Barton signs for QPR

[Phil 6]

The silence from the Ashley apologists has been deafening. And I'm talking about the more articulate among them, not deano, who has continued spouting his usual brand of inane drivel.

 

Come on toonpack, chez - let's be avin you.

 

You need to wait until Sept 1st. No point in discussing the overall outcome before then.

 

I'm still confident of two more signings.

No need to worry then, eh lads?

Incidentally, CT only refers to a collective 'Team Positive' to try to add some much needed credibility to his own postings.

 

 

There's no F in Team.

Edited August 25, 2011 by Phil

[McFaul 35]

I'm just disappointed you didn't get a chance to speak to Enrique Chez .

 

It could've all looked so different right now if you'd have had that half hour chat with him.

 

The one you rekoned that if you had, you could've persuaded him to stay ?

Me doing a rendition of 'Please don't go' and Stevie explaining why scousers are mugs and the lad would have signed that deal.

[Christmas Tree 4003]

The silence from the Ashley apologists has been deafening. And I'm talking about the more articulate among them, not deano, who has continued spouting his usual brand of inane drivel.

 

Come on toonpack, chez - let's be avin you.

 

You need to wait until Sept 1st. No point in discussing the overall outcome before then.

 

I'm still confident of two more signings.

No need to worry then, eh lads?

Incidentally, CT only refers to a collective 'Team Positive' to try to add some much needed credibility to his own postings.

 

Not at all. My own postings have a habit of being agreed with usually in the weeks that pass. you of course should know this by now Alex.

[Christmas Tree 4003]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

[manc-mag 1]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

Not the point I'm making - I'm saying Chez's output is the antithesis of the polarised claptrap that gets posted on here and therefore to call him an Ashley 'apologist' is both wrong and yet entirely symptomatic of that particular problem. It's not a cue for an Ashley/Shepherd debate, in fact quite the opposite-I'm appealing for people to engage brains when they read what's written, particularly when it's done thoughtfully and logically, because sadly that's not as common as it ought to be on here given the posters we have.

 

If anything, I phrased it like that so Gloomy would understand what I was getting at, because he often makes the same criticism himself.

[manc-mag 1]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

 

Seriously, can we not fucking leave this? My reason for posting what I said is explained below. A lot of the time you have to actively manage threads from taking this unwanted direction, so please don't openly invite it.

[LeazesMag 0]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

 

1. The club generated its money and had the ambition and desire to aim for success.

 

2. 7th in the premiership only 12 months prior to the sale, and 15 years of regular european football, is far from "going to slime".

 

3. Some would not dance at this happening, but the point I make above - again - is that a new owner AGAIN may not match the Halls and Shepherd, and could be just as bad or lacking in ambition as Ashley, for whatever reason, which is irrelevant. They either have the ambition and understand the size of the club, and that we should not be losing our best players to some of the clubs they have gone to, or they don't. And we should be backing our managers completely and attempting to capitalise on the size of the clubs support and commercial potential.

 

This is a direct reply to your questions, don't say in future I don't reply. I have made ALL of these points to people who said otherwise for the last 4 years since the club changed hands and long before that to people who wanted it to change hands.

Edited August 25, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

hmmmmm, maybe you have a--No, FUCK HIM

 

TEAM NEGATIVE!

[LeazesMag 0]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

 

Seriously, can we not fucking leave this? My reason for posting what I said is explained below. A lot of the time you have to actively manage threads from taking this unwanted direction, so please don't openly invite it.

 

do fuck off. Its topical and relevant. Not everybody "agrees" with you, and to remind you, you have been wrong and this is what pisses you off so much about what I say, I suspect.

[Christmas Tree 4003]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

 

Seriously, can we not fucking leave this? My reason for posting what I said is explained below. A lot of the time you have to actively manage threads from taking this unwanted direction, so please don't openly invite it.

 

Apologies.

[LeazesMag 0]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

Not the point I'm making - I'm saying Chez's output is the antithesis of the polarised claptrap that gets posted on here and therefore to call him an Ashley 'apologist' is both wrong and yet entirely symptomatic of that particular problem. It's not a cue for an Ashley/Shepherd debate, in fact quite the opposite-I'm appealing for people to engage brains when they read what's written, particularly when it's done thoughtfully and logically, because sadly that's not as common as it ought to be on here given the posters we have.

