I know you really want to catch me in some contradiction, but I never said we should take Dhaliwal’s rumour as the truth. It’s a rumour. I tagged you because you typically give a lot of weight to Dhaliwal rumours. The rumour may or may not be true. Pettersson may or may not be injured. We won’t know unless he confirms this.
You are moving the goal posts and strawmanning me as you always do. Your shockingly stupid logic wasn’t the logic you have restated above, it was to argue that Pettersson’s direct testimony, in May of 2024, confirming that he had an injury in 2023-24, should be taken as direct testimony confirming that he currently has an injury 10 months later. I.e., you are trying to take Pettersson’s earlier comment from May of 2024 as contemporaneous direct testimony that he is currently injured in a halfwitted attempt to catch me in a contradiction where I preferred Dhaliwal’s current rumour over this direct testimony. Again, it’s shockingly stupid logic and if you don’t refrain from this obviously disingenuous and stupid line of argument I’m going to stop engaging with you.
Do you have the quote?
Ultimately, some rumours will be correct and some will be wrong. This isn’t some surprising concept. I gave reasons why I doubted Dhaliwal’s rumour which didn’t apply to this Pettersson rumour. Plus, I acknowledge this current Dhaliwal rumour may be false. I am not taking it as the truth. It just surprises me that he seems so certain.
We don't know there is a disconnect here. The only evidence you have provided is how each side has handled the disclosure of the injury which you point to as a disconnect in terms of the actual injury which it isn’t necessarily. I have already said this to you, but the inconsistency in disclosure can reasonably be explained by management/coaching not disclosing injuries and letting the players disclose the injuries which is why they said there was no injury initially but Pettersson confirmed there was one later. In fact, it’s almost unfathomable for Pettersson to somehow know he had patellar tendinitis but for management and coaching to not know this.
No, that’s a strawman.
Again, I’d love to see a quote where he attributes his poor play to the patellar tendinitis. I recall him being quite sheepish when disclosing the injury.
Again, I have no desire to relitigate our original debate from a year ago. And I’ve told you this. And I don’t even have a ton of conviction for my position, and in fact I believe I even recognized I could be wrong. Again, I don’t really care. What I do care about is your total inability to understand the preference for direct testimony over rumours.
You realize I keep on acknowledging to you that his knee may be injured, but you keep on sticking your head in the sand strawmanning me as thinking he absolutely must not have an injury.
But in terms of the icing, that may be preventative. Icing helps to stop the tendon from swelling which is effectively what patellar tendinitis is. So he may not currently have patellar tendinitis, but may still ice the knee to ensure it doesn’t come back.
That’s your problem, though. You, and one or two others , mistake my critique / analysis of the various evidence, as having an absolute or unwavering position notwithstanding the fact that I have confirmed my position to you and the others like a dozen times.
I can vehemently, as you say, debate the various evidence, or the conclusions some are drawing from the evidence, but that doesn’t mean you can strawman my global position on the matter which has been communicated to you many times.
The record is clear. And you are literally strawmanning my position in almost every post you make. And I continually point this out, and you never even bother trying to refute it because it’s clear as day.