|
|
Post by Johnny_Hellzapoppin on Sept 19, 2018 15:25:03 GMT
...
|
|
|
|
Post by HELENA MARIA on Sept 19, 2018 15:26:55 GMT
TEAM RACHEL  |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 19, 2018 15:37:05 GMT
They were both in the wrong.
Rachel ended the relationship. Regardless of whether or not she meant it as a temporary thing, she said straight-up that they needed to take a break from each other. So it isn't cheating. With that said, while Ross was single at that point, he shouldn't have banged the copy girl minutes after the fact because it's incredibly skeevy and sends a message to Rachel that he didn't care enough about her to at least take some time to himself and not just rebound-fuck someone (who was clearly into him while Rachel and Ross were together), so I definitely see why it hurts her.
In short, I don't side with either one because they were both immature jerks who weren't ready for a committed relationship with each other at the time.
|
|
Zeb31
Based
Bernardo is not believing que vous êtes come to bing bing avec nous
Posts: 2,557 
Likes: 3,794
|
Post by Zeb31 on Sept 19, 2018 15:58:16 GMT
Copy/pasting what I've said before:
To me, the whole "we were on a break" debate is basically missing the whole point. I get why the fans get so riled up (I swear to god, the Friends board on IMDB was basically 95% weekly arguments about who was in the wrong, always going past 200 posts each time it got brought up again), but in all honesty neither of them was at fault. Ross had every reason to believe that they were through at that point (especially since Rachel had Mark over at her place), which means he didn't really cheat, but on the other hand, she had every right to be hurt and not want to take him back. I never saw it as a situation where one is right and the other isn't. The real story is what led to the break in the first place, and I'm a lot less forgiving about that one. Ross fucked up that relationship big time, and it's only thanks to Schwimmer's charisma as a comedian that he isn't more widely regarded as an emotionally manipulative, immature ass. The shit he pulled on Rachel throughout the 3rd season was just terrible, which is why I never got swept up in the whole "will they won't they" thing. They just shouldn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by DeepArcher on Sept 19, 2018 16:02:46 GMT
They were on a break, but what Ross did was unjustified.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Sept 19, 2018 16:15:37 GMT
Copy/pasting what I've said before: To me, the whole "we were on a break" debate is basically missing the whole point. I get why the fans get so riled up (I swear to god, the Friends board on IMDB was basically 95% weekly arguments about who was in the wrong, always going past 200 posts each time it got brought up again), but in all honesty neither of them was at fault. Ross had every reason to believe that they were through at that point (especially since Rachel had Mark over at her place), which means he didn't really cheat, but on the other hand, she had every right to be hurt and not want to take him back. I never saw it as a situation where one is right and the other isn't. The real story is what led to the break in the first place, and I'm a lot less forgiving about that one. Ross fucked up that relationship big time, and it's only thanks to Schwimmer's charisma as a comedian that he isn't more widely regarded as an emotionally manipulative, immature ass. The shit he pulled on Rachel throughout the 3rd season was just terrible, which is why I never got swept up in the whole "will they won't they" thing. They just shouldn't. They were just toxic together, and the show would've been stronger had they not paired up again. This isn't to say that Schwimmer and Aniston didn't have chemistry; they absolutely did. But they were just not right for each other and proved it time and again. Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by stabcaesar on Sept 20, 2018 8:41:40 GMT
Team Rachel +1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2018 19:35:17 GMT
Team Rachel. Ross is a moron.
|
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Oct 9, 2018 16:06:05 GMT
They were on a break, the fact that Rachel's response to WE WERE ON A BREAK was NO WE WEREN'T was just horrendous writing. If she could have instead argued how a person should act when on a break then she'd be the clear winner of this argument, but I guess that wouldn't have lent itself so easily to comedy  |
|
