monkadill Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 If we had started the season with a clean sheet we would be in the same position in the table as we are now! Would that be acceptable?
kpturner Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 If we had started the season with a clean sheet we would be in the same position in the table as we are now! Would that be acceptable? what?:confused:
paulwantsapint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Think the idea is that even had we beat Millwall we would still be bottom
Matthew Le God Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Think the idea is that even had we beat Millwall we would still be bottom Doesn't make it ironic though. The press use the term so much and always get it wrong. Take note Daily Echo if you are reading this and use a dictionary to see what ironic means
Whitey Grandad Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Even without the -10, we would still be bottom of the table. It's not realy acceptable, is it, but there's a long way to go yet.
kpturner Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Think the idea is that even had we beat Millwall we would still be bottom Why is that ironic?
um pahars Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 (edited) You can't beat around the bush, no wins from 6 games and only 4 points is not a good start by any stretch of the imagination. Throw in the -10 and it certainly makes it even worse. I'd like to think we have the players and set up to recover from such a poor start, but there can be no denying that the start so far is anything but good. Edited 5 September, 2009 by um pahars too much cider and kroney
saint_stevo Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 think he means that without -10 we would only be off bottom on goal difference by one goal......
70's Mike Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Think the idea is that even had we beat Millwall we would still be bottom but we were always likely to be bottom until october/november unless we won every game and another side lost every game
kpturner Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 think he means that without -10 we would only be off bottom on goal difference by one goal...... So no, not acceptable
Glasgow_Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 His point is, even without the minus 10 we are still the worst team in the league..... one word sums us up - pathetic
Colinjb Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Incorrect, we would still be above Tranmere.
Whitey Grandad Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Incorrect, we would still be above Tranmere. Phew, for a moment there I was worried!
Block 5 Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 If we had started the season with a clean sheet we would be in the same position in the table as we are now! Would that be acceptable? You are factually incorrect. However you are right, of course it's not acceptable. But if you think that you can do better.......etc etc. The fact is that we have a new manager and 8 new players who have never played together, coupled with a bunch of kids who only know how to lose because some sick, twisted individual thought he could pay two Dutch clowns a pittance to manage a team of infants. That kind of f*ckup takes time to fix.
Glasgow_Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 & people still manage to make excuses......
aintforever Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 How long do they give Pardew? you cannot ignore the fact that he ****ed Charlton up big time.
Genk Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 How long do they give Pardew? you cannot ignore the fact that he ****ed Charlton up big time. Seriously, that isn't the answer to our problems
70's Mike Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 How long do they give Pardew? you cannot ignore the fact that he ****ed Charlton up big time. BUT not Reading. i really believe we have to stick with a manager for more than a season to ever have a chance of rebuilding the club, even if it means going down again
um pahars Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 The fact is that we have a new manager and 8 new players who have never played together, coupled with a bunch of kids who only know how to lose because some sick, twisted individual thought he could pay two Dutch clowns a pittance to manage a team of infants. That kind of f*ckup takes time to fix. I would have to agree 100%. Of course I'm not happy with the start and I'm not overly impressed with today's performance, but given the total Fckfest that was last year, then I'm more than willing to give the new team some time to turn things around.
Glasgow_Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 How long do they give Pardew? you cannot ignore the fact that he ****ed Charlton up big time. good question
aintforever Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 BUT not Reading. i really believe we have to stick with a manager for more than a season to ever have a chance of rebuilding the club, even if it means going down again But do we want to be stuck with another Burley - good record but someone who's had his day and just cannot be bothered. It's too early to sack him but if I was Cortese I would be worried.
Glasgow_Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 I think I would have more points on the board if I were appointed.......one thing im sure of is WGS definitly would have. nuff said
Block 5 Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 I think I would have more points on the board if I were appointed.......one thing im sure of is WGS definitly would have. nuff said Guff said.
sadoldgit Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 What is ironic is that were are more rubbish than we have been for decades but the hanging mob still want to lynch a blokes who have nothing to do with the club now.
CB Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Six games in and the rumblings about sacking Pardew have started. Unbelievable.
Whitey Grandad Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Six games in and the rumblings about sacking Pardew have started. Unbelievable. Even Poortvliet was given more games than that.
once_bitterne Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 but there can be no denying that the start so far is anything but poor. I'd say it was poor.....
Glasgow_Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 Six games in and the rumblings about sacking Pardew have started. Unbelievable. some people are better at spotting talent than others? bottom of the league (2nd bottom without -10) out of the cup and playing awful......who do you blame? Let me guess the past? or RL? :confused:
rallyboy Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 current form is all about sticking two fingers up to Mawhinney and showing him that even if he hadn't hit us with the penalty we would still be down there....so the jokes on him.... I think.....
Saint in Paradise Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 current form is all about sticking two fingers up to Mawhinney and showing him that even if he hadn't hit us with the penalty we would still be down there....so the jokes on him.... I think..... Made me laugh I think ?
Glasgow_Saint Posted 5 September, 2009 Posted 5 September, 2009 current form is all about sticking two fingers up to Mawhinney and showing him that even if he hadn't hit us with the penalty we would still be down there....so the jokes on him.... I think..... Finally an answer...thank you rallyboy.
70's Mike Posted 6 September, 2009 Posted 6 September, 2009 But do we want to be stuck with another Burley - good record but someone who's had his day and just cannot be bothered. It's too early to sack him but if I was Cortese I would be worried. how do you tell fergie had a crap record at united for a few seasons
Windmill Arm 2 Posted 6 September, 2009 Posted 6 September, 2009 How long do they give Pardew? you cannot ignore the fact that he ****ed Charlton up big time. Did he **** West Ham up? Did he **** Reading up? You are a ****ing mong if you think sacking Pardew is gonna help, ****ing drama queen !!!!! :mad:
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 6 September, 2009 Posted 6 September, 2009 Doesn't make it ironic though. The press use the term so much and always get it wrong. Take note Daily Echo if you are reading this and use a dictionary to see what ironic means I spluttered when you mentioned that 'Hallowed Publication' :---) and the use of a dictionary within the same sentence!
aintforever Posted 6 September, 2009 Posted 6 September, 2009 Did he **** West Ham up? Did he **** Reading up? You are a ****ing mong if you think sacking Pardew is gonna help, ****ing drama queen !!!!! :mad: Try learning to read ****-head, I never said we should sack him.
Bearsy Posted 6 September, 2009 Posted 6 September, 2009 circa this forum a month ago: "If only we hadn't got hit with that 10 point deduction! RL really ****ed up our chances of automatic promotion this season. Rosey-cheeked ****." The irony is obvious you retarded mother****ers.
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now