Jump to content

Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, nbthree3 said:

 

 

After 14 years of MISERY caused by him to our great club and its supporters, it is great that our new owners can stand up to him until he is forced to realise and admit just how C R A P he was (and still is).

 

"So you want to sue us little Mikey?"

 

"SEE YOU IN COURT PAL, WHERE WE CAN TALK ABOUT ALL THIS . . . "

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Abacus said:

Ah, it's about the Sports Direct signs then, if that's right.

Then surely his action should be against the club and all 3 owners? But being the pathetic, thin skinned bully that he is, he's clearly not going to take on PIF or the Reubens so he's targeting PCP as they are smaller than him

 

Also has Staveley actually criticised him? Saying things like the club has had a lack of investment for 14 years is hardly criticism, it's just factual

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Miggys First Goal said:

I’ve never heard AS criticise Ashley once. In fact she’s always been fair towards him when talking to the media. 
 

Ah well, we’re all behind you, Amanda!

 

As for the fat cunt. Just die. Nobody would miss you. Modern day Scrooge. 

 

I read an article where she mentioned, either in direct quotes or by the person writing the article, that she was annoyed at not being able to take a photo in SJP without  SD signs being in the photo. That was my original guess about what it would be and it wouldn't surprise me if that's it. Pettiest, most thin-skinned bloke going.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Geordie Ahmed said:

Then surely his action should be against the club and all 3 owners? But being the pathetic, thin skinned bully that he is, he's clearly not going to take on PIF or the Reubens so he's targeting PCP as they are smaller than him

 

Also has Staveley actually criticised him? Saying things like the club has had a lack of investment for 14 years is hardly criticism, it's just factual

Complete guesswork, but it was Stavely that he gave the loan to, and so presumably it's her that had to adhere to those conditions on that loan, not the club or the other owners.

 

Think it's very hard to prove criticism, and that's why I'd guess it's really all about the advertising.

 

I read something at the time (in a tweet, so take that for what it's worth) saying that they were supposed to stay up till the end of the year, which one thought was till the end of the calendar year, and the other thought it was till the end of the season.

 

Might be talking a load of old nonsense with all that, mind.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...