Dazzler and Henry both use the phrase 'new manager'.
I'd just settle for a manager - because, as I have been complaining for the last four games of aimless drift, we haven't got one. Merely a stand-in, understudy, patch-and-mend, substitute, make-do, tide-us-over, here-today-gone-tomorrow caretaker.
Worst of all worlds. We desperately need a manager. In effect , we haven't had one now for seven matches - three under Pardew on borrowed time when even the tea ladies must have known he was a pretend monarch reigning over a make-believe kingdom and four under a temporary lieutenant who was never even a pretender to the crown because of his complicity in the utterly discredited ancien regime...
Comments
a win is the only thing we need we have gone over this before i think
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=21527&page=1last timethis was a tongue in cheek thread seeing the commotion it caused last time the question was asked
http://www.charltonlife.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=21527&page=1
As nonsensical a question as it was when you first asked it. No matter who is the boss it is better for the team to win that to lose.
For all their faults one result isn't going to swing the board one way or the other.
Even if he is in charge and wins it i will want a new manager one with heart so couldn't care less!
as I said, a tongue firmly in cheek thread.
I'd just settle for a manager - because, as I have been complaining for the last four games of aimless drift, we haven't got one. Merely a stand-in, understudy, patch-and-mend, substitute, make-do, tide-us-over, here-today-gone-tomorrow caretaker.
Worst of all worlds. We desperately need a manager. In effect , we haven't had one now for seven matches - three under Pardew on borrowed time when even the tea ladies must have known he was a pretend monarch reigning over a make-believe kingdom and four under a temporary lieutenant who was never even a pretender to the crown because of his complicity in the utterly discredited ancien regime...