sammynb 2929 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 Smith's purchase has Allardyce written all over it imo. Laura probably just got the shirt cheap after someone ordered it and then never picked it up. 5 quid extra for his size anarl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 (edited) Smith being a Mashley buy I thought was common knowledge. Fucking hell and your proof for the truth of that statement is what? The shirt he wears??? Christ don't wet your pants. It could be bollocks. See here is where you look like a twat. Smith being a Mashley buy I thought was common knowledge. Followed by It could be bollocks. Really does nothing for your agrument. So what are you Arthur or Martha? I can't be arsed to get into this. I take it back, wrong choice of phrase etc... His undroppability through endless games where he contributed nothing did fuel rumours that he was chosen as much by MA as SA iirc. The pure facts are we didn't spend enough and SA is moaning about it cause FS probably promised him £40m or summat or all the telly money. If SA is saying he had to change his targets I don't see why he would lie on telly Mort is a lawyer after all and the pay off must have come with legal strings. He has a point (SA). All the legions of nodding dogs are fucked off on N.O. cause they've just realised they've been reading the back of a cornflake packet. I've said for months we needed to bring in some attacking players and it was vital in the Jan window. KK said he didn't need anyone at the moment and he seems happy at not buying. IMO it has been a huge gamble and might yet get us into trouble. BBC results predictor hasn't to my knowledge saved a side from relegation yet. Edited February 4, 2008 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 It's not really what Keegan said at all as I see it. He said it wasn't worth buying players for the sake of it - i.e. stop-gaps etc. and that he'd rather wait until the summer. That's just being pragmatic and is a million miles away from thinking the current squad is good enough. It's a relatively small gamble given we probably won't go down. Obviously the right players being available in January would have been a perfect, if highly unlikely scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 2929 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I can't be arsed to get into this. I take it back, wrong choice of phrase etc... His undroppability through endless games where he contributed nothing did fuel rumours that he was chosen as much by MA as SA iirc. The pure facts are we didn't spend enough and SA is moaning about it cause FS probably promised him £40m or summat or all the telly money. If SA is saying he had to change his targets I don't see why he would lie on telly Mort is a lawyer after all and the pay off must have come with legal strings. He has a point (SA). Allardyce doesn't have a point. In the time he was with the club, like Souness, he had every excuse under the sun except admiting he was to blame for the way they were playing. Smith was undropable (sic) because as Alex said, he had all the qualities of a fat fuck Sam buy, huff and puff amounting to fuck all stuff. The only reason people assume Smith was a Ashley buy is because the silly twat wears (wore) a shirt with his name on it. I've got one with N'Zogbia but he wasn't my buy (although I'm quite willing to take the credit for it.) Lastly can I just remind you, Allardyce spent 26m pounds in the summer and look what we generally got. It was his team that didn't perform for him, he allegedly sold those he didn't want, it was no-one else's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 It's not really what Keegan said at all as I see it. He said it wasn't worth buying players for the sake of it - i.e. stop-gaps etc. and that he'd rather wait until the summer. That's just being pragmatic and is a million miles away from thinking the current squad is good enough. It's a relatively small gamble given we probably won't go down. Obviously the right players being available in January would have been a perfect, if highly unlikely scenario. I don't disagree with what you're saying at all and I have no reason to believe he didn't see enough plus points in bringing in certain players. But, his constant bigging up of the current squad and talking patent nonsense about Emre's creativity etc is pure delusion. Not sure who's feeding him this bollocks...But sure as shit he can have no idea of the current teams ability....Although he is beginning to realise it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 2929 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 It's not really what Keegan said at all as I see it. He said it wasn't worth buying players for the sake of it - i.e. stop-gaps etc. and that he'd rather wait until the summer. That's just being pragmatic and is a million miles away from thinking the current squad is good enough. It's a relatively small gamble given we probably won't go down. Obviously the right players being available in January would have been a perfect, if highly unlikely scenario. Inevitably he will turn to the little talent we have in the stiffs and the bairns, hopefully unearthing someone with a future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I can't be arsed to get into this. I take it back, wrong choice of phrase etc... His undroppability through endless games where he contributed nothing did fuel rumours that he was chosen as much by MA as SA iirc. The pure facts are we didn't spend enough and SA is moaning about it cause FS probably promised him £40m or summat or all the telly money. If SA is saying he had to change his targets I don't see why he would lie on telly Mort is a lawyer after all and the pay off must have come with legal strings. He has a point (SA). Allardyce doesn't have a point. In the time he was with the club, like Souness, he had every excuse under the sun except admiting he was to blame for the way they were playing. Smith was undropable (sic) because as Alex said, he had all the qualities of a fat fuck Sam buy, huff and puff amounting to fuck all stuff. The only reason people assume Smith was a Ashley buy is because the silly twat wears (wore) a shirt with his name on it. I've got one with N'Zogbia but he wasn't my buy (although I'm quite willing to take the credit for it.) Lastly can I just remind you, Allardyce spent 26m pounds in the summer and look what we generally got. It was his team that didn't perform for him, he allegedly sold those he didn't want, it was no-one else's fault. SA is as culpable as Mashley imo I'd agree with that. I think SA also wildly understimated the pressure at SJP and that must have got to him as much as anything else. Concerning the spend it has to be said the had to rebuild the whole def and these days 26m doesn't really buy you that much in all reality. It was 10m net or summat iirc. I don't think the squad as a whole moved forward that much because it was already carrying that much dead weight. It would have been impossible for any manager to put that right in one window with what was in all reality (taking into account the size and quality of the squad) with £26m. People are still think of player prices in terms of 10 years ago imo. There are a dozen clubs now in the PL who