New Sky Blue Talk Forum Members (1 Viewer)

RegTheDonk · Jul 7, 2013

There's been quite a few new people join this forum in the last week or so.

Bearing in mind that a lot has happened to the City in the last couple of months, and looks like its coming to a head since the "sale" of CCFC, the groundshare, the football league's lack of action, the NOPM campaign, and the actions of the Sky Blue Trust, people are going to want to join in and put their 2p in the mix.

So please let the noobs have their say. Whatever their stance, pro or anti-SISU, pro or anti-groundshare, there are enough people here who either share or have the opposite view to make a valid debate.

I mean, come on, they cant ALL be Fisher.

Otis · Jul 7, 2013

Yeah, but there's his wife, his kids, next door neighbour's dog, Mr. Thompson at number 27 and Postman Phil.

And that's just for starters.

Grendel · Jul 7, 2013

It's the bullshit response "you must be nice but dim Tim" that's really pissing me off. Lame crap by someone who know doubt earns a fraction of what dim Tim gets and Tim is not even nice.

BurbageSkyBlues · Jul 7, 2013

Grendel said:
It's the bullshit response "you must be nice but dim Tim" that's really pissing me off. Lame crap by someone who know doubt earns a fraction of what dim Tim gets and Tim is not even nice.

So, you judge the value of everyone's contribution, by how much they earn?

New depths of snobbery..........

christonabike · Jul 7, 2013

I like the cut off this Reg`s jib. Been hovering but at last a chap who doesnt want to join the "IN" posters just have an opinion and fair play!:wave:

Sky Blue Harry H · Jul 7, 2013

Grendel said:
It's the bullshit response "you must be nice but dim Tim" that's really pissing me off. Lame crap by someone who know doubt earns a fraction of what dim Tim gets and Tim is not even nice.

As someone a bit along the line from Kirk Douglas once said ....................................."I'm Timicus"

Sky Blue Harry H · Jul 7, 2013

christonabike said:
I like the cut off this Reg`s jib. Been hovering but at last a chap who doesnt want to join the "IN" posters just have an opinion and fair play!:wave:

Reg can't wear cut offs - they don't call him Reg the Donk for nothing

bigfatronssba · Jul 7, 2013

RegTheDonk said:
There's been quite a few new people join this forum in the last week or so.
 
Bearing in mind that a lot has happened to the City in the last couple of months, and looks like its coming to a head since the "sale" of CCFC, the groundshare, the football league's lack of action, the NOPM campaign, and the actions of the Sky Blue Trust, people are going to want to join in and put their 2p in the mix.
 
So please let the noobs have their say. Whatever their stance, pro or anti-SISU, pro or anti-groundshare, there are enough people here who either share or have the opposite view to make a valid debate.
 
I mean, come on, they cant ALL be Fisher.

In fairness I think at least one of them is fisher (not naming names!).

SkyblueBazza · Jul 7, 2013

BurbageSkyBlues said:
So, you judge the value of everyone's contribution, by how much they earn?

New depths of snobbery..........

He isn't saying that at all is he? Really.
He is simply saying that anyone who can command a high salary cannot be so readily accused of being dim. The "dim" accuser we know nothing about so I think Grendel ought not make those assumptions...IMO it doesn't suggest a highly thought out response to anything though.

Grendel · Jul 7, 2013

SkyblueBazza said:
He isn't saying that at all is he? Really.
He is simply saying that anyone who can command a high salary cannot be so readily accused of being dim. The "dim" accuser we know nothing about so I think Grendel ought not make those assumptions...IMO it doesn't suggest a highly thought out response to anything though.

What I am saying us that anyone who now posts a view that opposes the council or ACL view is accused of being a sisu plant. Its pathetic. Yet there are other posters (who deploy very common usernames like jack and James) who Never poster unless its to vehemently defend the landlord.

