So looks like Zoggy is off in the summer.

[Rebellious]

I think the Zog will become a great player, not at this club or under this manager.  He was frustrating when he played this season ? or was it the back of last.  He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward, something we have done the opposite of for many years.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

I think the Zog will become a great player, not at this club or under this manager.  He was frustrating when he played this season ? or was it the back of last.  He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward, something we have done the opposite of for many years.

 

heard it all now. Manager to blame for player running into opponents

[Rebellious]

I think the Zog will become a great player, not at this club or under this manager.  He was frustrating when he played this season ? or was it the back of last.  He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward, something we have done the opposite of for many years.

 

heard it all now. Manager to blame for player running into opponents

 

You have just proved how crap your understanding of football is, not that the whole forum hasn`t realised how pathetic you are weeks ago.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

I think the Zog will become a great player, not at this club or under this manager.  He was frustrating when he played this season ? or was it the back of last.  He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward, something we have done the opposite of for many years.

 

heard it all now. Manager to blame for player running into opponents

 

You have just proved how crap your understanding of football is, not that the whole forum hasn`t realised how pathetic you are weeks ago.

 

"He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward,"

 

are you fucking blind? I'm only reading what you wrote. Sorry if that makes you look like an idiot

[Northern Monkey]

I think the Zog will become a great player, not at this club or under this manager.  He was frustrating when he played this season ? or was it the back of last.  He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward, something we have done the opposite of for many years.

 

heard it all now. Manager to blame for player running into opponents

 

You have just proved how crap your understanding of football is, not that the whole forum hasn`t realised how pathetic you are weeks ago.

 

"He kept recieving the ball and constantly ran into other players befoe releasing it. I would like him to stay but under a manager that can bring a player forward,"

 

are you fucking blind? I'm only reading what you wrote. Sorry if that makes you look like an idiot

 

Its not Roeders fault that The Zog ran into someone. It IS his fault for being unable to develop/inspore/coach players.

[Keefaz]

Surely this is what Ferguson's been coaching Ronaldo though? To use the ball better? That's part of a manager's job, isn't it?

[Northern Monkey]

Surely this is what Ferguson's been coaching Ronaldo though? To use the ball better? That's part of a manager's job, isn't it?

 

Not if its Roeder being slated, and Vic hears.

[Rebellious]

Surely this is what Ferguson's been coaching Ronaldo though? To use the ball better? That's part of a manager's job, isn't it?

 

Not if its Roeder being slated, and Vic hears.

 

Thanks you 2 for saving me the effort. I could have wrote that but Vic just spends all day looking for a reaction by completely missing points, probably on purpose to act the WUM. If not he is incredibly thick.

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Surely this is what Ferguson's been coaching Ronaldo though? To use the ball better? That's part of a manager's job, isn't it?

 

Not if its Roeder being slated, and Vic hears.

 

Thanks you 2 for saving me the effort. I could have wrote that but Vic just spends all day looking for a reaction by completely missing points, probably on purpose to act the WUM. If not he is incredibly thick.

 

I'm just able to read posts tbh. I'm waiting for you to point out exactly how what you wrote could be meant in any other way

 

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

[Guest Gemmill]

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

Quite sad when more and more people are twigging on to what an insufferable prick you are, and there's only you that can't see it.

 

I'll ask again - what's the point in the trolling rule if not to dispose of trolls?

[ohmelads]

Wouldn't disagree. Therefore you'd realise that we actually needed another striker rather than a LW or a LB. Take a look at the goals scored column. Goals win games. You also need to take into account availability. Something the majority on this forum don't appear to consider in the slightest. I'm waiting for someone to convince me with solid facts that signing Duff directly led to the club failing to sign a defender, rather than the defender the manager wanted to sign simply not being available.

