Has SB made anything up? What he's posted is hearsay by his own admission.
Which is the same as about 90% of the other posts on the thread.
Except in his first post of August 8th (quoted by Airman on the previous page) SB claims to have spoken directly to Peter Varney - but then today, in reponse to Airman, says "I simply happen to know someone who is a good friend of Peter’s"!!??
Has SB made anything up? What he's posted is hearsay by his own admission.
Which is the same as about 90% of the other posts on the thread.
Except in his first post of August 8th (quoted by Airman on the previous page) SB claims to have spoken directly to Peter Varney - but then today, in reponse to Airman, says "I simply happen to know someone who is a good friend of Peter’s"!!??
not necessarily - he could be saying the friendship isn't really his but he is an acquaintance, if you like, because of his friend friendship, not his.
Has SB made anything up? What he's posted is hearsay by his own admission.
Which is the same as about 90% of the other posts on the thread.
Except in his first post of August 8th (quoted by Airman on the previous page) SB claims to have spoken directly to Peter Varney - but then today, in reponse to Airman, says "I simply happen to know someone who is a good friend of Peter’s"!!??
not necessarily - he could be saying the friendship isn't really his but he is an acquaintance, if you like, because of his friend friendship, not his.
But in his post of August 8th SB says:
"PV is a very private person who has caused me years of endless frustration having continually refused to give me any ‘inside info’ despite my persistent attempts to extract something (anything!) from him. I do know though that - and I am sure he will not mind me saying it - that it was entirely his decision to leave the club. It has been a source of frustration for me reading otherwise on here so god knows how he would feel if he read Charlton Life!
Having spoken to him briefly just before he returned to the club he told me he planned to work around two days a week"???
I think SB is getting a bit of a hard time from a lot of people as he is not one of their chums. People are reading what they want to read from him, not what he is actually saying.
If any of what he said had come from a couple of others, we would all be wetting ourselves with these 'facts'.
He may well be, but he's hardly said anything devastating, libellous or too controversial. Surely he'd be posting far more frequently if he wanted to stir things up?
He said two members of staff are "taking action" against the Club.
If true that is a fairly big bombshell.
Airman seems to think he's a stool pigeon. I'm not sure but can see why Airman would think two such conflicting posts strange especially when they are the posters only two posts.
I think SB is getting a bit of a hard time from a lot of people as he is not one of their chums. People are reading what they want to read from him, not what he is actually saying.he is actually saying.
If any of what he said had come from a couple of others, we would all be wetting ourselves with these 'facts'.
Well neither Airman, Peter Varney or SB are among my 'chums' -
But when someone (SB August 8th) first posts that he has spoken directly to PV and implies that he has known him for 'years' - but then today, when challenged by Airman, says he has: "never claimed to be a good friend of Peter Varney’s, I simply happen to know someone who is a good friend of Peter’s" - then I can't see that questioning what he says is unfairly 'giving him a hard time' or 'reading what I want to read from him' but is quoting 'what he is actually saying'?
Comments
Which is the same as about 90% of the other posts on the thread.
"PV is a very private person who has caused me years of endless frustration having continually refused to give me any ‘inside info’ despite my persistent attempts to extract something (anything!) from him. I do know though that - and I am sure he will not mind me saying it - that it was entirely his decision to leave the club. It has been a source of frustration for me reading otherwise on here so god knows how he would feel if he read Charlton Life!
Having spoken to him briefly just before he returned to the club he told me he planned to work around two days a week"???
If any of what he said had come from a couple of others, we would all be wetting ourselves with these 'facts'.
Why is everyone trying to disect the post
He may well be, but he's hardly said anything devastating, libellous or too controversial. Surely he'd be posting far more frequently if he wanted to stir things up?
One of the "holier than thou" brigade says you're moody so you must be.
Geezers talking in riddles. Other geezers posts being dissected ad infinitum, all very boring. Must be a Friday
If true that is a fairly big bombshell.
Airman seems to think he's a stool pigeon. I'm not sure but can see why Airman would think two such conflicting posts strange especially when they are the posters only two posts.
But when someone (SB August 8th) first posts that he has spoken directly to PV and implies that he has known him for 'years' - but then today, when challenged by Airman, says he has: "never claimed to be a good friend of Peter Varney’s, I simply happen to know someone who is a good friend of Peter’s" - then I can't see that questioning what he says is unfairly 'giving him a hard time' or 'reading what I want to read from him' but is quoting 'what he is actually saying'?
I really envy your ability to do things like that.
Brilliant.
Why look at how many times somone has posted To critique what they say
All abit too secret ob for my liking
But he still calls me John.