Bromwich Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I hope George and his agent are reading all this they must be laughing all the way to the bank.Whatever happens its win,win for them ,and not the end of the world for either club.He is just a young footballer who might come good,or might not.There are loads of them,this is happening in clubs up and down the country ask Southampton. I wouldn't say it's win-win for Thorne, if he truly does want out of the club. If we just don't let him leave and he is stuck rotting in the reserves, I wouldn't say he has won then? WBA are in the driving seat, we have a 2nd string player who is majorly wanted by another club, the control is very much in Jeremy Peace's hands Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyB Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 If I was Jeremy Peace I would be concentrating on how I'm going to stay up this season. After finishing one place above the relegation zone last season and appointing a head coach without Premier League experience, I would hope the Thorne issue doesn't become a distraction for the club when they need everyone pulling in the same direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 One thing we do know... There will be sour grapes after this is over. Derby fans started a #FreeGeorgeThorne hashtag on twitter. Real classy Twitter is full of idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The big issue addressed though. The apostrophe is gone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Ram Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 If I was Jeremy Peace I would rule out calling any of my sons Warren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maydrakin Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Maybe if Jeremy hadn't forgotten to buy George a birthday card with a big glittery 21 on it, we wouldn't be having this debate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 If I was Jeremy Peace I would rule out calling any of my sons Warren. I'd do that anyway. Who'd name their kid "Warren"? Borderline child abuse. Almost as bad as "Cecil" or "Wayne". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derby_Dave Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 I see the apostrophe has gone now. It is nice to know I have some influence on the world no matter how tiny! Has he signed yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thierry Ennui Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The apostrophe was correct. This has angered me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The big issue addressed though. The apostrophe is gone! Doesn't make eye contact, pretends to tie shoelaces, crosses the road. Mission accomplished. Bumps into bloody Help For Heroes chugger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Doesn't make eye contact, pretends to tie shoelaces, crosses the road. Mission accomplished. Bumps into bloody Help For Heroes chugger. Well done Digger! Admired your persistence in silence. I'll jump in next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The apostrophe was correct. This has angered me. Only correct if it was George playing the game. As in the possessive. And that'd suggest he was a conniving, manipulative sort. Is that what you were thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derby_Dave Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The apostrophe was correct. This has angered me. don't start! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshfieldRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The bloke who lives up the street from me is a huge west Brom fan and I was talking to him yesterday about this whole saga. He believes its in the best interests of everybody involved to let George Thorne come to derby. He was furious about thornes comments that he did in the mirror and can't understand why the club would reject 2 transfer requests when he's already said he wants to leave! He was admittedly disappointed about loosing an academy prospect but his exact words yesterday were ' With f****** Alan Irvine on charge we'll be in the championship come may anyway' so I don't think loosing Thornr is the thing he is most worried about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The apostrophe was correct. This has angered me. Indeed. If one is saying that the game 'belongs' to Thorne it would be Thorne's game or game of Thorne's. Just as it would be friend of Thorne's. The apostrophe simply leaves us to infer the the game was instigated and is being played by Thorne. Which is the case. Put the apostrophe back and publish a full apology to the original poster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Indeed. If one is saying that the game 'belongs' to Thorne it would be Thorne's game or game of Thorne's. Just as it would be friend of Thorne's. The apostrophe simply leaves us to infer the the game was instigated and is being played by Thorne. Which is the case. Put the apostrophe back and publish a full apology to the original poster. The OP concerned talks between WBA and Derby after Watford failed to extend a loan agreement. Hardly seems George was controlling the game. So...no! As an aside, reading the first few posts, I was surprised to be reminded how it all started. Only end of January too. Was it ever clarified why Watford failed to extend what had been a successful loan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EssendonRam Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 The OP concerned talks between WBA and Derby after Watford failed to extend a loan agreement. Hardly seems George was controlling the game. So...no! As an aside, reading the first few posts, I was surprised to be reminded how it all started. Only end of January too. Was it ever clarified why Watford failed to extend what had been a successful loan? Ok, read on and saw the reasons. Bit cactus of me not to have done so before asking the question. Impressed by Ambitious' early call on his ability! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Indeed. If one is saying that the game 'belongs' to Thorne it would be Thorne's game or game of Thorne's. Just as it would be friend of Thorne's. The apostrophe simply leaves us to infer the the game was instigated and is being played by Thorne. Which is the case. Put the apostrophe back and publish a full apology to the original poster. With respect, I disagree. The title is a pun on the "Game of Thrones" series of books and films, where there is no apostrophe. The pun doesn't really work but in order to make it work you have to pluralise "Thorne". So I ain't putting it back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 Disagree all you like. The apostrophe was correct. It's perfectly acceptable to rearrange the syntax of a phrase in order to make a pun. Eg the adult entertainment version of Steven Speilberg's WWII epic - Shaving Ryan's Privates. There's no apostrophe in the original title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyinLiverpool Posted June 28, 2014 Share Posted June 28, 2014 How many Thornes are involved in this game? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.