Carlos on TalkSport

[debram]

8 hours ago, matthefish2002 said:

 

 

I really struggle to believe many of the signings we made then (and still causing us problems today) were Carvahaul choices.
Think Jordan Rhodes was just a vanity signing by the Chairmen similar to Andriy Shevchenko when he was at Chelsea.

Think the chairman listened to owlstalk re signing Rhodes, its who most wanted on here, why I don't know, it was plain to see he was finished when at Middlesbrough.

[VBQ24]

6 hours ago, Lincs Owl said:

 

Well, I'm hoping Monks first season is a similar disaster then.

Had a brilliant base to build on and made poor signings, despite this still qualified for the Playoffs and threw away a brilliant opportunity to get promoted. In the process destroyed the team spirit and confidence of the players.

[quinnssweetshop]

Set the club back years to the mess we are in now..... and for what ?  Play off failure and bottling out.

 

Loves to talk about himself and big himself up... in reality. .an awful manager with no success.

[dorian gray]

On 24/01/2020 at 09:13, bigthinrob said:

Blah Blah Blah, 

 

ps I never mentioned Winston Churchill!!

you have nothing, and it shows...

btw, my grandfather won a DSO at Gallipoli, but I noticed that the c**t that sent him weren't there.

[bigthinrob]

1 hour ago, dorian gray said:

you have nothing, and it shows...

btw, my grandfather won a DSO at Gallipoli, but I noticed that the c**t that sent him weren't there.

Tell you what 'pal', I'll debate all day if you want to.

 

Chances are, I'll be able to do it without getting all arsy & personal.

 

It's a matter of fact that we overachieved that 1st year.  Checkout what that Hull squad cost in comparison to ours. 3 examples. Robertson, Diame, Snodgrass (and others) all sold for big fees. (I take it you remember Diame? the guy who scored the worldy that was basically the only difference between the two teams on the day.)  

 

We had a thin squad with a couple of key injuries & no one with any great talent to look to from the sub's bench. Eg Jeremy Helan!!

 

I've said it a few times, Carlos ran his course like all manager's do after a couple / few years and moved on. Big deal, maybe you & one or two more ought to do the same.

 

As for your comment on the last line, absolutely not worthy of comment.

Edited January 25, 2020 by bigthinrob

[SquirrelSlingshot]

4 hours ago, bigthinrob said:

It's a matter of fact that we overachieved that 1st year.  Checkout what that Hull squad cost in comparison to ours. 3 examples. Robertson, Diame, Snodgrass (and others) all sold for big fees. (I take it you remember Diame? the guy who scored the worldy that was basically the only difference between the two teams on the day.)  

 

We had a thin squad with a couple of key injuries & no one with any great talent to look to from the sub's bench. Eg Jeremy Helan!!

 

 

Not sure I agree with this...

 

Carlos inherited a team that had comfortably finished mid-table the previous season, with a strong spine (Westwood/Loovens/Lees/Hutchinson/Lee) that had the best clean sheet record in the division.  He was then given money to spend and an increased wage budget - the likes of which no manager has had before or since - to bolster the squad.  And we had plenty of squad depth that year (along with Forestieri being at his absolute best).

 

I mean, just look at the teams who finished just outside the playoffs that year.  They were really average and workmanlike.  To be honest I feel that with the squad we had that year we should have been competing higher up the table.

[dorian gray]

19 hours ago, bigthinrob said:

Tell you what 'pal', I'll debate all day if you want to.

 

Chances are, I'll be able to do it without getting all arsy & personal.

 

It's a matter of fact that we overachieved that 1st year.  Checkout what that Hull squad cost in comparison to ours. 3 examples. Robertson, Diame, Snodgrass (and others) all sold for big fees. (I take it you remember Diame? the guy who scored the worldy that was basically the only difference between the two teams on the day.)  

 

We had a thin squad with a couple of key injuries & no one with any great talent to look to from the sub's bench. Eg Jeremy Helan!!

 

I've said it a few times, Carlos ran his course like all manager's do after a couple / few years and moved on. Big deal, maybe you & one or two more ought to do the same.

 

As for your comment on the last line, absolutely not worthy of comment.

let's go.

according to you, the best side wins, thus hull, but then hull should have lost to brighton in the final, as brighton entered the play off as the strongest best side.

we did have a thin squad, but we had thinner tactic s, and that's down to just one man.

