Saint_clark Posted 13 November, 2009 Share Posted 13 November, 2009 I was thinking the same thing, but was unsure where to post it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 13 November, 2009 Share Posted 13 November, 2009 Still even you write in the past tense except for MLT and you forget to stress he was a hero to all Saints fans until he decided to tarnish that image quite badly IMO. He is no Niall Quinn that's for sure and despite all the support this club gave him he decided to take 'Le Tiss' out of it. As public relations go - not his finest hours and still not a word from him and he continues to pedal around the circuit as if nothing happened. Great footballer but not such a great man IMO. You are a dispicable creature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 13 November, 2009 Share Posted 13 November, 2009 You are a dispicable creature. Try not to waste your 3 posts a day on me as it would be interesting to hear some of your original thoughts on the past, present and future happenings concerning the club we love. In the meantime I will treat your posts with desdain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 13 November, 2009 Share Posted 13 November, 2009 Try not to waste your 3 posts a day on me as it would be interesting to hear some of your original thoughts on the past, present and future happenings concerning the club we love. In the meantime I will treat your posts with desdain. I see what you did there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 13 November, 2009 Share Posted 13 November, 2009 I see what you did there! I would expect you to but Dune without the c will not even notice or come back and tell me I'm thick as well as stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 I had heard rumours that he had not been getting on with NC who I hear is a shrewd, tough cookie to deal with. He was appointed after NC rang the FA asking if they could recommend anyone for the position. He had nothing to do with the Swiss coming to the table. In a way I am personally a little saddened by the news because although he had a bad reputation with some of the staff I felt AO was a "football" man and also he showed a genuine interest in the history and traditions of the club when we held our one meeting on the future role for Hagiology and the club's 125th anniversary. Pretty sure that something is quite not in place otherwise he would still be there. But I don't go along with all the made up ****** that has been put against his name, more in line with Nick Illingworths bit on the UI. Looking back to the point when he first came to the club, the fractious atmosphere and unpleasant job that had to be done. It would give little chance to Mother Theresa coming out with even a smile in the popularity stakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beatlesaint Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 I would expect you to but Dune without the c will not even notice or come back and tell me I'm thick as well as stupid. Shock Horror as 19C insults yet another poster............... As we are nearly all so far below your intelligence level why do you bother coming on here ? Oh thats right, its to insult MLT, Lawrie etc etc. Even had to drip your poison into the MLT Penalty thread didn't you ? You are pure malice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 Shock Horror as 19C insults yet another poster............... As we are nearly all so far below your intelligence level why do you bother coming on here ? Oh thats right, its to insult MLT, Lawrie etc etc. Even had to drip your poison into the MLT Penalty thread didn't you ? You are pure malice. BS before you write your bs have a look at said poster's history and personal and unsubstantianted attacks on me and you'll know that I don't insult people unless it is warranted. I agnore a lot of the playground stuff but insults dressed as thinly disguised slander or that are way over the top need to be responded to IMO. I don't see why I should be despised for having a different opinion no more than I feel I should regard Dune or yourself as some kind of disciples. My opinions on MLT, McMenemy and Crouch are based on my personal observations and what most of us who are not ITKer's are aware of from the media. I have never underplayed the positive contributions each have made but neither do I simply ignore the very damaging and negative influence they have had IMO. Likewise, if a respected poster says something to the contrary to make me rethink my views then I tend to listen and take it on board. However, people with a very different view from me on many aspects are actually just as critical as I am of these 3 people that seem to be so blindly defended by some. Trust, faith and respect to me are absolute prerequisites in life and qualities that work both ways. When people let me down be they distant heros or close friends or somewhere in between I move on and 9 times out 10, time has proven me right. MLT acted dishonestly IMO and that is not a personal trait I wish to ignore as we are not talking a little white lie in any event. I have also lost faith in both him and Crouch over the Pinnacle affair and even giveing them the benefit of the doubt of the NDA's that ensures their silence