: it is so obvious that leaving home to do something meaningful, which
obviously involves transport of some sort, that I did not need to write that.
Given that this part of the thread originated from the possibility of suing the
football club for loss of income from being unable to travel, it is only you
who can have failed to grasp this obvious fact.

You said:

"Wrong: Chelsea play "at home" at least once a fortnight mid-week


This being clearly untrue, you are now trying to claim you said to claim
you said Chelsea play "at home" at least once a fortnight. Goalposts
moved.


No: I may have inadvertently left out "mid-week" in my latter statement, but I
wholeheartedly stand by my original assertion that Chelsea play at home
mid-week at least once a fortnight. Perhaps I should have added "during the
football season" and "barring world wars and nuclear attack" but these are such
obvious assumtions that only a fool would require them to be stated in adult
debate.

Marc.