These New Owners of West Ham

[Baggio 0]

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Anyone who fails to accept the above conditions is a complete 'doublewanker'

Or a 'KK bandwagon jumper'.

[LeazesMag 0]

I'm not whinging like a bairn at all, I'm saying the club can't continue to borrow money to finance the signing of players as we're getting deeper into debt and that we need to look at an alternative way of operating.

 

Do you think the club should carry on borrowing money to finance signings or do you think we should look to an alternative way of operating?

 

yawn.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the club is in a position where it needs to be careful with its finances, in fact as you are probably aware, I predicted this would happen as a result of Souness selling players he shouldn't have and wasting money on poor replacements, although there are plenty of people on here and NO who backed his actions, and still think the club should be buying players, so I suggest you raise that question to those people and not me.

 

I would be curious to know what projected increased figure of income you have in mind, when you think the club can raise more money through appointing a CEO, or whatever, in comparison to the cash they are raising at the moment, and have done in the last 10-15 years.

 

Because, in my opinion, as I have said, the key to success is through appointing a manager who knows what he is doing, not a CEO, media men etc etc. Although it is fair to say that the people who appoint the better managers and run the better clubs are the ones who win the trophies, and/or qualify for europe, and/or buy major international footballers, would you not agree ?

Edited March 11, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Baggio 0]

I'm not whinging like a bairn at all, I'm saying the club can't continue to borrow money to finance the signing of players as we're getting deeper into debt and that we need to look at an alternative way of operating.

 

Do you think the club should carry on borrowing money to finance signings or do you think we should look to an alternative way of operating?

 

yawn.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the club is in a position where it needs to be careful with its finances, in fact as you are probably aware, I predicted this would happen as a result of Souness selling players he shouldn't have and wasting money on poor replacements, although there are plenty of people on here and NO who backed his actions, and still think the club should be buying players, so I suggest you raise that question to those people and not me.

 

I would be curious to know what projected increased figure of income you have in mind, when you think the club can raise more money through appointing a CEO, or whatever, in comparison to the cash they are raising at the moment, and have done in the last 10-15 years.

 

Because, in my opinion, as I have said, the key to success is through appointing a manager who knows what he is doing, not a CEO, media men etc etc. Although it is fair to say that the people who appoint the better managers and run the better clubs are the ones who win the trophies, and/or qualify for europe, and/or buy major international footballers, would you not agree ?

 

You do know the difference between a CEO and a DOF don't you?!

[LeazesMag 0]

I'm not whinging like a bairn at all, I'm saying the club can't continue to borrow money to finance the signing of players as we're getting deeper into debt and that we need to look at an alternative way of operating.

 

Do you think the club should carry on borrowing money to finance signings or do you think we should look to an alternative way of operating?

 

yawn.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the club is in a position where it needs to be careful with its finances, in fact as you are probably aware, I predicted this would happen as a result of Souness selling players he shouldn't have and wasting money on poor replacements, although there are plenty of people on here and NO who backed his actions, and still think the club should be buying players, so I suggest you raise that question to those people and not me.

 

I would be curious to know what projected increased figure of income you have in mind, when you think the club can raise more money through appointing a CEO, or whatever, in comparison to the cash they are raising at the moment, and have done in the last 10-15 years.

 

Because, in my opinion, as I have said, the key to success is through appointing a manager who knows what he is doing, not a CEO, media men etc etc. Although it is fair to say that the people who appoint the better managers and run the better clubs are the ones who win the trophies, and/or qualify for europe, and/or buy major international footballers, would you not agree ?

 

You do know the difference between a CEO and a DOF don't you?!

 

Of course, but it appears that you and others don't know the difference between a CEO, DOF and a football manager

[Baggio 0]

I'm not whinging like a bairn at all, I'm saying the club can't continue to borrow money to finance the signing of players as we're getting deeper into debt and that we need to look at an alternative way of operating.

 

Do you think the club should carry on borrowing money to finance signings or do you think we should look to an alternative way of operating?

 

yawn.

 

I've said on numerous occasions that the club is in a position where it needs to be careful with its finances, in fact as you are probably aware, I predicted this would happen as a result of Souness selling players he shouldn't have and wasting money on poor replacements, although there are plenty of people on here and NO who backed his actions, and still think the club should be buying players, so I suggest you raise that question to those people and not me.

 

I would be curious to know what projected increased figure of income you have in mind, when you think the club can raise more money through appointing a CEO, or whatever, in comparison to the cash they are raising at the moment, and have done in the last 10-15 years.