I couldn't give a stuff if ACL went bust to irriwuf it means the club plays at the Ricoh. Why? I suppose the club and I couldn't care less about anything else. There are some real subversive tossers on here who do not have the clubs interest at heart.

letsallsingtogether · Jul 7, 2013

OH yes they can I have worked with a few then theirs the yes men and Arse lickers . I have had many a supervisor who was made up due to being useless on the shop floor that was a way of solving production problems?

SkyblueBazza said:
He isn't saying that at all is he? Really.
He is simply saying that anyone who can command a high salary cannot be so readily accused of being dim. The "dim" accuser we know nothing about so I think Grendel ought not make those assumptions...IMO it doesn't suggest a highly thought out response to anything though.

Broken Hearted Sky Blue · Jul 7, 2013

Grendel said:
What I am saying us that anyone who now posts a view that opposes the council or ACL view is accused of being a sisu plant. Its pathetic. Yet there are other posters (who deploy very common usernames like jack and James) who Never poster unless its to vehemently defend the landlord.

I couldn't give a stuff if ACL went bust to irriwuf it means the club plays at the Ricoh. Why? I suppose the club and I couldn't care less about anything else. There are some real subversive tossers on here who do not have the clubs interest at heart.

Youre talking crap as usual again your mouthwash aint working

letsallsingtogether · Jul 7, 2013

All he wants is that SISU get the Ricoh make shed loads of money and still we will be in debt and own nothing :facepalm:

Broken Hearted Sky Blue said:
Youre talking crap as usual again your mouthwash aint working

Evo1883 · Jul 8, 2013

i think the problem is that we arent really hearing much and all eagerly await something positive to happen ,either way it leaves pointless threads to be started and people getting at eachothers throats because in reality every single person here should want 1 thing and that is whatever is the best outcome for ccfc .

Mucca Mad Boys · Jul 8, 2013

BurbageSkyBlues said:
So, you judge the value of everyone's contribution, by how much they earn?

New depths of snobbery..........

I don't think that's what he was going for.

I assumed he was saying that Fisher isn't 'dim Tim' because he must be half successful to have been hired by CCFC, and his numerous private ventures to be earning, a lot more than a lot of people on here.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jul 8, 2013

letsallsingtogether said:
All he wants is that SISU get the Ricoh make shed loads of money and still we will be in debt and own nothing :facepalm:

You must understand for SISU to make CCFC a profitable venture, they need CCFC to be successful? What good is the RICOH if CCFC is in L2 playing in front of 3k week in, week out.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 8, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
You must understand for SISU to make CCFC a profitable venture, they need CCFC to be successful? What good is the RICOH if CCFC is in L2 playing in front of 3k week in, week out.

Guess getting rid of any half decent player and appointing a complete buffoon as manager was the best way of going about it then.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jul 8, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
Guess getting rid of any half decent player and appointing a complete buffoon as manager was the best way of going about it then.

Thorn was a legitimate contender for the job when he got it, and during the relegation season, I think the fans wouldn't have backed a decision to sack him hence the embarrassing 'Fergie couldn't do better' comments and some opposition to it when he finally got the sack.

It's a shame that our best players contracts were up that year - they weren't going to stay, they could demand way more than we could afford to pay them - and I personally don't think Thorn intended to start Turner, I think he was settled on Keogh and Cranie - guess we'll never know - so that's why he may have been sold for a low price.

I think we've assembled a good team, bar CBs at this moment in time, we only really need fringe players to replace any injuries e.g. Leon Clarke.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 8, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
Thorn was a legitimate contender for the job when he got it, and during the relegation season, I think the fans wouldn't have backed a decision to sack him hence the embarrassing 'Fergie couldn't do better' comments and some opposition to it when he finally got the sack.

It's a shame that our best players contracts were up that year - they weren't going to stay, they could demand way more than we could afford to pay them - and I personally don't think Thorn intended to start Turner, I think he was settled on Keogh and Cranie - guess we'll never know - so that's why he may have been sold for a low price.