 

Come on we all know there were defenders available because we saw them signing for the likes of Portsmouth, Middlesbrough and other clubs. Some have gone on to be good, some haven't, but we all know that Roeder had £5m in his pocket and we know that he spent it on a left winger and left his defence threadbare.

 

The argument you're using could be used to justify any signing in history.

 

As for 'goals win games', goals also lose games and they've lost us a lot of games this season through crap defending. In Europe we scored 4 times and still went out.

[Northern Monkey]

Surely this is what Ferguson's been coaching Ronaldo though? To use the ball better? That's part of a manager's job, isn't it?

 

Not if its Roeder being slated, and Vic hears.

 

Thanks you 2 for saving me the effort. I could have wrote that but Vic just spends all day looking for a reaction by completely missing points, probably on purpose to act the WUM. If not he is incredibly thick.

 

I'm just able to read posts tbh. I'm waiting for you to point out exactly how what you wrote could be meant in any other way

 

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

You know you're in trouble when you have to accuse people of piggy-backing MY posts to retain dignity!

[Guest Invicta_Toon]

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

Quite sad when more and more people are twigging on to what an insufferable prick you are, and there's only you that can't see it.

 

I'll ask again - what's the point in the trolling rule if not to dispose of trolls?

 

As if you aren't the very definition of the original internet troll gems

 

anyway, how's the ST renewal application going?

[Guest Gemmill]

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

Quite sad when more and more people are twigging on to what an insufferable prick you are, and there's only you that can't see it.

 

I'll ask again - what's the point in the trolling rule if not to dispose of trolls?

 

As if you aren't the very definition of the original internet troll gems

 

anyway, how's the ST renewal application going?

 

They haven't sent them out yet dear.  I suspect it'll go as usual though, I'm not anticipating any extra hoops to jump through.

[Howaythelads]

Wouldn't disagree. Therefore you'd realise that we actually needed another striker rather than a LW or a LB. Take a look at the goals scored column. Goals win games. You also need to take into account availability. Something the majority on this forum don't appear to consider in the slightest. I'm waiting for someone to convince me with solid facts that signing Duff directly led to the club failing to sign a defender, rather than the defender the manager wanted to sign simply not being available.

 

Come on we all know there were defenders available because we saw them signing for the likes of Portsmouth, Middlesbrough and other clubs. Some have gone on to be good, some haven't, but we all know that Roeder had £5m in his pocket and we know that he spent it on a left winger and left his defence threadbare.

 

The argument you're using could be used to justify any signing in history.

 

As for 'goals win games', goals also lose games and they've lost us a lot of games this season through crap defending. In Europe we scored 4 times and still went out.

 

The most difficult thing in football is to score goals, that's why strikers and creative players cost more than defenders. We needed another forward before a LB regardless of signing Duff. Also, you're correct that some defenders moved club. Big deal. Roeder either tried to get them and they decided to go elsewhere, or he didn't want them at all. Shit happens. This is the real world.

[Howaythelads]

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

Quite sad when more and more people are twigging on to what an insufferable prick you are, and there's only you that can't see it.

I'll ask again - what's the point in the trolling rule if not to dispose of trolls?

 

Looks to me like you're trying to get someone banned. Typical abuse as well, tbh.

[Guest Gemmill]

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

Quite sad when more and more people are twigging on to what an insufferable prick you are, and there's only you that can't see it.

I'll ask again - what's the point in the trolling rule if not to dispose of trolls?

 

Looks to me like you're trying to get someone banned. Typical abuse as well, tbh.

 

Zip it, Captain Mainwaring.

[NE5]

any club in the world needs 2 top players for every position

 

Thats an ideal scenario. Fact is that we have no top players in any position when it comes to defence. The nearest thing we have is "potential" in Steven Taylor, but thats it. And the only striker weve had playing for us for 95% of the season who is even remotely Premiership calibre is Martins.

 

Im all for strengthening the squad, but it was madness to blow a sizeable transfer fee and massive wages to replace arguably our best player last season when the rest of the squad had such massive gaping holes.

