horribleives
Posts: 4251
Joined: 12/6/2009 From: The North
|
Okay, we've clearly got opposing views on this so it's pointles debating but just for the record: quote:
ORIGINAL: Flatulent_Bob 1. Football fans aren't loyal, its a bullshit phrase thrown out there but as soon as things go south the fans are on the backs of players/coaches/owners. When a player is playing poor they are more than happy to get on their backs, want them sold/dropped. 3. Where was Newcastle fans loyalty to their manager when Pardew was appointed? 4. What about the loyalty shown to Big Sam? 1. All of them? You must've been to a shitload of games at every ground in the country (to say nothing of your fare share of Newcastle matches) to state this as absolute fact. Some fans do get on players/managers backs, sure (and I'm highly critical of supporters who do) - the majority don't (and I'm talking about people who watch and attend games here, not arseholes mouthing off on Twitter or wherever). 2. I'm not denying Pardew was no-one's first choice but everyone was supportive of him regardless and got behind him from his first game onwards. He was never once booed or jeered by anyone. People ranting about him on the internet do not represent the majority of fans. 3. Big Sam was sacked by an owner who didn't want him and for playing terrible football and losing games. Most of the fans, however, were still behind the team and vocally expressed this so I'm not sure how else we could have helped him to be honest. Anyone booing him was in a minoirity and, as I said above, are the type of fan I have no time for at all. quote:
ORIGINAL: Flatulent_Bob 1. Ba has done nothing wrong, and has completed his contract as per the agreement with the club and you are attacking him for this because he is looking to activate a clause your club put in there. He's been loyal by not breaking his contract, I really don't know what additional loyalty you think you should be owed. 2. Again I didn't hear Newcastle fans complaining when you got him for free, in a very similar situation. 3. He's not refused to play, he's not been disruptive, he just activating a clause in his contract... 4. ..to earn more money elsewhere by going to a top team. What a wanker! 1. The clause wasn't put in there by the club, it was agreed to by the club but put in by Ba and his agents. The 'additional loyalty' would have been a commitment to seeing out the whole season, mainly to back up Ba's claims in regular interviews with the local press that he had no desire to leave, wanted to stay and was devoted to the team (meanwhile he and his people were engineering a move to whoever was willing to pay up). 2. I've already responded to that point. 3. He hasn't no, but he's disrupted the team by refusing to play in a certain position and quite blatantly (on several occasions) playing for himself and not his team-mates. I'm assuming you haven't seen every game he's played this season - he may well have scored 13 goals but as I've already stated that doesn't tell the whole story and he's been more than instrumental in some of our bad performances in plenty of games. 4. A top team which he'll be lucky to get into. So much for his claims that he 'just wanted to play football'.
_____________________________
www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.
|