LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 For Alex. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/...c,16535.60.html Once again you have proved to be a stupid bastard who doesn't read threads....I don't give a shit if those players were available at the time or not, the question was to name players.... and I named players, low priced ones too, and also stated quite factually that bearing in mind the chairman had handed over 50m quid [as a result of himself running a club very well and having such an amount of money] that we could have bought all those players I named simply by making an offer that couldn't be turned down [as was the case with Boumsong], again because we are bigger than the clubs in question, which is down to the way the club is run by the chairman and his directors. The questions I had in mind, which I'm sure everyone else knew what I meant, were Name me the clubs who have been more successful than us on and off the pitch than us over the last decade. [Clue = 4. Which is why I named 4 players as you asked] Explain why the other big city clubs have not filled their own grounds and maximed their potential to match us, as they have all done in the past. Thus answering who is responsible for us being bigger and better than Villa, Everton, Birmingham, Wolves, Portsmouth, Leeds, Southampton, Spurs, Man City over th last decade, when all these clubs have been bigger and better than us at times in the past, some of them for long periods. Explain why our old board didn't fill the ground, buy England players, appoint England managers, and qualify regularly for europe, especially when they had the opportunity to build on the unexpected Fairs Cup Win. As you are so quick to call trophy winning managers we appoint as "shit", please explain what exact criteria further to this the club should be doing in future, on top of funding all of them with an enormous amount of money to bring the same success to the club that they achieved elsewhere ? Now, answer these questions, I answered yours, don't bother giving stupid little mincey smarmy 3 word answers like a fucking tart as usual....answer them with factual answers or don't bother fuckin asking me any more, and just accept you are talking a heap of crap and have absolutely no idea how much this football club has advanced ahead of our rivals under this current board of directors. 106542[/snapback] Abuse you say 107090[/snapback] He said DON'T BOTHER giving stupid little mincey smarmy 3 word answers like a tart, and what do you do? Naughty boy! 107093[/snapback] Working late Gem....or still thinking of answers 107096[/snapback] Answers to what? You're like an inquisitive child. What do you want to know now? 107101[/snapback] dearie dearie me....just admit it you've lost the gist of the thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 Well he could have of course left it until half way through the season like Souness....then what ? he backed him with MONEY Alex...he gave him the freedom to re-create his success at Liverpool and Blackburn....understand ????? Comprehend ???? If you think this is the wrong approach, please explain what the right one is ? 106992[/snapback] Aye, he backed him with money then sacked him right at the start of a new season and to be honest, no I don't understand why he did it or why you're trying to defend his timing of that dismissal. 106994[/snapback] Should have had the guts to dismiss him after the FA cup final OR given him an adequate run in the new season (whatever that is but more than 2 games). Howay Leazes man, I know you agree with this really. 106998[/snapback] With hindsight.....which neither you, me nor anyone else has. Did you say sack him after the FA Cup Final ? When is the best time to sack a manager, early in the season like Dalglish or do you want to carry on baying for his head and wait until half way through like Souness ? Is reaching the FA Cup Final failure BTW ?? And deserving of the sack...Just a thought like... Why don't you think we shouldn't have given Dalglish more time, because of his track record of winning trophies, or is the "5 year plan" now out the window.... Truth is, you can't have it every way and no matter what Fred does you would twist something to criticise, unless he does the impossible and has foresight. 107094[/snapback] Well Alex ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Well he could have of course left it until half way through the season like Souness....then what ? he backed him with MONEY Alex...he gave him the freedom to re-create his success at Liverpool and Blackburn....understand ????? Comprehend ???? If you think this is the wrong approach, please explain what the right one is ? 106992[/snapback] Aye, he backed him with money then sacked him right at the start of a new season and to be honest, no I don't understand why he did it or why you're trying to defend his timing of that dismissal. 106994[/snapback] Should have had the guts to dismiss him after the FA cup final OR given him an adequate run in the new season (whatever that is but more than 2 games). Howay Leazes man, I know you agree with this really. 106998[/snapback] With hindsight.....which neither you, me nor anyone else has. Did you say sack him after the FA Cup Final ? When is the best time to sack a manager, early in the season like Dalglish or do you want to carry on baying for his head and wait until half way through like Souness ? Is reaching the FA Cup Final failure BTW ?? And deserving of the sack...Just a thought like... Why don't you think we shouldn't have given Dalglish more time, because of his track record of winning trophies, or is the "5 year plan" now out the window.... Truth is, you can't have it every way and no matter what Fred does you would twist something to criticise, unless he does the impossible and has foresight. 107094[/snapback] Well Alex ? 