Ha ha ha ha ha!

[Bartleby]

Oh I see - difficult to detect sarcasm in text and you never know with pommpey!

actually you are right it is sarcasm I meant not irony. And isn't it ironic that there is no irony in the song Isn't it Ironic?

 

[coaxingstar71]

actually you are right it is sarcasm I meant not irony. And isn't it ironic that there is no irony in the song Isn't it Ironic?

I knew what you meant, but ironically I can't say the same for pommpey's response to me! That is irony isn't it.... argh!.... I'm confused!

Ed Byrne did a very clever routine on the song, "Ironic".

 

[pommpey]

yes you're right there. But this season we have got a replacement in David Edgar and having seen him play I'd say an excellent replacement at that. We also have Collins back in from the cold, and despite his limitation he has done OK alongside Edgar in the games I've been to.

So two simple changes made by an excellent manager that have made such a difference. Go on say summat negative about that then

Excellent. And as people have been correctly stating (and is acknowledged) we have conceded one goal singe Edgar has been in the side and Collins is currently returning to some sort of form.

Behind that we have ... Kennedy, a known crock and then we are sucking fumes in the central defender tank. Its back to Basham and McEveley then.

I'd be happy with making Edgar a permanent fixture if and when we can and bringing in someone who can ably replace Collins or at least rotate as he hasn't got forty odd games in him at his age. Simply redrafting McE or Basham back in is not the answer. Neither are loanees.

pommpey

 

[MobileBlade]

And still no answers.

 

[pommpey]

Seriously - McMahon was our best player?

My sarcasm-o-meter was on ten when I typed that coaxing.

What you are missing is the 'reality' of the footballing world we now live in. Look at the current situation with Berahino - what do you think is going to happen there? We've seen it time and time again and NO I don't agree with it but I think if a player wants to go that badly then why upset the whole apple cart by making him stay?

So, tell me the rationale of 'contracts', please? Are you saying we are again, mugs to even get excited about say, Murphy signing a three year contract and him saying he is happy in Sheffield and playing for the team, family settled etc, just for a.n.other team to come in, wave cash at him and suddenly he gets 'unhappy' ... with a remaining contract over his head to pay off? Why bother? Why not just say, 'Murphs, we love you and the fans love you, but when you want to fuck off, just leave your locker keys with Beryl and we'll see you sometime later (possibly in your late thirties when you want a testimonial)'?

I think someone else has answered the Maguire v Brayford but all I was saying was, we have spent some money, obviously not every single penny that we've recouped and although I'd rather we did, I'm realistic enough to realise that this ain't happening.

I'm saying last season we spent eight months in need of a decent central defensive pairing. What we got was a right back and a front man.

I wasn't going to say that anyone replaced McDonald - as I said, it was very disappointing to lose him so cheaply.

We agree.

Like I've said before, I enjoy reading your posts and I'll enjoy you pulling apart my latest one. I'll just say, though you probably couldn't give a toss, that it doesn't reflect well on you to merely insult other posters and fans. We all basically want the same thing and that I'm sure is something we can all agree on.

I'll insult posters if they insult me. My 'cabbages' and 'daft twats' descriptive is as ever, taken out of context for the purpose of people defending the indefensible. My point there was that McCabe and the board are treating ST holders like cabbages and daft twats by ensuring the ST sales are well established and then flogging our best player. Why should they care? Those seats are filled even if we re-sell Sharp and sack the entire first team and replace them with eleven kids from a Graves Park kick-about.

And then they'll watch us tear each other's heads off as to why we fuck it all up and stay down.

pommpey

 

[pommpey]

And still no answers.

To what? How many games I have attended this season?

C'mon Mobile. Don't be shy. What exactly do you want to know?

pommpey

 

[MobileBlade]

To what? How many games I have attended this season?

C'mon Mobile. Don't be shy. What exactly do you want to know?

pommpey

Go back one page on this thread. Even you could manage that couldn't you?

 

[sheffielder]

well, this could escalate...

 

[pommpey]

this comment just confirms my growing view that you are negative for the sake of it. Ok I'm fairly new to this forum and from what I've seen you seem to have a bit of a fan base on here that like and respect your views, but I am not one of them.

