Parky

More examples of the shitty way they've conducted themselves this summer. I used to have a lot of time for Benitez, and Liverpool in general (it may seem a cliche, but they really did used to do things the right way), but the way he has conducted their transfer business this summer has been disgraceful. Don't say I didn't tell you.

But did he pay for that suit?

I've no idea what his plans are, but it doesn't say that to me at all. Looking for investors is pure common sense I don't read it any other way. More ammo the better imo. If you have the cash, why would you need investors? Serious question btw. Seems to me that you only need investors if you lack a bit of £££. Chelsea don't any, neither do Portsmouth, and similarly Man Utd don't.... however, Liverpool do. Ashley for me has never come across or given signals that he intends to be a sugar-daddy type. His goal as far as I see it is to make the club first a viable self-sustaining business and build from there. He doesn't lack the cash as such, but I don't think he is the type to bankroll endlessly. He wants to see the club working in a business like manner. We will see what that entails as time goes on.

Compared to the Ronnie, the Standard is a major newspaper. Having lived in Cockneyland for many (many) years - I am aware that it is an even worse local than the Chronicle. A "major" newspaper - oh for goodness sake!!!! Didn't mean "good" - I meant widely read. (By more people who count in the context of his business) There are more people living in the London area than there are living in the Newcastle area. It is still the most awful 'local' (parochial) little rag that I have ever eaten fish and chips out of. It thinks it is a 'national' though (because it is printed in Cockneyland) - and some others seem to think so too!!!! Bizarre . . . What's wrong with the Evening standard? Briefly . . . (1) Its content. (2) Its obsesssional parochiality (worse than most locals even). (3) Its "pretentions" (which may well have worked on you!!) Your talking out your arse. It's a very good London paper and it is a great waste of energy to have these faux media wars. Media companies are worth billions and have immense power. The clever thing is to manage how you deal with them and improve the way the portray the club in a positive manner. Ashley isn't very good at this to this point, but he needs to understand this. Football clubs aren't like discount garment shops. Oh dear. You epitomise the London-obsessed BRAINWASHING that goes on in this country. It is a grotty insular little rag that (lord be praised) happens to come from (lord be praised again) L O N D O N. Braninwashing is very powerful - most of the brainwashed do not know that they are . . . Oh dear indeed. We agree then!!! No. But that's the fun. At some point we're going to have to cut deals with the London media as I'm sure you realise. For me the club is a brand with world wide potential and part of that project will include taking the media with us. The parochial London Media (working for the so called 'Nationals') YES. A local rag for cockneyland - NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! London is practically the center of world finance and investment vehicles, anything printed and read by a million Londoners on their way home from work in the city is important to us IMO.

I've no idea what his plans are, but it doesn't say that to me at all. Looking for investors is pure common sense I don't read it any other way. More ammo the better imo.

Compared to the Ronnie, the Standard is a major newspaper. Having lived in Cockneyland for many (many) years - I am aware that it is an even worse local than the Chronicle. A "major" newspaper - oh for goodness sake!!!! Didn't mean "good" - I meant widely read. (By more people who count in the context of his business) There are more people living in the London area than there are living in the Newcastle area. It is still the most awful 'local' (parochial) little rag that I have ever eaten fish and chips out of. It thinks it is a 'national' though (because it is printed in Cockneyland) - and some others seem to think so too!!!! Bizarre . . . What's wrong with the Evening standard? Briefly . . . (1) Its content. (2) Its obsesssional parochiality (worse than most locals even). (3) Its "pretentions" (which may well have worked on you!!) Your talking out your arse. It's a very good London paper and it is a great waste of energy to have these faux media wars. Media companies are worth billions and have immense power. The clever thing is to manage how you deal with them and improve the way the portray the club in a positive manner. Ashley isn't very good at this to this point, but he needs to understand this. Football clubs aren't like discount garment shops. Oh dear. You epitomise the London-obsessed BRAINWASHING that goes on in this country. It is a grotty insular little rag that (lord be praised) happens to come from (lord be praised again) L O N D O N. Braninwashing is very powerful - most of the brainwashed do not know that they are . . . Oh dear indeed. We agree then!!! No. But that's the fun. At some point we're going to have to cut deals with the London media as I'm sure you realise. For me the club is a brand with world wide potential and part of that project will include taking the media with us.

