Martin Samuel...again

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

grafikhaus

grafikhaus

Kraft durch Freude
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
12,173
Reaction score
21,256
Location
Lodge Moor, Sheffield
Such a pity as Samuel usually writes decent stuff, but he just won't let his irrational hatred of United go. In todays Mail:

Graham case misses point
Watford have been charged with breaking third party investment rules regarding former striker Danny Graham. The allegations centre on the regime of previous owner Laurence Bassini, who — it is claimed — secured advance payment loans against the instalments due to be paid by Swansea City for Graham. There is talk of a points deduction.
Why should this be? No points were taken from West Ham United or Queens Park Rangers over third party interference, and the Football Association ran a mile from even investigating the shenanigans around Matthew Spring’s loan transfer from Luton Town to Charlton Athletic — with Sheffield United deciding what matches he could play — so it is a little late to come over all masterful.
If guilty, Watford should receive a fine, which is the going rate for an offence football chooses to take seriously, when it suits.

No, Samuel. We're more than aware that your beloved 'ammers didn't have a points deduction. We're also aware that the Olympic Stadium 'legacy' was to hand it into West Hams lap. Kabba playing against Watford? You missed that out.
 



No points were taken from West Ham United or Queens Park Rangers over third party interference,

London clubs!

Not to worry. Watford can point to their presence on the Tube map, pretend they are a London club, and all will be well.
 
In the same article, he has a (pretty irrelevant) dig at the PFA for including Ched in their L1 team last season after he had been convicted. Alleging that this shows a lack of commitment to women's rights.

That sort of thing makes me want to tear my hair out. Ched had been voted into the team as one of the best players in L1, which he was. He was not voted as the most right-on, non-sexist player in L1. I don't understand this argument that says "if you are reprehsible in one area of your life, you must be reprehesible in all areas".

In my view, the PFA had a much more grown up attitude than United. Evans was obviously voted Player of the Year last season, but as the result was announced after his conviction, there was some mealy mouth stuff about the whole team getting the award. Why not tell the truth - Evans was voted the player of the year because he was the best player last season, but given his conviction, the club would not be making an award to him.
 
But isn't the point to actually ensure that appropiate punishments are dished out going forward, not to look back at the previous fcuk ups and say "oh well, we didn't do that before, so lets not bother now eh"

I'd love football to clean up its act and start dishing out appropriate punishments, swiftly... it'll never happen though as its run by the mafia
 
Darren said:
In the same article, he has a (pretty irrelevant) dig at the PFA for including Ched in their L1 team last season after he had been convicted. Alleging that this shows a lack of commitment to women's rights.

That sort of thing makes me want to tear my hair out. Ched had been voted into the team as one of the best players in L1, which he was. He was not voted as the most right-on, non-sexist player in L1. I don't understand this argument that says "if you are reprehsible in one area of your life, you must be reprehesible in all areas".

In my view, the PFA had a much more grown up attitude than United. Evans was obviously voted Player of the Year last season, but as the result was announced after his conviction, there was some mealy mouth stuff about the whole team getting the award. Why not tell the truth - Evans was voted the player of the year because he was the best player last season, but given his conviction, the club would not be making an award to him.
Click to expand...

Totally agree.
 
Darren said:
In my view, the PFA had a much more grown up attitude than United. Evans was obviously voted Player of the Year last season, but as the result was announced after his conviction, there was some mealy mouth stuff about the whole team getting the award.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but the goal montage shown on the video boards at the end of season games was edited so that none of Evans' goals were included, which was a bit 1984-ish for my liking.
 
Revolution said:
Not only that, but the goal montage shown on the video boards at the end of season games was edited so that none of Evans' goals were included, which was a bit 1984-ish for my liking.
Click to expand...

Really?

Hamlet without the Prince, indeed.
 
Revolution said:
Not only that, but the goal montage shown on the video boards at the end of season games was edited so that none of Evans' "The striker who cannot be named" goals were included, which was a bit 1984-ish for my liking.
Click to expand...

That has to be a joke!

Its like Evans "The striker who cannot be named" never existed
 
I don't know what's worse. The article itself, or the sycophantic, polyp licking comments at the bottom of it. These people think this fat twat actually talks sense.
 



Martin Samuel Journalist

Three words not usually seen in the same sentence.

