|
Post by venceremos on Aug 16, 2010 13:39:27 GMT 1
Overall it was OK, we weren't good enough to go up but nor were we in the downward spiral we had been when he over. Really? When he over we were 15th having dropped from a much higher position earlier in the season. When he left us we were in 12th having dropped from a much higher position earlier in the season. I'd say the similarities are there for everyone to see. If the back half of the 2007/8 season was a downward spiral then the back half of last season certainly was too. Yes really. We were in freefall when Peters went, McMahon stopped the immediate rot and, although we struggled for the rest of the season, we weren't crashing and burning the way we had been at the end of Peters' time. We'd been poor since the autumn. Last season we were right in the frame until that dreadful losing run in Feb/Mar. But that was a lot shorter than the decline under Peters. Until then we'd actually got ourselves into position for a real challenge following an excellent January. Maybe you felt differently but to me that run didn't feel terminal the way the last games under Peters did. After the Barnet defeat in 2008, we seemed very capable of losing for the rest of the season and maybe even being relegated.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Aug 16, 2010 15:03:55 GMT 1
i was referring to the Darlo match as i didnt go to Burton. i just couldnt understand the reaction as he was plainly talking about the people that booed and not those who didnt. looked for the burton comments and cant find them, on the bbc site they only seem to have his match related comments. Any manager in a customer facing job who called any of his customers diabolical, regardless if they had complained, would not stay in that job long. Just imagine the outcry if a supermarkret manager told a customer he was diabolical when he complained. Monkee don't go down the road that they are different because they are both in the business of providing their customers with a quality product. In addition to " don't bite the hand that feeds you" Simpson should have remember the old adage "the customer is always right". We were told as he arrived by the Preston fans that when things started to go wrong Simpson would blame players, fans and anyone else but himself. Stockport fans BEWARE!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Hippo on Aug 16, 2010 16:47:56 GMT 1
Pretty sure there'd be no outcry if a supermarket manager called a customer diabolical, if said customer had been standing behind his team of shelf stackers heckling and demeaning them, for following their supervisor's orders and displaying the jaffa cakes in a less than eye-catching manner, that the customer deemed to be ineffective and unsatisfactory to his/her consumer needs - however many times he'd done his big shop at the store. The customer'd probably be arrested? Or at least regarded as weird and marginalised from civilised society.
Be a good story though.
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 16, 2010 17:57:05 GMT 1
i was referring to the Darlo match as i didnt go to Burton. i just couldnt understand the reaction as he was plainly talking about the people that booed and not those who didnt. looked for the burton comments and cant find them, on the bbc site they only seem to have his match related comments. Any manager in a customer facing job who called any of his customers diabolical, regardless if they had complained, would not stay in that job long. Just imagine the outcry if a supermarkret manager told a customer he was diabolical when he complained. Monkee don't go down the road that they are different because they are both in the business of providing their customers with a quality product. In addition to " don't bite the hand that feeds you" Simpson should have remember the old adage "the customer is always right". We were told as he arrived by the Preston fans that when things started to go wrong Simpson would blame players, fans and anyone else but himself. Stockport fans BEWARE!!!!! someone gave an answer that i agree with. Pretty sure there'd be no outcry if a supermarket manager called a customer diabolical, if said customer had been standing behind his team of shelf stackers heckling and demeaning them, for following their supervisor's orders and displaying the jaffa cakes in a less than eye-catching manner, that the customer deemed to be ineffective and unsatisfactory to his/her consumer needs - however many times he'd done his big shop at the store. The customer'd probably be arrested? Or at least regarded as weird and marginalised from civilised society. Be a good story though. what he said. p.s. let it go he's gone now so you have what you wanted
|
|
|
Post by Hatfieldshrew on Aug 16, 2010 18:33:44 GMT 1
This thread bring up an interesting point, how are football fans of a club supposed to complain ?
According to some people booing/jeering the team/manager/board is wrong.
Writing to the local paper, can look as if it's 1 person
Writing to the manager, you never know if he got it or read it, let alone the the board see it.
Writing to the board, you never know if they got it or read it.
Hold demonstrations outside the ground, they paying to see the match, just like at Man U.
Not go to the matches, which can cause the club to go under (just like Chester)
It seams to me which ever one you choose as a fan your in the wrong, but at the end of the day we pay the wages/bills of the club by going and paying hard earned money to watch or support something we don't like.
