[Archived] Players v venkys puppets

[ABBEY]

After listening to radio Agnew last night i, I think it's time for someone somewhere to have the gonads and tell the fans the truth over contracts....

ARE THE PLAYERS LYING ? Are : have there not been players not played due to clauses??

Cryer, nicko and Andy Bayes are you nosy and investigate media people or puppets?!

The truth is out there.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

After listening to radio Agnew last night i, I think it's time for someone somewhere to have the gonads and tell the fans the truth over contracts....

ARE THE PLAYERS LYING ? Are : have there not been players not played due to clauses??

Cryer, nicko and Andy Bayes are you nosy and investigate media people or puppets?!

The truth is out there.

I have a vague recollection of Kean mentioning contractual problems for certain players not playing - Roberts was one, can't remember if Salgado was the other.

Didn't hear the specific question - but at the moment he is possibly right that that Orr and Lowe are ahead of Salgado. However, to spin the question to suit his own agenda is very disrespectful to Salgado - even though age has caught up with him, has always given a 100% to the club. To be honest, I think he has been a tremendous ambassador for the club in his time with us.

[Mattyblue]

Salgado himself said it was a contract issue.

Now he's always come across as a decent bloke, so it's up to you who you believe...

[braddock]

So what you're hoping for is the players to turn against the owners and start coming out with unsettling statements just so you can feel vindicated and the oh so special fans get to know what's going on with every players contract?

I'd rather we just concentrate on survival till the Summer, then start digging.

[ABBEY]

NOONE ASKED YOU!

[braddock]

It's a valid point though.

[DE.]

Thing is Braddock, whilst you actually do post some valid points and have a good posting style... as long as you have that avatar and signature you're always going to be considered a WUM. If you're serious about posting on here on a semi-regular basis and contributing properly why don't you change your avatar & sig, and stop ripping on the fans.

You clearly have the capacity for rational debate, but nobody will take you seriously until you change the above. Until then you'll just be considered an irritation.

[braddock]

Thing is Braddock, whilst you actually do post some valid points and have a good posting style... as long as you have that avatar and signature you're always going to be considered a WUM. If you're serious about posting on here on a semi-regular basis and contributing properly why don't you change your avatar & sig, and stop ripping on the fans.

You clearly have the capacity for rational debate, but nobody will take you seriously until you change the above. Until then you'll just be considered an irritation.

Prejudiced against my profiles appearance and that's where the problem stems?

How surprising.

[Al]

Thing is Braddock, whilst you actually do post some valid points and have a good posting style... as long as you have that avatar and signature you're always going to be considered a WUM. If you're serious about posting on here on a semi-regular basis and contributing properly why don't you change your avatar & sig, and stop ripping on the fans.

You clearly have the capacity for rational debate, but nobody will take you seriously until you change the above. Until then you'll just be considered an irritation.

Put him/her on ignore. It's very satisfying.

[Mattyblue]

Prejudiced against my profiles appearance and that's where the problem stems?

How surprising.

Prejudice against avatars, the forgotten bigotry.

[braddock]

Prejudice against avatars, the forgotten bigotry.

It's massive.

[The_Expert]

It's massive.

The trouble is your posts just cause noise that gets in the way of the serious points that concerned fans are trying to make. Until you learn to use these forums in a dignified and positive way to support argument rather than to provoke or undermine it, then no one is going to treat anything you write with anything other than the contempt it deserves.

[braddock]

The trouble is your posts just cause noise that gets in the way of the serious points that concerned fans are trying to make. Until you learn to use these forums in a dignified and positive way to support argument rather than to provoke or undermine it, then no one is going to treat anything you write with anything other than the contempt it deserves.

Or people could just read what is being written. If they want to skate around issues because of a prejudice against the person saying them then I don't care, that's up to them. I shan't be pandering to such people.

My inbox tells me I do get through to some, and also that some others have shared my beliefs before I typed them. Others can respond in whatever way they wish. That is fine.

[DE.]

Prejudiced against my profiles appearance and that's where the problem stems?

How surprising.

I think you're a WUM, btw, but you do disguise it fairly well with half-coherent posts every so often.

Point is if you were serious about contributing to debate here you wouldn't wind people up by having an avatar of the person currently destroying the club. You've already admitted you're just doing it because it's akin to "rattling cages in a zoo", and you've also admitted to being a propaganda merchant.

I guess I don't see why you bother spending time writing detailed messages on here outlining your stance when everything about your profile suggests you're a WUM, meaning you won't be taken seriously and will just irritate people. You could be on here just to irritate people, but that would be very sad indeed.

[braddock]

I think you're a WUM, btw, but you do disguise it fairly well with half-coherent posts every so often.

Point is if you were serious about contributing to debate here you wouldn't wind people up by having an avatar of the person currently destroying the club. You've already admitted you're just doing it because it's akin to "rattling cages in a zoo", and you've also admitted to being a propaganda merchant.

I guess I don't see why you bother spending time writing detailed messages on here outlining your stance when everything about your profile suggests you're a WUM, meaning you won't be taken seriously and will just irritate people. You could be on here just to irritate people, but that would be very sad indeed.

I debate with plenty of people. The likes of Mattyblue disagree with almost everything I say but we still debate things.

My avatar was as it was before there was so much hatred for Venky's. There were people who disliked them, but they still had plenty of people intrigued and cautiously optimistic. I refuse to change it simply because a few numpties seem to think it devalues anything in my posts. If my posts are poor people should concentrate on disecting and ridiculing the posts themselves. That would be a more credible response. As a side note it does humour me that it offends people so much but it's no less provocative as having an avatar of oversized mammary glands.

I'm a propaganda merchant to an extent. I push forward what I believe BUT I do so at a time when people are more ready to listen. I do believe everything I write. I'm not just typing it for the sake of it.

[DE.]

I debate with plenty of people. The likes of Mattyblue disagree with almost everything I say but we still debate things.

My avatar was as it was before there was so much hatred for Venky's. There were people who disliked them, but they still had plenty of people intrigued and cautiously optimistic. I refuse to change it simply because a few numpties seem to think it devalues anything in my posts. If my posts are poor people should concentrate on disecting and ridiculing the posts themselves. That would be a more credible response. As a side note it does humour me that it offends people so much but it's no less provocative as having an avatar of oversized mammary glands.

I'm not sure people debate with you as much as tolerate/humour you.

Regardless of that, as I said previously, sometimes you do make some half-decent points. With your current avatar&sig combo, though, people will just assume you're on the wind up and are unlikely to debate with you properly if at all. Generally you just end up being called various names. Your argument back is "I refuse to change it simply because a few numpties seem to think it devalues anything in my posts" ... and you're technically right, it doesn't devalue the content of your posts. However, it does give the impression of somebody on the wind up, therefore any comments you type will be viewed in that context. You don't help yourself by regularly making comments about winding people up on purpose or making sweeping generalisations about fans... but you wouldn't be the first person to do that.

I don't know/care when your avatar was first changed, but you know full-well that having it there now is not conductive to serious debate. It just annoys people - and the reasons for that are obvious. To say it's the same as having a pair of boobs in your avatar is wrong and you know it. I think you have it there because, as you have just said, it humours you to see the reaction you get.

But whatever works for you pal. It doesn't wind me up personally, I just find it strange that you'd waste your time trying to post seriously when your profile is set up to make you seem like a WUM. If you are genuine about being a serious poster it's somewhat self-defeating.

[braddock]

I'm not sure people debate with you as much as tolerate/humour you.

Regardless of that, as I said previously, sometimes you do make some half-decent points. With your current avatar&sig combo, though, people will just assume you're on the wind up and are unlikely to debate with you properly if at all. Generally you just end up being called various names. Your argument back is "I refuse to change it simply because a few numpties seem to think it devalues anything in my posts" ... and you're technically right, it doesn't devalue the content of your posts. However, it does give the impression of somebody on the wind up, therefore any comments you type will be viewed in that context. You don't help yourself by regularly making comments about winding people up on purpose or making sweeping generalisations about fans... but you wouldn't be the first person to do that.

I don't know/care when your avatar was first changed, but you know full-well that having it there now is not conductive to serious debate. It just annoys people - and the reasons for that are obvious. To say it's the same as having a pair of boobs in your avatar is wrong and you know it. I think you have it there because, as you have just said, it humours you to see the reaction you get.

But whatever works for you pal. It doesn't wind me up personally, I just find it strange that you'd waste your time trying to post seriously when your profile is set up to make you seem like a WUM. If you are genuine about being a serious poster it's somewhat self-defeating.

As I've said, my inbox tells a different story so I'm satisfied posting as I have been doing.

Thanks for the advice and concern though.

[Majiball]

You've got to love people who believe you should view the world differently and yet are unwilling to make any changes themselves.

[Kelbo]

So what you're hoping for is the players to turn against the owners and start coming out with unsettling statements just so you can feel vindicated and the oh so special fans get to know what's going on with every players contract?

I'd rather we just concentrate on survival till the Summer, then start digging.

I think many of the senior players have turned against Venkys, hence their absence/transfers from the club!!

[braddock]

I think many of the senior players have turned against Venkys, hence their absence/transfers from the club!!

In which case do you support Abbey's view that they should all come out and lift the lid, helping our survival plans?

Moving away from the ridiculous point of the thread.

[yoda]

As I've said, my inbox tells a different story so I'm satisfied posting as I have been doing.

Thanks for the advice and concern though.

don't tell us, 500 messages a day

[Majiball]

don't tell us, 500 messages a day

Come on he's not our Keano.

Although I'd place a tenner on him being Paul Agnew.

[yoda]

Or people could just read what is being written. If they want to skate around issues because of a prejudice against the person saying them then I don't care, that's up to them. I shan't be pandering to such people.

My inbox tells me I do get through to some, and also that some others have shared my beliefs before I typed them. Others can respond in whatever way they wish. That is fine.

I thought it was you that wanted to skate around ABBEY's genuine point,

bit hypocritical that don't you think

[Stuart]

So what you're hoping for is the players to turn against the owners and start coming out with unsettling statements just so you can feel vindicated and the oh so special fans get to know what's going on with every players contract?

I'd rather we just concentrate on survival till the Summer, then start digging.

If players came out and told the truth about the situation, then that's nothing to do with vindicating Abbey, it's because it's the truth!! And after being told that an out of position Lowe or ex-QPR reserve are better than him then he has every right to put his side of the story out there,

The reason don't debate with you is because you'll never cede the point. If you are cornered by a post, you just ignore it and move on to the next comment you can stir things up with.

And trying to turn you deliberately provocative avatar into a race issue? FFS, grow up.

It's because of this point that ANOTHER poster puts you on ignore. And to think I removed you from my ignore list as part of my New Year forgetting of old acquaintance...

[Hughesy]

I think the more important question should be - Is the team limited to a game by game budget which restricts who we can and cant play?

I have no problem with not playing the likes of Roberts & Salgado if it means they would have been given an extra year for the sake of a couple of games.