Martin Samuel Arse

Fixed it.
 
I've tidied the article up for him, done a precis to the salient points and tried to say what he should be saying:

"As a football crime it really does deserve a points deduction, and if found guilty Watford should be deducted points. But because I, the FA, the PL and other spineless prats either campaigned, argued or implemented only a fine for that model and upstanding football club that is West Ham United for a far more serious offence of this kind, I'm now reduced to trying to still retrospectively justify that heinous action."

:fattwat:
 
Easy fix isn't it?

Liverpool veto'd buying The Sun.

Blades fans veto the Mail.
 
...and the boycott falls.

Never mind chaps, we taught them a lesson they won't forget in a hurry.
 
Darren said:
That sort of thing makes me want to tear my hair out. Ched had been voted into the team as one of the best players in L1, which he was. He was not voted as the most right-on, non-sexist player in L1. I don't understand this argument that says "if you are reprehsible in one area of your life, you must be reprehesible in all areas".
Click to expand...

I don't agree with the airbrushing from history, but I'm quite happy for Evans' player of the season awards to be passed on to the next highest scorer/voted player (not that United did that). The bloke was in prison for heaven's sake!

The award night is all about the presentations. Giving the big award to an incarcerated rapist would hardly make for a celebratory evening!
 
id rather dangle me love spuds in a crocogators mush, than read that hate-filled lie-riddled piece of shit roll.
 
This is what the Fat Cunt had to say in December.

Bradford City are to appeal against their expulsion from the FA Cup, for fielding an ineligible player in their second-round tie with Brentford. ‘The error was of an administrative, technical nature and not one to intentionally break competition rules,’ said a club statement. No matter.
Allow this, and ineligible players could appear in every tie, with the club blaming hapless administrative staff. Who can tell, with any certainty, a genuine mistake from an attempt to swing the lead? The FA stance has to be black and white. It is the job of the club to get their house in order — the buck stops there.

 
Robby Blade said:
This is what the Fat Cunt had to say in December.

Bradford City are to appeal against their expulsion from the FA Cup, for fielding an ineligible player in their second-round tie with Brentford. ‘The error was of an administrative, technical nature and not one to intentionally break competition rules,’ said a club statement. No matter.
Allow this, and ineligible players could appear in every tie, with the club blaming hapless administrative staff. Who can tell, with any certainty, a genuine mistake from an attempt to swing the lead? The FA stance has to be black and white. It is the job of the club to get their house in order — the buck stops there.

Click to expand...

That really is a stunning peice of hypocrisy.
 



grafikhaus said:
Such a pity as Samuel usually writes decent stuff, but he just won't let his irrational hatred of United go. In todays Mail:

Graham case misses point
Watford have been charged with breaking third party investment rules regarding former striker Danny Graham. The allegations centre on the regime of previous owner Laurence Bassini, who — it is claimed — secured advance payment loans against the instalments due to be paid by Swansea City for Graham. There is talk of a points deduction.
Why should this be? No points were taken from West Ham United or Queens Park Rangers over third party interference, and the Football Association ran a mile from even investigating the shenanigans around Matthew Spring’s loan transfer from Luton Town to Charlton Athletic — with Sheffield United deciding what matches he could play — so it is a little late to come over all masterful.
If guilty, Watford should receive a fine, which is the going rate for an offence football chooses to take seriously, when it suits.

No, Samuel. We're more than aware that your beloved 'ammers didn't have a points deduction. We're also aware that the Olympic Stadium 'legacy' was to hand it into West Hams lap. Kabba playing against Watford? You missed that out.
​
​
Click to expand...
FRIG OFF FAT TWAT:fattwat:cant stand the bastard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Millhousesblade1889
Big 4 Games
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
Montymagic
Montymagic
Deadbat
United 1 Watford 0 - report/ratings
2
Replies
47
Views
4K
United Aren't Back.
U
Shadota
Statistics The subsequent fate of losing play off finalists
Replies
4
Views
700
Shadota
Shadota
ucandomagic
Matchday 4 Graphs and Chat – Root Salute and Hornets Stung in a Sheffield Treble
Replies
15
Views
2K
ThirdGenBlade
T
Deadbat
WBA 2 United 0 - report/ratings
Replies
17
Views
2K
54yrblade
5

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom