I just read the formal outcome of,the viva communicated by my university and I am quite pissed that the examiners could have easily just given me minor corrections considering that most of the correction only involves restructuring. The university allows that for upto six months! I don't know why they have given me full 12 months. It's way too much and it shows their poor reading if the university guideline. Although, in their report, they do sAy the analysis and theoretical contribution was missing in my current t submission. But, in their list of corrections, they didn't care at all to mention what theories they would like me to consider and accordingly what analytical angle SHIULD i use. I feel that the external was quite pissed that I said my findings supports the conclusions another person whi I think is her contemporary as they both work in the same region. The external clearly said that instead if saying support, i should say that I contradict it and not only that I should a,sk criticize it. What the hell? That's a total flipping of my entire bone of the thesis!
I have to be blamed for this partially as I blindly allowed my supervisors to choose my examiners. I am so repenting now! I should have really used those whom I had cited the most and whose conclusions matched that of mine. I am really feeling scared that I must have royally pissed the examiner as her expectations might be too high from the resubmission and I might not be able to convince her and so I better take the baite now and get re-examined by the person whom I support in her conclusions.
What happens if I choose to be re-examined? , i don't think my university allows,it as I will have to check it ...