can and will match or outspend us. There is a quantum change on our ability at this point to radically alter our situation. I also think SA began to see that too late hence all the 'negative' talk of finishing just higher than last year. IMO Mashley won't prove to be big spenders. Maybe KK is the only man that can demand that, we will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 So we still need to spend £100M in the next window if we're going to compete with West Ham do we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammynb 2929 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 It was 10m net or summat iirc. I don't think the squad as a whole moved forward that much because it was already carrying that much dead weight. It would have been impossible for any manager to put that right in one window with what was in all reality (taking into account the size and quality of the squad) with £26m. People are still think of player prices in terms of 10 years ago imo. There are a dozen clubs now in the PL who can and will match or outspend us. There is a quantum change on our ability at this point to radically alter our situation. I also think SA began to see that too late hence all the 'negative' talk of finishing just higher than last year. IMO Mashley won't prove to be big spenders. Maybe KK is the only man that can demand that, we will see. It was 10m net but the club were extremely fortunate to get what they did for Dyer and Parker which was more down to Mashley than the previous incumbents ability to sell players at a huge loss, were they getting tax rightoffs or what. Also the club knew they wanted to leave so it was no surprise and must of been factored into the 40m. If Allardyce was promised 40 and he got to spend 26, that extra 14 would of only just covered Anelka's fee if we could have got him, so I personally believe all the hype about Ashley not willing to release funds is wide of the mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 (edited) It was 10m net or summat iirc. I don't think the squad as a whole moved forward that much because it was already carrying that much dead weight. It would have been impossible for any manager to put that right in one window with what was in all reality (taking into account the size and quality of the squad) with £26m. People are still think of player prices in terms of 10 years ago imo. There are a dozen clubs now in the PL who can and will match or outspend us. There is a quantum change on our ability at this point to radically alter our situation. I also think SA began to see that too late hence all the 'negative' talk of finishing just higher than last year. IMO Mashley won't prove to be big spenders. Maybe KK is the only man that can demand that, we will see. It was 10m net but the club were extremely fortunate to get what they did for Dyer and Parker which was more down to Mashley than the previous incumbents ability to sell players at a huge loss, were they getting tax rightoffs or what. Also the club knew they wanted to leave so it was no surprise and must of been factored into the 40m. If Allardyce was promised 40 and he got to spend 26, that extra 14 would of only just covered Anelka's fee if we could have got him, so I personally believe all the hype about Ashley not willing to release funds is wide of the mark. You think we spent enough but a simple look at the table (and the piss poor haggard squad) says we didn't. No debate really. The Dyer and Parker deals were good business I agree. And Mort has to take credit for that. Edited February 4, 2008 by Park Life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 So we still need to spend £100M in the next window if we're going to compete with West Ham do we? I thought we were going to shit Boro Nicos? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 So we still need to spend £100M in the next window if we're going to compete with West Ham do we? I thought we were going to shit Boro Nicos? No, you thought we were going to lose to them...and the next two. And now you're covering your arse with talk of how Boro were too timid and should have won. By the time they scored we could have been four up, and should have been at least two up. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. The only fact is we both guessed the outcome wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 So we still need to spend £100M in the next window if we're going to compete with West Ham do we? I thought we were going to shit Boro Nicos? No, you thought we were going to lose to them...and the next two. And now you're covering your arse with talk of how Boro were too timid and should have won. By the time they scored we could have been four up, and should have been at least two up. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. The only fact is we both guessed the outcome wrong. I said we would lose 3 games and but for the post I would have been right. Although a draw was a fair result and yes we were both wrong but you were wronger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 (edited) So we still need to spend £100M in the next window if we're going to compete with West Ham do we? I thought we were going to shit Boro Nicos? No, you thought we were going to lose to them...and the next two. And now you're covering your arse with talk of how Boro were too timid and should have won. By the time they scored we could have been four up, and should have been at least two up. Coulda, woulda, shoulda. The only fact is we both guessed the outcome wrong. I said we would lose 3 games and but for the post I would have been right. Although a draw was a fair result and yes we were both wrong but you were wronger. I was wronger despite us being a referee away from giving them a 4-0 drubbing? Whatever Chester! Edited February 4, 2008 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontoasey 0 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 I listened to him on Sky, and a few truths came out and how this board is going to operate, and thats on the cheap! The players he brought in were not the original players that he wanted because they didn't want to spend the money.Can't see it working tho, in this league you need to splash the cash to be up there and amazingly i felt sorry for Sam listening to him like. And judging by todays game... it's going to be a long end of the season thats for sure with the shit on display there! The owner never gave him the money because he wasnt their manager, he was fat freds, i reckon Mike Ashley knew what he was doing and wanted his own man in before handing over millions of pounds to be spent on the squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 If he was operating 'on the cheap' why did he spend £12m on Smith and Barton? For example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix 0 Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 He'll be arsed about the blow to his ego more than anything else. Yes, but his bank balance should soothe his aching pride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 4, 2008 Share Posted February 4, 2008 He'll be arsed about the blow to his ego more than anything else. Yes, but his bank balance should soothe his aching pride. Just a bit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now