Mostyn6 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 You don't know it though , you have heard it. I'm not going through this with you too. So think what you like, I don't give a toss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 I'm not going through this with you too. So think what you like, I don't give a toss. Had you written - I share what I hear or am told I wouldn't have mentioned it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Had you written - I share what I hear or am told I wouldn't have mentioned it. Oh, so you're picking me up on choice of words and semantics then, figures of speech? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Oh, so you're picking me up on choice of words and semantics then, figures of speech? No, it's not semantics its totally different meanings Of you say you know something it means you have checked and know its correct If you say you have been told something it means it may not be correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 No, it's not semantics its totally different meanings Of you say you know something it means you have checked and know its correct If you say you have been told something it means it may not be correct. <Bananas> Being as though there is nothing topically being discussed, the conversation is based on hypothesis, and I clearly said "I pass on things I hear, from varying sources, some I imagine has been embelished, other stories will be total truth, but I don't need to be called a liar or whatever for sharing what I know." which mentioned 'embelishments' etc, you're obviously just having a dig at me for having a dig's sake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NormantonRam Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 1, Please 'remind me' of said scandalous gossip. 2, Self-appointed spokesman? Grow up ffs. It's been pretty clear that I speak for myself only, if other's agree, that's fine, if they don't, they're idiots, er... that's fine too! Oh, and I'm very nice too. Nicer by far than the bloke who's just gone to Sheffield. I've never changed any of my employees names from Tomasz to "cu*t". I've never bullied anyone either! What are you Implying ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 What are you Implying ? That NC changed Cywka's name from Tomasz to Curt because it made him sound more English? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 <Bananas> Being as though there is nothing topically being discussed, the conversation is based on hypothesis, and I clearly said "I pass on things I hear, from varying sources, some I imagine has been embelished, other stories will be total truth, but I don't need to be called a liar or whatever for sharing what I know." which mentioned 'embelishments' etc, you're obviously just having a dig at me for having a dig's sake! Nope I'm not. You like posting things you hear and passing them off as fact, but don't like it when pulled up on it. Before hitting reply check what you have written. Oh and that paragraph you have just quoted shows that you don't check your posts because it starts off saying things you hear and by the end they have become things you know. It soubd like you are a little confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Nope I'm not. You like posting things you hear and passing them off as fact, but don't like it when pulled up on it. Before hitting reply check what you have written. Oh and that paragraph you have just quoted shows that you don't check your posts because it starts off saying things you hear and by the end they have become things you know. It soubd like you are a little confused. But I wasn't sharing anything so you're talking nonsense. You cannot pull me up for passing something off as fact when there's nothing being 'passed off'!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 But I wasn't sharing anything so you're talking nonsense. You cannot pull me up for passing something off as fact when there's nothing being 'passed off'!! I'm not talking about that post - which was your way of explaining why you post so many stories that you hear. I'm talking about your posts detailing all of the things you "know" about contracts etc.. Which are the things you are told and pass off as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 "I'm not stupid enough to post anything that I cannot prove" mostyn 23/10/13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 I'm not talking about that post - which was your way of explaining why you post so many stories that you hear. I'm talking about your posts detailing all of the things you "know" about contracts etc.. Which are the things you are told and pass off as fact. okay, well if I say "I was told" in the same sentence, or "I'm led to believe", then that would be a clue. If you can give me an example. As for the Savage contract, yeah, I'm pretty confident I 'know' that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Why is what Rush said necessarily "rubbish"? I don't think that comment by him was exactly controversial - I think most people would agree that picking his best 11 players first and foremost was exactly what Clough did. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't. He often seemed (to me) to be reluctant to make substitutions or dramatic changes, which kind of indicated that he was more concerned with having what he thought was his best 11 on the field. He'll do the same at Sheff Utd, and good luck to him, I hope it works out and I hope he starts to feel better about what happened here soon. Why is it rubbish? 1. Its totally inappropriate to be talking like that in an open forum. 2. Sam seems to presume that he knows more about football management than the previous manager. 3. It is obviously factually untrue to suggest that nigel clough did not consider systems and formation. Everyone knows that i have been critical of NC & co but i would accept that they did try different systems and formations .e.g. 4411 with Commons playing in the hole 442 with wingers - commons and teale etc 4231 with bailey and savage in the holding roles, commons bueno and cywka all in attacking midfield roles. 442 with a diamond midfield of hughes, bryson and eustace playing deep, ward behind the strikers 433 with ward up front with martin and russell, etc 451 ete etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Srg Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Why is it rubbish? 1. Its totally inappropriate to be talking like that in an open forum. 2. Sam seems to presume that he knows more about football management than the previous manager. 3. It is obviously factually untrue to suggest that nigel clough did not consider systems and formation. Everyone knows that i have been critical of NC & co but i would accept that they did try different systems and formations .e.g. 4411 with Commons playing in the hole 442 with wingers - commons and teale etc 4231 with bailey and savage in the holding roles, commons bueno and cywka all in attacking midfield roles. 442 with a diamond midfield of hughes, bryson and eustace playing deep, ward behind the strikers 433 with ward up front with martin and russell, etc 451 ete etc Absolutely all of which were personnel driven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamNut Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Absolutely all of which were personnel driven. Lol Well a team sheet usually has names on it. And its not a bad idea to find a system which suits the personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearson Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 Good riddance - bunch of amateurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearson Posted October 24, 2013 Share Posted October 24, 2013 JayramGood riddance - bunch of amateurs.Why would you say that after 4+ years dedicated effort, which when analysed, has been very successful. It’s truly lost on me.McClaren has inherited a fantastic infrastructure, some excellent players, a team growing in value and a team that would have made the play offs irrespective of his appointment.How you can classify that development as amateurish is churlish and loses sight of the excellence that has been achieved.It’s Cloughs team at the moment, lets hope that it’s kept together for the final push! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbrianRam Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Maybe Clough should write an autobiography slagging off his old players to make him feel better, seems to be the en vogue thing to be done nowadays... No need, did it after matches anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curb Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 " a team that would have made the play offs irrespective of his appointment" Erm, you what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Hold on lads, I'm trying to sell tickets. Roll up, roll up! Get your ringside tickets! £1 per ticket or get in on our amazing deal 2 for £2!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.