OzzieMandias Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 Shame you don't answer the question about Martins. Not that everyone reading this will not know why Yeah, I know why. It's because, pulled out of context, it's a dumb question. We shouldn't have got into the position where we had to go even deeper into debt to buy a striker. "Backing the manager" as the sole requirement of a chairman glosses over the fact that he's supposed to be managing club revenues in such a way as to make sustainable progress. No one can say that Peter Ridsdale didn't back David O'Leary. Look at Leeds now. We were deep in debt because of Souness alienating and selling our best players for next to nowt and wasting millions replacements, which you backed until the end, and still do. Can't get much dumber than that. Nobody has ever been successful without backing managers to buy top players, how else do you think you can be successful ? Almost as dumb as your last "opinion" If Fred was responsible for the day-to-day running of the club -- a fact you are frantically attempting to spin elsewhere -- then he is responsible for running us into debt. Fact. the actions of which you supported ? Also responsible for qualifying for the Champions League and filling the stadium through bringing in top quality players, correct ? Until the manager YOU backed decided we were better off without them, correct ? Please attempt to shift your brain out of neutral for once in your posting life. You can't just point at the good bits and credit Shepherd, and then point at the bad bits and blame someone else. Like, if Souness is solely responsible for the mess that the club is now, and your fat friend is no way to blame, then Robson must be completely responsible for the two or three good years we had in the last decade, and Shepherd can take none of the credit. Your "argument" is moronic. As usual. mackems.gif I've not credited Shepherd for anything, And that's as dumb a lie as I've ever seen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 Shame you don't answer the question about Martins. Not that everyone reading this will not know why Yeah, I know why. It's because, pulled out of context, it's a dumb question. We shouldn't have got into the position where we had to go even deeper into debt to buy a striker. "Backing the manager" as the sole requirement of a chairman glosses over the fact that he's supposed to be managing club revenues in such a way as to make sustainable progress. No one can say that Peter Ridsdale didn't back David O'Leary. Look at Leeds now. We were deep in debt because of Souness alienating and selling our best players for next to nowt and wasting millions replacements, which you backed until the end, and still do. Can't get much dumber than that. Nobody has ever been successful without backing managers to buy top players, how else do you think you can be successful ? Almost as dumb as your last "opinion" If Fred was responsible for the day-to-day running of the club -- a fact you are frantically attempting to spin elsewhere -- then he is responsible for running us into debt. Fact. the actions of which you supported ? Also responsible for qualifying for the Champions League and filling the stadium through bringing in top quality players, correct ? Until the manager YOU backed decided we were better off without them, correct ? Please attempt to shift your brain out of neutral for once in your posting life. You can't just point at the good bits and credit Shepherd, and then point at the bad bits and blame someone else. Like, if Souness is solely responsible for the mess that the club is now, and your fat friend is no way to blame, then Robson must be completely responsible for the two or three good years we had in the last decade, and Shepherd can take none of the credit. Your "argument" is moronic. As usual. mackems.gif I've not credited Shepherd for anything, And that's as dumb a lie as I've ever seen. you can answer the rest of the post if you like , which was as follows : I've always said that Souness was a bad appointment and that selling Craig Bellamy and Robert were huge mistakes. You supported him, and those sales. You backed the boards decision to support their manager. I said that Shepherd ie the board, should have sacked him for putting his ego before doing his job. Isn't it great to see an idiot - ie you - wriggle. I have never credited Shepherd for the performance of the players on the pitch, or for freezing in big games. I have - however - alwasys said that he and the board have backed their managers enough to give us a team good enough to reach these stages, and after that it is down to the manager and players to perform on the day. You can reply to the bold bit now. As you clipped it earlier, what a surprise Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 Shame you don't answer the question about Martins. Not that everyone reading this will not know why Yeah, I know why. It's because, pulled out of context, it's a dumb question. We shouldn't have got into the position where we had to go even deeper into debt to buy a striker. "Backing the manager" as the sole requirement of a chairman glosses over the fact that he's supposed to be managing club revenues in such a way as to make sustainable progress. No one can say that Peter Ridsdale didn't back David O'Leary. Look at Leeds now. We were deep in debt because of Souness alienating and selling our best players for next to nowt and wasting millions replacements, which you backed until the end, and still do. Can't get much dumber than that. Nobody has ever been successful without backing managers to buy top players, how else do you think you can be successful ? Almost as dumb as your last "opinion" If Fred was responsible for the day-to-day running of the club -- a fact you are frantically attempting to spin elsewhere -- then he is responsible for running us into debt. Fact. the actions of which you supported ? Also responsible for qualifying for the Champions League and filling the stadium through bringing in top quality players, correct ? Until the manager YOU backed decided we were better off without them, correct ? Please attempt to shift your brain out of neutral for once in your posting life. You can't just point at the good bits and credit Shepherd, and then point at the bad bits and blame someone else. Like, if Souness is solely responsible for the mess that the club is now, and your fat friend is no way to blame, then Robson must be completely responsible for the two or three good years we had in the last decade, and Shepherd can take none of the credit. Your "argument" is moronic. As usual. mackems.gif I've not credited Shepherd for anything, And that's as dumb a lie as I've ever seen. you can answer the rest of the post if you like , which was as follows : I've always said blah blah blah Your endless regurgitation of the same old tripe has not escaped my attention. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NE5 Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 Shame you don't answer the question about Martins. Not that everyone reading this will not know why Yeah, I know why. It's because, pulled out of context, it's a dumb question. We shouldn't have got into the position where we had to go even deeper into debt to buy a striker. "Backing the manager" as the sole requirement of a chairman glosses over the fact that he's supposed to be managing club revenues in such a way as to make sustainable progress. No one can say that Peter Ridsdale didn't back David O'Leary. Look at Leeds now. We were deep in debt because of Souness alienating and selling our best players for next to nowt and wasting millions replacements, which you backed until the end, and still do. Can't get much dumber than that. Nobody has ever been successful without backing managers to buy top players, how else do you think you can be successful ? Almost as dumb as your last "opinion" If Fred was responsible for the day-to-day running of the club -- a fact you are frantically attempting to spin elsewhere -- then he is responsible for running us into debt. Fact. the actions of which you supported ? Also responsible for qualifying for the Champions League and filling the stadium through bringing in top quality players, correct ? Until the manager YOU backed decided we were better off without them, correct ? Please attempt to shift your brain out of neutral for once in your posting life. You can't just point at the good bits and credit Shepherd, and then point at the bad bits and blame someone else. Like, if Souness is solely responsible for the mess that the club is now, and your fat friend is no way to blame, then Robson must be completely responsible for the two or three good years we had in the last decade, and Shepherd can take none of the credit. Your "argument" is moronic. As usual. mackems.gif I've not credited Shepherd for anything, And that's as dumb a lie as I've ever seen. you can answer the rest of the post if you like , which was as follows : I've always said blah blah blah Your endless regurgitation of the same old tripe has not escaped my attention. clipped again, rather than replied mackems.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted July 29, 2007 Share Posted July 29, 2007 Yawn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts