Blog Wars – Response to Ron’s Attack

I’ve just got home from work, a bit worn out, bit upset that Gardner might be coming back [thats for another time], still upset about Rowett’s sacking [naturally] and I walked into VivaBrownie towers to receive some tweets asking if i’d read Ron’s blog attacking me?

I hadn’t until about half an hour ago. But I have now, well I better have or else none of this will make any sense.

It’s a good Ron blog. I’ll give the Muse of Moseley that. Well written, with a pace that keeps ticking along, a good bit of nostalgia and it manages to pull a few verbal punches while giving off that ‘i don’t really care‘ vibe, which was always the hallmark of a solid Ron blog.

It reminded me of all those great Ron blogs I used to read growing up, and his match reports, especially the infamous one about Burnley. That one went down in Small Heath Alliance history as a classic and even triggered a response from Burnley council.

I have nothing against Ron, and all those expecting [and hoping] for a bit of a personal slanging match are going to be disappointed. I genuinely like Ron, or the internet entity that is Ron, and I enjoy his output.

Sure I disagree with his thoughts on Rowett. I disagreed when he posted a tweet celebrating Rowett’s sacking with an applause smiley and suggested Rowett was going stale [can you go stale after having just one full season at a club?].

I disagreed when he sent personal abuse to Legdzins after the Burton error and I thought his tweet about not speaking to any ‘rational’ Blues fan who was disappointed Rowett was sacked said more about the echo chamber he resides in than anything else.

But I quite like diversity of opinion.

I like reading things that challenge the way I think, and make me question my stance.

It’s why my Twitter is awash with Blues fans, Villa fans, Alt Right accounts, Liberal accounts. I love that Twitter is a marketplace of opinions and debate.

Ron implied that he doesn’t like to see opinions on issues like Trump or Syria. I do, I love reading the informed and the ill-informed on these subjects. Not such a fan of the dreary and endless comments about food, and what cereal is the best. But I appreciate different people are into different things.

Twitter exists as a platform for the layman to have a chat and air their views. If you don’t like to read people’s opinions, it’s probably not the best platform for you, or you should perhaps be a bit more discerning in deciding who to follow.

But it’s not up to me to decide how people use Twitter. That’s the beauty of it, everybody will use it in their own way.

Before I quickly comment on the stuff Ron brought up, I will just say the following.

I am a little bit, a little bit disappointed that Ron has so massively bitten to my Baby Boomer blog, and has reacted in the manner he has.

It’s difficult to tell on the internet and Ron will no doubt say that his article lambasting me is also tongue in cheek, but it seems like my blog has annoyed him enough to set up a WordPress site and sift through 11,000 of my tweets in order to pull out a few ‘aha!’ comments I made about games a good while ago.

I mean, God, the amount of shit he’s had to scroll through to get to my observations during Wolves at home – when was that? August?

I can only apologise for all the crap he’s had to endure over the last few hours.

I thought that the tone of my Baby Boomer blog the other night was quite clear in its intentions, and was quite clearly meant to be read as being tongue-in-cheek and a bit of light ribbing and fun, at a time when there’s been a lot of negativity around the club.

Comments about asbestos roofing, the amicable and placid Holdsworth being an ‘attack dog’, Ron being a spiritual leader, people 40 years old being ‘Baby Boomers’ – I thought it was obvious that it wasn’t meant to be read seriously.

But hey ho.

Back to Ron’s blog. It seems to be evenly weighted between two concepts:

  1. Ron doesn’t use the internet anymore, doesn’t comment anymore, and has ‘grown out of it’.
  2. Because I criticised Rowett’s decision making in the odd game here and there, that means I lose all right to be disappointed he’s been sacked.

If we quickly deal with the first point.

It’s a nice sentiment to be ‘above’ giving opinions, but when you have SIXTY FOUR THOUSAND tweets [six times what I have]. I think it’s a difficult argument to make.

And i’d say to Ron. Who cares if you enjoy posting on the internet? It’s not the dirty word it once was. Loads of people post on here. In all kinds of forums and mediums. Embrace it.

You’re too good a commentator to shy away [not that you are, with 64,000 tweets] but I say be proud of it, and comment more.

So I won’t accept that Ron is some noble, old timey, quiet type that has had to come forward after years of silence to make a point. He’s bloody everywhere, and I think it’s great.

The 2nd point is that, yes I criticised Rowett. I praised Rowett too. I’ll criticise Zola, and i’ll praise Zola.

Isn’t that a healthy way to think? Not be so pro or anti one or the other?

Just because I thought Rowett was a fool to substitute Che Adams at 1-1 at home to Wolves, doesn’t mean I want him sacked on the spot, a week before Christmas, have his whole backroom staff wiped out, piss the players off, rile the fans and plunge us into utter chaos.

It is possible to critique, but have a sense of the overall picture.

The great H-Bomb once said ‘Just because me and the wife argue, doesn’t mean I want to divorce her’.

I’ll finish because i’ve waffled enough and as you’ve found out to your great horror this week, I don’t like to post too seriously for too long.

All I would say is that I like you as a football fan, I like your Twitter feed, I don’t care that you post a lot, I want more, more Ron more, and I believe football supporters do have the right to moan about team selections without having to blow the whole thing up, rip up the script and demand wholesale changes.

That’s all.

(Thank you for your time *TheSpecialRon)

Blog Wars – Response to Ron’s Attack

2 thoughts on “Blog Wars – Response to Ron’s Attack

  1. Colin Cross says:

    Blues fans and too many Blues Blogs are banning me for telling the truth the simple fact is TTA are duping us.

    The REAL REASON Rowett walked, note I said he walked, before he was sacked was he had been led up the garden path. Promised funds of up to £10m, he presented the Board with a list of 4 signings and 1 loan; a centre back; a left back; a central midfielder and a pacy big front man – all under 26. All
    decent at Championship level, 2 with Prem experience and a loan player with proven form of getting sides promoted from Championship,

    The Board would not sanction the deals, they had given agreement a week before via Panos – then over that weekend 3 new Board appointments from China and Zola contacted BEHIND Panos’s back

    Lets be clear we WONT SPEND £10M in January – a few loan signings and yet more BROKEN PROMISES. If Rowett had got his deals we would have been odds on to be in top 6.

    Now we’ll be lucky to be above bottom 6.

    Mark my words!

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Interesting Colin. The sudden additions to the board did look dodgy. Will have to see what happens over January. Interesting that you have such specific information, including the number of players and their positions.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s