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Aug 16, 2010 20:02:41 GMT 1
Yes really. We were in freefall when Peters went, McMahon stopped the immediate rot and, although we struggled for the rest of the season, we weren't crashing and burning the way we had been at the end of Peters' time. We'd been poor since the autumn. When Peters left we had 40 points and 42 (and a better goal difference) would have seen us stay up. In Peters last ten game we picked up 6 points, where as in the remaining 12 games after he left we only picked up a further ten points from 12 games (and three of these were against Wrexham who were so bad an 8 year old with a bit of play station experience could have beaten them) So getting rid of Peters and appointing Simpson had no affect on us staying up. Peters had to go after such a bad run, but the lack of a bounce back in results when Simpson over was perhaps the first warning sign that things weren't right (compare Simpsons impact with that made by Turner, Peters and Quinn in their first few games) Funnily enough Simpsons last ten games in charge last season were quite similar to Peters - picking up just 7 points from ten games. Moral of this seems to be once you drop below a point per game your jobs in trouble!
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 16, 2010 21:40:24 GMT 1
This thread bring up an interesting point, how are football fans of a club supposed to complain ? According to some people booing/jeering the team/manager/board is wrong. Writing to the local paper, can look as if it's 1 person Writing to the manager, you never know if he got it or read it, let alone the the board see it. Writing to the board, you never know if they got it or read it. Hold demonstrations outside the ground, they paying to see the match, just like at Man U. Not go to the matches, which can cause the club to go under (just like Chester) It seams to me which ever one you choose as a fan your in the wrong, but at the end of the day we pay the wages/bills of the club by going and paying hard earned money to watch or support something we don't like. fans forums and questions to the manager on websites are one way. nobody is saying that people have no right to boo, i just happen to think that it is counter productive and pointless because, a)it is more likely to de-motivate the players than motivate them, and b)the players and the manager have more than enough experienced to know that they are not performing so you dont need to complain.
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Aug 16, 2010 22:04:14 GMT 1
Yes really. We were in freefall when Peters went, McMahon stopped the immediate rot and, although we struggled for the rest of the season, we weren't crashing and burning the way we had been at the end of Peters' time. We'd been poor since the autumn. When Peters left we had 40 points and 42 (and a better goal difference) would have seen us stay up. In Peters last ten game we picked up 6 points, where as in the remaining 12 games after he left we only picked up a further ten points from 12 games (and three of these were against Wrexham who were so bad an 8 year old with a bit of play station experience could have beaten them) So getting rid of Peters and appointing Simpson had no affect on us staying up. Peters had to go after such a bad run, but the lack of a bounce back in results when Simpson over was perhaps the first warning sign that things weren't right (compare Simpsons impact with that made by Turner, Peters and Quinn in their first few games) Funnily enough Simpsons last ten games in charge last season were quite similar to Peters - picking up just 7 points from ten games. Moral of this seems to be once you drop below a point per game your jobs in trouble! Most accurate post on the thread. I went to the penultimate away game of the season, where we lost 3-1 at soon to be relegated Mansfield, proof we were still crashing and burning with the best of them under Simpson. The only win Simpson could muster that season was the home game against Wrexham, who finished rock bottom. I agree that Peters had come to the end of the line but the fact is that Simpson had no impact until he was able to bring in Holt, Murray, Coughlan et al.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Aug 16, 2010 22:50:57 GMT 1
When Peters left we had 40 points and 42 (and a better goal difference) would have seen us stay up. In Peters last ten game we picked up 6 points, where as in the remaining 12 games after he left we only picked up a further ten points from 12 games (and three of these were against Wrexham who were so bad an 8 year old with a bit of play station experience could have beaten them) So getting rid of Peters and appointing Simpson had no affect on us staying up. Peters had to go after such a bad run, but the lack of a bounce back in results when Simpson over was perhaps the first warning sign that things weren't right (compare Simpsons impact with that made by Turner, Peters and Quinn in their first few games) Funnily enough Simpsons last ten games in charge last season were quite similar to Peters - picking up just 7 points from ten games. Moral of this seems to be once you drop below a point per game your jobs in trouble! Most accurate post on the thread. I went to the penultimate away game of the season, where we lost 3-1 at soon to be relegated Mansfield, proof we were still crashing and burning with the best of them under Simpson. The only win Simpson could muster that season was the home game against Wrexham, who finished rock bottom. I agree that Peters had come to the end of the line but the fact is that Simpson had no impact until he was able to bring in Holt, Murray, Coughlan et al. No doubt it is an accurate post - if it happens to reinforce your own point of view. It ignores the fact that of course we had no idea at the time that 42 points would be enough to keep us up. Didn't Peters himself always target 50 points for safety? From another perspective, Simpson did a little better than Peters in the final games of that season with essentially the same players (as your stats show). Then he improved the squad and did much better the following season. New managers sometimes produce an immediate improvement in results but, even when they do, it's usually short term unless they're able to bring in new players. Which is what happened that summer. Comparing Turner's impact to Simpson's is misleading. Turner had the summer to bring in new players and work with his squad away from the glare of competitive games. Simpson didn't have that when he came in - when he did, the results improved significantly. Besides which, as good a start as it's been, we're only 2 games in. In the end we didn't progress enough under Simpson but it wasn't the disaster some make it out to be.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Aug 16, 2010 23:00:56 GMT 1
i was referring to the Darlo match as i didnt go to Burton. i just couldnt understand the reaction as he was plainly talking about the people that booed and not those who didnt. looked for the burton comments and cant find them, on the bbc site they only seem to have his match related comments. Any manager in a customer facing job who called any of his customers diabolical, regardless if they had complained, would not stay in that job long. Just imagine the outcry if a supermarkret manager told a customer he was diabolical when he complained. Monkee don't go down the road that they are different because they are both in the business of providing their customers with a quality product. In addition to " don't bite the hand that feeds you" Simpson should have remember the old adage "the customer is always right". We were told as he arrived by the Preston fans that when things started to go wrong Simpson would blame players, fans and anyone else but himself. Stockport fans BEWARE!!!!! Presumably then Ed, you're on the side of the offensive passenger in the Steven Slater case, the customer always being right and all that. [Slater was the flight attendant who downed a beer, retaliated verbally to the abuse he'd received and then left the plane via the emergency chute.] I say well done him. The customer isn't always right - that's almost as worn out and useless a cliche as "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Of course it was Roland that pushed Simpson through the emergency exit but you always did take Simpson's comments too seriously.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Aug 17, 2010 8:16:56 GMT 1
Any manager in a customer facing job who called any of his customers diabolical, regardless if they had complained, would not stay in that job long. Just imagine the outcry if a supermarkret manager told a customer he was diabolical when he complained. Monkee don't go down the road that they are different because they are both in the business of providing their customers with a quality product. In addition to " don't bite the hand that feeds you" Simpson should have remember the old adage "the customer is always right". We were told as he arrived by the Preston fans that when things started to go wrong Simpson would blame players, fans and anyone else but himself. Stockport fans BEWARE!!!!! someone gave an answer that i agree with. Pretty sure there'd be no outcry if a supermarket manager called a customer diabolical, if said customer had been standing behind his team of shelf stackers heckling and demeaning them, for following their supervisor's orders and displaying the jaffa cakes in a less than eye-catching manner, that the customer deemed to be ineffective and unsatisfactory to his/her consumer needs - however many times he'd done his big shop at the store. The customer'd probably be arrested? Or at least regarded as weird and marginalised from civilised society. Be a good story though. what he said. p.s. let it go he's gone now so you have what you wanted I would agree totally with Hippo's anology but unfortunately that wasn't the case with Simpson, as far as I can remember the only time he complained about a player being booed was when it was his son, Jake. The other times he complained about the fans were when he was the subject of the abuse. In fact Simpson was quite keen on attacking his own players in public. The first time I started to doubt Simpson's abilities was when he described the whole squad he had inherited as not being good enough. Strange when 7 of that squad are now playing at a higher level than the Town. Monkee last week you suggested that I wanted every STFC manager to fail and now you suggest that I wanted Simpson to fail. As a fan for over 50 years I find that totally insulting. I have never wanted a manager to fail not even Simpson. Nobody would have been happier to have been proved wrong but unfortunately things went from bad too goodish to very bad. venceremos this actually proves my point point, Steven Slater is no longer employeed. What he did was both childish and dangerous no matter how much abuse he had taken.
|
|
|
Post by heavenlyshrew on Aug 17, 2010 8:45:39 GMT 1
someone gave an answer that i agree with. what he said. Ed you said in your post that simmo got 7 players he brought in were playing at a higher level he must have a good eye for spotting decent players. p.s. let it go he's gone now so you have what you wanted I would agree totally with Hippo's anology but unfortunately that wasn't the case with Simpson, as far as I can remember the only time he complained about a player being booed was when it was his son, Jake. The other times he complained about the fans were when he was the subject of the abuse. In fact Simpson was quite keen on attacking his own players in public. The first time I started to doubt Simpson's abilities was when he described the whole squad he had inherited as not being good enough. Strange when 7 of that squad are now playing at a higher level than the Town. Monkee last week you suggested that I wanted every STFC manager to fail and now you suggest that I wanted Simpson to fail. As a fan for over 50 years I find that totally insulting. I have never wanted a manager to fail not even Simpson. Nobody would have been happier to have been proved wrong but unfortunately things went from bad too goodish to very bad. venceremos this actually proves my point point, Steven Slater is no longer employeed. What he did was both childish and dangerous no matter how much abuse he had taken.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Aug 17, 2010 9:58:23 GMT 1
Martin I guess what you put was "Ed you said in your post that simmo got 7 players he brought in were playing at a higher level he must have a good eye for spotting decent players."
I think you have got that the wrong way round those 7 players were already at the club in a squad described by Simpson as not good enough.
|
|
|
Post by heavenlyshrew on Aug 17, 2010 10:09:26 GMT 1
Martin I guess what you put was "Ed you said in your post that simmo got 7 players he brought in were playing at a higher level he must have a good eye for spotting decent players." I think you have got that the wrong way round those 7 players were already at the club in a squad described by Simpson as not good enough. Well in that case he made them players better and they found themselves playing at a higher level
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Aug 17, 2010 11:35:20 GMT 1
I'm really struggling to see the reason behind the simmo love in. Are people seriously suggesting they wish he was still here?
And if he's so good why has he ended up at stockport?
And what other managers have used post match interviews to have a go at their own team's fans - and if so, are they still in jobs?
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 17, 2010 12:17:49 GMT 1
I'm really struggling to see the reason behind the simmo love in. Are people seriously suggesting they wish he was still here? And if he's so good why has he ended up at stockport? And what other managers have used post match interviews to have a go at their own team's fans - and if so, are they still in jobs? dont look in the world in such black and white terms. just because it didnt work out, it doesnt mean that everything he did was wrong or that absolutely nothing he did was in any way good. the point you seem to have missed over the last page or so is the discussion about whether he was justified in his comments about a group of fans who were booing, and the hysterical outrage it caused. personally i dont understand the intense dislike for him, he tried his best and it didnt work out. the football wasnt particularly good or pretty in the last season and we finished midtable, not a disaster by any stretch of the imagination. but some want to carp on about niggles with him that they are unable to put aside. yes its a discussion board and things need to be discussed to keep things moving, but i really cant see the point people getting all wound up about something that has passed.
|
|
|
Post by heavenlyshrew on Aug 17, 2010 12:22:44 GMT 1
Well simmo cant be that bad at being a manager. Firstly he got sacked from here and he walks back into another mangers job with in weeks. He is only one of 92 league mangers in this country and there are over 60+ million people in this country. next point simmo had a decent first season here and with in 2 months of the new season people were calling for his head how fickle some fans are.
As the point about having simmo still here no as we have got a great manager who will give us 110% and get us out of this league.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2010 12:47:39 GMT 1
Most accurate post on the thread. I went to the penultimate away game of the season, where we lost 3-1 at soon to be relegated Mansfield, proof we were still crashing and burning with the best of them under Simpson. The only win Simpson could muster that season was the home game against Wrexham, who finished rock bottom. I agree that Peters had come to the end of the line but the fact is that Simpson had no impact until he was able to bring in Holt, Murray, Coughlan et al. No doubt it is an accurate post - if it happens to reinforce your own point of view. It ignores the fact that of course we had no idea at the time that 42 points would be enough to keep us up. Didn't Peters himself always target 50 points for safety? From another perspective, Simpson did a little better than Peters in the final games of that season with essentially the same players (as your stats show). Did he? Under Peters - played 34 points 41 = 1.21 points per game Under Simpson - played 10 points 7 = 0.7 points per game
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Aug 17, 2010 13:15:45 GMT 1
I'm really struggling to see the reason behind the simmo love in. Are people seriously suggesting they wish he was still here? And if he's so good why has he ended up at stockport? And what other managers have used post match interviews to have a go at their own team's fans - and if so, are they still in jobs? dont look in the world in such black and white terms. just because it didnt work out, it doesnt mean that everything he did was wrong or that absolutely nothing he did was in any way good. the point you seem to have missed over the last page or so is the discussion about whether he was justified in his comments about a group of fans who were booing, and the hysterical outrage it caused. personally i dont understand the intense dislike for him, he tried his best and it didnt work out. the football wasnt particularly good or pretty in the last season and we finished midtable, not a disaster by any stretch of the imagination. but some want to carp on about niggles with him that they are unable to put aside. yes its a discussion board and things need to be discussed to keep things moving, but i really cant see the point people getting all wound up about something that has passed. I haven't missed the point at all, as i posted earlier i don't think he was justified and all he did was wind up the ordinary fans and consequently bought himself less time and eroded a lot of goodwill which meant subsequent poor performances and defeats weren't as tolerated as they might have been. My point is that managers who do this don't last long and as i mentioned I can't think of another manager who has done it. There isn't any intense dislike as far as I can see, most people say he's come across as a nice bloke in media appearances but that the quality of football and results was poor as you yourself say. Mid-table was maybe not a disaster but it was certainly disappointing and clearly not what his pre-season objective was hence why he's gone. I can't see anywhere where people have said they dislike him just that he wasn't a good manager for us.
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 17, 2010 13:28:48 GMT 1
dont look in the world in such black and white terms. just because it didnt work out, it doesnt mean that everything he did was wrong or that absolutely nothing he did was in any way good. the point you seem to have missed over the last page or so is the discussion about whether he was justified in his comments about a group of fans who were booing, and the hysterical outrage it caused. personally i dont understand the intense dislike for him, he tried his best and it didnt work out. the football wasnt particularly good or pretty in the last season and we finished midtable, not a disaster by any stretch of the imagination. but some want to carp on about niggles with him that they are unable to put aside. yes its a discussion board and things need to be discussed to keep things moving, but i really cant see the point people getting all wound up about something that has passed. I haven't missed the point at all, as i posted earlier i don't think he was justified and all he did was wind up the ordinary fans and consequently bought himself less time and eroded a lot of goodwill which meant subsequent poor performances and defeats weren't as tolerated as they might have been. My point is that managers who do this don't last long and as i mentioned I can't think of another manager who has done it. There isn't any intense dislike as far as I can see, most people say he's come across as a nice bloke in media appearances but that the quality of football and results was poor as you yourself say. Mid-table was maybe not a disaster but it was certainly disappointing and clearly not what his pre-season objective was hence why he's gone. I can't see anywhere where people have said they dislike him just that he wasn't a good manager for us. brian clough once clouted a couple of fans (btw, a am in no way saying that simpson is or is ever going to be even 1/10th of the manager clough was).
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Aug 17, 2010 13:48:37 GMT 1
dont look in the world in such black and white terms. just because it didnt work out, it doesnt mean that everything he did was wrong or that absolutely nothing he did was in any way good. the point you seem to have missed over the last page or so is the discussion about whether he was justified in his comments about a group of fans who were booing, and the hysterical outrage it caused. personally i dont understand the intense dislike for him, he tried his best and it didnt work out. the football wasnt particularly good or pretty in the last season and we finished midtable, not a disaster by any stretch of the imagination. but some want to carp on about niggles with him that they are unable to put aside. yes its a discussion board and things need to be discussed to keep things moving, but i really cant see the point people getting all wound up about something that has passed. I haven't missed the point at all, as i posted earlier i don't think he was justified and all he did was wind up the ordinary fans and consequently bought himself less time and eroded a lot of goodwill which meant subsequent poor performances and defeats weren't as tolerated as they might have been. My point is that managers who do this don't last long and as i mentioned I can't think of another manager who has done it. There isn't any intense dislike as far as I can see, most people say he's come across as a nice bloke in media appearances but that the quality of football and results was poor as you yourself say. Mid-table was maybe not a disaster but it was certainly disappointing and clearly not what his pre-season objective was hence why he's gone. I can't see anywhere where people have said they dislike him just that he wasn't a good manager for us. No, no dislike but by the same token I don't see any 'love in' either. Don't see too many wishing to have him back in Turner's stead either. Folk are pretty much saying what you are saying. Decent chap, good media work but as a manager he didn't make the grade at Town. I just hope he doesn’t get a bad reception from Town fans moreso than I hope he gets a good one...
