thomas

you don't understand the principle I've outlined ? I'll answer for you. Nothing. I see. You don't understand the point/hypocrisy about odious people then which I knew mandiarse wouldn't answer. Souness has nothing to do with the current discussion. Stick to the topic at hand and people might consider taking you seriously. you mean like when I said long before you and everybody else that Ashley was ruining the club ? I'm assuming that's all you're looking for? I'd far rather people like you saw sense, to be honest. I've said numerous times that we needed to spend money. I've said numerous times that the current approach isn't going to work. I've said numerous times that we "could" be better off without Ashley. What I won't admit though is that we weren't going in the same direction, albeit via a different path, under Shepherd. You constantly talk about proof, yet you fail to acknowledge the fact that we were in FACT going backwards. Nobody disagrees with you that for a few years things were better under the Halls and Shepherd, yet you constantly argue that everyone on this board thinks that Ashley is the greatest owner ever. Why? Well, I don't agree. Because I think if you back your managers, keep the stadium filled and the revenue coming in, you can get back onto the right road, but if you don't back your managers you've got no chance, because the other things will fall away. Looking at what you've said above, I don't see your problem anyway and you should be stalking someone else. Somebody who is clueless and still backing Ashley in fact. Who is still backing Ashley, and I'll make them my next project why don't you ask the numerous people who are defending everything he does ? I would, but I'm yet to see that they actually exist. Make it easier, and name names. Who here defends everything he does? there are lots of people on here still supporting what he is doing and believing in what he is doing and you don't need me to point them out. So you'd rather type 29 words in a post dodging an answer than 1 single name. I wonder why. mackems.gif mackems.gif mackems.gif

Berbatov also wanted out... Bellamy wanted out, Man City knew that as well, yet West Ham robbed them blind, £15 million for that old waster. You've also got to remember that as a club we owed a lot more to Given than Spurs did to Berbs or West ham to Bellamy. For all the years of loyal service he'd given to the club he had to be allowed to leave if he wanted to, and therefore to even get £6 million is pretty good. On another point I'm still shocked and disgusted at the number of you who are willing to abuse Given, he is still and always will be a legend in my eyes. He eventually got fed up with the turmoil at the club, but who wouldn't have, I'm amazed he stayed with us as long as he did. Can you explain this please? I mean that given all his years of loyal service he should expect that he will be treated fairly by the club, along the lines that older players who have given long service are often allowed to move clubs for free even if they are still under contract. A service is defined as something that is offered for free. Given was paid a massive wage. He stayed with us for years, but your suggestion of letting your best players go for nothing is ridiculous, should Liverpool let Gerrard go for nothing then? link?

Not sure I understand the criticism concerning not holding Manchester City to ransom over him. Keeping him on on whatever wages, upset and rotting in the reserves and not knowing who (if anyone) was going to come knocking in the summer or beyond seems a huge risk. Getting what was gettable and him out the door still seems like the smarter move. But eh, he's moved on and I'll try to too. Agree with others that the way he went about it deserves no excuses and really lowered my opinion of him.

Ah the good old days of N-O, when no one bothered to complete sentences in their titles.

From a 2 to a 2.

1 point more than I expected, not too upset.

Scary thing is that's true.

technically they didn't win "the" case, the judge just ruled that the company trying to sue them didn't dot all the i's and cross all the t's before starting legal proceedings. Basically it's a stay of execution, much as I really want to see them not go away edit: "The" lawsuit being the one that ultimatly decides whether or not what they're doing is legal.

ETA on that ignore function, dave?

1 game and his season may be over. nolan ftw in every way. Confirmed today. Out for the rest of the season.

A persons stake in the company is only part of the story, which you don't seem to realize. Bill Gates is still the single largest shareholder of Microsoft but is completely removed from decision making. Steve Ballmer (a minority shareholder GASP! ) runs the show. Banging on about what percentage he owned is pointless when the authority given to him wasn't dictated by shares owned. Freddy was running things after SJH stepped aside and gave control of the families interests to Dougie. I suspect you know this. You know that Freddy steamrolled Dougie, told him what was what, how "I've been doing this for years son, leave this up to me." was probably the order of the day. You know it.

Think last year was as good as it was ever going to get from him and he's not going to repeat. Can't really complain about this move.

He was hardly tutored by Jose for years on end. He arrived in July 2007 as DoF, Jose left in September 2007. I wouldn't fancy your chances at all in those circumstances.

Chelsea's first XI and our First XI? Pressure on Chelsea to perform and our own underwhelming expectations?

Our team picked itself when KK walked yet we promptly crumbled. Mourinho is as much an icon to Chelsea and Grant did admirably.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzofit_Grant If he's married to a woman who would drink her own piss on TV I think working under Wise wouldn't be a problem.

Also he's used to the DOF idea so, hey, if this system is kept who else is available that would slot in with minimal fuss?

what would be your basis for appointing grant then, out of interest? 20 years experience in management with a great club record, did very well with Chelsea in a difficult position and with a dressing room probably in 300 times more turmoil than ours, doesn't seem easily rattled and his teams played decent football. edit: also according to wiki he likes to give young players chances

Is my sarcasm detection plugin in Firefox broken or are people really saying they wouldn't take Grant? I mean, nevermind the possibility of actually getting him, or anyone of quality in, but saying no?

People? With opinions different to my own? ON THE INTERNET?!?! I call bullshit. Clearly a conspiracy. Seriously though, I'm just a t***. I like forcing people to back up their opinions and a lot of people don't like to be challenged when they spout shit.

Llambias went back and edited those numbers in

I'm unhappy with the manner and timing of their protests, lack of coherent direction and message. I don't think their actions are beneficial to the club, regardless of their stated aims. I am also unhappy with our current league position. Just because they are too doesn't mean that I have to agree with everything else they do. There is no conflict here.

Your happy, just above relegation? Relevant? yes. Incorrect. I can be both unhappy with our current league position AND unhappy/unsupportive of the way NUSC conducts itself. I cannot imagine the magnitude of idiocy required to think the two are mutually exclusive. try harder then. Afraid I'll need your help with it sweetheart. Explain how they're mutually exclusive to me. Use small words.

P.S quit hiding your online status you wimps. seeing (+4 Hidden) sickens me

Your happy, just above relegation? Relevant? yes. Incorrect. I can be both unhappy with our current league position AND unhappy/unsupportive of the way NUSC conducts itself. I cannot imagine the magnitude of idiocy required to think the two are mutually exclusive.