Have We Been Closed Down Then? (1 Viewer)

Sky Blue Kid · Apr 4, 2015

@ Nick..... As well as calling me a liar, you're calling DazzleTommyDazzle a liar too?

Sky Blue Kid · Apr 4, 2015

@ hill83....... Where have I made a balls up then? I've posted a link to which prove I and DazzleTommyDazzle are not liars.

The Reverend Skyblue · Apr 4, 2015

I love late night Saturday's on here, a few more whiskies and I'm in

Grendel · Apr 4, 2015

RegTheDonk said:
Patented deflection tactics.

No - why do I want to deflect?

Nick · Apr 4, 2015

Sky Blue Kid said:
@ Nick..... As well as calling me a liar, you're calling DazzleTommyDazzle a liar too?

Are you serious? Read the thread back. You are wrong, the quote I posted was from the article the thread is about.

Nick · Apr 4, 2015

Sky Blue Kid said:
@ hill83....... Where have I made a balls up then? I've posted a link to which prove I and DazzleTommyDazzle are not liars.

It's the wrong link...

hill83 · Apr 4, 2015

Sky Blue Kid said:
@ hill83....... Where have I made a balls up then? I've posted a link to which prove I and DazzleTommyDazzle are not liars.

Div

1. You failed to acknowledge the part which was missed from dazzletommys copy and paste, which nick pointed out. Tommy even acknowledged it himself.
2. You then linked the entirely wrong article
3. You have simply got to be on a wind up, nobody can be as relentlessly and consistently thick as you and feed themselves.

You are actually starting to piss me off now.

Noggin · Apr 4, 2015

Nick said:
Are you serious? Read the thread back. You are wrong, the quote I posted was from the article the thread is about.

I wonder if different people write the headline/short blurb and the article because the article is completely fair and explains the situation well, the blurb is sensationalist, it seems to be something you frequently see in print media, it's almost like the headline is written by marketing and is frequently click bait, you see this really often at the worst papers like the daily mail sometimes articles bear almost no resemblance to the title and short blurb.

ccfcway · Apr 4, 2015

there is that much belief in what the CT wrote and panic on this site that the story isnt even on the first few pages of this forum......

A bit of a nothing thread when no-one was worried about it

chiefdave · Apr 4, 2015

Noggin said:
I wonder if different people write the headline/short blurb.

I have a feeling Simon has mentioned in the past that the headlines are nothing to do with him.

martcov · Apr 4, 2015

chiefdave said:
I have a feeling Simon has mentioned in the past that the headlines are nothing to do with him.

It worked. We read the article. But the article is correct and nowhere dös it say that we will be closed down at the end of March. "Threat" and "theoretically" don't mean definately.

skybluetony176 · Apr 4, 2015

Grendel said:
No - why do I want to deflect?

I don't think anyone really knows (including you) what YOUR thread is supposed to be about so it's easy to see why you're being accused of deflection.

Hobo · Apr 4, 2015

Just storing the pot comes to mind Grendel, a bit like the Coventry Telegraph, nothing more nothing less.

The Gentleman · Apr 4, 2015

hill83 said:
Div

1. You failed to acknowledge the part which was missed from dazzletommys copy and paste, which nick pointed out. Tommy even acknowledged it himself.
2. You then linked the entirely wrong article
3. You have simply got to be on a wind up, nobody can be as relentlessly and consistently thick as you and feed themselves.

You are actually starting to piss me off now.

letsallsingtogether · Apr 4, 2015

Look Nick and Gren are pissing in the wind as usual lets all move on........
Next...

The Gentleman · Apr 4, 2015

Sick Boy said:
I challenge you to name a poster who believes that. Plenty think that ccc are innocent in all of this though.

RFC and CCFC4L to name 2. Challenge met I believe, hope you're feeling better soon.

There is probably a few more too, but the spineless tossers would rather appear to be 'balanced' despite only ever digging out one side.

Nick · Apr 4, 2015

letsallsingtogether said:
Look Nick and Gren are pissing in the wind as usual lets all move on........
Next...

What you on about? Have you read the thread?

letsallsingtogether · Apr 4, 2015

Yes have you Nick give up you are losing this battle big time.
Even I know when I am beaten.

you are looking a bigger fool then usual.

Nick · Apr 4, 2015

letsallsingtogether said:
Yes have you Nick give up you are losing this battle big time.
Even I know when I am beaten.

you are looking a bigger fool then usual.

What are you talking about? I suggest you have a good read before you end up sat with sbk.

Which "battle" are you on about? The one sbk is having with himself?

SBT · Apr 5, 2015

Grendel said:
No - why do I want to deflect?

