Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Btw you don't like loans anyway, you told me you'd prefer us to stick to our guns and only pay our valuation for permanent signings.  Anything else is deviating from our principles.

 

Part of the change in my attitude from one window to the next is that I can kind of applaud sticking to your policy in any given window (especially if, as in Debuchy's case, it means you get your man later on, at the price you want) but to fluff two, and to run risks / sacrifice league performance by doing so, you've got to ignore opportunities to bend your policy a bit. Pull a Mertesacker, get some warhorse in who has no resale value. Loan someone. Pay £1m extra to make sure you have some depth, whatever it takes. But I stand by my utter indifference to us missing out on targets in the summer. I know that seems weird

 

edit: indifference is the wrong word. In terms of blame, maybe. I can see that happening without anyone necessarily fucking up

 

You've moved the goalposts to the fucking moon man, and you'll move them back to Earth when it suits you to, as long as the end result is a message of "We're areet man, we're improving slowly (probably too slowly for the naked eye[/pards]), we're in it for the long haul so judge us next transfer window" etc.

 

All of this at a time when Shola Ameobi is still getting games for us, 10 years after his sell-by date, before which he was average at best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

Yes, I'd prefer permanent signings. I've said that looooads of times

 

Where's the move in the goalposts there? I said that one quiet window can happen, to cock up two running suggests you're doing something a bit wrong as if things really aren't going for you in the market, you can always fuck your principles slightly, go for a loan, bring in someone to fill the gap, whatever. I don't expect us to cock up this summer, just as I didn't think we'd cock up last January.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One minute you want us to avoid loans at all costs because it's wasted time and money and is against the transfer principles we've recently established.  The next they're fine, no worries.  It's almost as if you change your mind on a whim dependent on what Ashley does, and then agree with it.  But that can't be the case I'm sure.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One minute you want us to avoid loans at all costs because it's wasted time and money and is against the transfer principles we've recently established.  The next they're fine, no worries.  It's almost as if you change your mind on a whim dependent on what Ashley does, and then agree with it.  But that can't be the case I'm sure.

 

Why would anyone do that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

One minute you want us to avoid loans at all costs because it's wasted time and money and is against the transfer principles we've recently established.  The next they're fine, no worries.  It's almost as if you change your mind on a whim dependent on what Ashley does, and then agree with it.  But that can't be the case I'm sure.

 

Er I've said I don't know how many times, permanent signings are way way way better and that's what we should be doing. I also pointed out that loan signings do actually count as signings, so saying "we've signed nobody in X windows" etc when in reality we've bought in two extremely highly-regarded players on loan, is a bit rubbish.

 

How much more clearly can I put it? Loans aren't good value, we should be signing players permanently, but if a loan is really the best you can do, or the only way of getting a certain kind of player, sometimes you might have to loan someone. It's not ideal. Signing permanently is better and should form the basis of the transfer policy. Ideally we should not sign players on loan. I want us to avoid loans. Pretending that a loan player who has come in and scored a load of goals for you isn't an actual signing just so you can complain about a lack of signings is silly.

 

It's a very simple idea. Once again, just to make sure

 

Permanent signings > loans

 

Loans = not good value

 

Loan signings are nonetheless signings who play for you, and who you pay money for.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

Search for: "loan"

By user: "trollemache"

 

Choose from 4 posts.  Much less arduous than the tedious debate itself, it was practically a party in comparison.

 

yeah and you came up with a post in which I say a loan is an ok last resort

 

not one in which I praise Ashley to the heavens for bringing in lots of delicious loans, which you would've thought from your post there

 

Again, can we stick to things I actually say

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

It has to be, because it appears I have to repeat every simple point 4 times before people start engaging with it and not something else they imagine I've said

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

Dude, that probably means your turd at explaining yourself.

 

Yeah the problem is definitely one of comprehension. Look at the example above. People have just flat-out invented something I'm supposed to have said. Look at bimpy earlier, saying it didn't matter what I'd actually said because he could "read between the lines" and tell what my real opinion was. That's what I'm up against. People are determined that I'm going to be some Ashley-fellating quisling so they're arguing against the idea of that, not the actual words I'm writing. Yesterday I dared to say that 8th wouldn't be considered a failure by the press - pretty innocuous statement - and people went MENTAL because I had failed to condemn Pardew, or because they decided to believe I'd said we should only ever look to finish 8th.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

Two can play at that game - you used about six too many there for example.

 

The more people twist what you're saying, the more carefully you have to go back and explain, and that takes more words. Sad but true. Before you quote my last post to Interpolic, that was deliberate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

Been quite busy haven't I... set up a few meetings, did a few emails, did a bit of writing and read.... 45 pages of this book.

 

Probably a problem with my coffee intake or something. It's a brilliant book btw. "S" by JJ Abrams and Doug Dorst

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two can play at that game - you used about six too many there for example.

 

The more people twist what you're saying, the more carefully you have to go back and explain, and that takes more words. Sad but true. Before you quote my last post to Interpolic, that was deliberate.

 

You alter your own posts though after making them, then accuse people of doing what you are doing  :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

I've never altered the meaning of a post - I've often gone straight back in after posting to add to them though, if I think I can explain myself better. Why would I post then immediately change what I'm trying to say?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest tollemache

Also your post makes no sense unless you're saying that I twist other people's words. But then me editing my own posts would be irrelevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never altered the meaning of a post - I've often gone straight back in after posting to add to them though, if I think I can explain myself better. Why would I post then immediately change what I'm trying to say?

 

Leave what you said out there man otherwise you`ll end up in endless circles of arguments. Oh wait...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...