107115[/snapback] Well Renton you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35639 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 For Alex. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/...c,16535.60.html Once again you have proved to be a stupid bastard who doesn't read threads....I don't give a shit if those players were available at the time or not, the question was to name players.... and I named players, low priced ones too, and also stated quite factually that bearing in mind the chairman had handed over 50m quid [as a result of himself running a club very well and having such an amount of money] that we could have bought all those players I named simply by making an offer that couldn't be turned down [as was the case with Boumsong], again because we are bigger than the clubs in question, which is down to the way the club is run by the chairman and his directors. The questions I had in mind, which I'm sure everyone else knew what I meant, were Name me the clubs who have been more successful than us on and off the pitch than us over the last decade. [Clue = 4. Which is why I named 4 players as you asked] Explain why the other big city clubs have not filled their own grounds and maximed their potential to match us, as they have all done in the past. Thus answering who is responsible for us being bigger and better than Villa, Everton, Birmingham, Wolves, Portsmouth, Leeds, Southampton, Spurs, Man City over th last decade, when all these clubs have been bigger and better than us at times in the past, some of them for long periods. Explain why our old board didn't fill the ground, buy England players, appoint England managers, and qualify regularly for europe, especially when they had the opportunity to build on the unexpected Fairs Cup Win. As you are so quick to call trophy winning managers we appoint as "shit", please explain what exact criteria further to this the club should be doing in future, on top of funding all of them with an enormous amount of money to bring the same success to the club that they achieved elsewhere ? Now, answer these questions, I answered yours, don't bother giving stupid little mincey smarmy 3 word answers like a fucking tart as usual....answer them with factual answers or don't bother fuckin asking me any more, and just accept you are talking a heap of crap and have absolutely no idea how much this football club has advanced ahead of our rivals under this current board of directors. 106542[/snapback] Abuse you say 107090[/snapback] He said DON'T BOTHER giving stupid little mincey smarmy 3 word answers like a tart, and what do you do? Naughty boy! 107093[/snapback] Working late Gem....or still thinking of answers 107096[/snapback] Answers to what? You're like an inquisitive child. What do you want to know now? 107101[/snapback] dearie dearie me....just admit it you've lost the gist of the thread 107114[/snapback] Coming from you? There is no gist to an argument with you man. As soon as you get shown up on one thing you hammer on about something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 (edited) For Alex. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/...c,16535.60.html Once again you have proved to be a stupid bastard who doesn't read threads....I don't give a shit if those players were available at the time or not, the question was to name players.... and I named players, low priced ones too, and also stated quite factually that bearing in mind the chairman had handed over 50m quid [as a result of himself running a club very well and having such an amount of money] that we could have bought all those players I named simply by making an offer that couldn't be turned down [as was the case with Boumsong], again because we are bigger than the clubs in question, which is down to the way the club is run by the chairman and his directors. The questions I had in mind, which I'm sure everyone else knew what I meant, were Name me the clubs who have been more successful than us on and off the pitch than us over the last decade. [Clue = 4. Which is why I named 4 players as you asked] Explain why the other big city clubs have not filled their own grounds and maximed their potential to match us, as they have all done in the past. Thus answering who is responsible for us being bigger and better than Villa, Everton, Birmingham, Wolves, Portsmouth, Leeds, Southampton, Spurs, Man City over th last decade, when all these clubs have been bigger and better than us at times in the past, some of them for long periods. Explain why our old board didn't fill the ground, buy England players, appoint England managers, and qualify regularly for europe, especially when they had the opportunity to build on the unexpected Fairs Cup Win. As you are so quick to call trophy winning managers we appoint as "shit", please explain what exact criteria further to this the club should be doing in future, on top of funding all of them with an enormous amount of money to bring the same success to the club that they achieved elsewhere ? Now, answer these questions, I answered yours, don't bother giving stupid little mincey smarmy 3 word answers like a fucking tart as usual....answer them with factual answers or don't bother fuckin asking me any more, and just accept you are talking a heap of crap and have absolutely no idea how much this football club has advanced ahead of our rivals under this current board of directors. 