Because you still haven't answered my question, and I've asked four times now. Are you OK?

hill83 · Apr 5, 2015

Yeah Grendel, answer the question that can't be answered. Do us all a favour.

skybluetony176 · Apr 5, 2015

hill83 said:
Yeah Grendel, answer the question that can't be answered. Do us all a favour.

He probably shouldn't have started a second thread on a non-story (Grendulls own words) with a question. It was bound to lead to further questions. The irony being he's done a very good job of keeping this "non-story" going.

hill83 · Apr 5, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
He probably shouldn't have started a second thread on a non-story (Grendulls own words) with a question. It was bound to lead to further questions. The irony being he's done a very good job of keeping this "non-story" going.

I agree with you. I want to see if he'll pull something out of thin air and answer it.

Edit: He makes a valid point about the telegraph but it didn't require a new thread.

skybluetony176 · Apr 5, 2015

hill83 said:
I agree with you. I want to see if he'll pull something out of thin air and answer it.

Edit: He makes a valid point about the telegraph but it didn't require a new thread.

Isn't all of Grendulls post pulled out of thin air? This should be his natural habitat

martcov · Apr 5, 2015

It could of course be pure genius. He started a no news thread with a sensationalist headline, thus getting Nick's forum more traffic, to make a point about the CT starting a report with a sensationalist headline, thus getting the telegraph more clicks. That's his point. But...... I stick by my original theories... Either he's bored and just wants a good wind up, or he has been drinking or smoking something.... This is more likely as he has started to wriggle by bringing in Mount Everest and the P.I.T.S. Stadium....

Grendel · Apr 5, 2015

skybluetony176 said:
He probably shouldn't have started a second thread on a non-story (Grendulls own words) with a question. It was bound to lead to further questions. The irony being he's done a very good job of keeping this "non-story" going.

So your saying the original thread was a non story?

Deleted member 5849 · Apr 5, 2015

hill83 said:
Edit: He makes a valid point about the telegraph

Get you with your SISU sympathising ways.

but it didn't require a new thread.

Nah, should have been a 'hill is a SISU sympathiser' thread.

Fuck it, this thread is superb, even more mental than usual on here!

Grendel · Apr 5, 2015

hill83 said:
I agree with you. I want to see if he'll pull something out of thin air and answer it.

Edit: He makes a valid point about the telegraph but it didn't require a new thread.

To be fair if we didn't start a new thread we may not have seen the Easter new release of SBK Having A Nightmare Part 562

Grendel · Apr 5, 2015

Deleted member 5849 said:
Get you with your SISU sympathising ways.

Nah, should have been a 'hill is a SISU sympathiser' thread.

Fuck it, this thread is superb, even more mental than usual on here!

I'm just relieved that everyone agreed with me - that the article was a sensationalist non story that was never going to come to anything.

I'm just a bit confused why so few who now say it on here didn't say it then.....

bigfatronssba · Apr 5, 2015

Grendel said:
I'm just relieved that everyone agreed with me - that the article was a sensationalist non story that was never going to come to anything.

I'm just a bit confused why so few who now say it on here didn't say it then.....

You still haven't said how you know that SP hasn't begun legal proceedings have you?

Grendel · Apr 5, 2015

bigfatronssba said:
You still haven't said how you know that SP hasn't begun legal proceedings have you?

If he has what do you think might be the first thing that happens?

bigfatronssba · Apr 5, 2015

Grendel said:
If he has what do you think might be the first thing that happens?

SP would give the go ahead to his lawyers to begin the process of recovering his money, thus a final warning would be sent to CCFC.

Sky Blue Kid · Apr 5, 2015

Grendel said:
There is no irony - just a general annoyance that people swallow everything the local media chuck at them if they think it's helping to chuck rocks and the owners. Chucking rocks at a iron wall is a bit pointless. They just bounce off.

A bit like you swallowing your fav website's estimated transfer fees, and you posting them on here as a fact?

skybluetony176 · Apr 5, 2015

Grendel said:
So your saying the original thread was a non story?

What ever drew you to that conclusion given that I said "non-story" twice, first time I pointed out in brackets that they're your words and the second time I put it in quote marks.

Well done in bumping up YOUR "non-story" thread again. The irony of you going out your way to keep it at the top of the page is hilarious.

Nick · Apr 5, 2015

Sky Blue Kid said:
A bit like you swallowing your fav website's estimated transfer fees, and you posting them on here as a fact?

The same as you saying it's fact players haven't signed for us because they think we will go bust?

Do you have horses?

Have We Been Closed Down Then? (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Administrator

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency