• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Grayson v Rafa

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pukka pad said:
the same team that was bankrolled in the summer, the squad all on here said would get ripped to shreds, the same squad i was scathing of and that Benitez needed to shut the fuck up and get on with it? well he rammed that up my arse, got on with it and is proving he can operate and improve a shit squad( on paper)
Click to expand...
After 9 games

AndyH said:
Rafa spent -32 million and still got us promoted (that's minus 32 million in case you missed it)
Click to expand...
You can't spend -£32m, it's a physical impossibility. Such a thing doesn't exist.
 

Mally Mackem said:
You have waited nearly 3 months to post this.. what a pathetic person you are.. dredging up posts from 3 months ago on a Sunderland forum.
Click to expand...

It's been linked elsewhere tbh. You claim 99% of Sunderland fans would prefer to have Simon Grayson managing Sunderland than Rafa Benitez and I'm the 'pathetic person' :lol:

0321safc said:
When the mags go on an inevitable shit run over December he won't be on here.
Click to expand...

But I'm never off here? Have we always been playing well?

I could have sworn we were Rafagated less than 18 months ago. Was I 'never off here' then?
 
Sima said:
It's been linked elsewhere tbh. You claim 99% of Sunderland fans would prefer to have Simon Grayson managing Sunderland than Rafa Benitez and I'm the 'pathetic person' :lol:



But I'm never off here? Have we always been playing well?

Which one is it?
Click to expand...
Since September you've been an ever present on here, can't remember you being on as much in August, funny that.
 
TopCat said:
After 9 games


You can't spend -£32m, it's a physical impossibility. Such a thing doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

Of course you can you buffoon its a business, with accounts in which terms such as gross and net are used to define expenditure and profits.
when you calculate a clubs dealings in the transfer window you subtract the amount coming in from the amount that goes out and that gives you a net spend which is plus or minus.

Buy your rationale your team is 1.5 million in players better than last year because losing Pickford, Defoe and whoever else went is irrelevant because it only matters what you spend and not what you sell. Do you have a better team than last year you numpty?
 
AndyH said:
Of course you can you buffoon its a business, with accounts in which terms such as gross and net are used to define expenditure and profits.
when you calculate a clubs dealings in the transfer window you subtract the amount coming in from the amount that goes out and that gives you a net spend which is plus or minus.

Buy your rationale your team is 1.5 million in players better than last year because losing Pickford, Defoe and whoever else went is irrelevant because it only matters what you spend and not what you sell. Do you have a better team than last year you numpty?
Click to expand...
You stated he had spent a minus number which, in even the basic maths is impossible. You are now talking about accounting which is different and of course allows negative net spend. The point remains, he spent millions and millions on getting you promoted. How those millions were funded (through player sales, or through sponsorship and investment) is irrelevant. The way you lot go, you;d think you'd be asset stripped and "rafa" somehow conjured up promotion with a team full of free transfers and academy lads :lol::lol:

Glad my point on a different thread about you lot being easy to wind up is being evidenced here :lol:
 
Roker Mackem said:
Net spend is completely irrelevent man ya clown.

He is just given money (unlimited in this case) and gets who he wants.
Click to expand...
No he hasn't, he has had no money, he has had to make do with what is there, sell before he can buy. He wouldn't to bring more in during the last window but he couldn't because he couldn't sell the ones he wanted.

If kone is sold in the coming transfer window for 3 million and Grayson is allowed to bring in someone else at a cost of 3 million has the manager been given money to improve the team?
 
AndyH said:
No he hasn't, he has had no money, he has had to make do with what is there, sell before he can buy. He wouldn't to bring more in during the last window but he couldn't because he couldn't sell the ones he wanted.

If kone is sold in the coming transfer window for 3 million and Grayson is allowed to bring in someone else at a cost of 3 million has the manager been given money to improve the team?
Click to expand...

Yes. He'll have been given 3 million, you f***ing idiot.
 
TopCat said:
You stated he had spent a minus number which, in even the basic maths is impossible. You are now talking about accounting which is different and of course allows negative net spend. The point remains, he spent millions and millions on getting you promoted. How those millions were funded (through player sales, or through sponsorship and investment) is irrelevant. The way you lot go, you;d think you'd be asset stripped and "rafa" somehow conjured up promotion with a team full of free transfers and academy lads :lol::lol:

Glad my point on a different thread about you lot being easy to wind up is being evidenced here :lol:
Click to expand...

seriously?
You surely can not be this fuckin' stupid?
How is it irrelevant how the money is funded?
If you fund the sales through investment or sponsorship you are improving the side buy that sum, if you do it through player sales then you are not improving the team buy that sum.

Barcelona buy Perez for 10 million they have improved the squad (granted not by much) by the sum of 10 million
Barcelona sell Messi for 200 million and buy Perez for 10 million

Is the fact that they no longer have Messi irrelevant you plonker?
 
AndyH said:
seriously?
You surely can not be this fuckin' stupid?
How is it irrelevant how the money is funded?
If you fund the sales through investment or sponsorship you are improving the side buy that sum, if you do it through player sales then you are not improving the team buy that sum.

Barcelona buy Perez for 10 million they have improved the squad (granted not by much) by the sum of 10 million
Barcelona sell Messi for 200 million and buy Perez for 10 million

Is the fact that they no longer have Messi irrelevant you plonker?
Click to expand...
When you are talking about how much has been spent on transfers it is irrelevant how it was funded. You are trying to make it appear as though Rafa is a genius in getting you promoted on a show string when the opposite is in fact true.

Again, thanks for making my point about how easy you lot are to wind up :lol::lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top