 

his track record proves he didn't 'run the course like all managers' his course ran for around 12 months if he was lucky, at hillsborough it was the perfect storm for him, an inexperienced owner, and little if any supervision from above.

maybe me what?

there weren't many dumped on that coastline had anything nice to say about your 'chancer' hero, same as some nigh on 20 years later with his Norwegian fiasco that cost my grandfather the life of his son when the glorious, argent, and arcasta met with the scharnorst and gneisnau in his latest 'cowboy' adventure.

[dorian gray]

On 23/01/2020 at 14:06, dorian gray said:

he's doing what he can with what he has at his disposal, he has us in touch with the play offs at present with only one decent forward who is injured.

look at what coco did in his third season with a squad he'd chosen not inherited.

you cocoettes don't like uncle coco's shortcomings mentioning do you?

[83owl]

On 24/01/2020 at 14:02, Ronnie Starling said:

Maybe if he had refused to get on the coach he would have had more game time

And an improved contract

[cowl]

37 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

you cocoettes don't like uncle coco's shortcomings mentioning do you?

 

 

But you just quoted yourself!

[bigthinrob]

54 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

let's go.

according to you, the best side wins, thus hull, but then hull should have lost to brighton in the final, as brighton entered the play off as the strongest best side.

we did have a thin squad, but we had thinner tactic s, and that's down to just one man.

 

his track record proves he didn't 'run the course like all managers' his course ran for around 12 months if he was lucky, at hillsborough it was the perfect storm for him, an inexperienced owner, and little if any supervision from above.

maybe me what?

there weren't many dumped on that coastline had anything nice to say about your 'chancer' hero, same as some nigh on 20 years later with his Norwegian fiasco that cost my grandfather the life of his son when the glorious, argent, and arcasta met with the scharnorst and gneisnau in his latest 'cowboy' adventure.

Is everything in your life totally black or totally white with no in between, no middle ground?

 

In this and other posts you seem to infer that any people who don't see Carlos in the totally negative way you see him, then automatically have to 'hero worship' him.

 

In reality, most people think he did pretty well in his first year & started to lose his way in the second and after that. Some good, some not so good, but this idea that you automatically have to hate the guy and if you don't hate him you therefore obviously worship him is just bizarre. 

 

Your description of "Cocoettes" & uncle "coco", is not only ridiculously childish & somewhat pathetic, it again shows this tendency to 'pigeon hole' people as if they only have single issue arguments. Almost as if the legacy of Carlos (for good or bad) is the ONLY thing they are interested in. In reality, myself, & (I would assume) most others have moved on & Carlos is nothing more than another character in our recent history. 

 

My intervention (& opinion) was purely to offer an alternative opinion to the one, that EVERYTHING involving Carlos was totally negative, which i personally see as not only inaccurate but also completely unfair. 

 

Your 'Black & white' world view is again replicated in your tirade against the person who was voted by a huge majority to be the "Greatest ever Englishman".

 

Again, he had his problems, frailties & was by no means perfect and again was he TOTALLY beyond criticism? No. 

 

Was he the devil incarnate you seem to infer. Obviously not. 

 

It seems that there is a personal angle that shapes your opinion of Churchill so I can understand this (but not agree with) to some degree.

 

As for your original vile tirade against him, inferring he was a bystander in the campaigns you refer to. He had already fought numerous campaigns as a younger man where he was most definitely a combatant & not a bystander, so your views of the man and his record, are not only massively extreme, they are also wildly inaccurate.

 

   

Edited January 26, 2020 by bigthinrob

[Emerson Thome]

Haven't seen the original posts so apols if already covered, but didn't Churchill fight on the Western Front after his demotion for Gallipoli?

 

(This is about as relevant to our current season as poring over Carlos's record)

[dorian gray]

11 minutes ago, bigthinrob said:

Is everything in your life totally black or totally white with no in between, no middle ground?

 

In this and other posts you seem to infer that any people who don't see Carlos in the totally negative way you see him, then automatically have to 'hero worship' him.

 

In reality, most people think he did pretty well in his first year & started to lose his way in the second and after that. Some good, some not so good, but this idea that you automatically have to hate the guy and if you don't hate him you therefore obviously worship him is just bizarre. 

 

Your description of "Cocoettes" & uncle "coco", is not only ridiculously childish & somewhat pathetic, it again shows this tendency to 'pigeon hole' people as if they only have single issue arguments. Almost as if the legacy of Carlos (for good or bad) is the ONLY thing they are interested in. In reality, myself, & (I would assume) most others have moved on & Carlos is nothing more than another character in our recent history. 

 

My intervention (& opinion) was purely to offer an alternative opinion to the one, that EVERYTHING involving Carlos was totally negative, which i personally see as not only inaccurate but also completely unfair. 