106542[/snapback] Abuse you say 107090[/snapback] He said DON'T BOTHER giving stupid little mincey smarmy 3 word answers like a tart, and what do you do? Naughty boy! 107093[/snapback] Working late Gem....or still thinking of answers 107096[/snapback] Answers to what? You're like an inquisitive child. What do you want to know now? 107101[/snapback] dearie dearie me....just admit it you've lost the gist of the thread 107114[/snapback] Coming from you? There is no gist to an argument with you man. As soon as you get shown up on one thing you hammer on about something else. 107120[/snapback] I don't think so. My stance and opinion based on fact is clear. I'm only responding to the ridiculous amount of angles that you and the others find to attack the directors of the club because you are unable to realise that they are doing a good job, not the best admittedly, without persuading Abramovic to buy us out they won't be the best, or the overnight capturing of ManU's worldwide following, but good. Edited March 15, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Leazes, far be it from me to butt into the argument, but I shall anyway. You maintain that we are doing better than 88 clubs or something, but under Shepherd: Average league position: 10th Average points total: 54 Managers departing under a cloud: Three Trophies won: None Money paid to the Hall and Shepherd families during this time in dividends alone: £23.6m How exactly are we doing better? One season in the Champions League and two Cup Finals in which we didn't even put up a fight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 (edited) Leazes, far be it from me to butt into the argument, but I shall anyway. You maintain that we are doing better than 88 clubs or something, but under Shepherd: Average league position: 10th Average points total: 54 Managers departing under a cloud: Three Trophies won: None Money paid to the Hall and Shepherd families during this time in dividends alone: £23.6m How exactly are we doing better? One season in the Champions League and two Cup Finals in which we didn't even put up a fight? 107170[/snapback] I thought the influx of people on here going onto Newcastle Online, despite the slagging off between the 2 boards, was only a one way thing. Obviously not. I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position. There were reasons for our low positions under Dalglish and Gullt, then Robsons first few years of re-building. But by far the most important point is that the club showed the desire to re-build and pay the money to do it. Agreed ? Your last point is ignorance, go back and read the whole thread. It is actually one season in the Champions League, 7 seasons in all in europe and 2 Cup Finals more than other big city clubs who could have done the same if they had our ambiton ie Leeds, Man City, Spurs, mackems, Everton, Villa, Southampton, Portsmouth, Wolves, Sheff Wed, Birmingham. And the same more than all our previous directors before the Halls and Shepherd, who all could have tapped the fanbase but chose not to. Particularly when we finished 15th for 3 years, lost a Cup Final and is considered a "golden era". Fact. I also don't give a flying fuck about 23m quid over a decade which equates to 2.3m a year which is nothing. 2.3m a season makes absolutely no difference, put against about 200m+ which has been handed over to all the managers to try and be successful. The board are legally entitled to their dividend, and if they keep us competing for and buying England players, qualifying for europe, and appointing top managers with proven winning CV's and backing they can have it, come the day someone actually does the trick and wins the breakthrough trophy they can have double so far as I am concerned. All these other clubs I've named could match us if they want, but don't. Study the facts. I'm not repeating this again for you either give a factual reply that makes sense, if you just want to create a 2 man comparison with Liverpool then fuck off because it's not a proper presentation of the progress the club has made or the ambition it displays. Edited March 15, 2006 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35639 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position That's because it kicks the legs out from under your whole argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position That's because it kicks the legs out from under your whole argument. 107212[/snapback] no it doesn't. Read the whole post. Anyway, as we know, maths isn't your strong point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position I do. 107210[/snapback] bollox that gol....in 1997 we were 2nd, in 1998 we were 13th.....so we were 7th or 8th... right ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 I thought the influx of people on here going onto Newcastle Online, despite the slagging off between the 2 boards, was only a one way thing. Obviously not. I come on here quite often. That ok? I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position. Why not exactly? I'd have thought it was quite important myself. There were reasons for our low positions under Dalglish and Gullt What were they? But by far the most important point is that the club showed the desire to re-build and pay the money to do it. Agreed ? Rebuilding is only so good if you do it, then do not let the house fall back down again. Your last point is ignorance, go back and read the whole thread. It is actually one season in the Champions League, 7 seasons in all in europe and 2 Cup Finals more than other big city clubs who could have done the same if they had our ambiton ie Leeds, Man City, Spurs, mackems, Everton, Villa, Southampton, Portsmouth, Wolves, Sheff Wed, Birmingham. Only two of those clubs are not surrounded in the very immediate area by clubs as big as them or even bigger. Do you think that if there were another Premiership team in Newcastle, our crowds would still be as big? And the same more than all our previous directors before the Halls and Shepherd, who all could have tapped the fanbase but chose not to. Particularly when we finished 15th for 3 years, lost a Cup Final and is considered a "golden era". Fact. How many times must you be told that since 1992 and since Hall and Keegan, there has been a massive boom in football and in Newcastle United? It's got absolutely sod all to do with Freddy Shepherd. I also don't give a flying fuck about 23m quid over a decade which equates to 2.3m a year which is nothing. 