Jump to content

dorian gray

Member
  • Content Count

    16,694
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dorian gray

  1. a few years ago i worked with a romanian engineer, i asked him 'what it was like working under communism?' he studied for a while, and answered, 'they pretended to pay us, and we pretended to work'.
  2. this has been going on so long by now that the efl should release a statement of at just what point proceedings are at, otherwise it looks like a stitch up.
  3. it could be their gaffer/s have told em wigan and wednesday are going down from point deductions, so all is to play for.
  4. they are in trouble, chances are running out, here's an opportunity against a side with a glass chin, i think they'll see this as a turning point. i'll be surprised if they're not up for it.
  5. YUP! but knowing us we'll need to score 3 to win at least.
  6. true, and enjoying their derby wi t'dingles.
  7. our victory on saturday had a great deal to do with qpr being utter shybo tactically, and at the back. if 'uddersfield come, roll their sleeves up, and get stuck in, we've a game on our hands. we need to keep a clean sheet.
  8. visitors to hillsborough bringing a good defence, or good numbers in defence can and do cause us problems. if they keep it tight at the back, we have to come out, leaves us light at the back, and open to counter. it would be worse with a crowd in showing their approval, so a blessing in a way with our need for points.
  9. YUP! have been for some time now. as i pointed out before their last defeat was to the roman Vllll legion shortly before they left on their tour of caledonia, must be having a great time as they haven't returned yet, think of the 'back money' they're due.
  10. hahahahahahahaha! talent my ar$e, there was only ff any good, and nuhiu for 15 mins a game. ff had been a quite a while since stringing a few good games together . winnall went to derby a decent striker, what we got back was short of what we sent out by some way. rhodes was/is due another good game in 2 years time. we hadn't a 9, we'd a squad full of 'false' ones. wickham was woefully off the pace (matchfit?) when he arrived. the belief that no manager would struggle (with our unbalanced squad) after losing fletcher is only a 'myth' to those who don't know a great deal, and those wanting monk out from the very start and growing sick of waiting to backstab our manager. anyway, back to topic.
  11. it did far more than 'play it's part' it was the reason for it, as it would with any side losing it's only 90 minute attacking option. why did he choose to drop westwood and hutch? because as manager it's his choice, my guess is on westwood he saw that lately he'd made some calamitous decisions costing goals and rash penalties, then being unfit and unavailable as a squad player. hope ur foot is ok, A&E is not the place to be, though they don't have as many customers (for some reason) these days, i spent 3.5 hours in one the other week, and for God's sake, don't cough while ur there.
  12. but some of our supporters would have knocking yet another one out over it, as that is the 'proper' way to play. sides with fantastic money can afford a multi-pass game (they have vastly better players) BUT still carry a savage cutting edge. week after week silly sides are being caught out 'overplaying' the ball around for the sake of it, inviting pressure upon themselves. it is 'the emperor's new clothes' and long may sides play it against us.
  13. give him time, judge the finished article. getting medals is fantastic, but they hurt like **** when they are ripped off.
  14. that's why it needs announcing now, with a full explanation as to why it's taken so long.
  15. not sure we'd accept that. for me it's guilty or not as charged. IF it's guilty we're going to a court of law (where you will be the accused) for damages as we believe that we have written consent from a person in authority working for your body at the time, a person appointed by you, not us, and thus your responsibility.
  16. it's not one post, it was numerous, as there are some who didn't want monk in the first place were just waiting their time. his lack of flexibility (and there was some) was down to the disastrous squad he inherited, but he shuffled what he had, and then found out what we all knew, all our forwards other than fletcher weren't worth a hill of beans. nihiu could perhaps do 15 mins at the end of a game and he used that, but otherwise he'd been handed very poor fare indeed. what would this 'flexibility' have included that he didn't choose?
  17. i'll never forget us having to give qpr their transfer money back for vic mobley, yet we got eff all in the abdi deal, apart from shafted.
  18. i already have, and more than once, but i'll gladly repeat for you. fletcher was his only forward of any note, once he picked up his injury we had nothing in reserve worthy of being called a decent championship attacker. as far as i can see no side can, or could expect to stay in contention with the high flyers without a forward of any note whatsoever. the criticism was bound to fall on monk, as some had daggers drawn already awaiting their opportunity as his appointment didn't suit them.
  19. sounds interesting, depending upon who has their hands on them.
×
×
  • Create New...