spongebob toonpants

Chezney, if you are going to play the contrarian you can surely do better than this. Even Christmas Tree wouldn't have the temerity to pass this off

The opposition isn't up to much Steve http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/...l#ixzz1DPiEFZRW Amateurs tbh

because it meant selling our best players and being relegated ? Fairly basic lad, even for you. Do you accept that the 14th biggest turnover in football is enough money for the club to speculate with and therefore should not have to sell its best players ? No, I do not accept that it is big enough if... The outgoings are bigger than the turnover. Do you accept that I need this to sink in before I can stop laughing at you? So cutting outgoings and maintaining high turnover means selling best players and getting relegated?? Why did you just suggest that that was all Ashley needed to do then? Tying yourself in knots again wash, rinse, repeat The old board actually looked like they realised the need for a period of retrenhment, as they had before after the Woodgate signing -hence the appointment of Allerdyce -Alas we will never know as Ashley came in and started doling out 60k/week contracts to the likes of Alan Smith left right and centre. Aye, the old board had realised that they had skinted the club so appointed a manager who made his name spending nothing. They were about to pay the cost of their own reckless ambition, unfortunately for Ashley, he bought the club and inherited the blame for this in certain obsessed, possessive people's eyes. You are guilty of exactly what you accuse Leazes of, just in reverse. You are judging Ashley by the actions of Shepherd/Hall, inventing positions for other people to argue against and ignoring points that don't fit your preconceived opinions We will never know what would have happened if Shepherd was still at the helm, he may have driven the club forward with the casino, found new funding from elsewhere, put it into administration sold it Sheik Yermoney. Its completely pointless to speculate. What we do know is the club was in the top 15 revenue generators in the world -that is not in doubt. The reason Ashley is so bad an owner has very little at this stage to do with Shepherd/Hall. You seem to forget he paid off the debt in a popularist flourish on arrival. The problems since then are very much of his making.Putting the management into such disarray that we managed to achieve relegation is astonishing He even managed to inflate the wage bill from the previous administration with a combination of managerial sackings, ill judged contracts and jobs for the boys. (How many of the mega contracts we are still paying were signed under Shepherd/Hall?) His ownership is devaluing the club, receipts are down, sponsorship is down, corporate is down-this is nobodies fault but his own. People aren't blaming him for the problems he inherited-they are blaming him for the problems he has created How am i? The casino idea was fuckin' desperation man, a long shot to say the least. The facts are, and they are facts, that the club was debted up the the eyeballs and there was no money left, as indicated by the signings of Bernard, Rossi, Sibierski, the exact kind of bargain basement and loan signings that Ashley gets slated for from leazes. I don't blindly defend ashley, so for you to say I'm guilty of the same thing in reverse in just stupid. He inherited a lot of problems and created more himself. Leazes blames him for the problems he inherited (not spending money), which is why I am pulling him up. The evidence shows that the money was gone before Ashley came. Leazes calls Ashley unambitious for not spending money that isn't there and wasn't there when he got here. How is that a problem he created? Stop talking shit. Leazes is dead right-of course he is unambitious. He has also run the club disasterously badly. Fact is he did spend money when he first bought the club, and he spent it badly -that wasn't Shepherds fault. He made matters worse by sacking at great cost, financially and to our reputation, Allerdyce and Keegan. He engineered the relegation of the club, none of this is Shepherds fault by the way. He has through no fault of Shepherd collapsed the income, and wasted untold money. He paid off the debt when he came in -since then he has made terrible decsision after terrible decision -none of which have been Shepherd or Hall or anybody elses fault. The reason he is a bad chairman is not anybodies fault but his own. Your obsession with everything wrong at the club now and for evermore being the fault of the previous owners is even more misplaced than Leazes unwillingness to admit any fault for them. You are so blinded by your hatred for Leazes point of view you can't see that you've dissappeared up your own arsehole. You are a blinkered boring fool, you follow Leazes about posting the same tedious shite. He can't make an post about Ashley without you appearing to go on about Shepherd, even when it is completely unrelated to the point-you actually go on about Shepherd more that he does You know how Leazes used to derail every thread with the same argument again and again -that's you that is There's so much wrong with that I'm not going to bother taking it all apart because I've been on nights and I can't be arsed. You're a fucking tool. You've got the same comprehension issues that Leazes has. I DO NOT THINK THAT MIKE ASHLEY IS A GOOD OWNER/CHAIRMAN AND NEVER HAVE. Let's get that clear. BECAUSE MIKE ASHLEY IS A BAD OWNER, THIS DOES NOT MEAN SHEPHERD WAS A GOOD ONE. Leazes runs around spouting that he was right along, was he fuck. He doesn't comprehend that we've gone from a failing ownership to a bad one. He doesn't acknowledge that the previous owners had fucking had it. Mike Ashley being bad or even worse doesn't make them any better. That's all I do, pull him up for talking shit and gloating about being right when he clearly wasn't. You obviously don't read any of these posts I make or you'd know all of this. You're a fuckin' nob you, a full on cock. Leazes might be a bit thick and a bit of a twat sometimes, but you're a full on nob. As I said - you are more obsessed with Shepherd than Leazes is. You have to make everybody believe he was a disaster for the club and would have lead us into administration. Unfortunately we will never know, all we do know is the club was revitalised under their ownership - the opposite of what is happening now You should just relax and let it go