 

Because, in my opinion, as I have said, the key to success is through appointing a manager who knows what he is doing, not a CEO, media men etc etc. Although it is fair to say that the people who appoint the better managers and run the better clubs are the ones who win the trophies, and/or qualify for europe, and/or buy major international footballers, would you not agree ?

 

You do know the difference between a CEO and a DOF don't you?!

 

Of course, but it appears that you and others don't know the difference between a CEO, DOF and a football manager

 

Why don't you tell us what the difference is then.

[gram 0]

Although it is fair to say that the people who appoint the better managers and run the better clubs are the ones who win the trophies

 

I don't think I need to say anything else really. You mentioned it with Souness.

[LeazesMag 0]

Although it is fair to say that the people who appoint the better managers and run the better clubs are the ones who win the trophies

 

I don't think I need to say anything else really. You mentioned it with Souness.

 

you can reply to the rest of the post, and therefore its whole context, in your own time. Think about it first mind.

Edited March 11, 2007 by LeazesMag

[geordieshandy 0]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

 

As per usual Leazes you're twisting things in your own childish way, you add a word to my post so that you can argue about it even though you put it there.

 

I'll try and explain it to you so you don't get to confused.

Arsenal and Spurs have better squads than us, they've built these squads without having to go into debt to do so (ie not borrowing to fund player transfers, understand?) they've done it by using a DOF to spot bargain players and help set up a top class scouting network, I think we should do the same.

 

It isn't hard to get your head around.

 

You speak about Chelsea having debt when Abramovich took over but they did exactly the same as us, borrowed money to fund player transfers, it came out after that if Abramovich hadn't bought the club when he did they would have gone into administration. did you think Ken Bates was a good chairman?

 

As usual, you whinge on about a few clubs that have done better than us. That is all. A few clubs, not dozens, or more, a few.

 

Everybody wants to match these clubs. We have came closer than most. We all want to match them. In your naive desperation to match them, you make things up and overstate the "failure" of your own club, which the vast majority of other fans would like to have matched, and completely fail to grasp that you actually support a good club, one of the best, such is the modern NUFC fan - like you - who whinge on like bairns that qualifying for europe and buying major England players is "shit".

 

You should give yourself a good shake mate - and some of your chums - and understand this. Sadly, it will take a shit board to come in and make you realise just what complete rubbish you have been spouting.

 

As usual, some people on here will understand, but I don't expect the idiots on here to understand, nor the KK bandwagon jumpers.

 

I'm not interested in comparing us to Spurs and their fcuking "planning" BTW, give me Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger as manager instead anyday.

 

 

I want to bring issue with this comment that you consistently bring up Leazes. Now, I have to say I agree with a fair amount of what you say, that consistent qualifying for European competition is a indictation of the club doing fairly well, and that changing things won't necessarily bring about success, but as for using the purchasing of "major" England internationals as some sort of gauge of success is wide of the mark. Firstly, considering the national teams recent performances in the finals of major competitions that signing these useless feckers wouldn't seem to be the most successful of strategies.

 

Secondly, and most importantly, is that these players usually bear ridiculously high price tags, way way out of proportion with their actual ability. They also usually carry delusions of their own abilities, built up by this nations media.

 

Personally I'd prefer to see the signing of lesser known talented individuals that have been scouted and identified to improve the squads ability, for example N'Zogbia, Krul. Admittedly we can't just sign young players, we do need experience, but it is possible to create an effective side from lesser known players, and some would argue you'd have a better team because of it.

[LeazesMag 0]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

 

As per usual Leazes you're twisting things in your own childish way, you add a word to my post so that you can argue about it even though you put it there.

 

I'll try and explain it to you so you don't get to confused.

Arsenal and Spurs have better squads than us, they've built these squads without having to go into debt to do so (ie not borrowing to fund player transfers, understand?) they've done it by using a DOF to spot bargain players and help set up a top class scouting network, I think we should do the same.

 

It isn't hard to get your head around.

 

You speak about Chelsea having debt when Abramovich took over but they did exactly the same as us, borrowed money to fund player transfers, it came out after that if Abramovich hadn't bought the club when he did they would have gone into administration. did you think Ken Bates was a good chairman?

 

As usual, you whinge on about a few clubs that have done better than us. That is all. A few clubs, not dozens, or more, a few.

