Martin Samuel Pt. 487

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
21,251
Location
Lodge Moor, Sheffield
Once again our favourite fat idiot is at it again. Today, he writes an article which on the face of it, has some merit. He's discussing the loan system and in particular teams like Chelsea who can afford to loan out star players such as Lukaku who, despite being barred from playing against their host club, are free to inflict damage on Chelsea's rivals.

So far, so reasonable. But then he reverts to type, going back seven years with:

At the same time it was revealed that Sheffield United had a good thing going with Watford over Steve Kabba.

The match between the clubs at Bramall Lane, in which the loaned Kabba did not play for Watford, was one of only two in the final 11 that Sheffield United won.

Had the Premier League wished to conduct a proper investigation into those deals, the season might have ended in even greater chaos (it was also the year of Carlos Tevez at West Ham United), but instead they brushed the incidents under the carpet and introduced regulation that was intended to prevent this happening again.

So he's basically comparing the isolated 'Kabba incident' with West Ham's serial cheating with Tevez.

What a cunt. :fattwat:
 

but thats how loans are , you dont play against the hand that feeds you, and whos to say the result was decided by kabba not playing, its just speculation , how come he didnt mention man utd resting half team v west ham in the season finale as they were in the cup final, that has more relevance as west ham gained far more by half a team being missing
 
Conveniently ignores two things:

It's common practice for loan players to sit out games against their parent club. IIRC there was a similar situation with Tim Howard at about the same time.
It would have been Watford that were punished for any wrong-doing, as they were the club being "influenced" whether or not to play Kabba. But wasn't he injured anyway?

Whatever Martin... just another attempt to justify W*st H*m's cheating. Tell us who got the money when Tevez & Mascherano were transferred?
 
grafikhaus said:
Once again our favourite fat idiot is at it again. Today, he writes an article which on the face of it, has some merit. He's discussing the loan system and in particular teams like Chelsea who can afford to loan out star players such as Lukaku who, despite being barred from playing against their host club, are free to inflict damage on Chelsea's rivals.

So far, so reasonable. But then he reverts to type, going back seven years with:

At the same time it was revealed that Sheffield United had a good thing going with Watford over Steve Kabba.

The match between the clubs at Bramall Lane, in which the loaned Kabba did not play for Watford, was one of only two in the final 11 that Sheffield United won.

Had the Premier League wished to conduct a proper investigation into those deals, the season might have ended in even greater chaos (it was also the year of Carlos Tevez at West Ham United), but instead they brushed the incidents under the carpet and introduced regulation that was intended to prevent this happening again.

So he's basically comparing the isolated 'Kabba incident' with West Ham's serial cheating with Tevez.

What a cunt. :fattwat:
Click to expand...

He has his facts wrong. Kabba was sold to Watford, not loaned.

He has a sliver of a point though. It seems that Kabba not being able to play against us in that game was part of the transfer deal, which does involve third party influence over a clubs' players. Obviously though the scale of that particular sin was the mote in the eye compared to the beam that was Tevez.

Incidentally, the other game we won in that last 11 was against WHU, which he fails to mention :-)
 
Darren said:
He has his facts wrong. Kabba was sold to Watford, not loaned.

He has a sliver of a point though. It seems that Kabba not being able to play against us in that game was part of the transfer deal, which does involve third party influence over a clubs' players. Obviously though the scale of that particular sin was the mote in the eye compared to the beam that was Tevez.

Incidentally, the other game we won in that last 11 was against WHU, which he fails to mention :)
Click to expand...

I seem to remember that it was sale as you say.

But didn't the authorities investigate this and find no evidence of wromng doing? Ohh won't someone thing of the poor west ham fans!
 
SwissBlade said:
I seem to remember that it was sale as you say.

But didn't the authorities investigate this and find no evidence of wromng doing? Ohh won't someone thing of the poor west ham fans!
Click to expand...

I can't recall any investigation. I think this was a common practice until relatively recently. In 2001 we signaed Asaba from Gillingham with the proviso that he wouldn't play for us in the upcoming fixture between the clubs. The Gills' chairman went spare (publicly) when Warnock hinted that Asaba would play after all (though he didn't in the end).

It was a dodgy practice which I believe has now been outlawed. However, as I say, it is a minor infraction compared to the continued deception and lies in the Tevez affair (not to mention that Tevez is a slightly better player than Kabba so the former infraction had rather more effect than the latter).

It's strangely comical that Samuels still bangs on about it when not 1 in a 1000 of his readers will have ever heard of Kabba.
 
grafikhaus said:
Once again our favourite fat idiot is at it again. Today, he writes an article which on the face of it, has some merit. He's discussing the loan system and in particular teams like Chelsea who can afford to loan out star players such as Lukaku who, despite being barred from playing against their host club, are free to inflict damage on Chelsea's rivals.

So far, so reasonable. But then he reverts to type, going back seven years with:

At the same time it was revealed that Sheffield United had a good thing going with Watford over Steve Kabba.

The match between the clubs at Bramall Lane, in which the loaned Kabba did not play for Watford, was one of only two in the final 11 that Sheffield United won.

Had the Premier League wished to conduct a proper investigation into those deals, the season might have ended in even greater chaos (it was also the year of Carlos Tevez at West Ham United), but instead they brushed the incidents under the carpet and introduced regulation that was intended to prevent this happening again.

So he's basically comparing the isolated 'Kabba incident' with West Ham's serial cheating with Tevez.