Well, don't expect me to break my heart over it. If we all agreed life would be dull, which is what I suspect some on here want.

so I'm guessing you haven't watched a game this season then? If you have and you would still say we are not a capable side (which is basically the same players as last season plus just a few inspired signings) then you can have no credibilty whatsoever IMHO

We are currently a capable side, but as some reports mention, we still are not firing on all cylinders. The inspired signings - Sammon and Sharp are the standouts here - may be good, but we will need strengthening elsewhere. Midfield still seems lightweoight without the playmaker, box-to-box bloke needed to make the game more secured and dominating.

pommpey

 

[pommpey]

Go back one page on this thread. Even you could manage that couldn't you?

Nope. Still struggling to see what you want.

Brayford - not Maguire or his replacement, at whatever cost. And that cost ... cost us as you freely admit.

Keep trying, mind.

pommpey

 

[Bartleby]

Behind that we have ... Kennedy, a known crock and then we are sucking fumes in the central defender tank. Its back to Basham and McEveley then.

agree we could use more strength in depth at the back, but the original gripe was about selling one player, Maguire, and not replacing him if I remember correctly and we have now finally, a season later, as we have Edgar on a season long loan with, I believe, an option to make permanent at the end of the season.

Don't know what the long term prognosis is with Kennedy's knee injury at all, Adkins seemed quite optimistic about his return in the post match interview last night.

 

[MobileBlade]

Nope. Still struggling to see what you want.

Brayford - not Maguire or his replacement, at whatever cost. And that cost ... cost us as you freely admit.

Keep trying, mind.

pommpey

Ah. An impression of a cabbage.

I think Darren summed them up perfectly. I know, it was hard work finding them.

Without wishing to intrude....

What's your argument here? Is it:

(a) Over the past few years the owners of the club have made a number of disastrous decisions whilst trying to do their best or;
(b) the owners have deliberately fucked over the club

I think everyone agrees re a. It's b some of us find unconvincing.

I repeat what MobileBlade asked.

Is your point really that Clough said to the Board "I have a centre back I want to buy and we can use the Maguire money for that" and the Board said "no, you can only buy Brayford" and Clough cravenly said "ok"?

 

[Bartleby]

Well, don't expect me to break my heart over it. If we all agreed life would be dull, which is what I suspect some on here want.

no don't go breaking your heart

The inspired signings - Sammon and Sharp are the standouts here - may be good

was thinking Edgar as well. In the two games I've seen him in he actually made it look quite easy.

 

[eric_oulthwaite]

My sarcasm-o-meter was on ten when I typed that coaxing.
So, tell me the rationale of 'contracts', please? Are you saying we are again, mugs to even get excited about say, Murphy signing a three year contract and him saying he is happy in Sheffield and playing for the team, family settled etc, just for a.n.other team to come in, wave cash at him and suddenly he gets 'unhappy' ... with a remaining contract over his head to pay off? Why bother? Why not just say, 'Murphs, we love you and the fans love you, but when you want to fuck off, just leave your locker keys with Beryl and we'll see you sometime later (possibly in your late thirties when you want a testimonial)'?

Essentially the "rationale" nowadays is just for the clubs to get more value when they have to sell. That's the only reason really. The longer left on the contract the more you can squeeze out the buying club.

 

[MobileBlade]

no don't go breaking your heart



was thinking Edgar as well. In the two games I've seen him in he actually made it look quite easy.

I think you got it right with not seen a game this season. Think you might need to go back a bit further than that (live). He may see the Bradford game, though.

 

[Darren]

Ah. An impression of a cabbage.

I think Darren summed them up perfectly. I know, it was hard work finding them.

Indeed:

Clough should have used the Maguire money to sign a centre back rather than Brayford = reasonable argument
Clough was forced by the Board to sign Brayford when he wanted to sign a centre back = utter craziness.

 

[Rodders]

Indeed:

Clough should have used the Maguire money to sign a centre back rather than Brayford = reasonable argument
Clough was forced by the Board to sign Brayford when he wanted to sign a centre back = utter craziness.

My theory on b) is that:
The board told Clough - "we want to buy John Brayford as the fans will love us forever if we do" Clough - "damn right, he's a great player and will make me look like less of a nob when we're getting tonked by Fleetwood, and I can shoe-horn him in at CB as well".
I don't think they did ban him from signing a centre-back (they did let him get McCarthy in afterall), but I wouldn't be surprised if they'd expressed concerns that he'd not made it up with Butler first.

 

[Bartleby]

IHe may see the Bradford game, though.

he's got sky sport has he? Oh well that's one game he'll see this season.