 

Everybody wants to match these clubs. We have came closer than most. We all want to match them. In your naive desperation to match them, you make things up and overstate the "failure" of your own club, which the vast majority of other fans would like to have matched, and completely fail to grasp that you actually support a good club, one of the best, such is the modern NUFC fan - like you - who whinge on like bairns that qualifying for europe and buying major England players is "shit".

 

You should give yourself a good shake mate - and some of your chums - and understand this. Sadly, it will take a shit board to come in and make you realise just what complete rubbish you have been spouting.

 

As usual, some people on here will understand, but I don't expect the idiots on here to understand, nor the KK bandwagon jumpers.

 

I'm not interested in comparing us to Spurs and their fcuking "planning" BTW, give me Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger as manager instead anyday.

 

 

I want to bring issue with this comment that you consistently bring up Leazes. Now, I have to say I agree with a fair amount of what you say, that consistent qualifying for European competition is a indictation of the club doing fairly well, and that changing things won't necessarily bring about success, but as for using the purchasing of "major" England internationals as some sort of gauge of success is wide of the mark. Firstly, considering the national teams recent performances in the finals of major competitions that signing these useless feckers wouldn't seem to be the most successful of strategies.

 

Secondly, and most importantly, is that these players usually bear ridiculously high price tags, way way out of proportion with their actual ability. They also usually carry delusions of their own abilities, built up by this nations media.

 

Personally I'd prefer to see the signing of lesser known talented individuals that have been scouted and identified to improve the squads ability, for example N'Zogbia, Krul. Admittedly we can't just sign young players, we do need experience, but it is possible to create an effective side from lesser known players, and some would argue you'd have a better team because of it.

 

The reference to "England players" denotes by implication "quality players", as in the past when we had quality players we sold them, due to having a shit board who created such a shit club that they all saw their futures elsewhere, and the shit board was happy to take the money, look for replacements in the lower leagues and use the rest to either build a stand or keep the club solvent. Instead of showing ambition and trying to attract supporters and fill the ground and play in europe.

 

However, I take your point, which is that more foreigners are playing in the top league now and so there are many more quality players than just the English ones.

 

Scouting younger players is an admirable and worthy concept, I agree with you, of course I do, but spotting and developing these players is the difficult part. We have tried this approach but most of them either fail through not being good enough, not developing enough, or have the wrong attitude and not enough desire to succeed. I don't look on this as a failing of the club though, because this happens at most clubs.

 

The Leeds side under Don Revie was successful and was built on a platform of young players who all came through together. The ManU side that won the European Cup in 1999 was the same. The Everton team who won the League, Cup Winners Cup and may have had a shout in the European Cup if not for the ban was also composed of a lot of youth players who come through together.

 

I think that this is not the normal thing though, it is quite rare, and however good a scouting network you have, is probably almost lucky that all of this falls into place.

 

We won the FA Youth Cup in 1985, and only Gazza came through and played at the top level. Joe Allon had the next half decent career but spent most of his career in the lower leagues. Brian Tinnion too.

 

To be fair, Taylor is coming through, you mention Zoggy having been spotted and brought in, add [hopefully] Edgar to that list who most of us think has promise, Given who was brought in as a young keeper, and that is 4 players who could be first team regulars, and good quality ones, in a years time if Edgar steps up.

 

Lastly, England performance in competitions lately has been better than in the past. After losing in Mexico in 1970 they didn't qualify for either the 1974 or the 1978 Finals. If anything, I would say the best England team in the last 20 years was the 1990 team with the 3 ex NUFC players all playing a major part in it. It was certainly the best run on paper ie reaching the Semi Final and with a bit of luck could have made the Final.

Edited March 12, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Kevin Carr's Gloves 3963]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

 

As per usual Leazes you're twisting things in your own childish way, you add a word to my post so that you can argue about it even though you put it there.

 

I'll try and explain it to you so you don't get to confused.

Arsenal and Spurs have better squads than us, they've built these squads without having to go into debt to do so (ie not borrowing to fund player transfers, understand?) they've done it by using a DOF to spot bargain players and help set up a top class scouting network, I think we should do the same.

 

It isn't hard to get your head around.

 

You speak about Chelsea having debt when Abramovich took over but they did exactly the same as us, borrowed money to fund player transfers, it came out after that if Abramovich hadn't bought the club when he did they would have gone into administration. did you think Ken Bates was a good chairman?

 

As usual, you whinge on about a few clubs that have done better than us. That is all. A few clubs, not dozens, or more, a few.

