FAO Leazes Mag

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

[Sima 0]

I'm adding "plan(s)" to the LM dictionary tbh

[Gemmill 34606]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

I can just imagine you at work.

 

Boss: We've got a meeting later on to discuss plans for next year and how we want to take things forward.

 

LM: *affects high pitched voice* WoooOOOOOoo "plans" eh? He wants to do some "planning" lads. *adopts limp wrist pose* Ooooooo chase meh round the board room and spank me with your "plans".

 

Boss: Errrrrr.

[Meenzer 14060]

I can just imagine you at work.

 

Boss: We've got a meeting later on to discuss plans for next year and how we want to take things forward.

 

LM: *affects high pitched voice* WoooOOOOOoo "plans" eh? He wants to do some "planning" lads. *adopts limp wrist pose* Ooooooo chase meh round the board room and spank me with your "plans".

 

Boss: Errrrrr.

That's his best Elton John impression you're taking the piss out of there.

[Renton 17825]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

[Gemmill 34606]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

I made the mistake of getting into another tussle with Leazes over on NO. I've revisited the thread today and there's about 3 pages worth of him arguing with other people, but on several occasions he puts in the classic "or do you think x,y,z as Gemmill does". Obviously the fact that I've never mentioned x, y or z is irrelevant to Leazes, but it strengthens his position if he attributes things to people that they've never said. Makes it easier to argue when you make someone's opinion up for them.

[Renton 17825]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

I made the mistake of getting into another tussle with Leazes over on NO. I've revisited the thread today and there's about 3 pages worth of him arguing with other people, but on several occasions he puts in the classic "or do you think x,y,z as Gemmill does". Obviously the fact that I've never mentioned x, y or z is irrelevant to Leazes, but it strengthens his position if he attributes things to people that they've never said. Makes it easier to argue when you make someone's opinion up for them.

 

He does it all the time. I endured over 20 pages of him telling people I was happy for terrorists to blow up civilians on at least two threads on General chat, not forgetting the hilarious qualifications debacle. Still, where would the board be without dear Leazes?

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

Clipping posts - I don't.

 

And as for proving me wrong, go ahead - but I suspect the reason you aren't attempting is because you know you can't...

 

My point is pretty straightforward. Football is not the high street. Managers are appointed and sacked on the back of results, so long contracts and 5 year plans don't work, the success or a failure of the results of the first team determine how long a manager stays at a club, and nothing else. The contract is worthless, all it means is if you are losing it cost you more to get rid of him and if you can't afford it you are fucked.

 

Surprised this has to be explained to so many bright sparks ....

 

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

I made the mistake of getting into another tussle with Leazes over on NO. I've revisited the thread today and there's about 3 pages worth of him arguing with other people, but on several occasions he puts in the classic "or do you think x,y,z as Gemmill does". Obviously the fact that I've never mentioned x, y or z is irrelevant to Leazes, but it strengthens his position if he attributes things to people that they've never said. Makes it easier to argue when you make someone's opinion up for them.

 

He does it all the time. I endured over 20 pages of him telling people I was happy for terrorists to blow up civilians on at least two threads on General chat, not forgetting the hilarious qualifications debacle. Still, where would the board be without dear Leazes?

 

You're quite right.....the notion that having medical qualifications - especially if they are similar to the ones they give away these days having made them 10 times easier to get than they used to be - gives you knowledge of matters of defence and security of the country, is in fact, hilarious.

 

Of cours, the terrorist threat to this country, and the growing influence and demands on our society of muslims to live their own seperate, non-integrated lifestyle, is no worse or bigger than it was 10 years ago, and it wil not become more so.

Edited October 9, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Renton 17825]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

I made the mistake of getting into another tussle with Leazes over on NO. I've revisited the thread today and there's about 3 pages worth of him arguing with other people, but on several occasions he puts in the classic "or do you think x,y,z as Gemmill does". Obviously the fact that I've never mentioned x, y or z is irrelevant to Leazes, but it strengthens his position if he attributes things to people that they've never said. Makes it easier to argue when you make someone's opinion up for them.

 

He does it all the time. I endured over 20 pages of him telling people I was happy for terrorists to blow up civilians on at least two threads on General chat, not forgetting the hilarious qualifications debacle. Still, where would the board be without dear Leazes?

 

You're quite right.....the notion that having medical qualifications - especially if they are similar to the ones they give away these days having made them 10 times easier to get than they used to be - gives you knowledge of matters of defence and security of the country, is in fact, hilarious.