 

[Bartleby]

My theory on b) is that:
The board told Clough - "we want to buy John Brayford as the fans will love us forever if we do" Clough - "damn right, he's a great player and will make me look like less of a nob when we're getting tonked by Fleetwood, and I can shoe-horn him in at CB as well".
I don't think they did ban him from signing a centre-back (they did let him get McCarthy in afterall), but I wouldn't be surprised if they'd expressed concerns that he'd not made it up with Butler first.

not denying the CB issue, but to be fair to Clough if Brayford had been in the same form when he came back as he was the season before he could have made a huge difference to our promotion push and would have been a great captain.

 

[Revolution]

Indeed:

Clough should have used the Maguire money to sign a centre back rather than Brayford = reasonable argument
Clough was forced by the Board to sign Brayford when he wanted to sign a centre back = utter craziness.

Sometimes players get signed without the managers input. Billy Sharp (in 2007) and Geoff Horsfield are 2 such examples. And who do you think was really behind the proposed return of Ched Evans?

 

[Darren]

Sometimes players get signed without the managers input. Billy Sharp (in 2007) and Geoff Horsfield are 2 such examples. And who do you think was really behind the proposed return of Ched Evans?

Fair point, but Evans was rather sui generis. The idea that the Board would not release the Maguire money for anyone except Brayford is, as I say, nonsense.

 

[Revolution]

Fair point, but Evans was rather sui generis. The idea that the Board would not release the Maguire money for anyone except Brayford is, as I say, nonsense.

It's unlikely but not completely impossible. Remember this board is a massive believer in bread and circuses.

 

[blade too long]

All the way to ...

Play off exit.

Your point was ... what, exactly

so we didnt win the play offs, , only 3 go up we missed it by Brayford getting crocked in the first leg
theres always that element of luck things going your way
say like a judge putting off a sentencing for 2 weeks wed be back up there already

 

[MobileBlade]

We're on another page now. We'll never get an answer.

 

[coaxingstar71]

My sarcasm-o-meter was on ten when I typed that coaxing.



So, tell me the rationale of 'contracts', please? Are you saying we are again, mugs to even get excited about say, Murphy signing a three year contract and him saying he is happy in Sheffield and playing for the team, family settled etc, just for a.n.other team to come in, wave cash at him and suddenly he gets 'unhappy' ... with a remaining contract over his head to pay off? Why bother? Why not just say, 'Murphs, we love you and the fans love you, but when you want to fuck off, just leave your locker keys with Beryl and we'll see you sometime later (possibly in your late thirties when you want a testimonial)'?



I'm saying last season we spent eight months in need of a decent central defensive pairing. What we got was a right back and a front man.



We agree.



I'll insult posters if they insult me. My 'cabbages' and 'daft twats' descriptive is as ever, taken out of context for the purpose of people defending the indefensible. My point there was that McCabe and the board are treating ST holders like cabbages and daft twats by ensuring the ST sales are well established and then flogging our best player. Why should they care? Those seats are filled even if we re-sell Sharp and sack the entire first team and replace them with eleven kids from a Graves Park kick-about.

And then they'll watch us tear each other's heads off as to why we fuck it all up and stay down.

pommpey

Rationale of contracts - that is pretty much it, yes. It just means the selling club get a fee. I agree it's absolute crap but it happens all the time where basically players are engineering moves despite being contracted. I wish players wouldn't come out saying how much they love the club, how settled they are etc because you know the next minute they'll be off.

Insults - sorry but your 'daft twats' was in post #1 so no one had insulted you at that point. I don't mind the colourful language, it sometimes makes me laugh, I just think it detracts from any valid point you're making.

Keep up the good work. This thread has kept me entertained for several days now!

 

[coaxingstar71]

We're on another page now. We'll never get an answer.

There are no answers, only extreme differences of opinion.

 

[Bert]

"Insults - sorry but your 'daft twats' was in post #1 so no one had insulted you at that point."

That being the crux of Bert's gripe with pommpey. Run round stamping your feet by all means but don't insult fellow Unitedites who see things differently or even those who agree.

 

[blade too long]

http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/shef...ven-t-given-up-on-targets-says-boss-1-7439264

this supports the theres no need to panic theory
theres plenty of opportunity for us to still strengthen as wed like

 

[MobileBlade]

There are no answers, only extreme differences of opinion.

Depending on which of his threads you read you will see both extremes.

 

[pommpey]

I think you got it right with not seen a game this season. Think you might need to go back a bit further than that (live). He may see the Bradford game, though.

Nah. I did go to Crawley last year. Does that satisfy your criteria? What was your verdict on that game, by the way?

pommpey