Richard Murray appears a straightforward and sincere man, I think supporters just have to show a little patience and the right decision will be made and hopefully very soon
Have a quess who posted this on the last day of last year.
[cite]Posted By: Addickted[/cite]I love the self serving smug posts that can be produced when you have the great ability of hindsight.
You have to put your trust in people sometimes - and the men who ran my football club seemed to be doing EVERYTHING right from the moment they took over. I quite happily put my faith in them when things started to go wrong - because I believed they were aware of their errors and could rectify them - or at least put us back on an even footing.
I may have been a fool to have thought that and certainly some of the recent rumblings seem to indicate that I (and several others) have seen things with rose tinted spectacles. But I'm an optimist. Always have been.
OK, so you've 'told me so'. But please show some humility and stop having a dig at people on here for attempting to put positive spin on certain situations. After all these people love the Club - just like the Board - and are part of everything thatcan be'right' about CAFC.
Brilliant.
There are people out there who seem to want us to be trouble so thay can say 'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'
Sailor Browneye is a longtime, if infrequent of late, poster dating back to netaddicks days.
He has been questioning if not critical of the Board since the time Curbishley left or thereabouts and a search of the archives will bear that out. So he is hardly saying ....'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'.....but rather being entirely consistent with previously expressed views.
Those views may not "toe the party line" but I thought this was meant to be a forum for debate.
Richard Murray appears a straightforward and sincere man, I think supporters just have to show a little patience and the right decision will be made and hopefully very soon
Have a quess who posted this on the last day of last year.
Oh, I did - the day before, or on the day itself prior to the announcement, that PP was appointed as the 'best man' to lead us out of our relegation position.
Thanks Addickted for that. Proof there are no agendas and people are given more than enough time to make good decisions - eventually.
Pardew was sacked too late and there we were so many of us believing that Murray couldn't make another howler in the 'strategic review'.
But we know that happened next...you want to take up the story of the past six months??
If my post above isn't clear enough and as Addickted is trying to take things out of context - quite how low can some people on here go - I was saying that PP could not and would not be appointed by Murray.
He couldn't do that to us in essence. After the previous mistakes, surely the Board would have to find the money for a new manager. i was trying, albeit with difficulty, to believe our failing Board wouldn't shaft us again. But within hours, PP was our man.
Care to find my post where I say how shocked and disappointed I was after PP was appointed Addickted???
[quote][cite]Posted By: Sailor Browneye[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]We are a broad church and always will be, that's one of the things I love best.[/quote]
I’ve heard a rumour that, sadly, the Murray Evangelicals are about to be excommunicated.
I was passing their shiny, ambitious church this morning and there was just one person in there.
A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to the delightful little shrine of St Richard the Spinner. He had lit a candle and was holding a tiny effigy in his big hands sobbing, ’How could you do this to me! How could you do this to me!’
I was going to comfort the poor creature but I had to rush off as on Monday mornings Ooh Aah, Len and I lay fresh flowers at the tomb of Llewellyn the Great.
It used to be a fairly quiet place but just recently it’s been getting busier.
I said to the Warden if there were plans for expanding the public area to deal with the unexpected influx of new worshippers. He just smiled sheepishly and said ‘praps’.
[cite]Posted By: Sailor Browneye[/cite] Pardew was sacked too late and there we were so many of us believing that Murray couldn't make another howler in the 'strategic review'.
Can't disagree with that - indeed I felt your posts on him were insightful and accurate at the time. I thought that the 'strategic review' or 'pick a card' as you would probably prefer to call it, was a sensible idea at the time. But then I don't know the ins and outs of running a professional football club and of course I don't have that wonderful ability called hindsight.
[cite]Posted By: Sailor Browneye[/cite] But we know that happened next...you want to take up the story of the past six months??
I'm sure you can do that much more eloquently than me. I have far more important things going on in my life and my friend's lifes without going into in depth post mortems of what a disasterous last six months at my club. I can always read your (all too) infrequent posts to tell me as it is.
Still, I'll be in Bray on wednesday, supporting the Club in the best way I know how.
[cite]Posted By: Addickted[/cite]I love the self serving smug posts that can be produced when you have the great ability of hindsight.
You have to put your trust in people sometimes - and the men who ran my football club seemed to be doing EVERYTHING right from the moment they took over. I quite happily put my faith in them when things started to go wrong - because I believed they were aware of their errors and could rectify them - or at least put us back on an even footing.