or 'straight bat' replies IMO events and their actions just don't stack up. Finally, McMenemy has proven over time there is more to his support of Saints than simply the love it. From this forum I learned that he allegedly cashed in readily on the PLC and then proceeded to bite the hand that fed him which in my experience in life no matter what happens you remain gracious to your benefactors and recently the alleged reasons for turning his back on Saints seems bitter and spiteful IMO so lets hope his apparent new found love of Grimsby and allegedly free lunch and ticket at Bournemouth comes to fruition. We don't need these people at this club anymore what we need are new heros to mirror some of the good things about these 3 whilst not making the same mistakes. My support is as loyal as it isn't blind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docker-p Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 There were only 9 out of 43 boxes signposted, Flybe are the main sponsors, Cedar do the programmes, Sky speaks for itself, Draper Tools were a main sponsor, Paris Smith and Randall are the club's solicitors.that only leaves 4 independents. It may well be a ramping up of the commercial department to sell the corporate side. I've heard on the grapevine there were only 3 boxes sold, at the same asking price as last season, (£45K I think) and even Paris Smith and Randall were reluctant to buy, but did so only for 'political' reasons and after the season had started. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 Shock Horror as 19C insults yet another poster............... As we are nearly all so far below your intelligence level why do you bother coming on here ? Oh thats right, its to insult MLT, Lawrie etc etc. Even had to drip your poison into the MLT Penalty thread didn't you ? You are pure malice. BTW you may want to dwell on this insult. Do you seriously believe my sole desire is to cause harmful intent (legally speaking) and nothing but (to clarify 'pure') ? Read my posts before your answer as like you I just want to talk about my club, understand more about the issues of the day and ask questions about my opinions that require some correlation. Having an opinion different to your own does not label someone as being 'pure malice' and to refer to them as such can accuse you at best of parochialism or worse threatened by alternatives and / or the ability of others, but let's not go there. I suggest you put me back on ignore like you keep telling everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyinthesky Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 I've heard on the grapevine there were only 3 boxes sold, at the same asking price as last season, (£45K I think) and even Paris Smith and Randall were reluctant to buy, but did so only for 'political' reasons and after the season had started. Think the Boxes are £30-£33k. Far too expensive in my view Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 On the usually reliable principle that a leopard doesn't change its spots, I'm sticking with the idea that Oldknow has acted in much the same way that made him so deeply unpopular the first time around. BTW, why are we talking about 19C's compulsive but wildly irrelevant obsession on a thread about Oldknow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 On the usually reliable principle that a leopard doesn't change its spots, I'm sticking with the idea that Oldknow has acted in much the same way that made him so deeply unpopular the first time around. BTW, why are we talking about 19C's compulsive but wildly irrelevant obsession on a thread about Oldknow? Why do you ask if you don't want to talk about it? They say ignorance is bliss, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 14 November, 2009 Share Posted 14 November, 2009 Why do you ask if you don't want to talk about it? They say ignorance is bliss, is it? You have tried to ruin another thread..... Id say ignorance is 19c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 You have tried to ruin another thread..... Id say ignorance is 19c Have I? I voiced caution over Oldknow's departure and someone called for lawrie to be given a position and I felt that was worthy of discussion. So I haven't ruined it or diverted it, just commented on previous posts and the feeling that Oldknow's departure for some has seemingly left the sluice gates open for IMO a few rats to get back on board ship. I don't think they are needed and we are doing more than fine without them Gemmel don't you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 Have I? I voiced caution over Oldknow's departure and someone called for lawrie to be given a position and I felt that was worthy of discussion. So I haven't ruined it or diverted it, just commented on previous posts and the feeling that Oldknow's departure for some has seemingly left the sluice gates open for IMO a few rats to get back on board ship. I don't think they are needed and we are doing more than fine without them Gemmel don't you agree? Everyone is aware of what your views are on LM. I'm not particularly fussed myself. If NC believes he will add something then I will trust his judgement. He's done everything right so far and if he wants him in then that's good enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 Everyone is aware of what your views are on LM. I'm not particularly fussed myself. If NC believes he will add something then I will trust his judgement. He's done everything right so far and if he wants him in then that's good enough for me. Hypo I agree with you with regard to Mr Cortese but I am sure he'll agree that he doesn't get it right 100% of time as human perfection doesn't exist, well not quite anyway. If he opens the way back for LM then having rid this club from the shackles of its past he would reverse all the good work and sense of 'new era' many fans are enjoying. IMO I see no sense in bringing back a man who has been unsupportive of the club by his alleged refusal to attend games and a man capable of that level of shallow bitterness is not someone we should be welcoming back into the fold. In any event it is difficult to see what value he will add and whilst I appreciate the phrase about keeping your friends close and all that, in this instance I don't think Mr Cortese needs to keep this McMenemy closer still, IMO. Lawrie McMenemy has burnt his bridges IMO and why should he be allowed back on the basis of something he achieved a generation ago and has proven recently IMO that his heart is not in this club at all, unlike the rest of us paying fans. So, yes it would bother me if McMenemy was allowed back in, would I stop going? Of course not, I wouldn't be that bitter or churlish and leave those kind of antics to more respected men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 19C's puts a good argument across, but when you consider worships Rupert Lowe (as part of his act) it shows him up for his true colours. I do not even believe he is as rabidly anti MLT, Lawrie or LC as he makes out (although it ties in with his act because they are his perceived enemies of Lowe) - it's just that holding such polar views [to the overwhelming majority] are a means to get attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 Ask yourself this - how many replies would 19C get to his posts if he was anti Lowe, supported MLT, Lawrie and Leon? The answer is very few. So 19C who's your next victim - Marcus Liebherr, Ted Bates, Ron Davies? Oooooh think of the replies you'd get if you slagged them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 Everyone is aware of what your views are on LM. I'm not particularly fussed myself. If NC believes he will add something then I will trust his judgement. He's done everything right so far and if he wants him in then that's good enough for me. I urge caution when you slip easily and naturally into referring to Nicola Cortese as NC and commenting on the possibility of him bringing in Lawrie McMenemy in some capacity. Especially as there is another NC posting at the same time, who cannot resist gnawing at his bone once more, his obsessive dislike of our past heroes. Everybody else realises that that bone long ago ceased to have any meat on it, but I'd hate to think that any comments praising the astute businessman who has been responsible for much of the turnaround in our club's fortunes could be misconstrued as praise for our resident contrary antagonist and wind-up merchant par excellance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 19C's puts a good argument across it's just that holding such polar views [to the overwhelming majority] are a means to get attention. I agree that his views may not be popular but as you state he does put an 'argument' across, you call it argument I would call it matters for discussion and there is reason in his debate regarding McMenemy, does it not grate on you that he no longer goes and as a respected poster informed us will not go as he has to pay, not only like the rest of us but the owner of the club as well ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarb101 Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 Lawrie McMenemy has burnt his bridges IMO and why should he be allowed back on the basis of something he achieved a generation ago and has proven recently IMO that his heart is not in this club at all, unlike the rest of us paying fans. So, yes it would bother me if McMenemy was allowed back in, would I stop going? Of course not, I wouldn't be that bitter or churlish and leave those kind of antics to more respected men. I agree with 19C. Let's move on and enjoy the new environment. McMenemy opens his mouth when it suits him, but who really listens to his opnions these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 15 November, 2009 Share Posted 15 November, 2009 I wouldn't take any notice of Nineteen Canteen, he only hates Lawrie because of his love for Lowe. I don't know why people are even talking about Big Mac though, there is no way he would do a similar role to Oldknow. If Cortese wants him in though you would have to back his judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 I urge caution when you slip easily and naturally into referring to Nicola Cortese as NC and commenting on the possibility of him bringing in Lawrie McMenemy in some capacity. Especially as there is another NC posting at the same time, who cannot resist gnawing at his bone once more, his obsessive dislike of our past heroes. Everybody else realises that that bone long ago ceased to have any meat on it, but I'd hate to think that any comments praising the astute businessman who has been responsible for much of the turnaround in our club's fortunes could be misconstrued as praise for our resident contrary antagonist and wind-up merchant par excellance. Can't beat a broad generalisation Wes. Search my posts and find one where I slag off the likes of Paine, Peach, Holmes, Channon or Bates just as an example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 Ask yourself this - how many replies would 19C get to his posts if he was anti Lowe, supported MLT, Lawrie and Leon? The answer is very few. So 19C who's your next victim - Marcus Liebherr, Ted Bates, Ron Davies? Oooooh think of the replies you'd get if you slagged them off. About as many as your's Dune with a silent c. I post my opinion not +1 which is generally as pointless as your 3 post a day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 19C's puts a good argument across, but when you consider worships Rupert Lowe (as part of his act) it shows him up for his true colours. I do not even believe he is as rabidly anti MLT, Lawrie or LC as he makes out (although it ties in with his act because they are his perceived enemies of Lowe) - it's just that holding such polar views [to the overwhelming majority] are a means to get attention. Worships Rupert Lowe? Have a look in the Lounge at the Le God Delusion thread and tell MLG he needs to change the number of gods that have been worshipped since the dawn of time to 10,001. For more considered posters please read 'rabidly anti' as critical of recent actions. The percieved Lowe angle has actually nothing to do it with it especially in the way IMO, MLT has conducted himself recently. I don't suppose Le Tiss consulted Lowe on Pinnacle or his book but it may of helped had he done so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 .For more considered posters please read 'rabidly anti' as critical of recent actions. The percieved Lowe angle has actually nothing to do it with it especially in the way IMO, MLT has conducted himself recently. I don't suppose Le Tiss consulted Lowe on Pinnacle or his book but it may of helped had he done so. I think you find that the mods had to edit the mis- leading title of that thread, but I can't for the life of me think why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 I think you find that the mods had to edit the mis- leading title of that thread, but I can't for the life of me think why. Because they didn't appreciate it was a just a hook to get peoples interest in a thread they may have passed by and it worked. Unfortunately, the mods got a bit fed up by the ignorant few complaining about the title (as if there is a patent on the phrase) who never actually took the time to read the content. As explained by Ponty but you may have missed that Gemmel Misleading? Yet hooks and phrases, are used all the time but inconsistent standards apply. Has Le God treated us with respect? Not in my opinion so 'Le God' is up for grabs as if nothing else our gods should represent a strong moral code by which we should be able to mirror and live our lives by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Will Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 Because they didn't appreciate it was a just a hook to get peoples interest in a thread they may have passed by and it worked. Unfortunately, the mods got a bit fed up by the ignorant few complaining about the title (as if there is a patent on the phrase) who never actually took the time to read the content. As explained by Ponty but you may have missed that Gemmel Misleading? Yet hooks and phrases, are used all the time but inconsistent standards apply. Has Le God treated us with respect? Not in my opinion so 'Le God' is up for grabs as if nothing else our gods should represent a strong moral code by which we should be able to mirror and live our lives by. same ****, different thread. And on an Andy Oldknow thread too. Lunatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 same ****, different thread. And on an Andy Oldknow thread too. Lunatic. Lunatic? I'm not the one doing the stalking. Read the post and put it into context with regards to Gemmel's post. I was just doing the decent thing and replying to his question. Now shouldn't you be out and about caddying for someone? Does the club shop not open on a Monday as I can tell it's going to get very tiresome on here today with you following me around like a lapdog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Will Posted 16 November, 2009 Share Posted 16 November, 2009 Lunatic? I'm not the one doing the stalking. Read the post and put it into context with regards to Gemmel's post. I was just doing the decent thing and replying to his question. Now shouldn't you be out and about caddying for someone? Does the club shop not open on a Monday as I can tell it's going to get very tiresome on here today with you following me around like a lapdog. Lol your aren't offending me. Am I paying taxes for you to be sat on your computer posting this nonsense? And I'm not following you, I'm reading the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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