I think we've assembled a good team, bar CBs at this moment in time, we only really need fringe players to replace any injuries e.g. Leon Clarke.

If the team were any good it wouldn't be in League 1. Every caretaker goes through a honeymoon spell and when you look at Thorn's it was half decent but not outstanding-the fact he managed to win a few games was a bonus to the board as the cheap option was always going to be taken. Your assessment of the squad strength never ceases to baffle me as we are solely relying on Leon Clarke and perhaps Baker to score our goals and a highly inexperienced defence to keep things tight.

It is going to be a complete disaster unless the off field situation turns on its head.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jul 8, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
If the team were any good it wouldn't be in League 1. Every caretaker goes through a honeymoon spell and when you look at Thorn's it was half decent but not outstanding-the fact he managed to win a few games was a bonus to the board as the cheap option was always going to be taken. Your assessment of the squad strength never ceases to baffle me as we are solely relying on Leon Clarke and perhaps Baker to score our goals and a highly inexperienced defence to keep things tight.

It is going to be a complete disaster unless the off field situation turns on its head.

So you believe that Thorn was never a serious contender for job? Myself included, the fans, by and large, wanted Thorn as the new manager, in fact, I think I can remember seeing that other teams were sniffing around him (I stand to be corrected), and I will guarantee you this, had we not signed him up, and he went to another team, Thorn would've become exactly like Eric Black with a cult surrounding him as the man to take us back to the big time! Hindsight is brilliant.

I'm going to allude to points you make and are applicable to the last 2 season: points dropped from leading positions, which would suggest that the team, in 11/12, was good enough to stay up, an in 12/13, suggest that the team can aim for playoffs minimum. There are numerous factors for this: players, tactics, mentality etc. I personally think we've needed a better defenders (well, CBs in particular) because they leak too many goals, once this is solved, I think we can do very well.

We were reliant on 3 players in particular to score last season, but this season could be different, I personally can't see Baker scoring 15 for starts, and I hope players like Moussa, Fleck, even a CB to chip in with more goals. Playing Bailey and Jennings at CM last season made it a bit more defensive than it needed to be in midfield's which may have affected goals scored - playing 1 goal a season McSheffrey didn't help either.

dongonzalos · Jul 8, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
If the team were any good it wouldn't be in League 1. Every caretaker goes through a honeymoon spell and when you look at Thorn's it was half decent but not outstanding-the fact he managed to win a few games was a bonus to the board as the cheap option was always going to be taken. Your assessment of the squad strength never ceases to baffle me as we are solely relying on Leon Clarke and perhaps Baker to score our goals and a highly inexperienced defence to keep things tight.

It is going to be a complete disaster unless the off field situation turns on its head.

Sorry BSB but 'every caretaker has a honeymoon period' is just not correct as is seen time and time again and as was clearly shown by us last season.

We had players suitable to playing on the deck. AB for some reason couldn't see that. AT if anything understood that.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 8, 2013

dongonzalos said:
Sorry BSB but 'every caretaker has a honeymoon period' is just not correct as is seen time and time again and as was clearly shown by us last season.

We had players suitable to playing on the deck. AB for some reason couldn't see that. AT if anything understood that.

The majority do, I should've said-though I think Shaw was so hopeless we didn't stand much chance. What is clear though is that soon into the 11/12 season Thorn was patently not up to scratch and he should've been sent his marching orders a long, long time before he eventually was. Dulieu, Igwe and Fisher all share the buck for this.

Mucca Mad Boys · Jul 8, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
The majority do, I should've said-though I think Shaw was so hopeless we didn't stand much chance. What is clear though is that soon into the 11/12 season Thorn was patently not up to scratch and he should've been sent his marching orders a long, long time before he eventually was. Dulieu, Igwe and Fisher all share the buck for this.

