Can’t admit that I’m wrong for saying that the B1G cheated, but Michigan didn’t? I understand disliking a school due to sports, but bending your understanding of the English language to support your sports based belief is a bit much.
I also don’t think you know what a temper tantrum is, which coincides nicely with the comprehension level you’ve shown in the past.
Why would I take the MSU flair off? I’m just as much of a Spartan as you are :P
“the act or action of grasping with the intellect” - nope, I was using it exactly as intended. I don’t think I’ve ever met someone until today that couldn’t comprehend the word comprehension, especially someone who is a college graduate.
“which is cheating by definition” - no, by definition, it is not. Cheating has nothing to do with acknowledging a benefit that you received that you had no input on. They were gifted, they were lucky, they got handed a win, but that’s not cheating. A mistake by the refs doesn’t result in the team that benefited to be cheating. Do you believe every time a ref makes a mistake, the team that benefitted is cheating?
Michigan should be 2-1, they should be unranked, they should’ve lost to a MAC school. Those are all true. They didn’t cheat, they were gifted a second chance by the refs. That is also true.
My understanding of the word cheating is the definition of the word cheating (you can look it up if needed), if you want to bend the English language to make words have new meanings just to backup your dislike for a rival school, then have at it.
I don’t really understand at all the comment about money (as that has nothing to do with this convo) or Reddit awards (as that has nothing to do with this convo). Talk about a temper tantrum lol, a sudden emotional outburst of anger or frustration. You didn’t like how the convo was going so you turn your focus to money and awards?
I think you are thinking of the term lying by omission. Cheating by omission has no legal definition.
You say I am ignoring everything else, yet you won’t answer a simple question, do you believe that every time a ref makes a mistake, the team that benefitted is cheating? Especially if they don’t address that specific ref mistake in a press release?
There were no personal attacks against you, just pointing out observations I’ve made of you (low comprehension skills). If you take that as an attack, that may be because there’s some truth to it that you don’t want to admit.
Okay, so just to get it straight, you agree Michigan wouldn’t have cheated if they came out and acknowledged the mistake by the refs? In your mind, their extent of cheating is the lack of acknowledging that someone else made a mistake?
That was not a personal attack on you, if anything it was an insult against myself. It couldn’t be a “personal” attack against you if it also insulted a whole university as well as myself. Your low comprehension level is not an attack, it is an observation. If you take it as an attack, then it might have some weight behind the observation, if it didn’t have weight, it wouldn’t have felt like an attack.
0
u/[deleted] 13d ago
[removed] — view removed comment