BottledDog

By a good, 22.5%

Just back up for the more experienced Bramble then. Woo.

Holy hell, the Titus Bramble wiki is mad. Check out the trivia bit as well as the main paragraphs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titus_Bramble

like when he cocked up against Mexico and let Borgetti in to score that goal just before the World Cup. tbf not seen that much of him though, looks built like a brick $hithouse Not an old head to organise the kids, and with no Premiership experience, he may have difficulty stepping up from the Belgian league, but we'll just have to wait and see. Good luck to the lad, seems to be a sensible and professional bloke in his interviews. I'm not sure he can be seen as an automatic first choice though, and if he does start, I could see it being alongside Bramble rather than Taylor considering Bramble's experience and Glenn's desire to give him a new contract.

Check out his Wiki. Oh, and 'good in the air and agressive' has nothing to do with me either. Them's Curbishly's words. ^-^ That's why i'm laughing, you just copied that off his wiki! It's a given, Tim Berners-Lee, father of the Web said it is the font of all knowledge, so I'm not about to argue. Ok, I'll rephrase it. Nothing that I have read about the bloke blows my socks off. /bibliography to follow...

Check out his Wiki. Oh, and 'good in the air and agressive' has nothing to do with me either. Them's Curbishly's words. ^-^

The quotes were released on the official site. Besides, what do you think might happen if people know about our interest in this player, or if he had just not commented on him full stop. /never mind taking the piss out of his name. The official site quotes were taken from the Chronicle earlier in the day. If Roeder had not of commented speculation would have persisted all weekend and a few other clubs may have had a look. Get away with you. A story from Oliver without quotes would have ignited interest from other clubs?

Piquionne averages 1 in 5 and while speedy his positioning, heading and tactical sense are in question. Not too excited by him. Smertin, Ashley Young, John Carew, all those new liverpool kids, Ricardo Rocha, Kepa Blanco, Warnock at a push all seem fairly decent buy's. Rocha, Blanco (good in the air and aggressive) and Carew could all have been useful for us.

The quotes were released on the official site. Besides, what do you think might happen if people know about our interest in this player, or if he had just not commented on him full stop. /never mind taking the piss out of his name.

The "I am aware of this player but he is not a player I am trying to sign." is still up on .cock, but for how long.

Anyone fancy helping Roeder out by phoning some of these chaps for him. http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_football.cfm?curpageid=1219

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder. You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond. Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough. For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition? If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars. Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money. What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ? They had more than enough money to buy him when Robson asked for him. The board stalled and when his price rocketed, bought Carr. Marcelino, Goma, Domi and Pistone? Poor to middling buys, but as you argue yourself, you have to back the manager you appoint, right? so whats your stance on this ? Should the club spend big money on defenders or not ? Tell us what you think, then don't go back on your response when you feel like slating the club whatever they do. I had a feeling you would be thick enough not to grasp the point. I have no stance on it. It is another example of the idiotic debates that you start to help you prance around the main points, usually around the time you get frustrated and feel the need to ramp up the insults. I couldn't give a toss how much or little we spend on defenders if the end result benefits the club. I only hope for the club to use the money wisely, just as I'm sure you were suggesting when you got all excited over the possibility of Francis Lee, and it is something that Shepherd and his managers have for the most part failed to do.

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder. You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond. Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough. For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition? If you really think this board haven't shown they have had ambition, then you must have been living on Mars. Quite simply, if they say they didn't have the money to buy Miguel then that will be fact, unless of course you are one of those who slate them for spending money then also slate them for not spending money. What did you think of spending 6m on Marcelino, 4m on Goma, 4m on Domi and 4.5m on Pistone ? They had more than enough money to buy him when Robson asked for him. The board stalled and when his price rocketed, bought Carr. Marcelino, Goma, Domi and Pistone? Poor to middling buys, but as you argue yourself, you have to back the manager you appoint, right?

of course, getting another board who lack ambition like the old one, is impossible and simply will not happen to us No board with ambition would employ Souness and Roeder. You'll now come out with Liverpool employing Souness so I'll just remind you that Liverpool employed Souness after he'd been a success at Rangers, we employed him after he'd been a failure at Liverpool and beyond. Quite, and if we are talking players (Francis Lee/Darren Bent etc), you could pull such examples for any board including the current one strangely enough. For instance when Robson wanted Miguel, the board held back and then chose to provide Carr instead. Was that an example of ambition?

Nah, it has probably just slipped his mind. Yup.

Fair enough, although I still don't feel comfortable with the idea that Roeder is to be particularly applauded for not blaming results on injuries, when the blame is implied everytime he says 'I will not blame injuries' or 'I could make excuses by saying we are missing him, him and him.... but I won't' during post match interviews, or his chats with Oliver.

He highlighted West Ham because Pardew was sacked despite missing possibly ther most important player. Big fucking deal.

An apointment almost worth resigning over. Even after Souness' departure Shepherd was still quoted as not understanding why the fans were on his back from the start, showing a shocking lack of insight or even much of an interest in finding out. Ah well, he was quoted as saying that he effectively had to get the next appopinment right or he would have to go. Lets hope it all works and he leaves with a big trophy in his wake, but if we do continue to falter and fail, I hope that this time, he keeps to his word.

What, and see those dastardly betting scammers get their way, oh sure.

Are you taking the piss?! Clearly. He is certainly 'not defending the Board'. The next time someone 'castigates' the board whether it be for their choice of manager, the inability along with their man to play the transfer market successfully, the drop in our fortunes both on and off the pitch, the debt, or for any other valid reason you will also quite possibly see him 'not defending the Board' in another of his posts.

What do you even mean by that? Have a guess. Well I assume it means that you are mocking his post as being a bit thick, which is a shame, though I have to say that I'm not entirely sure if there are any other ways in which you are supposed to interpret it. That is why I asked.

What do you even mean by that?

This is why many people find you defense of the current regime so astonishing, as the choices for 'their man' have, for the most part, proved to be poor at best. No, there is no guarantee any new Board will do either of those things any better than the current one, but nor is there any guarantee they would do any worse. While, lets be fair, as we repeatedly get the simple things wrong, the chances of Freddy and the current board improving would seem slim indeed.

I hope you aren't suggesting that he is a work shy foreigner... cos... http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f312/Tonito44/ThatsRacist.gif

No.