Search results

It's what I am saying. If the legals got dropped and we still weren't offered a deal or support from the council, many would then start gunning for the council and Wasps.

Yup. Agree with all that.

Ha.

I would re-word that and say 'not as much to blame as Sisu'. I know some side with the council, but I think there are very few who think the y have done NOTHING wrong. It's all about degrees, but it's all become a bit polarised. Think maybe the only thing that would open up everyones eyes...

There is hardly anyone I would say. What doesn't help is with stuff like this thread. Why can't people see there is a lot of decent and reasoned comment within the article, rather than go straight on the attack? Surely sensible is 'Yeah, a lot of that is accurate and reasoned, but there's...

I agree. I always want to come on here with an intention for a chill and to exchange views, but some clearly come on looking for a fight and an argument (that's not a dig at you, Nick)

Now there you have the other side of the daft reasoning. Who on here loves the council and Wasps? There may be misunderstanding of the entire picture and there may be a degree of sympathy for the council and our insect overlords, but love them both? Has anyone said everything the council have...

According to his reasoning HE'D give Thorn 5 years I think you mean. ;)

Agree. The striker choices have failed miserably thus far.

In name only. ;)

I really like him. Don't know why some are so critical of the bloke. He has a lovely touch at times.

It's my stock answer too, with the slight variance 'Do you like football?' 'No, I support Coventry City'.

It's absolutely fine to be annoyed with all of them, even if it is to varying degrees.

I wouldn't say they were the only one to blame, bawtry, but number one culprit for sure.

Indeed. If we had a goalscorer who was taking the sitters we have been creating we would be such a better side and would be sitting higher in the table.

Yeah, I know most don't, but of course there are some that are checked. If nothing is going to change why wasn't the statement simply 'nothing's going to change?'

Just watched it again. Yeah, I think it's a little dink, but the keeper gets a bit of a hand on it. Better than I thought. Still Chaplin's goal though.

Yeah, only seen it the once, but it sort of looked like it was bundled through. Chaplin might well have got a touch on the way through mind.

At the moment we wave all lorries through?