That's why the sacking of Thorn after 3 games was 100% justified, we couldn't risk pissing this season up the wall - which we did, and the 8 game handicap didn't help.

Brighton Sky Blue · Jul 8, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
That's why the sacking of Thorn after 3 games was 100% justified, we couldn't risk pissing this season up the wall - which we did, and the 8 game handicap didn't help.

If he had been sacked after relegation and someone like Robins installed before pre-season God knows how differently it could have turned out.

dongonzalos · Jul 8, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
That's why the sacking of Thorn after 3 games was 100% justified, we couldn't risk pissing this season up the wall - which we did, and the 8 game handicap didn't help.

Would have been interesting to see how the team did playing for the manager that signed them in the positions and manner he intended to play them when they signed for him.

We will never agree on this but three games including two draws against one team that went up another that finished in the play offs. Followed by a poor draw.

You either sack thorn and the new manager makes his signings or if you made a big song and dance about backing him. About having too much turn over of managers. Then you have the balls to back your decision for more than a couple of weeks!

That decision led to an unsettled squad more chopping and changing 4 more managers and another 6-7 layers having to come in.

You may be right AT may have failed

However to say it is right to sack someone after 3 games rubbish!

Nick · Jul 8, 2013

dongonzalos said:
Would have been interesting to see how the team did playing for the manager that signed them in the positions and manner he intended to play them when they signed for him.

We will never agree on this but three games including two draws against one team that went up another that finished in the play offs. Followed by a poor draw.

You either sack thorn and the new manager makes his signings or if you made a big song and dance about backing him. About having too much turn over of managers. Then you have the balls to back your decision for more than a couple of weeks!

That decision led to an unsettled squad more chopping and changing 4 more managers and another 6-7 layers having to come in.

You may be right AT may have failed

However to say it is right to sack someone after 3 games rubbish!

It wasn't 3 games though was it? He was here the season before...

Paxman II · Jul 8, 2013

SkyBlue_Taylor said:
So you believe that Thorn was never a serious contender for job? Myself included, the fans, by and large, wanted Thorn as the new manager, in fact, I think I can remember seeing that other teams were sniffing around him (I stand to be corrected), and I will guarantee you this, had we not signed him up, and he went to another team, Thorn would've become exactly like Eric Black with a cult surrounding him as the man to take us back to the big time! Hindsight is brilliant.

I'm going to allude to points you make and are applicable to the last 2 season: points dropped from leading positions, which would suggest that the team, in 11/12, was good enough to stay up, an in 12/13, suggest that the team can aim for playoffs minimum. There are numerous factors for this: players, tactics, mentality etc. I personally think we've needed a better defenders (well, CBs in particular) because they leak too many goals, once this is solved, I think we can do very well.

We were reliant on 3 players in particular to score last season, but this season could be different, I personally can't see Baker scoring 15 for starts, and I hope players like Moussa, Fleck, even a CB to chip in with more goals. Playing Bailey and Jennings at CM last season made it a bit more defensive than it needed to be in midfield's which may have affected goals scored - playing 1 goal a season McSheffrey didn't help either.

Were we not one of the highest scoring teams in the division last year?

RegTheDonk · Jul 8, 2013

Sky Blue Harry H said:
Reg can't wear cut offs - they don't call him Reg the Donk for nothing

Cheers Harry, wish that were true but unfortunately it's because I'm crap at poker

RegTheDonk · Jul 8, 2013

christonabike said:
I like the cut off this Reg`s jib. Been hovering but at last a chap who doesnt want to join the "IN" posters just have an opinion and fair play!:wave:

CoB, very nice to see you old friend :wave:.

Hope your old dad is doing ok, still drinking you under the table is he? Mine is a bit relieved I think - he now has an excuse not to watch "that load of tripe".

Looking forward to a bit of jousting with Tory and those mugs from the roof when the season starts.

New Sky Blue Talk Forum Members (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

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

Well-Known 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

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency