Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Rodgers Out


Red22
 Share

Recommended Posts

I guess that's one way to hide two transfer windows and nearly £60m outlay. Quite how you have the nerve to question my objectivity when your sole objective here is to hide any wrong doing by Kenny and trump up any thing else, well, it's quite laughable. You post about almost nothing else other than trying to hide Kenny's flaws. Fortunately, he's more honest about it than you.

 

Oh, we're back at this again.

 

Rather than going feet first every time with these lazy attempts at trying to undermine another persons position in the debate why not actually read what they're saying?

 

I could easily flip it around and say 'your sole objective is to hide any wrong doing by Brendan. You post about almost nothing else other than trying to hide Brendan's flaws' but that would be falling into your tedious trap.

 

You simply fail to apply a wider context when discussing Dalglish. Your failure to acknowledge some pretty important facts such as in January 2011 he was caretaker manager, in January 2012 no funds were available and overall he was employed within a framework put in place by FSG says it all about your lack of objectivity.

 

Repeating only half the truth time and again in your little game of one-upmanship is purely self defeating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco

If I'm 100% honest, I'd be shocked if you understand the concept of objectivity, much less have the ability to recognise when somebody lacks it. Still, I'm not going any deeper down your reality warping rabbit hole. Not got the inclination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco

I'm not ignoring what you're saying, I addressed it in my first reply to you - in a conversation you initiated - I'm now just having my usual fun with you. In a minute you'll pretend you're not an ignorant cretin and say how much smarter you are than me. Then I can laugh at you, call you a cunt, then go about ma bidness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ince and Sturridge are not enough, we all know that but I don't think we are asking or expecting a full fix in January and it's a bit naughty of him to believe we are.

 

January is the second fist at what was a fuck up in the summer.

 

For January? It might be.

 

We need first team improvement (Sturridge) and we need bodies that can do well (Ince).

 

I'd want more. I'd prefer Walcott and Sturridge, or Walcott and Ince though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Numero Veinticinco
For January? It might be.

 

We need first team improvement (Sturridge) and we need bodies that can do well (Ince).

 

I'd want more. I'd prefer Walcott and Sturridge, or Walcott and Ince though.

 

At this point, I'd settle for just Walcott. Quality over quantity. It's still not enough, but if it's a choice between a couple of okay players or a potential star player, it's obvious what we should do. Assuming he'd join us, of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For January? It might be.

 

We need first team improvement (Sturridge) and we need bodies that can do well (Ince).

 

I'd want more. I'd prefer Walcott and Sturridge, or Walcott and Ince though.

 

Walcott and Sturridge would be plenty - no need for Ince then - he is not going to challenge for Sterlings spot and at that point we got a bundle of wide attackers, a converted LB and Joe Cole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not ignoring what you're saying, I addressed it in my first reply to you

 

You were certainly dismissive of facts. So what now, James?

 

Does your usual idea of fun include flouncing?

 

You're always having your way with me, ignoring facts and throwing hissy fits when others wont fall into line with your views.

 

Such a scamp, aren't you James.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm, it's an interesting one. I've expressed an opinion on another forum about actually replacing Gerrard with Suarez in a 4-2-3-1. Then it'd depend on who comes in. Assuming we went for somebody like Sturridge and Walcott, I'd go for...

 

-------Sturridge--------Suarez---------Walcott--------

 

------------------------Borini--------------------------

 

Still, I'd certainly want Suarez in a Gerrard role when he was with Torres. He scored shit loads in that position, I think Suarez can too. He already has with Hunterlaar. EDIT: I'm saying this on the assumption we'll play a defensive player or two behind them.

 

Can't see Ince getting much of a start. Might be wrong.

 

You interforum hussy. How could you?

 

Is it better than here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for me anything below top 7 minium with that team is failure. he talks to much crap lacks the experience he was a gamble but i think were stuck with him, were not getting pep jose and rafa for sure is not coming back van gaal should have been given the job in the summer. instead fsg took a risk with a manager with one pl experience i hope he turns it around but i have not warmed to him at all losing at home to villa was bad but then listening to him whinge after it was worse he then blames the thin squad which he mentioned before should be aiming for second 22 points and were half way thrugh the season is a dreadful record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can remember Brian Clough on some sports program years ago answering questions from a audiance.

 

Somebody asked him about payoffs managers get or something.

 

Anyway Clough came out with a great idea and said he thinks if a manager gets sacked,then so should the chairman for hiring him.

That would soon stop the Russkie and his type of sacking managers after a few bad results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...