 

If anything, I phrased it like that so Gloomy would understand what I was getting at, because he often makes the same criticism himself.

 

I think Chez puts his point across well, as he sees it, its just that I personally think he is looking at it from the wrong angle.

 

As for "polarised claptrap", I don't know what you mean, could you be specific ? If it is what I think it is, then I'm sorry but this is just you having your head up your arse again.

[LeazesMag 0]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

 

Seriously, can we not fucking leave this? My reason for posting what I said is explained below. A lot of the time you have to actively manage threads from taking this unwanted direction, so please don't openly invite it.

 

Apologies.

 

you shouldn't apologise, they were relevant and worthwhile questions.

[Dr Gloom 20160]

The silence from the Ashley apologists has been deafening. And I'm talking about the more articulate among them, not deano, who has continued spouting his usual brand of inane drivel.

 

Come on toonpack, chez - let's be avin you.

 

Will respond to anything of interest tomorrow when I'll be working from home, am in the smoke just now, new gig.

 

Gloomy used to be a "anybody but Fred" person, just like you man.

 

I still am and I'm right

 

For the record Leazesmag, i wasn't. I won't dispute that i thought it was time for him go. I hoped a new owner with more money could get us back to where we were after Fred allowed things to stagnate by appointing souness and roeder. That doesn't mean i ever said anyone would do better than shepherd. I never said anyone but fred. Find where i said that or shut the fuck up already.

[Kid Dynamite 6089]

Oh good, we are arguing about owners again

[Christmas Tree 4003]

Aye, I was going to say like if it's not obvious to everyone that Chez's position is essentially one of constant review (in the pure sense) then it's yet another case of people reading summat, not liking it and simply translating it into Ashley/Shepherd-esque bite sized consumption to suit their own palate. It's not like we don't have enough of that on here. Mercifully, Chez is at the opposite end of that spectrum.

 

that is not really correct, again. It isn't so simple as Ashley v Fred, the next owner could also get nowhere near the ex owners either.

 

I'll leave it up to you if you want to start disputing this with me - again, and trying to prove me wrong, like you have done for the last 4 years, but one day the penny may drop that not too many people actually will match or better them. We will see.

 

There are worse owners than Ashley, I say this because I now think he is doing all this deliberately to get his money back asap and sell the club for whatever he can when someone offers an acceptable price.

 

 

After all this time I still dont quite get you.

 

Do you really think anyone on here would not rather be back in the days of SJH when we had money to splash and people who cared running the club?

 

Did you not notice that it had gone to slime under Shepherd and that people quite rightly hoped Ashley may do better?

 

Do you think there is anyone on this forum who wouldnt dance at the exit of Ashley given a better owner took over?

 

Seriously, can we not fucking leave this? My reason for posting what I said is explained below. A lot of the time you have to actively manage threads from taking this unwanted direction, so please don't openly invite it.

 

Apologies.

 

you shouldn't apologise, they were relevant and worthwhile questions.

 

Maybe but I appreciate everyone is fed up to the back teeth about the Shepherd v Ashley debate regardless of its rights or wrongs.

[Kitman 2188]

Maybe we should all just admit that Leazes was right all along? Then we can get back to bitching about Fat Ash.

[LeazesMag 0]

The silence from the Ashley apologists has been deafening. And I'm talking about the more articulate among them, not deano, who has continued spouting his usual brand of inane drivel.

 

Come on toonpack, chez - let's be avin you.

 

Will respond to anything of interest tomorrow when I'll be working from home, am in the smoke just now, new gig.

 

Gloomy used to be a "anybody but Fred" person, just like you man.

 

I still am and I'm right

 

For the record Leazesmag, i wasn't. I won't dispute that i thought it was time for him go. I hoped a new owner with more money could get us back to where we were after Fred allowed things to stagnate by appointing souness and roeder. That doesn't mean i ever said anyone would do better than shepherd. I never said anyone but fred. Find where i said that or shut the fuck up already.

 

a few facts for you. When Mike Ashley bought the club, only Chelsea were being bankrolled and that was NOT a reason for people wanting a new owner [and the club was not owned by Shepherd anyway either]. I accept that people wanted better, everybody wanted better, but my point is you thought it would be automatic and a new owner would "improve" things from being one of the top clubs in the country. Do you have a brain ? I'm afraid the grass was greener for you, and when I pointed it out, you and numerous others gave me flak for it. You now moan on about having an ambitious board, but quite simply, when you had it, you didn't want them.

 

So YOU shut the fuck up and stop moaning, because you got the change you wanted. All your posts are nowt but moaning on man.

[manc-mag 1]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I mentioned elsewhere about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due: inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere. (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

[Guest alex]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I said about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due-inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

Aye, I think you nailed it when you said that earlier. It's basically been the model since relegation and possibly even earlier than that (if you put Nolan down as a panic buy that January down to Barton getting injured).

[Tooj 17]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I mentioned elsewhere about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due: inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere. (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

Definitely. We should have went for Boyata on loan. He's certainly an upgrade on Taylor and Williamson.

[McFaul 35]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I mentioned elsewhere about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due: inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere. (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

Definitely. We should have went for Boyata on loan. He's certainly an upgrade on Taylor and Williamson.

I reckon if we put a cheeky £4m bid in for Bassong we might get him, and he's always tweeting about the toon. If Danny B is anything to go by the Spurs fans don't rate him too.

[Kitman 2188]

I reckon if we put a cheeky £4m bid in for Bassong we might get him, and he's always tweeting about the toon. If Danny B is anything to go by the Spurs fans don't rate him too.

 

Was thinking the same that Bassong would be a good signing. I reckon there's 4 million reasons why that won't happen though.

[Anth 54]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I mentioned elsewhere about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due: inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere. (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

Definitely. We should have went for Boyata on loan. He's certainly an upgrade on Taylor and Williamson.

I reckon if we put a cheeky £4m bid in for Bassong we might get him, and he's always tweeting about the toon. If Danny B is anything to go by the Spurs fans don't rate him too.

Whats his crack about Newcastle like? Reckon he misses the city?

[McFaul 35]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I mentioned elsewhere about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due: inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere. (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

Definitely. We should have went for Boyata on loan. He's certainly an upgrade on Taylor and Williamson.

I reckon if we put a cheeky £4m bid in for Bassong we might get him, and he's always tweeting about the toon. If Danny B is anything to go by the Spurs fans don't rate him too.

Whats his crack about Newcastle like? Reckon he misses the city?

Great fans. Wished us well against the mackems, praised us when we won. Misses shaggin lasses down the alley from Circus Circus* etc...

 

* not strictly true

[Anth 54]

Anyway, back to the thread, I still see Barton going as being consistent with what I mentioned elsewhere about all big earners leaving when their contract re-negotiations fall due: inevitable if they're actually in demand elsewhere. (contrast Alan Smith). It'll take no account of their position on the field (ie whether or not there is squad cover available) or their intrinsic value to the team. We're in a cycle of signing players on very modest wages and then having enough slack within the wage structure to offer them one level of uplift on renewal if they perform.

 

It's still all about who's coming in and (as Stevie has said) you can add a centre half to the LB and striker requirement. If at least two of those three aren't done adequately before the end of the window, it's an unjustifiable weakening of the team for the season.

Definitely. We should have went for Boyata on loan. He's certainly an upgrade on Taylor and Williamson.

I reckon if we put a cheeky £4m bid in for Bassong we might get him, and he's always tweeting about the toon. If Danny B is anything to go by the Spurs fans don't rate him too.

Whats his crack about Newcastle like? Reckon he misses the city?

Great fans. Wished us well against the mackems, praised us when we won. Misses shaggin lasses down the alley from Circus Circus* etc...

 

* not strictly true

Haha! Bet he loved Maceys and Robinson's town house anarl! Can't say I've seen alot of him since he left, has he stagnated at Spurs?