2.3m a season makes absolutely no difference, put against about 200m+ which has been handed over to all the managers to try and be successful. The board are legally entitled to their dividend, and if they keep us competing for and buying England players, qualifying for europe, and appointing top managers with proven winning CV's and backing they can have it, come the day someone actually does the trick and wins the breakthrough trophy they can have double so far as I am concerned. If they're being paid for failure, how on Earth do you expect them to ever aim higher? Yes, they are legally entitled to their dividend - so are the directors at Spurs, Arsenal, Liverpool etc - but they don't take it, preferring to plug the money back into the club. I don't have a problem with them taking money if we're doing well and winning things, like Man Utd's directors used to - but we're not. Who are these managers? Robson, yes. The rest, no. Either not top managers, not backed or both. All these other clubs I've named could match us if they want. How? When a massive proportion of their potential fanbase is off supporting the other, often bigger, team in their area? Study the facts. I'm not repeating this again for you either give a factual reply that makes sense, if you just want to create a 2 man comparison with Liverpool then fuck off because it's not a proper presentation of the progress the club has made or the ambition it displays. 107207[/snapback] Never mentioned Liverpool. We should be at least matching them and Arsenal though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position I do. 107210[/snapback] bollox that gol....in 1997 we were 2nd, in 1998 we were 13th.....so we were 7th or 8th... right ? 107214[/snapback] Ahh, so you can pick and choose which years you look at then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 no it doesn't. Read the whole post. Anyway, as we know, maths isn't your strong point 107213[/snapback] Christ, 51; are you not embarrassed for yourself? The accountant can't do sums! Ner ner, ne ner ner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 no it doesn't. Read the whole post. Anyway, as we know, maths isn't your strong point 107213[/snapback] Christ, 51; are you not embarrassed for yourself? The accountant can't do sums! Ner ner, ne ner ner. 107246[/snapback] whats wrong with being 51 ? Can Gemmill only count to 49 or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position I do. 107210[/snapback] bollox that gol....in 1997 we were 2nd, in 1998 we were 13th.....so we were 7th or 8th... right ? 107214[/snapback] Ahh, so you can pick and choose which years you look at then? 107238[/snapback] No. You get highs and lows, so I can't see the relevance of an average. Its negating a success and boosting a sub standard or failure season. Precisely whats being done in fact .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35639 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position I do. 107210[/snapback] bollox that gol....in 1997 we were 2nd, in 1998 we were 13th.....so we were 7th or 8th... right ? 107214[/snapback] Ahh, so you can pick and choose which years you look at then? 107238[/snapback] No. You get highs and lows, so I can't see the relevance of an average. Its negating a success and boosting a sub standard or failure season. Precisely whats being done in fact .... 107251[/snapback] Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 I don't actually give a flying fuck about our average position I do. 107210[/snapback] bollox that gol....in 1997 we were 2nd, in 1998 we were 13th.....so we were 7th or 8th... right ? 107214[/snapback] Ahh, so you can pick and choose which years you look at then? 107238[/snapback] No. You get highs and lows, so I can't see the relevance of an average. Its negating a success and boosting a sub standard or failure season. Precisely whats being done in fact .... 107251[/snapback] Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? 107261[/snapback] eerrr I just think its stupid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adios 717 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? 107261[/snapback] He doesn't have time for your fancy dan lecturing tbh. What does this fancy dan lecture in, anyway; Cowboy Studies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35639 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? 107261[/snapback] He doesn't have time for your fancy dan lecturing tbh. What does this fancy dan lecture in, anyway; Cowboy Studies? 107263[/snapback] He "just thinks it's stupid." Is that the whole concept of averages Leazes, or just the ones that fuck your arguments RIGHT up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythetoon 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Our old board had no ambition whatsoever, I'll give Shepherd credit where it's due, he's got plenty. I disagree. One of Freddy Shepherd's biggest strengths which fools a lot of fans, certainly the media, is to be seen to be ambitious (big name signings, big talk etc.) where as his real ambition, his motives and his drive, well that for me doesn't come from any real determination to see Newcastle United become a huge success, or the club we certainly have the potential to be. Oh no, but to make as much money as he can out of the club, for himself, his friends and his family, and for as long as possible. Or for as long as he can get away with it. Money, ego and importance or the feeling of being important, are what drives Freddy Shepherd into work each day, the needs of others beyond his own, i.e. the club's, is secondary. Any level of success we achieve is purely by fault and not by design under Freddy Shepherd and the nepotistic