I may have been a fool to have thought that and certainly some of the recent rumblings seem to indicate that I (and several others) have seen things with rose tinted spectacles. But I'm an optimist. Always have been.
OK, so you've 'told me so'. But please show some humility and stop having a dig at people on here for attempting to put positive spin on certain situations. After all these people love the Club - just like the Board - and are part of everything thatcan be'right' about CAFC.
Brilliant.
There are people out there who seem to want us to be trouble so thay can say 'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'
Sailor Browneye is a longtime, if infrequent of late, poster dating back to netaddicks days.
He has been questioning if not critical of the Board since the time Curbishley left or thereabouts and a search of the archives will bear that out. So he is hardly saying ....'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'.....but rather being entirely consistent with previously expressed views.
Those views may not "toe the party line" but I thought this was meant to be a forum for debate.
Thanks for that Len. Now that I am having to justify my right to an opinion on here (sadly it didn't take long), your open support is much appreciated.
[cite]Posted By: stilladdicted[/cite]We are a broad church and always will be, that's one of the things I love best.
I’ve heard a rumour that, sadly, the Murray Evangelicals are about to be excommunicated.
I was passing their shiny, ambitious church this morning and there was just one person in there.
A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to the delightful little shrine of St Richard the Spinner. He had lit a candle and was holding a tiny effigy in his big hands sobbing, ’How could you do this to me! How could you do this to me!’
I was going to comfort the poor creature but I had to rush off as on Monday mornings Ooh Aah, Len and I lay fresh flowers at the tomb of Llewellyn the Great.
It used to be a fairly quiet place but just recently it’s been getting busier.
I said to the Warden if there were plans for expanding the public area to deal with the unexpected influx of new worshippers. He just smiled sheepishly and said ‘praps’.
[cite]Posted By: Addickted[/cite]I love the self serving smug posts that can be produced when you have the great ability of hindsight.
You have to put your trust in people sometimes - and the men who ran my football club seemed to be doing EVERYTHING right from the moment they took over. I quite happily put my faith in them when things started to go wrong - because I believed they were aware of their errors and could rectify them - or at least put us back on an even footing.
I may have been a fool to have thought that and certainly some of the recent rumblings seem to indicate that I (and several others) have seen things with rose tinted spectacles. But I'm an optimist. Always have been.
OK, so you've 'told me so'. But please show some humility and stop having a dig at people on here for attempting to put positive spin on certain situations. After all these people love the Club - just like the Board - and are part of everything thatcan be'right' about CAFC.
Brilliant.
There are people out there who seem to want us to be trouble so thay can say 'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'
Sailor Browneye is a longtime, if infrequent of late, poster dating back to netaddicks days.
He has been questioning if not critical of the Board since the time Curbishley left or thereabouts and a search of the archives will bear that out. So he is hardly saying ....'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'.....but rather being entirely consistent with previously expressed views.
Those views may not "toe the party line" but I thought this was meant to be a forum for debate.
I am not part of any party and have not tried to stop debate. If there is a 'them and us' on this forum I vote neither. That does not stop me from saying what I feel about a negative post though does it?
am not part of any party and have not tried to stop debate. If there is a 'them and us' on this forum I vote neither. That does not stop me from saying what I feel about a negative post though does it?
........
Dude, this is the way that people like sailor brown-eye try and debate, you argue against their moronic rantings and you get accused of being part of the problem/being too pro-the board or whatever, don't expect a reasoned analysis of the problem, or logic or anything to back up a line of debate, you can though expect the type of stuff that you'd see in a playground from him though...
We've had plenty of people who come on here with agendas in the past and have uncovered another, once you get past the emotive rantings they have little or nothing of any substantive value to add...
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]am not part of any party and have not tried to stop debate. If there is a 'them and us' on this forum I vote neither. That does not stop me from saying what I feel about a negative post though does it?
........
Dude, this is the way that people like sailor brown-eye try and debate, you argue against their moronic rantings and you get accused of being part of the problem/being too pro-the board or whatever, don't expect a reasoned analysis of the problem, or logic or anything to back up a line of debate, you can though expect the type of stuff that you'd see in a playground from him though...
We've had plenty of people who come on here with agendas in the past and have uncovered another, once you get past the emotive rantings they have little or nothing of any substantive value to add...
I should add that yesterday - if you look at one of the threads sailor brown-eye was likening Richard Murray to Peter Risdale, something he was unable to back up when questioned about it.