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Aug 17, 2010 13:52:07 GMT 1
No doubt it is an accurate post - if it happens to reinforce your own point of view. It ignores the fact that of course we had no idea at the time that 42 points would be enough to keep us up. Didn't Peters himself always target 50 points for safety? From another perspective, Simpson did a little better than Peters in the final games of that season with essentially the same players (as your stats show). Did he? Under Peters - played 34 points 41 = 1.21 points per game Under Simpson - played 10 points 7 = 0.7 points per game Come on, Venceremos, games up on this one. Valiant effort but the facts show that we did not benefit from any noticeable 'bounce' when Simpson over. I suppose you could argue that had Peters stayed on we'd have averaged less than 0.7 points per game, but that would be pure conjecture.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Aug 17, 2010 14:04:03 GMT 1
The "Simpson saved us that season" line has received a good hiding on here several times in the past.
It seems strange to me when there were obvious achievements: getting us to Wembley, making a huge wedge on the Holt deal, that we don't just stick to stuff that did really happen.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Aug 17, 2010 14:09:58 GMT 1
Man, we just can't get clear of this one can we? I can't help myself if I see something I think is a misrepresentation but even I'm beginning to wear out on this topic.
Ed (of course I'm going to disagree with you) - you say Simpson only complained about the fans when they booed Jake or him. That's just wrong. The notorious " diabolical" quote (that you referred to recently) was in response to those fans who'd been booing the team generally. I don't remember Jake ever being singled out, apart from by a handful of fans who couldn't understand that he was an individual in his own right and not just an extension of his dad.
Ant - depends where you cut those stats. I was responding to the stats quoted earlier that showed Simpson had a slightly better record in his first 10 games than Peters in his last 12 (I think it was). Of course it looks different over the season - that's the point; Peters' team started well and collapsed horribly through the winter, culminating in that terminal spiral that saw him out of the job.
Ed still seems to think that, because some of those players are currently in League 1, that must mean it was really a good team (or could have been). It's a simple logic but fatally flawed by the evidence before our eyes every Saturday - it was a poor team and needed breaking up. Simpson was right in wanting to do that and, at the time, I don't think many fans would have shouted that those players were destined for higher things and we should keep the team together. I accept you never rated Simpson, but that smacks of airbrushing history to suit your point of view. Or did you honestly think we had a good team in March 2008?
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Aug 17, 2010 14:38:13 GMT 1
Or did you honestly think we had a good team in March 2008? As a matter of fact I think the following team would have given any of Simpson's team a run for there money. Bevan Herd Langmead ANother Tierney Humphrey Davies McIntyre Pugh Hibbert Constable So we needed a new central defender.
|
|
|
Post by heavenlyshrew on Aug 17, 2010 14:57:03 GMT 1
Or did you honestly think we had a good team in March 2008? As a matter of fact I think the following team would have given any of Simpson's team a run for there money. Bevan Herd Langmead ANother Tierney Humphrey Davies McIntyre Pugh Hibbert Constable So we needed a new central defender. More bulls**t Ed a few of those players were not in the first team and were squad players.You just come out with stuff that is very rarely right.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Aug 17, 2010 15:16:45 GMT 1
So who is this female relative of Simpson's who according to nicko bad mouths Shrewsbury and its supporters in the ground?
I'm surprised no one has commented on this earlier statement!
She surely must be a prime candidate for an invitation to a coffee and a quiet chat at the Greenhous Meadow.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Aug 17, 2010 15:23:54 GMT 1
More bulls**t Ed a few of those players were not in the first team and were squad players.You just come out with stuff that is very rarely right. Isn't football a squad game now Martin. Unfortunately we'll never get a chance to prove which team would be better. By the way have you ever heard the word opinion. Football discussions are about opinions and you should learn to accept other peoples opinions and express your own.
|
|
|
Post by BlueTone on Aug 17, 2010 17:05:31 GMT 1
Can't we just move on, acknowledge that Simpson was the worst manager we've ever had and lookforward. GP however made huge improvements and laid the foundations for onwards and upwards. GT is the man to capitalise on this and truly exploit the potential. Welcome home GT. .
|
|
|
Post by monkee on Aug 17, 2010 17:11:23 GMT 1
Can't we just move on, acknowledge that Simpson was the worst manager we've ever had and lookforward. .
|
|