 

Your 'Black & white' world view is again replicated in your tirade against the person who was voted by a huge majority to be the "Greatest ever Englishman".

 

Again, he had his problems, frailties & was by no means perfect and again was he TOTALLY beyond criticism? No. 

 

Was he the devil incarnate you seem to infer. Obviously not. 

 

It seems that there is a personal angle that shapes your opinion of Churchill so I can understand this (but not agree with) to some degree.

 

As for your original vile tirade against him, inferring he was a bystander in the campaigns you refer to. He had already fought numerous campaigns as a younger man where he was most definitely a combatant & not a bystander, so your views of the man and his record, are not only massively extreme, they are also wildly inaccurate.

 

   

the cowboy and chancer was voted 'the greatest ever englishman' in modern times by the vote of the modern day tory party.

very few at the time of his 'greatest achievement' (to hear some speak) voted for him then, enough to lose him a general election DURING that 'greatest ever achievement'.

perhaps his true greatest ever achievement was to switch from one party to another during his political career, something which now the present day tory party and a great number of it's supporters see as the greatest betrayal when it happens to them.

as for coco, he was a lowly qualified failure when he was appointed, he still is.

[dorian gray]

29 minutes ago, cowl said:

 

 

But you just quoted yourself!

YES, so as answer those who neg and don't post, perhaps you should try it. .

[dorian gray]

15 minutes ago, Emerson Thome said:

Haven't seen the original posts so apols if already covered, but didn't Churchill fight on the Western Front after his demotion for Gallipoli?

 

(This is about as relevant to our current season as poring over Carlos's record)

NO!, he didn't.

[bigthinrob]

4 minutes ago, dorian gray said:

the cowboy and chancer was voted 'the greatest ever englishman' in modern times by the vote of the modern day tory party.

very few at the time of his 'greatest achievement' (to hear some speak) voted for him then, enough to lose him a general election DURING that 'greatest ever achievement'.

perhaps his true greatest ever achievement was to switch from one party to another during his political career, something which now the present day tory party and a great number of it's supporters see as the greatest betrayal when it happens to them.

as for coco, he was a lowly qualified failure when he was appointed, he still is.

Now you're just making things up mate & it's turning into a desperate rant.

 

The vote on the "Greatest ever living Englishman" was taken over a prolonged period on mainstream television when Blair had a huge majority.

 

 

[bigthinrob]

21 minutes ago, Emerson Thome said:

Haven't seen the original posts so apols if already covered, but didn't Churchill fight on the Western Front after his demotion for Gallipoli?

 

(This is about as relevant to our current season as poring over Carlos's record)

Just for clarity & to put it into context.

 

I initially offered some simple mitigating factors against a particularly nasty (unnecessary) attack on Carlos.

 

This led to someone saying he was "my hero".

 

With tongue in cheek to some degree, I referred to Winston Churchill being my actual 'hero' & it descended from there.

 

So yeah, not relevant to our current season, but that's why the references cropped up. 

 

 

[dorian gray]

Just now, bigthinrob said:

Now you're just making things up mate & it's turning into a desperate rant.

 

The vote on the "Greatest ever living Englishman" was taken over a prolonged period on mainstream television when Blair had a huge majority.

 

 

despite the labour government, the tory party vote would be solid at 30%+ during that time, more than enough to bias such a broad based poll, in which both Elizabeth l, and Brunel would be well ahead of 'the chancer'.

as you post (which I had overlooked) the vote for him would be bolstered further because things were going so badly for the conservatives in the country at the time.

[dorian gray]

1 minute ago, bigthinrob said:

Just for clarity & to put it into context.

 

I initially offered some simple mitigating factors against a particularly nasty (unnecessary) attack on Carlos.

 

This led to someone saying he was "my hero".

 

With tongue in cheek to some degree, I referred to Winston Churchill being my actual 'hero' & it descended from there.

 

So yeah, not relevant to our current season, but that's why the references cropped up. 

 

 

I don't think it's 'unnecessary' to mention the man who 'spent' our best chance for decades, and is still championed by some who think 2 play off failures are worth that chance spent.

[Emerson Thome]

1 minute ago, dorian gray said:

despite the labour government, the tory party vote would be solid at 30%+ during that time, more than enough to bias such a broad based poll, in which both Elizabeth l, and Brunel would be well ahead of 'the chancer'.

as you post (which I had overlooked) the vote for him would be bolstered further because things were going so badly for the conservatives in the country at the time.

To be fair, if 30% of the people in a country want to vote for something that isn't really biasing a poll. Like saying Ben Stokes only won SPOTY because 30% of the people in the country like cricket.