Bellamy on way out at Man City

[LeazesMag 0]

I'd be ecstatic to get Bellamy back as he should still be here with Souness out on his arse at the time instead, however i doubt we'll go in form him myself or if we do it'll be the usual cheap attempt not coming close to what's required. He'd make a collossal difference to our team if we had him here.

 

He loved his time here and would definitely consider coming back (if we were being serious and not dicking about) but as people have said he would like to play for Hughes so Fulham have a great chance.

 

As much as I thought Souness was a complete wanker, the board HAD to back the manager (whoever he may be) over the player in this instance. It would have been a dangerous precedent had events turned out as you suggested.

 

That said we were a poorer team for his departure and I'd be behind him coming back.

 

 

You have to back your managerial appointment. But having said that, they had a case for sacking Souness when he assaulted an employee on the training ground. Which they should have done when the opportunity presented itself.

[shackbleep 0]

I'd be ecstatic to get Bellamy back as he should still be here with Souness out on his arse at the time instead, however i doubt we'll go in form him myself or if we do it'll be the usual cheap attempt not coming close to what's required. He'd make a collossal difference to our team if we had him here.

 

He loved his time here and would definitely consider coming back (if we were being serious and not dicking about) but as people have said he would like to play for Hughes so Fulham have a great chance.

 

As much as I thought Souness was a complete wanker, the board HAD to back the manager (whoever he may be) over the player in this instance. It would have been a dangerous precedent had events turned out as you suggested.

 

That said we were a poorer team for his departure and I'd be behind him coming back.

 

 

You have to back your managerial appointment. But having said that, they had a case for sacking Souness when he assaulted an employee on the training ground. Which they should have done when the opportunity presented itself.

 

How many times would Brian Clough have been sacked for lamping a player during training?

[LeazesMag 0]

I'd be ecstatic to get Bellamy back as he should still be here with Souness out on his arse at the time instead, however i doubt we'll go in form him myself or if we do it'll be the usual cheap attempt not coming close to what's required. He'd make a collossal difference to our team if we had him here.

 

He loved his time here and would definitely consider coming back (if we were being serious and not dicking about) but as people have said he would like to play for Hughes so Fulham have a great chance.

 

As much as I thought Souness was a complete wanker, the board HAD to back the manager (whoever he may be) over the player in this instance. It would have been a dangerous precedent had events turned out as you suggested.

 

That said we were a poorer team for his departure and I'd be behind him coming back.

 

 

You have to back your managerial appointment. But having said that, they had a case for sacking Souness when he assaulted an employee on the training ground. Which they should have done when the opportunity presented itself.

 

How many times would Brian Clough have been sacked for lamping a player during training?

 

how many times did he do it ?

 

You miss the point. Clough was a brilliant, but eccentric, manager. Souness was a grade 1 twat and they should have realised by his attitude to Bellamy and Robert they had made a big mistake and used the assault on Bellamy as the excuse to give him his P45.

[shackbleep 0]

I don't miss the point at all.

 

By appointing Souness your precious Shepherd confirmed that he felt there was an attitude problem in the dressing room which needed dealing with (he said as much publically at the time as well).

 

You didn't have to be well educated to work out which two players were the prime culprits.

[PaddockLad 14574]

I don't miss the point at all.

By appointing Souness your precious Shepherd confirmed that he felt there was an attitude problem in the dressing room which needed dealing with (he said as much publically at the time as well).

 

You didn't have to be well educated to work out which two players were the prime culprits.

 

Wasn't he 5th or 6th choice though?

 

Who turned the job down?...any other supperanuated "hard men" who confuse being hard with being a bully incapable of motivating millionaires?....

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't miss the point at all.

 

By appointing Souness your precious Shepherd confirmed that he felt there was an attitude problem in the dressing room which needed dealing with (he said as much publically at the time as well).

 

You didn't have to be well educated to work out which two players were the prime culprits.

