Skeletor Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 I love that 'Sunderland would be 3rd if the league had started when MON took over' stat. Guess who's above them in that league Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 And we get wanked over like a excessively white Norwegian Xmas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Paxton seemed a well balanced intelligent individual. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Decided to listen to the mackems-Spurs game on Radio Newcastle today - "Cattermole had an excellent game and led by example." Ha! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphrodite Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 People getting a bit overly tetchy on here- a bit RAWK-esque. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Zaius Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Another thick mackem twat... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ObiChrisKenobi Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 Decided to listen to the mackems-Spurs game on Radio Newcastle today - "Cattermole had an excellent game and led by example." Ha! Excellent by Cattermole's standards, probably. I don't think he was booked and he managed to kick 4 different people within 30 seconds at one point of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 O'Neill has huge and undeniable faults, and I'm not at all convinced than Short will keep any of them in check, and that it won't end in tears. I can see why Sunderland fans are 100% behind him though, he is the best manager they could possibly get . He is a good manager though. I didn't know you lot where in for Pep Guardiola like when you sacked Hughton? Cringeworthy last sentence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoot Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 O'Neill has huge and undeniable faults, and I'm not at all convinced than Short will keep any of them in check, and that it won't end in tears. I can see why Sunderland fans are 100% behind him though, he is the best manager they could possibly get . He is a good manager though. I didn't know you lot where in for Pep Guardiola like when you sacked Hughton? I didn't know that either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
broonalegeordie Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Just Pardiola. He'll do for now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 We were in for Guardiola? Gutted Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karjala Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I love that 'Sunderland would be 3rd if the league had started when MON took over' stat. Guess who's above them in that league What was the points gap with Postman Pat took over? 15? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowlingcrofty Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It's class when a mackem comes on here, tries to act intelligent and reasonable to get onside with us, because it's absolutely guaranteed that within a couple of days they'll have resorted to becoming stereotypical mackem number x we've had on here with utterly ridiculous posts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Just Pardiola. He'll do for now. Catts for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 When Alan Green expressed his surprise at how many empty seats there were at Sunderland yesterday, even against attractive top opposition, Michael Gray his co-commentator got all macum and said they had a "full house" for the cup QF but were badly let down and had decided not to return. Aren't pundits supposed to tell the truth? Considering Everton brought almost 10K fans to Wearside and there were still 5,000 empty seats doesn't that mean something like 33-35,000 Sunderland fans bothered turning out for their biggest game in years? Even with their Northern League price £5 tickets they can't get anywhere near a full house and that is a major reason why the Yank will lose interest soon. The SoL is becoming known as a music venue where football is also played. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 What's the cash prize for being NETD, Paxton? No prize, just a meal for two with Wireside Who is this Wireside you speak of? Masterplan off RTG and I agree with the NETD thing, small time as f*** but then again I wouldn't expect anything less from your mob. Now that's not on, like I said I don't like you judging our fan base off the basis of a few daft lads, every club has it's idiots. Like the whole carry on with Santon at his first interview, "Have you ever seen a mackem in Milan?". Cringeworthy. Wasn't that from Lee Ryder though? Possibly the most small time cunt ever to grace the region rather a club authorised season end DVD? It's all tit for tat anyway like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Not a cheap dig, but Sunderland built a ludicrously over sized stadium. In the modern age, there's rarely been the demand for a 48,000 stadium. As the new generation of grounds go, it's one of the better ones but it would have made far more sense to build it with 10,000 less seats and have it more or less full every week. On derby day the atmosphere is good, but generally when I see Sunderland play at home, the atmosphere is below tepid and the oversized stadium is one of the causes. It was telling that they didn't sell out for the recent cup game and they also have failed to sell out derby games before, albeit during the infamous 15 point season. Blame Bob Murray, a man thoroughly obsessesd with "keeping up with the Joneses". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Not a cheap dig, but Sunderland built a ludicrously over sized stadium. In the modern age, there's rarely been the demand for a 48,000 stadium. As the new generation of grounds go, it's one of the better ones but it would have made far more sense to build it with 10,000 less seats and have it more or less full every week. On derby day the atmosphere is good, but generally when I see Sunderland play at home, the atmosphere is below tepid and the oversized stadium is one of the causes. It was telling that they didn't sell out for the recent cup game and they also have failed to sell out derby games before, albeit during the infamous 15 point season. Blame Bob Murray, a man thoroughly obsessesd with "keeping up with the Joneses". It's a cheap bucket of shite. £20m and it shows. Fits in well though with the clientel. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 It's class when a mackem comes on here, tries to act intelligent and reasonable to get onside with us, because it's absolutely guaranteed that within a couple of days they'll have resorted to becoming stereotypical mackem number x we've had on here with utterly ridiculous posts. Nail on the head. Already noted his username previously on RTG as one of the argumentative and nonsensical hot-heads that epitomize Sunderland fans, by virtue of the fact that everyone on there tends to agree with him. Having started posting here, I don't think he's prepared for the higher level that most of us are on and his attempts at acting smart are swiftly going to result in hilarity on the way to his destiny of resorting to his real RTG persona, and subsequently rage quitting the forum only to re-surface each time we lose in vein attempts to troll us. They still haven't figured out how to not have half their front page on their forum swathed in Newcastle United related topics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveItIfWeBeatU Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I preferred it when being a Mackem was enough reason to get someone banned from this forum. "Paxton" gets a disproportionate number of replies to all his posts purely because he is a Mackem. It's like flies on shit. I don't want to know the Mackem perspective on all things NUFC. It's turned the Tiote thread into pages of Cattermole talk. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I preferred it when being a Mackem was enough reason to get someone banned from this forum. "Paxton" gets a disproportionate number of replies to all his posts purely because he is a Mackem. It's like flies on s***. I don't want to know the Mackem perspective on all things NUFC. It's turned the Tiote thread into pages of Cattermole talk. Sometimes I will want to know, it's curiosity, but for that I go to RTG. As regularly as I go to RAWK, redcafe or gloryglory. I welcome sensible posters from any club here, as it provides a different angle, but preachers are unwanted. And a club as deeply obsessed with us as Sunderland simply don't produce the type of fan that could integrate here. They are the stereotypical angry man of the PL who at the age of 27 is not going to grow any taller than 5ft 4 and is completely in denial at the lot they have been dealt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I preferred it when being a Mackem was enough reason to get someone banned from this forum. That has never been the case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 That game yesterday was the worst televised game I've seen all season. Turgid is a kind assessment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveItIfWeBeatU Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I preferred it when being a Mackem was enough reason to get someone banned from this forum. That has never been the case. I'm sure I read "being a Mackem" as the reason given for someone being banned once. My mistake. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 I preferred it when being a Mackem was enough reason to get someone banned from this forum. That has never been the case. I'm sure I read "being a Mackem" as the reason given for someone being banned once. My mistake. That was Wireside I believe. The reason given was very blatantly tongue-in-cheek. The actual reason was because he had acted like an astronomical bellend time and time again, and he knew it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts