Howaythelads

Certainly my none-too-sophisticated country dentist in Ireland was well clued up on them. If you make an informed decision then I don't think that's stupid, that's a choice, newsreaders with tooth-brighteners, athletes with steroids, Gemmill with chocolate. It's only as stupid as "buy now, pay later". 106274[/snapback] Some choices are stupid ones, mate.

That's not a trade secret, I thought everyone knew that was the trade-off? 106269[/snapback] I don't think they do. If they did, why do it? Are you telling me they're all stupid.

http://www.toontastic.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=4438 Still seems that you lot don't get it. BTW I know loads of spams, there's nowt great about their teeth. You should realise that this stuff they use to make them artificially 'white' is going to come back to bite them in the arse. It makes the enamel thinner, the teeth ultimately won't last as long. And the daft gits are paying money for it. Ho ho ho

Auld tracks. Maid Of Coolmore by the Bothy Band. Followed up by Take 5 by Dave Brubeck.

You're pissing against the wind, so my advice is to drop it.

I haven't read it either, but to be fair, the competition on here is tough. One of the most interesting posts I've ever seen by Gemma was that blank one she posted today, like. I think that one beats the 5,000+ on N.O hand down tbh. 102873[/snapback] Chomp 102874[/snapback] Eh? Is your head up your arse Alex? 102878[/snapback] Thats a bit rich....wheres your other hand? 102881[/snapback] Probably where you would like to put your gob.

I haven't read it either, but to be fair, the competition on here is tough. One of the most interesting posts I've ever seen by Gemma was that blank one she posted today, like. I think that one beats the 5,000+ on N.O hand down tbh. 102873[/snapback] Gemma - remind me again who's the childish one, you enormous tosser. 102883[/snapback] Ok, Graeme, then. How's that?

I haven't read it either, but to be fair, the competition on here is tough. One of the most interesting posts I've ever seen by Gemma was that blank one she posted today, like. I think that one beats the 5,000+ on N.O hand down tbh. 102873[/snapback] Chomp 102874[/snapback] Eh? Is your head up your arse Alex?

I haven't read it either, but to be fair, the competition on here is tough. One of the most interesting posts I've ever seen by Gemma was that blank one she posted today, like. I think that one beats the 5,000+ on N.O hand down tbh.

what the fuck do you mean by that? 102746[/snapback] I'm looking for the hidden meaning in what sumo said, you know, something honest and accurate such as, "Luque is a pile of shite and a waste of money", or "Bellamy and Robert are top players and shouldn't have been engineered out of the club", or "HTL was right all along, Souness is a wanker". But no, I've given this some concentrated thought for the last few hours and I reckon that what he's saying is that the mods over on N-O aren't in people's pockets.

Just returning the compliment, Craig. I can post lies on a forum as well, you know.

You followed up this childish rubbish with a number of petty snipes in later posts. Does you no credit, Craig. Show me the post(s) where you think I was reading selectively, show me the posts that prompted the childish comments you've been aiming toward me. Anyway, not that I expect you to believe me....I've never said that FS is a great Chairman, so it would seem it is you who reads selectively. Not very long ago I placed a post on the board pointing out how I thought FS is prone to error because he appoints managers for one character trait only, and that this is a reason why we fail. I've also posted a number of times that I think he knows fcuk all about football. Ignored by you, and then the idea I think FS is great is spread around as lies by you in your haste to portray me as believiing something I've never believed in. Good show, mate. As I say, this kind of stuff does you no credit at all. Doh! Seems to me that you make your mind up what someone is posting before you've even read the post. BTW It's not rocket science to come up with the idea a club needs to be properly run from top to bottom to be successful. I think everyone would agree with that, so again, you appear to have made up your mind before you even read a post. I'd be surprised if you were able to find any post from me anywhere that would indicate I think a shit club could be successful. 76759[/snapback] There goes another keyboard.... Do you do short-hand for HTT or is it the other way round? 76771[/snapback] Good to know you think a well run club is one where a Chairman interferes in team affairs.