 

Everybody wants to match these clubs. We have came closer than most. We all want to match them. In your naive desperation to match them, you make things up and overstate the "failure" of your own club, which the vast majority of other fans would like to have matched, and completely fail to grasp that you actually support a good club, one of the best, such is the modern NUFC fan - like you - who whinge on like bairns that qualifying for europe and buying major England players is "shit".

 

You should give yourself a good shake mate - and some of your chums - and understand this. Sadly, it will take a shit board to come in and make you realise just what complete rubbish you have been spouting.

 

As usual, some people on here will understand, but I don't expect the idiots on here to understand, nor the KK bandwagon jumpers.

 

I'm not interested in comparing us to Spurs and their fcuking "planning" BTW, give me Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger as manager instead anyday.

 

 

I want to bring issue with this comment that you consistently bring up Leazes. Now, I have to say I agree with a fair amount of what you say, that consistent qualifying for European competition is a indictation of the club doing fairly well, and that changing things won't necessarily bring about success, but as for using the purchasing of "major" England internationals as some sort of gauge of success is wide of the mark. Firstly, considering the national teams recent performances in the finals of major competitions that signing these useless feckers wouldn't seem to be the most successful of strategies.

 

Secondly, and most importantly, is that these players usually bear ridiculously high price tags, way way out of proportion with their actual ability. They also usually carry delusions of their own abilities, built up by this nations media.

 

Personally I'd prefer to see the signing of lesser known talented individuals that have been scouted and identified to improve the squads ability, for example N'Zogbia, Krul. Admittedly we can't just sign young players, we do need experience, but it is possible to create an effective side from lesser known players, and some would argue you'd have a better team because of it.

 

The reference to "England players" denotes by implication "quality players", as in the past when we had quality players we sold them, due to having a shit board who created such a shit club that they all saw their futures elsewhere, and the shit board was happy to take the money, look for replacements in the lower leagues and use the rest to either build a stand or keep the club solvent. Instead of showing ambition and trying to attract supporters and fill the ground and play in europe.

 

However, I take your point, which is that more foreigners are playing in the top league now and so there are many more quality players than just the English ones.

 

Scouting younger players is an admirable and worthy concept, I agree with you, of course I do, but spotting and developing these players is the difficult part. We have tried this approach but most of them either fail through not being good enough, not developing enough, or have the wrong attitude and not enough desire to succeed. I don't look on this as a failing of the club though, because this happens at most clubs.

 

The Leeds side under Don Revie was successful and was built on a platform of young players who all came through together. The ManU side that won the European Cup in 1999 was the same. The Everton team who won the League, Cup Winners Cup and may have had a shout in the European Cup if not for the ban was also composed of a lot of youth players who come through together.

 

I think that this is not the normal thing though, it is quite rare, and however good a scouting network you have, is probably almost lucky that all of this falls into place.

 

We won the FA Youth Cup in 1985, and only Gazza came through and played at the top level. Joe Allon had the next half decent career but spent most of his career in the lower leagues. Brian Tinnion too.

 

To be fair, Taylor is coming through, you mention Zoggy having been spotted and brought in, add [hopefully] Edgar to that list who most of us think has promise, Given who was brought in as a young keeper, and that is 4 players who could be first team regulars, and good quality ones, in a years time if Edgar steps up.

 

Lastly, England performance in competitions lately has been better than in the past. After losing in Mexico in 1970 they didn't qualify for either the 1974 or the 1978 Finals. If anything, I would say the best England team in the last 20 years was the 1990 team with the 3 ex NUFC players all playing a major part in it. It was certainly the best run on paper ie reaching the Semi Final and with a bit of luck could have made the Final.

 

Why don't you see it as a failure of the club. I don't know the stats but our inability in the recent past to develop young talent has been woeful.

 

Oh and Shay was an established well nown keeper when we bought him

[LeazesMag 0]

Baggio, see the quote you made here

 

As I've said Leazes, we should look at how [four] other clubs have gone about building better squads than us without having to go into debt to do so, it really is that simple.

 

you missed an important word - I've put it in brackets for you.

 

Without mentioning the debts that Chelsea and Liverpools new owners inherited, and manures now have, and Arsenals also now have.

 

 

Hey - but keep making things up

 

Tell you what mate, you may use Spurs as your yardstick, which is a bit odd anyway, but I wouldn't swap our club for theirs, or their last decade for ours, would you ?

