Search results

Blimey that added extra is a little unnecessary - here's me thinking we'd both done a good job of explaining ourselves.

I didn't want to go full 'tinfoil hat' while picking at the thread title but this was certainly one aspect I was dancing around re sensationalised reporting of events.

Well you'll not be flying anywhere for football, any time soon.

Of course none of it bears thinking about. For me very, very low down on the list of 'what's wrong with the world' is perfectly summed up with how you start that reply. 'wasn't meant to be sensationalist' and 'I am just over worrying'. You're entitled to be over worried by something that just...

No offence was meant, but for obvious reasons that kind of sensationalising title to a serious, yet incredibly rare event, is another troubling trend that has become 'normal'. Naturally I can't just say that and have to use a glib side eye instead!

The title is a simple blunt statement of fact without a single grammatical cue to suggest otherwise, a fact I challenged as did most other comments after mine and yet I get singled out in quite a snide fashion. As this isn't the thread for a back and forth on this that's me done.

Are you going to reply? Why is my post "pointlessly pissy" while all the others saying the same perfectly ok?

Why? It's a sensational thread title to which I and just about everybody else have said doesn't really have any validity. Which in turn is pretty much the dictionary definition of The Mail OnLine's content.

What I wanted to write but had I done some absolute weapon on here would be feverishly finding a local news story about an errant cyclist in order to somehow prove me 'wrong'.

As horrifying as this recent case is, your thread title is doing a lot of heavy lifting - A little too Mail OnLine.