 

"precious Shepherd" You let any constructive point you make down when you make such daft comments.

 

You do realise that I'm saying I'm admitting "precious Shepherd" didn't do everything right [much as it is pointed out by others I say this even when I admit that they made mistakes and have even listed some of them].

 

Incidentally, does your post above indicate you agreed with the appointment of Souness or the thinking behind appointing someone to "clear out the cancers from the dressing room" ?

[shackbleep 0]

Incidentally, does your post above indicate you agreed with the appointment of Souness or the thinking behind appointing someone to "clear out the cancers from the dressing room" ?

 

No, my post indicates that I understood the thought process that Shepherd had at the time he appointed him.

[LeazesMag 0]

Incidentally, does your post above indicate you agreed with the appointment of Souness or the thinking behind appointing someone to "clear out the cancers from the dressing room" ?

 

No, my post indicates that I understood the thought process that Shepherd had at the time he appointed him.

 

he appointed him without the backing and approval of his fellow [major and bigger] shareholders ?

 

I don't think so.

[shackbleep 0]

Incidentally, does your post above indicate you agreed with the appointment of Souness or the thinking behind appointing someone to "clear out the cancers from the dressing room" ?

 

No, my post indicates that I understood the thought process that Shepherd had at the time he appointed him.

 

he appointed him without the backing and approval of his fellow [major and bigger] shareholders ?

 

I don't think so.

 

Never suggested he did.

[LeazesMag 0]

Incidentally, does your post above indicate you agreed with the appointment of Souness or the thinking behind appointing someone to "clear out the cancers from the dressing room" ?

 

No, my post indicates that I understood the thought process that Shepherd had at the time he appointed him.

 

he appointed him without the backing and approval of his fellow [major and bigger] shareholders ?

 

I don't think so.

 

Never suggested he did.

 

[shackbleep 0]

At last. A response that you haven't a clue what to say

[LeazesMag 0]

Incidentally, does your post above indicate you agreed with the appointment of Souness or the thinking behind appointing someone to "clear out the cancers from the dressing room" ?

 

No, my post indicates that I understood the thought process that Shepherd had at the time he appointed him.

 

[shackbleep 0]

Shepherd DID appoint him but nowhere have I suggested that he did it without consenting the rest of the board.

 

Fucking hell man when you have to search for holes in an argument you should give it up you know

[LeazesMag 0]

Shepherd DID appoint him but nowhere have I suggested that he did it without consenting the rest of the board.

 

Fucking hell man when you have to search for holes in an argument you should give it up you know

 

YOU mentioned Shepherd !!!

 

I'm not searching for holes at all. At least most people agree now that Craig Bellamy was worth the bother he takes and we would be much better off with him.

[LeazesMag 0]

anyway, shackbleep. What is your ex username ?

[shackbleep 0]

Shepherd DID appoint him but nowhere have I suggested that he did it without consenting the rest of the board.

 

Fucking hell man when you have to search for holes in an argument you should give it up you know

 

YOU mentioned Shepherd !!!

 

Yes, with good reason.

[Barney 0]

Considering part of Bellamys tantrum was that he didnt want to play on the wing, he's spent an awful lot of time playing there since he left us.

[LeazesMag 0]

Considering part of Bellamys tantrum was that he didnt want to play on the wing, he's spent an awful lot of time playing there since he left us.

 

this is true.

 

Is it a reflection on the managers out there that only Bobby Robson recogised his best position ?

 

He played against us for Coventry and I always thought Gordon Strachan was a nuggetbrain for playing him out of position too......................

 

When we bought him I was totally delighted, because I always thought he was a top player playing up front through the middle

[Guest alex]

[Kitman 2188]

Considering part of Bellamys tantrum was that he didnt want to play on the wing, he's spent an awful lot of time playing there since he left us.

 

this is true.

 

Is it a reflection on the managers out there that only Bobby Robson recogised his best position ?