But typical of his ill-informed malicious nonsense. I note he hasn't repeated that claim...
But then again he's in Len Glover speak only "expressing an opinion"...
No problem with your posts Sailor - until you get into slagging off other posters with that shining whit of yours - then justifying it with a couple of smilies at the end.
Sorry, I can't find your anti Parkinson (or Parky as you so frequently call him) post in the search engine, though your posts on both his and Pardews loan signings are very accurate.
[quote][cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]am not part of any party and have not tried to stop debate. If there is a 'them and us' on this forum I vote neither. That does not stop me from saying what I feel about a negative post though does it?
........
Dude, this is the way that people like sailor brown-eye try and debate, you argue against their moronic rantings and you get accused of being part of the problem/being too pro-the board or whatever, don't expect a reasoned analysis of the problem, or logic or anything to back up a line of debate, you can though expect the type of stuff that you'd see in a playground from him though...
We've had plenty of people who come on here with agendas in the past and have uncovered another, once you get past the emotive rantings they have little or nothing of any substantive value to add...[/quote]
People in glasshouses....[/quote]
Nope...I am capable of backing up any argument with facts pal...
Nick Gray, if that is his real name has been waging a war with Richard Murray and the board for several years now on the OS and other message boards. Which he is entitled to do. He has an identity and an agenda. Many people on here have expressed the view that he is been unreasobale and vindictive. If people knew that the posting that started this thread was written by Nick Gray it would have triggered a very different response. Because we all know Nick Gray has an agenda.
Nick Gray has every right to post his agenda on this forum. But if he does, without identifying himself as the same person who has been very public about his views on Murray and the board for the last few years, he is being disingenuous to say the least. We have every right to ask whether or not he is Nick Gray.
does it matter who the points are made by in the end,if they are valid or not they are there to be debated and shot down if need be rather than focusing on who has posted such opinions that may or may not differ from their own?
[quote][cite]Posted By: Miserableold-ish git[/cite]As a newbie(ish) to this Nick Gray: 1). What IS his agenda / 2). Why is he so anti Murray/Board ?[/quote]
To answer your questions:
1) You have to ask what his agenda is?! Really? 2) Because he's a twat.
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]
Nope...I am capable of backing up any argument with facts pal...
BFR, you are also equally capable of being rude to people with opposing views to you. By doing so, it discourages those holding the differing views to reason their argument, or bother posting at all.
Please, just take a step back at times and think of the implications before verbally bashing into someone. As soon as that happens, that's the end of the decent debate and it shortly descends into squabbling. Addickted held a different view to Sailor, but showed he can make a point without being rude or argumentative.
It makes healthy debate that people hold differing views. To maintain that balance, it needs people to be a bit respectful when disagreeing.
Comments
Hold the front page!!!
No, sadly, I'm not him.
Writing for a living tho...nah...it'll never catch on...
Have a quess who posted this on the last day of last year.
Sailor Browneye is a longtime, if infrequent of late, poster dating back to netaddicks days.
He has been questioning if not critical of the Board since the time Curbishley left or thereabouts and a search of the archives will bear that out. So he is hardly saying ....'aren't I clever, told you so, blimey why couldn't anyone else see this coming'.....but rather being entirely consistent with previously expressed views.
Those views may not "toe the party line" but I thought this was meant to be a forum for debate.
Oh, I did - the day before, or on the day itself prior to the announcement, that PP was appointed as the 'best man' to lead us out of our relegation position.
Thanks Addickted for that. Proof there are no agendas and people are given more than enough time to make good decisions - eventually.
Pardew was sacked too late and there we were so many of us believing that Murray couldn't make another howler in the 'strategic review'.
But we know that happened next...you want to take up the story of the past six months??
Thanks for that mate.
He couldn't do that to us in essence. After the previous mistakes, surely the Board would have to find the money for a new manager. i was trying, albeit with difficulty, to believe our failing Board wouldn't shaft us again. But within hours, PP was our man.
Care to find my post where I say how shocked and disappointed I was after PP was appointed Addickted???
No, thought not.
I’ve heard a rumour that, sadly, the Murray Evangelicals are about to be excommunicated.
I was passing their shiny, ambitious church this morning and there was just one person in there.
A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to the delightful little shrine of St Richard the Spinner. He had lit a candle and was holding a tiny effigy in his big hands sobbing, ’How could you do this to me! How could you do this to me!’