 

But then, look at the results to see who is in the right here. Weve crashed out of the main cup competitions in humiliating fashion against sides we should have beaten easily (5-1 utter humiliation at home to a bloody championship side, thats 5-1, and a 2-0 spineless defeat against a Dutch side built with pennies, with the nation watching and eventually laughing at us). Weve done worse this year than we did last year in the league, with plenty of shiite results and shiite performances, even in games weve won. So, for those of us who said we should have signed a defender or a forward instead of a backup left winger at the time the signing was made - surely weve been proven correct?

 

Or rather, as certain individuals on this board with specific agendas would have us believe, its just crazy talk to think that our defence would be better with better individual defenders than Bramble and Ramage, or that wed have scored more goals if we had better individual forwards than the likes of Sibierski, Duff and Dyer. Anything to back the board, eh?

 

Anything to slate the board eh ? Despite us being among the top spenders, again

 

Now, thats what I call an agenda

 

 

 

In fairness - and I may have misread - but I'm not sure he mentioned or even implicated the board there? When he uses the word board is he not referring to this message board?

 

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, but isn't that entire post about how signing Duff was the wrong decision rather than castigating the board?

 

If the point is to castigate someone for deciding to buy Duff, then I would consider that to have been the managers decision, which I will defend BTW, as a proven quality player with his best years ahead of him for the price we paid for him and considering all the circumstances, which have been mentioned in this thread. Nobody was to know he would struggle to find the form he has displayed with other clubs in the premiership.

 

The clubs policy of price limits, wage limits etc, is set by the board. If the manager wanted the player, and the board felt it was within their means or simply chose to back their manager, they are doing what a good board should do as often as possible.

 

My comment about an agenda stands.

 

What I would really like is tmonkey [and he isn't the only one] to tell us is who exactly they consider to be these numerous "trophy players" at the club, and who they would prefer the club to have signed instead.

 

Before answering, they should consider what I said earlier. Do they prefer the club not to sign quality players, or would they prefer the club to sell its best players ? and do they think - before they start whinging on about not being 2nd in the league any more - that we have any chance whatsoever of ever getting back there if the club DON'T buy these quality players, or "trophy players" if that is what they prefer to call them ?

 

 

[Howaythelads]

Quite sad when people that have been made to look stooopid and can only resort to piggy backing other posts to claw back some dignity

 

Quite sad when more and more people are twigging on to what an insufferable prick you are, and there's only you that can't see it.

I'll ask again - what's the point in the trolling rule if not to dispose of trolls?

 

Looks to me like you're trying to get someone banned. Typical abuse as well, tbh.

 

Zip it, Captain Mainwaring.

 

No denying it, I see. Just slagging people off as usual.

[Guest Gemmill]

I thought I told you to zip it.

[Parky]

any club in the world needs 2 top players for every position

 

Thats an ideal scenario. Fact is that we have no top players in any position when it comes to defence. The nearest thing we have is "potential" in Steven Taylor, but thats it. And the only striker weve had playing for us for 95% of the season who is even remotely Premiership calibre is Martins.

 

Im all for strengthening the squad, but it was madness to blow a sizeable transfer fee and massive wages to replace arguably our best player last season when the rest of the squad had such massive gaping holes.

 

But then, look at the results to see who is in the right here. Weve crashed out of the main cup competitions in humiliating fashion against sides we should have beaten easily (5-1 utter humiliation at home to a bloody championship side, thats 5-1, and a 2-0 spineless defeat against a Dutch side built with pennies, with the nation watching and eventually laughing at us). Weve done worse this year than we did last year in the league, with plenty of shiite results and shiite performances, even in games weve won. So, for those of us who said we should have signed a defender or a forward instead of a backup left winger at the time the signing was made - surely weve been proven correct?