What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"? 76361[/snapback] This is something a manager would say should a club have a Chairman who is involved in team affairs when he shouldn't be. 76367[/snapback] 76370[/snapback] The final refuge. Obviously you believe a Chairman should be saying those words to a manager when in disagreement with the manager's decision on a team affairs issue, which means you are in favour of interference in team affairs by a Chairman. Wouldn't mind you telling me how any Chairman is supposed to convince ANY manager to join any club under those circumstances. 76389[/snapback] Sorry to get involved but i think this point of view is a kind of riposte to Leazes Mag. LM (i believe) has frequently stated that if you back Souness then you must, by inference back all of his decisions including getting rid of Bellamy and Robert. LM's support of Freddie was then felt to be hypocritical by some (me included) as by those standards LM must clearly back the appointment of Souness in the first place, and his continued employment. I think i'm right in this (regarding other people's opinions) but i most humbly apologise if i'm wrong. Also, i have no wish to re-open that debate with LM, i respect his stance and we've all discussed it to death which probably accounts for Craig's reluctance. 76430[/snapback] I can't see your point chocchip, I've said that I what I think of FS appointing Souness, but also one bad appointment doesn't make a bad chairman. It doesn't change the fact that FS is a good chairman because all the other managers he has appointed have been welcomed by the majority of the clubs support, as they were all successful, and built good teams, and left good sets of players at their previous clubs. Isn't this the same criteria we are all seeing when we are looking at Hitzfeld and Hiddink ? FS also backs his managers to the hilt, to the level of Newcastle United financially, and allows them the freedom to do their jobs. That, to coin a phrase, is a "proper" chairman. i can say this, because i said from the start i wasn't happy with Souness, but everyone who supported Souness to be successful, by saying give him time, are in no position to slag off freddie for appointing Souness because they agreed with it ! Souness getting rid of Bellamy is different, because i didn't support him. And I didn't support because he always has been, and always will be, a shit manager. If anything, his treatment of Bellamy proved to me conclusively that I had judged him correctly. By the same token, Bobby Robson sold Solano, but that didn't make him a bad manager either. 76432[/snapback] LM, apologies if my post seemed to be a criticism of your views. I was presuming the perception of your views was the basis for Craig's stance with HTL. I'm more than aware of your opinions . I don't necessarily agree with all of them but i listen to what you have to say. Didn't mean to start a debate with you in the middle of HTL and Craig's discussion. 76520[/snapback] There is no discussion between myself and Craig. By the way, I haven't the foggiest what you were on about earlier, and it's not because I didn't read what you posted, it's just beyond my feeble intellect. I have no idea why Chayton is accusing me of 'selective reading'.

You followed up this childish rubbish with a number of petty snipes in later posts. Does you no credit, Craig. Show me the post(s) where you think I was reading selectively, show me the posts that prompted the childish comments you've been aiming toward me. Anyway, not that I expect you to believe me....I've never said that FS is a great Chairman, so it would seem it is you who reads selectively. Not very long ago I placed a post on the board pointing out how I thought FS is prone to error because he appoints managers for one character trait only, and that this is a reason why we fail. I've also posted a number of times that I think he knows fcuk all about football. Ignored by you, and then the idea I think FS is great is spread around as lies by you in your haste to portray me as believiing something I've never believed in. Good show, mate. As I say, this kind of stuff does you no credit at all. Doh! Seems to me that you make your mind up what someone is posting before you've even read the post. BTW It's not rocket science to come up with the idea a club needs to be properly run from top to bottom to be successful. I think everyone would agree with that, so again, you appear to have made up your mind before you even read a post. I'd be surprised if you were able to find any post from me anywhere that would indicate I think a shit club could be successful.

What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"? 76361[/snapback] This is something a manager would say should a club have a Chairman who is involved in team affairs when he shouldn't be. 76367[/snapback] 76370[/snapback] The final refuge. Obviously you believe a Chairman should be saying those words to a manager when in disagreement with the manager's decision on a team affairs issue, which means you are in favour of interference in team affairs by a Chairman. Wouldn't mind you telling me how any Chairman is supposed to convince ANY manager to join any club under those circumstances.

Certain people won't have a wrong word said about Shepherd - never said it was you.... 76362[/snapback] Struggling, I see.

What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"? 76361[/snapback] This is something a manager would say should a club have a Chairman who is involved in team affairs when he shouldn't be.

Renton. I know you didn't say my PMs were abusive, mate, that insinuation was made by someone else, I'm surprised you didn't understand that, as it seems pretty obvious by reading the posts. Also, given what you said to me in your PM I just thought my latest point to you was worth making. I've nowt against your posts in any case. I wasn't aware there was an argument, actually. As I've said (again), I've nowt against you or your posts. Quite like your posts actually. No problem with that at all.

You know that's different, look at their pedigree, the same reason we can't blame him for Dalglish. I was looking at the comments made on the backup board last week from when Souness came in and a quote from a Blackburn forum had been posted, it was basically word for word what Souness has done to us. He could have got the same info from any number of club's supporters, you for example. I support Freddie but it was his job to know what Souness was. 76132[/snapback] Aye, and FS made a mistake which has been acknowledged by everybody. Having appointed a manager the role of FS is to support the manager, he has to allow any manager to actually manage. Nobody should want a Chairman to interfere with decisions regarding who is brought in and who leaves the club, that's the role of the manager. When Souness is eventually sacked ( too late, which is another FS mistake ) he will fall back on excuse after excuse, interference from a Chairman would be a good one if he could use it. He won't be able to though, because the team and personnel decisions have all been his own.

I haven't come across anybody, anywhere, who hasn't acknowledged the mistake by FS in the appointment of Souness. Craig, why do you keep banging on as though nobody is admitting this? The responsiblity for team affairs belongs with the manager. It is the manager who either gets it right or gets it wrong. Souness has got it wrong all on his own, the responsibility is his. As said above, FS fcuked up by appointing him. So what now, Craig? Why does this make FS responsible for all of the duff decisions made by the manager? How would people react if FS appointed a manager, but then it became known he stuck his nose into everything going on, and wouldn't allow the manager to actually manage? That would make him a really shit Chairman in my eyes. Q. Have we ever had a decent team with FS as Chairman?

What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team?

If only....... I won't explain what was in the PM, as Craig says, they shouldn't overflow into the forum, but that's not my fault. Believe me, there were no threats of any kind in any PM I sent to Renton. I've had PM's from you that are more threatening than anything I sent to Renton. BTW I've also seen many posts from others that include threats. Never see you banging on about those other posters. Do you fancy me, or something?

Who me? Nah, not me. I could show you the PMs, but as you know, I wouldn't do that.

Shit, I hadn't thought of that, I thought I was the most unpopular person on the forum! Maybe you're right, perhaps he's being stalked by someone? Maybe someone sent him 2 PM's yesterday and it's really pissed him off? That pink screen, what a pain in the arse, eh? No, it must be me. I don't believe in coincidences.

so you are saying that we should have gone on into the season with Shearer as our only forward/striker ? [that would have been down to Souness] 75766[/snapback] That doesn't appear to be what he's saying tbh. 75770[/snapback] do i really need to put the first line on bold - my whole post is addressing the desperate situation we were in before the deadline, thanks to Souness' ego and behaving like a complete amateur 75773[/snapback] You've just outlined precisely what I've known you've thought all along Leazes... We make a good signing, you praise Shepherd. We make a poor signing, you blame Souness... I'm not defending Souness, but my point is that Shepherd is ultimately responsible for the signings of Babayaro, Boumsong & Faye as well as those of Owen, Parker, Emre and Solano. 76023[/snapback] Souness decides who to buy and usually who to sell, he is responsible. The person who actually does the donkey work and the negotiation is not responsible for who the individuals players are. Only cases where it won't apply will be if a buying club makes an offer so large the Board accept it against the managers wishes. But as for buying, that should always be driven by the manager.