 

Of cours, the terrorist threat to this country, and the growing influence and demands on our society of muslims to live their own seperate, non-integrated lifestyle, is no worse or bigger than it was 10 years ago, and it wil not become more so.

 

 

Don't start, I don't want to go through that again, and I'm sure you don't either.

[LeazesMag 0]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

I made the mistake of getting into another tussle with Leazes over on NO. I've revisited the thread today and there's about 3 pages worth of him arguing with other people, but on several occasions he puts in the classic "or do you think x,y,z as Gemmill does". Obviously the fact that I've never mentioned x, y or z is irrelevant to Leazes, but it strengthens his position if he attributes things to people that they've never said. Makes it easier to argue when you make someone's opinion up for them.

 

He does it all the time. I endured over 20 pages of him telling people I was happy for terrorists to blow up civilians on at least two threads on General chat, not forgetting the hilarious qualifications debacle. Still, where would the board be without dear Leazes?

 

You're quite right.....the notion that having medical qualifications - especially if they are similar to the ones they give away these days having made them 10 times easier to get than they used to be - gives you knowledge of matters of defence and security of the country, is in fact, hilarious.

 

Of cours, the terrorist threat to this country, and the growing influence and demands on our society of muslims to live their own seperate, non-integrated lifestyle, is no worse or bigger than it was 10 years ago, and it wil not become more so.

 

 

Don't start, I don't want to go through that again, and I'm sure you don't either.

 

I'd rather not

 

However, Gemmill might go into automode again when he's back

[Gemmill 34606]

Automode like 5th best, England internationals, regular qualifiers for Europe.

 

Arguing with you is like discussing colour schemes with a blind man.

[LeazesMag 0]

Automode like 5th best, England internationals, regular qualifiers for Europe.

 

Arguing with you is like discussing colour schemes with a blind man.

 

Wierd, my friend...but I think those who constantly spout that 5th best in the country, qualifying 7 times for europe and buying major England players, over a time span of a decade, is shit, is automode as well as being a blind one

 

PS. Where's Alex ?

Edited October 9, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3206]

I don't agree with long term contracts or "plans".

 

Wow, that's a really stupid thing to say. It seems you and Shepherd are two peas from the same pod. I especially like the way you put plans in quotation marks, as if they're some sort of outlandish concept.

 

I also like the way you find yourself unable - through lack of knowledge or intelligence - to address the full context of the sentence, only clipping a section of it

 

That's pretty ironic coming from you Leazes tbf.

 

I made the mistake of getting into another tussle with Leazes over on NO. I've revisited the thread today and there's about 3 pages worth of him arguing with other people, but on several occasions he puts in the classic "or do you think x,y,z as Gemmill does". Obviously the fact that I've never mentioned x, y or z is irrelevant to Leazes, but it strengthens his position if he attributes things to people that they've never said. Makes it easier to argue when you make someone's opinion up for them.

 

He does it all the time. I endured over 20 pages of him telling people I was happy for terrorists to blow up civilians on at least two threads on General chat, not forgetting the hilarious qualifications debacle. Still, where would the board be without dear Leazes?

 

You're quite right.....the notion that having medical qualifications - especially if they are similar to the ones they give away these days having made them 10 times easier to get than they used to be - gives you knowledge of matters of defence and security of the country, is in fact, hilarious.

 

Of cours, the terrorist threat to this country, and the growing influence and demands on our society of muslims to live their own seperate, non-integrated lifestyle, is no worse or bigger than it was 10 years ago, and it wil not become more so.

 

 

I am going to hate myself for this but....

 

What qualifies you to argue on the point of terrorism and Islam?

[Sima 0]

He's been shoe-bombed tbh to the point of lobotomy. It was a dirty paki that done it as well.

Edited October 10, 2006 by Sima

[LeazesMag 0]

He's been shoe-bombed tbh to the point of lobotomy. It was a dirty paki that done it as well.

 

are you in the BNP

[Sima 0]

Could you not see me in the audience when you were preaching your white hate?

[Guest alex]

JWTBQF

[LeazesMag 0]

Could you not see me in the audience when you were preaching your white hate?

 

were you one of those blokes wearing the white pointed hoods

[Isegrim 8876]

Because of this thread I had another look at Keegan's biography and Robson's one (I only had the old one and bought the new edition just before I came back to Jormany).