management structure in place at Newcastle he is in control of as Chairman of the club and majority (single) shareholder. The money that the club has invested over the years is not a sign of ambition for me, it would be if it was applied with any real conviction. But we all know, well I do, that big name/big money signings only happen to serve one purpose, to self finance Freddy Shepherd and Co's existence as powerful, rich, football owners/directors/shareholders. Big name players put bums on seats, bums on seats pay big dividends, big dividends buys lots of shares, lots of shares gives one a bigger dividend, a bigger dividend gives one a bigger salary. If Freddy Shepherd was as ambitious as he would like us all to believe, he wouldn't have even considered Graeme Souness who was appointed on the back of a betting scam. (And he had the cheek to question the motives of those fans who want Hitzfeld...) You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours. That's all NUFC is and ever will be to these people so long as WE the people who bankroll the club, hand over our hard earned cash or sit on our arses on those plastic seats clapping like seals as we fawn over the latest dream sold to us by... a man who thinks we are all mugs, our women are dogs and who sleeps with prostitutes half his age. A man who sends out Alan Oliver to fill our heads with shite so we don't ask questions about his management which I don't know about you, but is weak as piss. They say in football the table never lies and your position in the table is the true mark of your team, well that also applies to our Chairman. He and he more than anyone is responsible for our current situation which isn't just down to Graeme Souness (far from it) but is the result of a catalogue of mismanagement he was/is at the head of that acted like a domino effect on our club. Or rather an avalanche effect as it transpired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? 107261[/snapback] He doesn't have time for your fancy dan lecturing tbh. What does this fancy dan lecture in, anyway; Cowboy Studies? 107263[/snapback] He "just thinks it's stupid." Is that the whole concept of averages Leazes, or just the ones that fuck your arguments RIGHT up? 107265[/snapback] Oh God gemma stop being such a prat FWIW..I stand by my "arguments" which will in time be proved right. We will be very very fortunate if someone comes along and does better for this club than Shepherd and the Halls. I notice you still don't say who you have in mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 35639 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? 107261[/snapback] He doesn't have time for your fancy dan lecturing tbh. What does this fancy dan lecture in, anyway; Cowboy Studies? 107263[/snapback] He "just thinks it's stupid." Is that the whole concept of averages Leazes, or just the ones that fuck your arguments RIGHT up? 107265[/snapback] Oh God gemma stop being such a prat FWIW..I stand by my "arguments" which will in time be proved right. We will be very very fortunate if someone comes along and does better for this club than Shepherd and the Halls. I notice you still don't say who you have in mind 107268[/snapback] I just think suggesting replacements is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythetoon 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Share Posted March 15, 2006 We will be very very fortunate if someone comes along and does better for this club than Shepherd and the Halls. I notice you still don't say who you have in mind Whilst (sadly) I agree that we could do a lot worse, that shouldn't however stop us from demanding better or asking pertinent questions about the management of our club or those who 'manage' it. And neither should it ever hold us back from wanting change. Alan Sugar was a Freddy Shepherd, he spent big, or tried to, he targeted big names, he talked the talk, but the people in control of Spurs today, who don't have his wealth or status, run the club much better than he ever did. They sprang out of a boardroom of a corporate bricks and mortar business. Some of them aren't even Spurs supporters or were born within a stones throw of White Hart Lane. It shouldn't be a question of who can replace Shepherd anyway, it doesn't need to be a mega rich businessman, a sugar daddy (Shepherd is neither anyway), or any kind of individual. We don't need a saviour like Steve Gibson or Dave Whelan. We just need a competent board. The club makes enough money to sustain itself. While I would ideally like the CEO or a Chairman of our club to be a Geordie, I realise the merits an independent board can bring, after all Chelsea, Arsenal and Man Utd before and now, were all ran by independent people not blood-tied to the 'their' respective clubs. And look at the success they've had. To sum up, I think we could do a hell of a lot better than FS and the Halls, a hell of a lot better and I'd wager that we would have far more success as a club without them, than with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 15, 2006 Author Share Posted March 15, 2006 Errr, no it's an average. Now who's having problems with his maths?? 107261[/snapback] He doesn't have time for your fancy dan lecturing tbh. What does this fancy dan lecture in, anyway; Cowboy Studies? 107263[/snapback] He "just thinks it's stupid." Is that the whole concept of averages Leazes, or just the ones that fuck your arguments RIGHT up? 107265[/snapback] Oh God gemma stop being such a prat FWIW..I stand by my "arguments" which will in time be proved right. We will be very very fortunate if someone comes along and does better for this club than Shepherd and the Halls. I notice you still don't say who you have in mind 107268[/snapback] I just think suggesting replacements is stupid. 107269[/snapback] how childish 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