Next time Stewie comes out of hiding...



The OP said he'd had 2 promotions in 16 years at this level to show how poor a choice he was. This is completely untrue - he's had 2 promotions, 2 play offs and some occasions where he's saved clubs from relegation in about 6 or 7 seasons at this level. Fair enough you can be underwhelmed but when you start to make things up and basically lie about his managerial achievements as the OP has you totally negate the point you are making. Not one of the managers linked could be labelled as a safe bet for promotion and I'm not sure who has said this. Reading Donald's press release he didn't say was a safe bet for promotion just that he had a good track record, which I think, compared to the others linked, he has. Who said that he's 'a safe bet for promotion'?
he certainly has a better track record than phillips or ainsworth..and probably than stendel. those are simply facts.
I'm sure they'll find a way to recoup.
im sure..as the next owner will want to as well..
 
and who is the reason behind there being no debt?
the external debt was cleared with the para money..after ellis took a loan from SBC to create it..
the reason there is no new external debt is because a) the new owners have run the club better from a financial point of view and reduced the losses...and b) covered anything esle themselves..
 
Look marra, I don't trust them. Their one season gamble didn't work. They used money belonging to the club to pay Short. I don't wish them ill. I've never threatene anyone. I just want the best for my club.

It does seem that when Donald goes quiet you reappear.
they didnt use money belonging to th club to pay short. they used it to pay SBC..that is, to clear a club debt. excpet for £10m that went to short..and has been repaid back into the club.
they work for free at safc every day..while most chairman and directors take a wage.they have fucked some stuff up royally..but the lies on here are revolting. they were offered the chance to port the debt, which would instantly havd made them very rich, that is, on day one, and chose not to, thats what makes me trust them..they turned down an immediate fortune.
they never intended to sell after one season and leave..as evidenced by the fact they tunred down the chance to do it repreatedly.
 
they didnt use money belonging to th club to pay short. they used it to pay SBC..that is, to clear a club debt. excpet for £10m that went to short..and has been repaid back into the club.
they work for free at safc every day..while most chairman and directors take a wage.they have fucked some stuff up royally..but the lies on here are revolting. they were offered the chance to port the debt, which would instantly havd made them very rich, that is, on day one, and chose not to, thats what makes me trust them..they turned down an immediate fortune.
they never intended to sell after one season and leave..as evidenced by the fact they tunred down the chance to do it repreatedly.
So you say.

The 10m that went to short has been paid back into the club? From who?
 
I’m amazed at Parkinson getting battered already.
He’s been here a few days, yes we were dog shit yesterday, same as we were prev games.
Give him time to get a system going and confidence in his players, he may have to get them fit first.
His first view of his team in action yesterday will have have shown him what’s wrong and who is being carried.
Some on here would have sacked him at half time.

He was getting a battering before we even knew he was being picked for the job. It started when fans heard he was one of five shortlisted and hasn't abated. He's here now so we need to give him time as he won't be leaving any time soon but the battering isn't a recent thing and hardly surprising when so many fans were so vehemently against his appointment. Giving him the job was always going to be a risk, his style of football certainly won't help him either
 
you know a little too much for my liking, none of this information seems to be public knowledge.
it is. it was in the times article revealing the potential investment by MSD...people just read what suits their agenda..the article said he dd the inital £5m to ellis..which we knew and "more than twice that since then"
 
He was getting a battering before we even knew he was being picked for the job. It started when fans heard he was one of five shortlisted and hasn't abated. He's here now so we need to give him time as he won't be leaving any time soon but the battering isn't a recent thing and hardly surprising when so many fans were so vehemently against his appointment. Giving him the job was always going to be a risk, his style of football certainly won't help him either

If the owners had any sense they'd have listened and responded to the fan reaction by retracting the job offer. You can't imagine for a moment they didn't see/hear the criticisms and very justifiable frustration which was almost unanimous.

Makes the idea it was given to him solely based on the fact he was the cheapest option all the more believable.
 
If the owners had any sense they'd have listened and responded to the fan reaction by retracting the job offer. You can't imagine for a moment they didn't see/hear the criticisms and very justifiable frustration which was almost unanimous.

Makes the idea it was given to him solely based on the fact he was the cheapest option all the more believable.

where was this transfer budget in the summer they said we would have?
 
If the owners had any sense they'd have listened and responded to the fan reaction by retracting the job offer. You can't imagine for a moment they didn't see/hear the criticisms and very justifiable frustration which was almost unanimous.

Makes the idea it was given to him solely based on the fact he was the cheapest option all the more believable.
they cant deode what to do based on the reactio n of fans..many of whom are making stuffup about paerkinson anyway!
where was this transfer budget in the summer they said we would have?
spoent on footballers...
 
they cant deode what to do based on the reactio n of fans..many of whom are making stuffup about paerkinson anyway!

They've made a rod for their own, and his back, by appointing him when he was obviously so unpopular. They appointed him because he was cheap....clear as day.

You keep saying you criticize them all the time but in really struggling to find examples of it. Every argument against them you pipe up to tell us how great they are or make excuses.

Except for the period where you conveniently disappeared.
 

Back
Top