I was going to comfort the poor creature but I had to rush off as on Monday mornings Ooh Aah, Len and I lay fresh flowers at the tomb of Llewellyn the Great.
It used to be a fairly quiet place but just recently it’s been getting busier.
I said to the Warden if there were plans for expanding the public area to deal with the unexpected influx of new worshippers. He just smiled sheepishly and said ‘praps’.
;-)
(only joshing)[/quote]
You talk a lot of shite pal...
Now what's your agenda?
Can't disagree with that - indeed I felt your posts on him were insightful and accurate at the time. I thought that the 'strategic review' or 'pick a card' as you would probably prefer to call it, was a sensible idea at the time. But then I don't know the ins and outs of running a professional football club and of course I don't have that wonderful ability called hindsight.
I'm sure you can do that much more eloquently than me. I have far more important things going on in my life and my friend's lifes without going into in depth post mortems of what a disasterous last six months at my club. I can always read your (all too) infrequent posts to tell me as it is.
Still, I'll be in Bray on wednesday, supporting the Club in the best way I know how.
Thanks for that Len. Now that I am having to justify my right to an opinion on here (sadly it didn't take long), your open support is much appreciated.
Expressing his opinion like you, I and others.
..........
Hmmm someone who slags off the board at every twist and turn is "expressing an opinion"?
And someone who slags off any/everyone who disagrees with him all the stuff about St Richard etc?
Maybe, maybe not...
I am not part of any party and have not tried to stop debate. If there is a 'them and us' on this forum I vote neither. That does not stop me from saying what I feel about a negative post though does it?
Equally it does not stop me from informing on background which may set that ngative post in to a context you may not have been aware of.
........
Dude, this is the way that people like sailor brown-eye try and debate, you argue against their moronic rantings and you get accused of being part of the problem/being too pro-the board or whatever, don't expect a reasoned analysis of the problem, or logic or anything to back up a line of debate, you can though expect the type of stuff that you'd see in a playground from him though...
We've had plenty of people who come on here with agendas in the past and have uncovered another, once you get past the emotive rantings they have little or nothing of any substantive value to add...
People in glasshouses....
But typical of his ill-informed malicious nonsense. I note he hasn't repeated that claim...
But then again he's in Len Glover speak only "expressing an opinion"...
No problem with your posts Sailor - until you get into slagging off other posters with that shining whit of yours - then justifying it with a couple of smilies at the end.
Sorry, I can't find your anti Parkinson (or Parky as you so frequently call him) post in the search engine, though your posts on both his and Pardews loan signings are very accurate.
........
Dude, this is the way that people like sailor brown-eye try and debate, you argue against their moronic rantings and you get accused of being part of the problem/being too pro-the board or whatever, don't expect a reasoned analysis of the problem, or logic or anything to back up a line of debate, you can though expect the type of stuff that you'd see in a playground from him though...
We've had plenty of people who come on here with agendas in the past and have uncovered another, once you get past the emotive rantings they have little or nothing of any substantive value to add...[/quote]
People in glasshouses....[/quote]
Nope...I am capable of backing up any argument with facts pal...
Nick Gray has every right to post his agenda on this forum. But if he does, without identifying himself as the same person who has been very public about his views on Murray and the board for the last few years, he is being disingenuous to say the least. We have every right to ask whether or not he is Nick Gray.
1). What IS his agenda /
2). Why is he so anti Murray/Board ?
A few moments ago he was posting merrily away, he gets called out and disappears...
Come back mate, Len Glover is missing you...
1). What IS his agenda /
2). Why is he so anti Murray/Board ?[/quote]
To answer your questions:
1) You have to ask what his agenda is?! Really?
2) Because he's a twat.
BFR, you are also equally capable of being rude to people with opposing views to you. By doing so, it discourages those holding the differing views to reason their argument, or bother posting at all.
Please, just take a step back at times and think of the implications before verbally bashing into someone. As soon as that happens, that's the end of the decent debate and it shortly descends into squabbling. Addickted held a different view to Sailor, but showed he can make a point without being rude or argumentative.
It makes healthy debate that people hold differing views. To maintain that balance, it needs people to be a bit respectful when disagreeing.
That actually goes for every one of us.
Okay, I'll rephrase that question.
Why has He got this agenda, what is the point he is trying to prove ?
Has he had a personal row with Mr.Murray, or someone else on the Board ?