 

He played against us for Coventry and I always thought Gordon Strachan was a nuggetbrain for playing him out of position too......................

 

When we bought him I was totally delighted, because I always thought he was a top player playing up front through the middle

 

I have to congratulate you for your excellent judgement and perception. As I recall, most people on the web said Sir Bobby was off his rocker paying six and a half million quid for a player who was shit for Coventry City. In fact iirc the Coventry fans were laughing their socks off that they'd mugged the gullible Geordies, and not many had seen him play for CCFC or Norwich so couldn't contradict them. Good on you LM for not being one of the common herd.

[Barney 0]

I wanted Jeffers instead

[Park Life 70]

He should never have been sent packing from here in the first place. Both Shearer and Souness should have been on the stage coach out of town before Bellamy.

 

I'd have him back no problem and he'd still be the best player at the club now - just like he was the day he was forced out.

[LeazesMag 0]

Considering part of Bellamys tantrum was that he didnt want to play on the wing, he's spent an awful lot of time playing there since he left us.

 

this is true.

 

Is it a reflection on the managers out there that only Bobby Robson recogised his best position ?

 

He played against us for Coventry and I always thought Gordon Strachan was a nuggetbrain for playing him out of position too......................

 

When we bought him I was totally delighted, because I always thought he was a top player playing up front through the middle

 

I have to congratulate you for your excellent judgement and perception. As I recall, most people on the web said Sir Bobby was off his rocker paying six and a half million quid for a player who was shit for Coventry City. In fact iirc the Coventry fans were laughing their socks off that they'd mugged the gullible Geordies, and not many had seen him play for CCFC or Norwich so couldn't contradict them. Good on you LM for not being one of the common herd.

 

sarcastic twat

 

I'm not lying BTW and did post my view at the time .......

[Kitman 2188]

Considering part of Bellamys tantrum was that he didnt want to play on the wing, he's spent an awful lot of time playing there since he left us.

 

this is true.

 

Is it a reflection on the managers out there that only Bobby Robson recogised his best position ?

 

He played against us for Coventry and I always thought Gordon Strachan was a nuggetbrain for playing him out of position too......................

 

When we bought him I was totally delighted, because I always thought he was a top player playing up front through the middle

 

I have to congratulate you for your excellent judgement and perception. As I recall, most people on the web said Sir Bobby was off his rocker paying six and a half million quid for a player who was shit for Coventry City. In fact iirc the Coventry fans were laughing their socks off that they'd mugged the gullible Geordies, and not many had seen him play for CCFC or Norwich so couldn't contradict them. Good on you LM for not being one of the common herd.

 

sarcastic twat

 

I'm not lying BTW and did post my view at the time .......

 

[LeazesMag 0]

Considering part of Bellamys tantrum was that he didnt want to play on the wing, he's spent an awful lot of time playing there since he left us.

 

this is true.

 

Is it a reflection on the managers out there that only Bobby Robson recogised his best position ?

 

He played against us for Coventry and I always thought Gordon Strachan was a nuggetbrain for playing him out of position too......................

 

When we bought him I was totally delighted, because I always thought he was a top player playing up front through the middle

 

I have to congratulate you for your excellent judgement and perception. As I recall, most people on the web said Sir Bobby was off his rocker paying six and a half million quid for a player who was shit for Coventry City. In fact iirc the Coventry fans were laughing their socks off that they'd mugged the gullible Geordies, and not many had seen him play for CCFC or Norwich so couldn't contradict them. Good on you LM for not being one of the common herd.

 

sarcastic twat

 

I'm not lying BTW and did post my view at the time .......

 

 

this is what I don't understand about Bellamy. I had seen him play through the middle for Coventry and Norwich so why had they not ? I also remember him playing for Coventry against us, wide left, and wondered why Strachan was playing him in that role. The memory that sticks is that he was given the bird by NUFC fans for being a gobshite and demanding all through the game, but I liked that too.