 

It's interesting to read the view of both managers regarding the board. And to me it's significant that they both are in appraisal of one Freddie - though it is Fletcher and not Shepherd. Keegan to a lesser extent because he felt that Fletcher was too little involved into football at the end and too much in the floating the time he left. Robson complains about the departure of Fletcher and that the "board" afterwards only consisted of Shepherd and Hall jnr. and that he never got speak with latter in the whole five years.

[Renton 17825]

Because of this thread I had another look at Keegan's biography and Robson's one (I only had the old one and bought the new edition just before I came back to Jormany).

 

It's interesting to read the view of both managers regarding the board. And to me it's significant that they both are in appraisal of one Freddie - though it is Fletcher and not Shepherd. Keegan to a lesser extent because he felt that Fletcher was too little involved into football at the end and too much in the floating the time he left. Robson complains about the departure of Fletcher and that the "board" afterwards only consisted of Shepherd and Hall jnr. and that he never got speak with latter in the whole five years.

 

Robson is also highly critical about the manner in which he was approached for the job, I'd hardly say Shepherd comes across in a good light. It's also apparent that they didn't approach him until after Gullit was fired. So since Dalglish, Gullit, Robson, and Souness have all been sacked without a replacement in mind. There is virtually no short-term planning let alone long-term planning by the sounds of it.

[Bombadil 0]

Because of this thread I had another look at Keegan's biography and Robson's one (I only had the old one and bought the new edition just before I came back to Jormany).

 

It's interesting to read the view of both managers regarding the board. And to me it's significant that they both are in appraisal of one Freddie - though it is Fletcher and not Shepherd. Keegan to a lesser extent because he felt that Fletcher was too little involved into football at the end and too much in the floating the time he left. Robson complains about the departure of Fletcher and that the "board" afterwards only consisted of Shepherd and Hall jnr. and that he never got speak with latter in the whole five years.

 

Robson is also highly critical about the manner in which he was approached for the job, I'd hardly say Shepherd comes across in a good light. It's also apparent that they didn't approach him until after Gullit was fired. So since Dalglish, Gullit, Robson, and Souness have all been sacked without a replacement in mind. There is virtually no short-term planning let alone long-term planning by the sounds of it.

 

"Planning"

[Isegrim 8876]

Because of this thread I had another look at Keegan's biography and Robson's one (I only had the old one and bought the new edition just before I came back to Jormany).

 

It's interesting to read the view of both managers regarding the board. And to me it's significant that they both are in appraisal of one Freddie - though it is Fletcher and not Shepherd. Keegan to a lesser extent because he felt that Fletcher was too little involved into football at the end and too much in the floating the time he left. Robson complains about the departure of Fletcher and that the "board" afterwards only consisted of Shepherd and Hall jnr. and that he never got speak with latter in the whole five years.

 

Robson is also highly critical about the manner in which he was approached for the job, I'd hardly say Shepherd comes across in a good light. It's also apparent that they didn't approach him until after Gullit was fired. So since Dalglish, Gullit, Robson, and Souness have all been sacked without a replacement in mind. There is virtually no short-term planning let alone long-term planning by the sounds of it.

 

They also nearly ruined everything by offering him a pittance.

[Guest alex]

There is some truth in what Leazes suggests, i.e. about the way things working out can lead to plans being thrown out the window. There is no doubt in my mind however that of the clubs have the neccessary financial clout it is the ones that are ran the best and exhibit the best levels of planning etc. that are the most successful. Long-term there is no real luck involved it's a question of getting the right people in, backing them and allowing them to get on with their jobs and when necessary and the time is right having the balls to get rid and start again.

[Isegrim 8876]

There is some truth in what Leazes suggests, i.e. about the way things working out can lead to plans being thrown out the window. There is no doubt in my mind however that of the clubs have the neccessary financial clout it is the ones that are ran the best and exhibit the best levels of planning etc. that are the most successful. Long-term there is no real luck involved it's a question of getting the right people in, backing them and allowing them to get on with their jobs and when necessary and the time is right having the balls to get rid and start again.

 

It is all about the infrastructure of a club, both at technical and personal level. Robson was complaining about the ridiculous conditions he had to work at before the club finally moved to Longbenton. Building this was some sort of planning (but also necessary because of the obligatory demands of the Premierleague). The other thing is the coaching set-up especially at the youth level. Another thing is an effective scouting set-up that continuosly checks on players who might be interesting. Maybe then we would see less panic buys. Of course football is in the end a day to day business, especially if you are lacking success, but the planning is all about to miminize risks and exterior factors. Real successful clubs do it. Newcastle don't.