 

As per usual Leazes you're twisting things in your own childish way, you add a word to my post so that you can argue about it even though you put it there.

 

I'll try and explain it to you so you don't get to confused.

Arsenal and Spurs have better squads than us, they've built these squads without having to go into debt to do so (ie not borrowing to fund player transfers, understand?) they've done it by using a DOF to spot bargain players and help set up a top class scouting network, I think we should do the same.

 

It isn't hard to get your head around.

 

You speak about Chelsea having debt when Abramovich took over but they did exactly the same as us, borrowed money to fund player transfers, it came out after that if Abramovich hadn't bought the club when he did they would have gone into administration. did you think Ken Bates was a good chairman?

 

As usual, you whinge on about a few clubs that have done better than us. That is all. A few clubs, not dozens, or more, a few.

 

Everybody wants to match these clubs. We have came closer than most. We all want to match them. In your naive desperation to match them, you make things up and overstate the "failure" of your own club, which the vast majority of other fans would like to have matched, and completely fail to grasp that you actually support a good club, one of the best, such is the modern NUFC fan - like you - who whinge on like bairns that qualifying for europe and buying major England players is "shit".

 

You should give yourself a good shake mate - and some of your chums - and understand this. Sadly, it will take a shit board to come in and make you realise just what complete rubbish you have been spouting.

 

As usual, some people on here will understand, but I don't expect the idiots on here to understand, nor the KK bandwagon jumpers.

 

I'm not interested in comparing us to Spurs and their fcuking "planning" BTW, give me Alex Ferguson or Arsene Wenger as manager instead anyday.

 

 

I want to bring issue with this comment that you consistently bring up Leazes. Now, I have to say I agree with a fair amount of what you say, that consistent qualifying for European competition is a indictation of the club doing fairly well, and that changing things won't necessarily bring about success, but as for using the purchasing of "major" England internationals as some sort of gauge of success is wide of the mark. Firstly, considering the national teams recent performances in the finals of major competitions that signing these useless feckers wouldn't seem to be the most successful of strategies.

 

Secondly, and most importantly, is that these players usually bear ridiculously high price tags, way way out of proportion with their actual ability. They also usually carry delusions of their own abilities, built up by this nations media.

 

Personally I'd prefer to see the signing of lesser known talented individuals that have been scouted and identified to improve the squads ability, for example N'Zogbia, Krul. Admittedly we can't just sign young players, we do need experience, but it is possible to create an effective side from lesser known players, and some would argue you'd have a better team because of it.

 

The reference to "England players" denotes by implication "quality players", as in the past when we had quality players we sold them, due to having a shit board who created such a shit club that they all saw their futures elsewhere, and the shit board was happy to take the money, look for replacements in the lower leagues and use the rest to either build a stand or keep the club solvent. Instead of showing ambition and trying to attract supporters and fill the ground and play in europe.

 

However, I take your point, which is that more foreigners are playing in the top league now and so there are many more quality players than just the English ones.

 

Scouting younger players is an admirable and worthy concept, I agree with you, of course I do, but spotting and developing these players is the difficult part. We have tried this approach but most of them either fail through not being good enough, not developing enough, or have the wrong attitude and not enough desire to succeed. I don't look on this as a failing of the club though, because this happens at most clubs.

 

The Leeds side under Don Revie was successful and was built on a platform of young players who all came through together. The ManU side that won the European Cup in 1999 was the same. The Everton team who won the League, Cup Winners Cup and may have had a shout in the European Cup if not for the ban was also composed of a lot of youth players who come through together.

 

I think that this is not the normal thing though, it is quite rare, and however good a scouting network you have, is probably almost lucky that all of this falls into place.

 

We won the FA Youth Cup in 1985, and only Gazza came through and played at the top level. Joe Allon had the next half decent career but spent most of his career in the lower leagues. Brian Tinnion too.

 

To be fair, Taylor is coming through, you mention Zoggy having been spotted and brought in, add [hopefully] Edgar to that list who most of us think has promise, Given who was brought in as a young keeper, and that is 4 players who could be first team regulars, and good quality ones, in a years time if Edgar steps up.

 

Lastly, England performance in competitions lately has been better than in the past. After losing in Mexico in 1970 they didn't qualify for either the 1974 or the 1978 Finals. If anything, I would say the best England team in the last 20 years was the 1990 team with the 3 ex NUFC players all playing a major part in it. It was certainly the best run on paper ie reaching the Semi Final and with a bit of luck could have made the Final.