 

Or rather, as certain individuals on this board with specific agendas would have us believe, its just crazy talk to think that our defence would be better with better individual defenders than Bramble and Ramage, or that wed have scored more goals if we had better individual forwards than the likes of Sibierski, Duff and Dyer. Anything to back the board, eh?

 

Anything to slate the board eh ? Despite us being among the top spenders, again

 

Now, thats what I call an agenda

 

 

 

In fairness - and I may have misread - but I'm not sure he mentioned or even implicated the board there? When he uses the word board is he not referring to this message board?

 

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, but isn't that entire post about how signing Duff was the wrong decision rather than castigating the board?

 

If the point is to castigate someone for deciding to buy Duff, then I would consider that to have been the managers decision, which I will defend BTW, as a proven quality player with his best years ahead of him for the price we paid for him and considering all the circumstances, which have been mentioned in this thread. Nobody was to know he would struggle to find the form he has displayed with other clubs in the premiership.

 

The clubs policy of price limits, wage limits etc, is set by the board. If the manager wanted the player, and the board felt it was within their means or simply chose to back their manager, they are doing what a good board should do as often as possible.

 

My comment about an agenda stands.

 

What I would really like is tmonkey [and he isn't the only one] to tell us is who exactly they consider to be these numerous "trophy players" at the club, and who they would prefer the club to have signed instead.

 

Before answering, they should consider what I said earlier. Do they prefer the club not to sign quality players, or would they prefer the club to sell its best players ? and do they think - before they start whinging on about not being 2nd in the league any more - that we have any chance whatsoever of ever getting back there if the club DON'T buy these quality players, or "trophy players" if that is what they prefer to call them ?

 

 

 

Cutting through all the clap-trap this has the hallmarks of a classic FS buy. GR probably didn't even know about it till he was asked to book the hire car.

[Parky]

I thought I told you to zip it.

 

You're going to have to be firmer with him.

[NE5]

any club in the world needs 2 top players for every position

 

Thats an ideal scenario. Fact is that we have no top players in any position when it comes to defence. The nearest thing we have is "potential" in Steven Taylor, but thats it. And the only striker weve had playing for us for 95% of the season who is even remotely Premiership calibre is Martins.

 

Im all for strengthening the squad, but it was madness to blow a sizeable transfer fee and massive wages to replace arguably our best player last season when the rest of the squad had such massive gaping holes.

 

But then, look at the results to see who is in the right here. Weve crashed out of the main cup competitions in humiliating fashion against sides we should have beaten easily (5-1 utter humiliation at home to a bloody championship side, thats 5-1, and a 2-0 spineless defeat against a Dutch side built with pennies, with the nation watching and eventually laughing at us). Weve done worse this year than we did last year in the league, with plenty of shiite results and shiite performances, even in games weve won. So, for those of us who said we should have signed a defender or a forward instead of a backup left winger at the time the signing was made - surely weve been proven correct?

 

Or rather, as certain individuals on this board with specific agendas would have us believe, its just crazy talk to think that our defence would be better with better individual defenders than Bramble and Ramage, or that wed have scored more goals if we had better individual forwards than the likes of Sibierski, Duff and Dyer. Anything to back the board, eh?

 

Anything to slate the board eh ? Despite us being among the top spenders, again

 

Now, thats what I call an agenda

 

 

 

In fairness - and I may have misread - but I'm not sure he mentioned or even implicated the board there? When he uses the word board is he not referring to this message board?

 

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, but isn't that entire post about how signing Duff was the wrong decision rather than castigating the board?

 

If the point is to castigate someone for deciding to buy Duff, then I would consider that to have been the managers decision, which I will defend BTW, as a proven quality player with his best years ahead of him for the price we paid for him and considering all the circumstances, which have been mentioned in this thread. Nobody was to know he would struggle to find the form he has displayed with other clubs in the premiership.

 

The clubs policy of price limits, wage limits etc, is set by the board. If the manager wanted the player, and the board felt it was within their means or simply chose to back their manager, they are doing what a good board should do as often as possible.