Compared to the Ronnie, the Standard is a major newspaper. Having lived in Cockneyland for many (many) years - I am aware that it is an even worse local than the Chronicle. A "major" newspaper - oh for goodness sake!!!! Didn't mean "good" - I meant widely read. (By more people who count in the context of his business) There are more people living in the London area than there are living in the Newcastle area. It is still the most awful 'local' (parochial) little rag that I have ever eaten fish and chips out of. It thinks it is a 'national' though (because it is printed in Cockneyland) - and some others seem to think so too!!!! Bizarre . . . What's wrong with the Evening standard? Briefly . . . (1) Its content. (2) Its obsesssional parochiality (worse than most locals even). (3) Its "pretentions" (which may well have worked on you!!) Your talking out your arse. It's a very good London paper and it is a great waste of energy to have these faux media wars. Media companies are worth billions and have immense power. The clever thing is to manage how you deal with them and improve the way the portray the club in a positive manner. Ashley isn't very good at this to this point, but he needs to understand this. Football clubs aren't like discount garment shops. Oh dear. You epitomise the London-obsessed BRAINWASHING that goes on in this country. It is a grotty insular little rag that (lord be praised) happens to come from (lord be praised again) L O N D O N. Braninwashing is very powerful - most of the brainwashed do not know that they are . . . Oh dear indeed.

Agree, it's a start, but he needs to do a lot more of this kind of thing. With the media if you don't feed it from time to time it eats you. Personally I don't give a fuck if they eat Ashley what will bother me is if they continue to use him as a bridge to hurt the club. He needs to wake up to this.

Compared to the Ronnie, the Standard is a major newspaper. Having lived in Cockneyland for many (many) years - I am aware that it is an even worse local than the Chronicle. A "major" newspaper - oh for goodness sake!!!! Didn't mean "good" - I meant widely read. (By more people who count in the context of his business) There are more people living in the London area than there are living in the Newcastle area. It is still the most awful 'local' (parochial) little rag that I have ever eaten fish and chips out of. It thinks it is a 'national' though (because it is printed in Cockneyland) - and some others seem to think so too!!!! Bizarre . . . What's wrong with the Evening standard? Briefly . . . (1) Its content. (2) Its obsesssional parochiality (worse than most locals even). (3) Its "pretentions" (which may well have worked on you!!) Your talking out your arse. It's a very good London paper and it is a great waste of energy to have these faux media wars. Media companies are worth billions and have immense power. The clever thing is to manage how you deal with them and improve the way the portray the club in a positive manner. Ashley isn't very good at this to this point, but he needs to understand this. Football clubs aren't like discount garment shops.

Compared to the Ronnie, the Standard is a major newspaper. Having lived in Cockneyland for many (many) years - I am aware that it is an even worse local than the Chronicle. A "major" newspaper - oh for goodness sake!!!! Didn't mean "good" - I meant widely read. (By more people who count in the context of his business) There are more people living in the London area than there are living in the Newcastle area. It is still the most awful 'local' (parochial) little rag that I have ever eaten fish and chips out of. It thinks it is a 'national' though (because it is printed in Cockneyland) - and some others seem to think so too!!!! Bizarre . . . What's wrong with the Evening standard?

Compared to the Ronnie, the Standard is a major newspaper. Having lived in Cockneyland for many (many) years - I am aware that it is an even worse local than the Chronicle. A "major" newspaper - oh for goodness sake!!!! Didn't mean "good" - I meant widely read. (By more people who count in the context of his business) Yup.

The papers wouldn't be all up in his shit if he managed expectations a bit more. He really needs to get positive spin out there and people working every day to manage our media footprint.

Contracts have to be to a certain extent honored and any deals filtering out of negotiations have to be with mutual concent. If Ronaldo can force the hand of the most powerful club in the world it looks bad for smaller clubs, their finances, their youth product and ultimately their survivability. This is a historic moment in football and the fallout will be immense if FIFA get formally invlolved. Man U won't back down I'm sure of it.

I'm getting the distinct feeling envious eyes are being cast at the PL from all over Europe.

True, but it's no good filling the midfield from utter wank with more utter wank, Sidwell's a decent player, nothing more. Do you think we'll buy someone better than Sidwell and Butt?

“In football there’s too much modern slavery,” the FIFA president said on Sky News. “I’m always in favour of protecting the player. “If he wants to leave, let him. If Ronaldo stays at a club where he does not feel comfortable to play then it’s not good for him or the club. “The important thing is that we should also protect the player. And if they want to play somewhere else, then a solution should be found.” Now, this could become a massive issue. If FIFA intervene in a formal manner clubs are going to be severely weakened when it comes to player negotiations and the meaning of contracts. http://www.goal.com/en/Articolo.aspx?ContenutoId=770315

All our midfielders are better? That's not really the point is it? He didn't say our midfielders are better, but he is saying if we bring in new ones we'd be better off setting our sights higher than Steve Sidwell. A late reply, perhaps, but nevertheless: As Role Model says, I wasn't suggesting all our midfielders are better. For example, Sidwell or Smith? I'd take Sidwell. But I'm hoping that's not the only choice we have. I don't think Sidwell would have represented much, if any, step up in terms of quality. I'm not suggesting we should be getting Messi or anything daft like that, but it would be nice to think that somewhere in the world of football there's someone somewhere with a bit of quality that we can sign. Sidwell is another grafter, and with Smith, Butt and Geremi already in the squad I don't think he was what we needed. We need a midfielder who can beat a man. Who can unlock a defence. Who can shoot from distance. Who scares defenders. That's not Steve Sidwell. If Geremi, Barton and Smith were the best we could do last summer, what on god's earth makes you think we should turn our noses up at Sidwell this summer? Fucking retards everywhere think the real world involves saying 'we need the best player available' and that therefore its as simple as signing them. Clearly all schoolchildren and students who have never had to make a deal in the real world. I agree we are crying out for some creativity in midfield but i'd say that only Barton should be kept out of those 3, as the other 2 are shite. This leaves a massive numbers problem. I want a 25 goal a year striker with pace, strength, aerial ability, able to beat a man and be a provider for others. I also want to fuck Scarlet Johanson. Is that meant to be insightful or something? Whatever, not arsed whether we sign him or not, a little dose of realism is required though. Who was the last midfielder we signed who fits your criteria and where was the club relative to now? Sidwell is a fair player no doubt and I'm sure he can do as good a job as Butt if not better. He would certainly deliver more than Geremi and Smith.

Scolari is has made a gaff by revealing his chat with Fat Frank...I think they're being silly trying to hang onto him, it's quite clear he wants to leave.

Very good point. It is more important sometimes for these players to get first team football at less fashionable clubs.

Sidwell isn't a defensive midfielder. Neither was speed mate. People are being far too simplistic about this. In my opinion Sidwell would make an excellent signing if we converted him into a DM, for the long term. i.e use coaching skills.... they haven't been used in a while at our club. Rather go for a proper DMC than fitting square pegs in round holes. Too simplistic, a) i just wanted to use the phrase 'ageing butt' and b) on numerous occasions last year, Butt was our best attacking player. When a player can defend, its really a massive advantage if they can attack too. I'd happily have a look at Sidwell in the middle of a central 3. Wasn't he asking for £80k last time round?

What?

Mate I'm loving the old skool Parky style quoting.

Oh no!

That's what the BBC's South American reporter Tim Vickery had to say about him. That looks about right.