 

Why don't you see it as a failure of the club. I don't know the stats but our inability in the recent past to develop young talent has been woeful.

 

Oh and Shay was an established well nown keeper when we bought him

 

why don't I see it as a failure of the club ? Why is it a failure, when it is very rare that this happens, how many clubs exactly fail in this area ? We don't produce any less good youngsters than the vast majority of other clubs, to say anything else is just making things up, but that is common on here.

 

Why is it also, that people on here, appear to think that every club has a youth policy, or a "plan", and we don't, when we qualify for europe etc more than the vast majority of these clubs ?

 

Definitely not in keeping with such an intelligent group of people, to be so illogical ........

 

BTW, Given was Blackburns reserve Keeper. The only run in a first team that he had had, was a short spell on loan at sunderland.

Edited March 13, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Baggio 0]

Given was 21 and already an ROI International when we signed him, don't think we can take credit for bringing him through tbh.

[Baggio 0]

I can see West Ham staying up, they're a team in form where as Sheff Utd and Wigan are struggling.

[Papa Lazaru 0]

I can see West Ham staying up, they're a team in form where as Sheff Utd and Wigan are struggling.

 

Very possible, especially if West Ham beat Sheff utd next game. Plus West Ham have in Tevez (now he's found some form) a genuine goal scorer that the other teams down there mightn't have.

[Baggio 0]

better than Fred and our current board ?

 

They took over the club and had a "plan", so they obviously are ........

 

 

I'll tell you what, if this new West Ham board didn't come in they would have been down this season.

 

Well done to the new West Ham board!

[Renton 21983]

better than Fred and our current board ?

 

They took over the club and had a "plan", so they obviously are ........

 

 

I'll tell you what, if this new West Ham board didn't come in they would have been down this season.

 

Well done to the new West Ham board!

 

We finished 2 points above West Ham.

[LeazesMag 0]

And sadly, you can't argue with that

 

Leazes can, and will.

 

You were right.

 

It really is a waste of time and effort replying to him.

 

i just spent a few minutes composing a post and then realised better.

 

so you wanted them replaced, and automatically presumed any replacements would be better ?

[LeazesMag 0]

You wouldn't be ridiculed so much if you addressed people's points a bit more. I don't think you actually addressed one of the ones Baggio was making there Leazes. It's as though the only alternatives are: don't criticise the board or support another team. It's not even as though I think you actually believe that.

 

I've addressed Baggios comments before, and I'm bored with them.

 

No Leazes, you don't answer because you know I'm right, so instead you either try to laugh it off by ridiculing the point someone has made or you just go off topic to avoid the question.

 

As I told you before, the redevelopment of St James Park cost just over £40 million, so that means the other £40 million has been borrowed to fund players, more than that if you consider that the stadium was extended in 2000, payments would have to be made on that.

 

Also, what does us having a larger fan base have to do with anything? The fact that we do have a larger fanbase yet we're still falling into deeper debt is an even bigger worry.

 

As for you saying "I don't believe I have ever said the club should carry on spending money." Didn't you say on Newcastle-Online that you would be happy to spend all of our money this summer on Tevez? That to me suggests you're happy to keep spending money we don't have.

 

Also this on your forum...

 

"Darren Bent would cost a big fee, do we have it ? Whether we have it or not, I think we have to find some money somewhere."

 

http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index...?showtopic=2460

 

So more lies from you, I had to laugh at this bit though...

 

"Luke Young is an option, has he ever played left back ?"

 

Have it your way Baggio. We will stop spending money on players, go down, and then you will whinge about not spending money and really living among the also rans. Which is where we used to be before the Halls and Shepherd. Take my word for it, if you can't be arsed to look it up.

 

Can't see the problem with the question about Luke Young though, do you have a secret yearning to support Charlton because they don't spend money ?

 

is Baggio back on here as someone else these days ?

[ChezGiven 0]

He's back on NO.

[Tom 14013]

Stop bumping threads needlessly please.

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

uh oh. I see trouble a brewin'

[TicTacWoe 0]

these old threads are bringing back terrible flashbacks of Fop and Baggio. All we need is a DannyB thread to resurface.

[Kitman 2207]

these old threads are bringing back terrible flashbacks of Fop and Baggio. All we need is a DannyB thread to resurface.

 

Yes. They're about as welcome as a haemorrhoid tbh.

[trophyshy 7084]

surely you can dig up better than this shite LM?