 

My comment about an agenda stands.

 

What I would really like is tmonkey [and he isn't the only one] to tell us is who exactly they consider to be these numerous "trophy players" at the club, and who they would prefer the club to have signed instead.

 

Before answering, they should consider what I said earlier. Do they prefer the club not to sign quality players, or would they prefer the club to sell its best players ? and do they think - before they start whinging on about not being 2nd in the league any more - that we have any chance whatsoever of ever getting back there if the club DON'T buy these quality players, or "trophy players" if that is what they prefer to call them ?

 

 

 

Cutting through all the clap-trap this has the hallmarks of a classic FS buy. GR probably didn't even know about it till he was asked to book the hire car.

 

What hallmarks are they ? Are you inventing an agenda or just making up some clap trap to suit you ?

 

 

[Howaythelads]

I thought I told you to zip it.

 

You're going to have to be firmer with him.

 

I'm sure he's "firm" with his "chums"

[Howaythelads]

any club in the world needs 2 top players for every position

 

Thats an ideal scenario. Fact is that we have no top players in any position when it comes to defence. The nearest thing we have is "potential" in Steven Taylor, but thats it. And the only striker weve had playing for us for 95% of the season who is even remotely Premiership calibre is Martins.

 

Im all for strengthening the squad, but it was madness to blow a sizeable transfer fee and massive wages to replace arguably our best player last season when the rest of the squad had such massive gaping holes.

 

But then, look at the results to see who is in the right here. Weve crashed out of the main cup competitions in humiliating fashion against sides we should have beaten easily (5-1 utter humiliation at home to a bloody championship side, thats 5-1, and a 2-0 spineless defeat against a Dutch side built with pennies, with the nation watching and eventually laughing at us). Weve done worse this year than we did last year in the league, with plenty of shiite results and shiite performances, even in games weve won. So, for those of us who said we should have signed a defender or a forward instead of a backup left winger at the time the signing was made - surely weve been proven correct?

 

Or rather, as certain individuals on this board with specific agendas would have us believe, its just crazy talk to think that our defence would be better with better individual defenders than Bramble and Ramage, or that wed have scored more goals if we had better individual forwards than the likes of Sibierski, Duff and Dyer. Anything to back the board, eh?

 

Anything to slate the board eh ? Despite us being among the top spenders, again

 

Now, thats what I call an agenda

 

 

 

In fairness - and I may have misread - but I'm not sure he mentioned or even implicated the board there? When he uses the word board is he not referring to this message board?

 

Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong, but isn't that entire post about how signing Duff was the wrong decision rather than castigating the board?

 

If the point is to castigate someone for deciding to buy Duff, then I would consider that to have been the managers decision, which I will defend BTW, as a proven quality player with his best years ahead of him for the price we paid for him and considering all the circumstances, which have been mentioned in this thread. Nobody was to know he would struggle to find the form he has displayed with other clubs in the premiership.

 

The clubs policy of price limits, wage limits etc, is set by the board. If the manager wanted the player, and the board felt it was within their means or simply chose to back their manager, they are doing what a good board should do as often as possible.

 

My comment about an agenda stands.

 

What I would really like is tmonkey [and he isn't the only one] to tell us is who exactly they consider to be these numerous "trophy players" at the club, and who they would prefer the club to have signed instead.

 

Before answering, they should consider what I said earlier. Do they prefer the club not to sign quality players, or would they prefer the club to sell its best players ? and do they think - before they start whinging on about not being 2nd in the league any more - that we have any chance whatsoever of ever getting back there if the club DON'T buy these quality players, or "trophy players" if that is what they prefer to call them ?

 

 

 

Cutting through all the clap-trap this has the hallmarks of a classic FS buy. GR probably didn't even know about it till he was asked to book the hire car.

 

Chomp! Chomp!

 

Good try, but not good enough.