What a cunt. :fattwat:
Click to expand...



Kabba was injured and didn't play for Watford again that season.
 
oldblade said:
Kabba was injured and didn't play for Watford again that season.
Click to expand...

Isn't that also the case with Michael Brown against West Brom when he was accused of faking injury? Which is another point he likes to bring up whenever possible (ignoring the fact he missed a few games afterwards)
 
what is it with this guy?
(i originally wrote something more tasty but seeing as it's Samuels i figured i'd better change it so he can't sue anyone)
 

super_pig said:
what is it with this guy?
(i originally wrote something more tasty but seeing as it's Samuels i figured i'd better change it so he can't sue anyone)
Click to expand...
He's a W*st H*m supporter (can't even bring myself to type it). Desperately trying to justify their cheating by claiming that every club (especially ours) does the same. Nice try Martin, but everyone knows the truth...
 
Do these tabloid hacks have any place in modern day society ? Does anyone actually value their opinion ? Sports journalists seem to be shit stirring little pricks now adays just trying to get a rise out of anyone and everyone desperate to try and justify their existence in a digital age that has no place for them and their agenda driven character assasinations , samuels knew west ham were guilty early on ( couldnt deny it ) so he looked for a way to make us guilty by association

If the fat greasy bearded twat wants to keep trying to convince himself and the world that everyone is cheating so what west ham did is ok then he is in no moral position to be passing comment on the sporting world he would be better off working as lance Armstrong' s public relations officer
 
good point actually.. when he was on the Times i wrote a complaint about his 'biased journalism based upon a personal agenda that didn't' do justice to such a great newspaper'.. next thing you know he's a the Mail
just ignore him
 
Hey Osbert,

Yes, ours aren't the only voices in the wilderness. I heard Ian Wright on Sunday's 606 being ever so slightly derogatory, (albeit in an ever so BBC way) of Samuels.

I think our favourite Mail journalist had got into a silly spat with Vilas-Boas (I haven't checked the spelling).
 
Last edited:
Aye well the trouble is he can say he's unbiased if fans from most teams apart from Wet Sham think he is biased against them too.

And as Gwidion says on that Watford site, he'd love himself even more if you did get in touch. I'm sure he already thinks he's the alpha mail.

Ignore him, its pretty easy if you aren't a Mail reader.
 
Last edited:
The thing is, this isn't the first or second time he's brought up the same subject. He's running out of bad things to say, so now he's repeating himself.
 
As Samuels well knows when we sold Kabba to Watford both clubs initially agreed that he wouldn't play against us later in the season, however this was pointed out this was against Premier League rules (though not against Football league rules at the time where both clubs had just come from) so that was removed from the agreement.

Kabba was fully entitled to play against us and probably would have done so except Watford had dropped him six weeks earlier for not being good enough for the Premier League.

Samuels is fully aware of all this but choses to misrepresent the facts as he is a fat bastard West Ham Fan with an agenda to discredit us.
 
Only ever agreed with him once or twice on a few obvious issues.

Most of the time the fat prick is wrong and is blatantly talking shite to keep himself in a job. The crap he spouts on Sunday Supplement every other week is annoying enough.
 
judge said:
If the fat greasy bearded twat wants to keep trying to convince himself and the world that everyone is cheating so what west ham did is ok then he is in no moral position to be passing comment on the sporting world he would be better off working as lance Armstrong' s public relations officer
Click to expand...

...and he's at it again...:fattwat:

So all’s well that ends well. West Ham United got by without Andy Carroll and, more significantly, without taking a torch to the Football Association’s disciplinary process.

Realistically, there was more chance of them overturning that 6-0 first-leg Capital One Cup defeat by Manchester City than Carroll’s ban, considering the club’s record in the law courts.

West Ham, remember, contrived to lose a case that hinged on Sheffield United being able to prove they were not responsible for their own league position.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...elegation-fate-worse-death.html#ixzz2subn8lFz
 
I could write out a post that articulates his hypocrisy and flaws in his argument. But what it all boils down to, is he is just a fat, vindictive see you next tuesday.
 

Two quotes…

There was more chance of West Ham coming back from 6-0 down against Man City in the Capital One Cup semi-final than overcoming Carroll's ban, such is their history with the FA in the law courts
Click to expand...

Aw bless those hard done to East Enders. Always on the wrong end of the authorities' decisions. (Ermm…..!)

West Ham, remember, contrived to lose a case that hinged on Sheffield United being able to prove they were not responsible for their own league position.
Click to expand...

Hahaha! This is just fabulous. Might I suggest it was his beloved West Ham who weren't responsible for their own league position, given it was repeatedly proven that Carlos Tevez's contractual obligations lay outside of Upton Park?

:fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat:

PS - have another: :fattwat:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

FATTYFOULKE
Simon Jordan at it again
2 3
Replies
75
Views
8K
MKY
MKY
G
Biggest away win in English Football League History
Replies
17
Views
2K
coaxingstar71
coaxingstar71
Balham
'Memries' Where are they now? United 0-0 Coventry City (Championship, 20 November 2021)
Replies
7
Views
693
Chilttheblade
Chilttheblade
Tony Currie
Why it's the biggest game in Football
Replies
0
Views
417
Tony Currie
Tony Currie
Deadbat
Home Forums Sheffield United Forums General Blades Chat Season Review / School Report 24/25: Part 3 - Goalkeepers
Replies
9
Views
982
programmechap
P

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