Jump to content

cowl

Member
  • Posts

    5,704
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by cowl

  1. Before DC spoke today, I would've said almost certainly not, but it's not obvious now. At least on what I've read of DC's comments on Hutchinson. It sounded before as though it was entirely down to Pulis, but when DC talks about some offers having been put in for some players then it's possible I suppose that Hutchinson might still be one of them? I mean DC didn't sound as though he was against Hutchinson coming back in principle. Still, you'd think that with Pulis' sacking that it will be far, far less likely now.
  2. No problem. I said this many posts ago, of course, and repeated it more than once since. Still waiting for you to prove that you're not a dupe.
  3. I keep telling you that I can't possibly prove that. I mean, just how dense are you? How can I be any clearer about it? I CANNOT PROVE YOU WERE DUPED BY MONK. Even though it's clear that you were. Now, once again, provide evidence for your claim that Hutchinson sets his own hours.
  4. When he talks about the fans it's just an absolute car wreck. If ever there was an owner that needed a PR person talking him through, it's DC. Not that he'd listen, of course.
  5. WTF? No one at the club—and not Monk either—ever made any concrete accusations against Hutchinson. Not once, not ever. So where are you getting your view from? Who are these ‘club sources’? Monk did make insinuations though. And evidently (your views being exemplary) many fans filled in the rest. You keep asking me to prove you've been duped. That makes no sense! But the best way to put me in my place is to merely support your assertions about Hutchinson that he sets his own hours.
  6. But Monk never said this about Hutchinson. He merely insinuated very generally about Hutchinson and Westwood when repeatedly asked about why they were no longer in the squad. The rest comes from the imaginations of folk who are all to ready and willing to fill in from the hints and insinuations (‘imaginative’ people such as yourself).
  7. I'd be embarrassed too if I'd been caught believing someone else's lies and insinuations without any circumspection. You were duped, and you weren't the only one. If you think by pointing out the obvious—that the above is an opinion only—that you've somehow relieved yourself of the need to support what you're saying about Hutchinson, then you're clearly very much mistaken.
  8. What's that got to do with it? Are you mental? Of course it's an opinion that many swallowed Monk's insinuations! How could it ever possibly the case that it wasn't an opinion. And surely you're only supporting the grounds for my opinion anyway when you just go ahead and make unsupported claims about Hutchinson.
  9. I would say the best way for you to clear that up is to simply explain how you arrived at the conclusion that Hutchinson was able to set his own working hours. This was your assertion that you made. And I didn't prompt you for it, and in any case it obviously (and logically) precedes me calling you a dupe. I know you're trying to wriggle out of this but doing so while also trying to keep face. It won't work.
  10. Aye, you should do, son, because this is clearly beyond you. You were the one that made the claim that Hutchinson decides when to work. You. It's on you then to prove that this is actually something that Hutchinson did. I'll not hold my breath, of course, because I know you won't be able to prove this, so indeed I also suggest you do as you say and move on.
  11. Yeah, I'm basing it on Hutchinson being seemingly under the impression that it was Pulis who wanted him back. Maybe the recruitment team still had him in mind, or even Chansiri (or his advisor), but then it's harder to understand how it was that Hutchinson left in the first place if their wish was for him to stay.
  12. I'd doubt it now. It was a pretty unbelievable gambit by Pulis as it was, and since Pulis has now been sacked, then what are the chances of the next manager wanting Hutchinson also?
  13. I'm saying you're a dupe for believing Monk's insinuations about Hutchinson. It's upon you, or anyone else for that matter, to prove that Hutchinson chooses to work when he pleases (as you more-or-less put it).
  14. Only a hater would assume it was Hutchinson that went ‘running’ to the local journos and not the other way round.
  15. There'll be zero sympathy for him on here. Far too many swallowed Monk's insinuations that he was a bad egg. I think some even pretty much hate Hutchinson, which is pretty weird.
  16. They opened us up repeatedly at the back. Although, in truth, I'm not sure I'd put that necessarily down to bad defending as much as I would down to the fact that I think Boro have some very promising looking young players who move well and are very good at finding space. Fortunately though they were far less impressive with their ultimate end product and Westwood was forced into far fewer taxing saves than he might otherwise have been. So there was perhaps a degree of good fortune in that regard. Elsewhere on the pitch it was a bit of a mixed bag. We certainly looked better for having 2 up top I suppose, and not least because we were at home (we actually set up similarly against Coventry at home), but I still felt midfield and attack seemed a mile apart at times. It was strange actually because Paterson and Windass were coming deep for the ball too. A special mention for Shaw who had a good game; he looks, and I suppose is, technically limited but he's clearly pretty strong on the ball, full of running, and very often finds a team mate even in tight angles. And now he's shown he can be a danger in the box. He could be an asset, and certainly for him to be coming into the team and holding his own despite his inexperience, there's a good chance he'll improve further still.
  17. If it's general advice then I don't suppose it matters where it comes from (so long as it's good advice!), but if this guy is bringing links and possibly setting up deals then I hope they're going to for players that we can actually sign within the new rules. Unless, of course, they're for full internationals from some of the more highly rated EU nations!
  18. Well, that certainly makes better reading! As much as I can understand TP's plan would be to firefight our way to safety this summer, the last thing we want is to be going down the route of signing players in that age range again. Ridiculous that DC brought Pulis in at all really. He just didn't think it through at all, which, as we all know, is absolutely typical of him. This at least would be showing more foresight though.
×
×
  • Create New...