There wasn't time for due dilligence and you accuse others of having a primary school level grasp of the facts

because it meant selling our best players and being relegated ? Fairly basic lad, even for you. Do you accept that the 14th biggest turnover in football is enough money for the club to speculate with and therefore should not have to sell its best players ? No, I do not accept that it is big enough if... The outgoings are bigger than the turnover. Do you accept that I need this to sink in before I can stop laughing at you? So cutting outgoings and maintaining high turnover means selling best players and getting relegated?? Why did you just suggest that that was all Ashley needed to do then? Tying yourself in knots again wash, rinse, repeat The old board actually looked like they realised the need for a period of retrenhment, as they had before after the Woodgate signing -hence the appointment of Allerdyce -Alas we will never know as Ashley came in and started doling out 60k/week contracts to the likes of Alan Smith left right and centre. Aye, the old board had realised that they had skinted the club so appointed a manager who made his name spending nothing. They were about to pay the cost of their own reckless ambition, unfortunately for Ashley, he bought the club and inherited the blame for this in certain obsessed, possessive people's eyes. You are guilty of exactly what you accuse Leazes of, just in reverse. You are judging Ashley by the actions of Shepherd/Hall, inventing positions for other people to argue against and ignoring points that don't fit your preconceived opinions We will never know what would have happened if Shepherd was still at the helm, he may have driven the club forward with the casino, found new funding from elsewhere, put it into administration sold it Sheik Yermoney. Its completely pointless to speculate. What we do know is the club was in the top 15 revenue generators in the world -that is not in doubt. The reason Ashley is so bad an owner has very little at this stage to do with Shepherd/Hall. You seem to forget he paid off the debt in a popularist flourish on arrival. The problems since then are very much of his making.Putting the management into such disarray that we managed to achieve relegation is astonishing He even managed to inflate the wage bill from the previous administration with a combination of managerial sackings, ill judged contracts and jobs for the boys. (How many of the mega contracts we are still paying were signed under Shepherd/Hall?) His ownership is devaluing the club, receipts are down, sponsorship is down, corporate is down-this is nobodies fault but his own. People aren't blaming him for the problems he inherited-they are blaming him for the problems he has created How am i? The casino idea was fuckin' desperation man, a long shot to say the least. The facts are, and they are facts, that the club was debted up the the eyeballs and there was no money left, as indicated by the signings of Bernard, Rossi, Sibierski, the exact kind of bargain basement and loan signings that Ashley gets slated for from leazes. I don't blindly defend ashley, so for you to say I'm guilty of the same thing in reverse in just stupid. He inherited a lot of problems and created more himself. Leazes blames him for the problems he inherited (not spending money), which is why I am pulling him up. The evidence shows that the money was gone before Ashley came. Leazes calls Ashley unambitious for not spending money that isn't there and wasn't there when he got here. How is that a problem he created? Stop talking shit. Leazes is dead right-of course he is unambitious. He has also run the club disasterously badly. Fact is he did spend money when he first bought the club, and he spent it badly -that wasn't Shepherds fault. He made matters worse by sacking at great cost, financially and to our reputation, Allerdyce and Keegan. He engineered the relegation of the club, none of this is Shepherds fault by the way. He has through no fault of Shepherd collapsed the income, and wasted untold money. He paid off the debt when he came in -since then he has made terrible decsision after terrible decision -none of which have been Shepherd or Hall or anybody elses fault. The reason he is a bad chairman is not anybodies fault but his own. Your obsession with everything wrong at the club now and for evermore being the fault of the previous owners is even more misplaced than Leazes unwillingness to admit any fault for them. You are so blinded by your hatred for Leazes point of view you can't see that you've dissappeared up your own arsehole. You are a blinkered boring fool, you follow Leazes about posting the same tedious shite. He can't make an post about Ashley without you appearing to go on about Shepherd, even when it is completely unrelated to the point-you actually go on about Shepherd more that he does You know how Leazes used to derail every thread with the same argument again and again -that's you that is

They'll be getting paid a fortune. The average Super Sunday game gets 1.2m viewers. Talksport averages 3m listeners during the day, all those ad's etc.. they'll be minting it in. Toontastic should start its own little radio station, would be easy to set up, each week with a new member presenting. that would be classic. highlights could include the breafast show. morning moans on all things toon related. some mid morning world and political programs, the highlight being parky's morning musings on the middle east and all the latest consipracy theories drivetime radio featuring all of the best selections from the "what are you listening to thread" evening show would have your daily old board v new board phone in show hosted by leazesmag and skidmark. a toontastic take on nightowls guaranteed to help send any listener off to sleep. Saturday morning with Kevin and Deadman - we could call it "Wake up to Dickhead" edit **nee offence like**

because it meant selling our best players and being relegated ? Fairly basic lad, even for you. Do you accept that the 14th biggest turnover in football is enough money for the club to speculate with and therefore should not have to sell its best players ? No, I do not accept that it is big enough if... The outgoings are bigger than the turnover. Do you accept that I need this to sink in before I can stop laughing at you? So cutting outgoings and maintaining high turnover means selling best players and getting relegated?? Why did you just suggest that that was all Ashley needed to do then? Tying yourself in knots again wash, rinse, repeat The old board actually looked like they realised the need for a period of retrenhment, as they had before after the Woodgate signing -hence the appointment of Allerdyce -Alas we will never know as Ashley came in and started doling out 60k/week contracts to the likes of Alan Smith left right and centre. Aye, the old board had realised that they had skinted the club so appointed a manager who made his name spending nothing. They were about to pay the cost of their own reckless ambition, unfortunately for Ashley, he bought the club and inherited the blame for this in certain obsessed, possessive people's eyes. You are guilty of exactly what you accuse Leazes of, just in reverse. You are judging Ashley by the actions of Shepherd/Hall, inventing positions for other people to argue against and ignoring points that don't fit your preconceived opinions We will never know what would have happened if Shepherd was still at the helm, he may have driven the club forward with the casino, found new funding from elsewhere, put it into administration sold it Sheik Yermoney. Its completely pointless to speculate. What we do know is the club was in the top 15 revenue generators in the world -that is not in doubt. The reason Ashley is so bad an owner has very little at this stage to do with Shepherd/Hall. You seem to forget he paid off the debt in a popularist flourish on arrival. The problems since then are very much of his making.Putting the management into such disarray that we managed to achieve relegation is astonishing He even managed to inflate the wage bill from the previous administration with a combination of managerial sackings, ill judged contracts and jobs for the boys. (How many of the mega contracts we are still paying were signed under Shepherd/Hall?) His ownership is devaluing the club, receipts are down, sponsorship is down, corporate is down-this is nobodies fault but his own. People aren't blaming him for the problems he inherited-they are blaming him for the problems he has created

He basically admitted he had been lying about Carrol from the start, whether that is true or it was a bizzarre attempt at face saving, or he was told to say that who can tell. Jerry, just remember, it's not a lie if you believe it

Sacking managers every couple of months isn't the best thing for the wage bill either

because it meant selling our best players and being relegated ? Fairly basic lad, even for you. Do you accept that the 14th biggest turnover in football is enough money for the club to speculate with and therefore should not have to sell its best players ? No, I do not accept that it is big enough if... The outgoings are bigger than the turnover. Do you accept that I need this to sink in before I can stop laughing at you? So cutting outgoings and maintaining high turnover means selling best players and getting relegated?? Why did you just suggest that that was all Ashley needed to do then? Tying yourself in knots again wash, rinse, repeat The old board actually looked like they realised the need for a period of retrenhment, as they had before after the Woodgate signing -hence the appointment of Allerdyce -Alas we will never know as Ashley came in and started doling out 60k/week contracts to the likes of Alan Smith left right and centre.

6am - 10 am Alan Brazil 10am - 1pm Andy Gray 7 solid hours of unreconstructed basketball-headed Scottish self opinionated hogwash-who could ask for more

Signed up for TalkSport http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/feb/0...-gray-talksport Stevie seething

Makes me angry seeing my seat in yellow. I'm seathing. Get TalkSport phoned - it is time for Marshall-Barnes to get the media onside Too much of a negative issue, he needs to protect the Marshall-Barnes brand. He can show himself to be a multi-faceted pan-topical commentator, the brand can be so much more than mildly self-mocking humorous anecdotes. As his self-appointed agent, i want him to focus on the core brand values set down by the half-time departure. Looking at a ten minute slot on Loose Women discussing premature ejaculation (jovial tone, self-deprecating style). You are Mike Ashley to my John Hall - I see nothing less than regular appearances on Question Time, giving a voice to the great unheard........in time obviously

She was nee Susan Stranks like

Makes me angry seeing my seat in yellow. I'm seathing. Get TalkSport phoned - it is time for Marshall-Barnes to get the media onside Too much of a negative issue, he needs to protect the Marshall-Barnes brand. He can show himself to be a multi-faceted pan-topical commentator, the brand can be so much more than mildly self-mocking humorous anecdotes.

I thought Michael O'Neill was going to be the new George Best. I know he didn't really come through the reserves, we bought him from Glentoran I think and he scored a hat trick in if not his first, certaily a very early runout for the reserves. I seem to remember Peter Jackson saying he was going to be our greatest evr player or some such

Makes me angry seeing my seat in yellow. I'm seathing. Get TalkSport phoned - it is time for Marshall-Barnes to get the media onside

I am genuinely a bit bemused at what to think at the moment about Pardew. I was completely disgusted by his appointment, obviously he only got it out of cronyism, and to what extent he was complicit in undermining Houghton we can only guess. However my initial belief that the dressing room would fragment, and all the good work and team spirit CH had generated would be destroyed proved unfounded, and to my mind we were, if anything, actually playing with more confidence-and had a bit more tactically than we had before. I remember thinking if Nolan and Barton are prepared to get behind him, then I should too I took at face value that he believed Carrol wouldn't be sold until the summer, and I actually thought he looked pretty gutted at the outcome. His comments the other day about all the not for sale bluster being to try and ward clubs off seemed a bit wierd though. I also can't understand why, if he knew he was on his way, or knew the injury wasn't about to clear up why he failed to bring in any cover. Having said that I think his "friendship" with Llambias wouldn't prevent him from being stitched up and lied to. Lets get real here a casino owner befriending you probably isn't a relationship so much as a money extraction technique. I don't actually know if he was also palsy with Ashley before this I thought after the first half on Monday that the team spirit I had been pleasantly surprised by plainly hadn't been down to him after all, but the second half performance does seem to mean he deserves a lot of credit. His comments on Tiote being sold if an offer came in were pretty depressing, but on the other hand I have long said if we had had more honesty about the financial situation from above it would have been easier to understand and support what was going on, upsetting as it might be. So to sum up I have no idea if he is a stooge or a patsy, if he actually has any idea what the plans for the club are, or if he is being lied to himself. I don't know if his interviews are what he actually thinks or what he is being told to say. I don't know if he has pulled the squad together or they are doing it in spite of him. I was speaking to a Wistham friend of mine the other day. His opinion of him was he was great until he wasn't - so that didn't help I like him more than I thought I would, but then again that wouldn't be hard. The only thing I do know at worst he is a symptom and not the cause of the problems at the club.

I always sing "the big ship sails on the AliAdiere" in my head when I see his name

He's calling you a cunt. ZaZA!!

That's a false choice it's not an either or question.

Good work Steve - thought you came over really well. Unfortunately the thought of Steve's double barrelled surname and Geordie accent just made me burst out laughing at work - got some right funny looks

Which is what I said about him having learned nothing and jeopardising us again. I Don't see a "hefty" profit even with survival though. the profit league last year was... Man U £91.3m Arsenal £58.8m Livepool 24.9m Spurs £18.4m Birmingham £13.7m Everton £6.3m Wolves -£1.6m Fulham -£2.1m Mackems -£2.4m Bolton -£5.3m Blackburn -£6.8m Stoke -£7.8m Burnley -£8.9m Hull -£9.2m Chelsea -£11.4m Villa -£13.1m Wigan -£17m Portsmouth -£17m West Ham -£32.8m Mn City -£34.2m http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/footbal...we-1912244.html Given the top 4 have a model based on champions league qualification, the next best model Ashley could look at to try and turn a profit is Birmingham. I doubt their wage bill is significantly greater than ours. If he was able to match their profits year in year out...he might have recouped his loan to the club and be able to start turning a profit in ten years time. There's only 3 clubs there that actually turn a profit outside of the champions league. The cash cow theory is full of holes. Ineptitude is far more plausible. Our turnover is double that of Birmingham

? EDIT: forgot about the time difference I had no idea what it meant til your post - so you have at least done me a service