Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
moore_94

Victor Kristiansen Officially Signs

By moore_94, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

OntarioFox

OntarioFox

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, moore_94 said:

Victor will be at King Power Stadium on Saturday to watch City’s Premier League encounter with Brighton & Hove Albion

Let's not count our chickens, official announcement or not - window's still open, he could be handing in a transfer request by Sunday :ph34r:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxile5

foxile5

Posted
Posted
Just now, The_77 said:

How’s your Danish these days?

Considering that I was referencing the Americanisation of the Leicester City post it wasn't really thinking of my Danish.

 

The steady and willingness of the Americanisation of the British football language has been a pet peeve of mine.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxile5

foxile5

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Guest said:

It is presumably a criticism of the way the club refers to itself/themselves in official communications rather than the language skills of Slick Vic

Correct.

 

Traditionally, football clubs are collectives and should be represented as such. Leicester City are signing a new player etc. We/they are. The verb should follow the collective.

 

American sports teams are franchised entities and are not communal. They don't have a fixed abode and are just entities. It is.

 

But the last few years have seen the media getting cheap thrills from aping the American language.

 

I'm tilting at windmills, I know, but it's just an argument I'm willing to have.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The_77

The_77

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Considering that I was referencing the Americanisation of the Leicester City post it wasn't really thinking of my Danish.

 

The steady and willingness of the Americanisation of the British football language has been a pet peeve of mine.

 

 

6 minutes ago, Guest said:

It is presumably a criticism of the way the club refers to itself/themselves in official communications rather than the language skills of Slick Vic

Write a letter to the editor, then, but I’m sorry to tell you that we don’t exactly employ staffers for The Times at the club. They quickly posted a direct quote from the player in a press release, everything will be OK. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The_77

The_77

Posted
Posted
Just now, The_77 said:

 

Write a letter to the editor, then, but I’m sorry to tell you that we don’t exactly employ staffers for The Times at the club. They quickly posted a direct quote from the player in a press release, everything will be OK. 

And Welcome Victor!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foxile5

foxile5

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Harpenden Fox said:

Leicester City’s players are underperforming. They are underperforming.

 

Leicester City is a football Club. It is a Club.

I'm not going to argue this all night. Not because I'm not prepared to - it's a hill I've died on many times - but I've got a headache.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kingfox

kingfox

Posted
Posted

A left-back who has won 70% of his defensive duels this season. Also ranks in the top 30 for most tackles and top 10 for most blocks in this season’s Champions League.

 

Highly rated and has some tenacity about him, something that our current squad lacks.

 

Quite looking forward to seeing his progression.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sampson

Sampson

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, foxile5 said:

Correct.

 

Traditionally, football clubs are collectives and should be represented as such. Leicester City are signing a new player etc. We/they are. The verb should follow the collective.

 

American sports teams are franchised entities and are not communal. They don't have a fixed abode and are just entities. It is.

 

But the last few years have seen the media getting cheap thrills from aping the American language.

 

I'm tilting at windmills, I know, but it's just an argument I'm willing to have.

“How’s your Danish these days” is still a fair point though.

 

Expecting someone who speaks English as a second language to have to conform to pedantic grammatical debates as if they are a native speaker, when both variations are perfectly understandable, is gatekeeping the language to the extreme.  
 

Why does it matter whether his use of English is more based on US English or not.


I can only assume you’ve never had to learn and use a second language and then get told, despite being perfectly understandable, your language is still worth criticism because you don’t use pedantic, regional, grammatical variations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...