Jump to content

Chronicle article denies kit washing and bailiff's problems


Recommended Posts

"Lemsagam says the Oldham supporters were the reason why he got involved with the football club and has claimed to have spent £5million since taking charge" :shock:

 

I dread to think what he spent on Vera and Sylla if that's the case. If he goes legal wins and proves he's put £5million into the club I will take it all back. I'm abit sceptical about that.

Edited by GlossopLatic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, GlossopLatic said:

"Lemsagam says the Oldham supporters were the reason why he got involved with the football club and has claimed to have spent £5million since taking charge" :shock:

 

I dread to think what he spent on Vera and Sylla if that's the case. If he goes legal wins and proves he's put £5million into the club I will take it all back. I'm abit sceptical about that.

He has said that before, and even if its true it doesn't detract that the club is being run like Billy Smarts circus with him at the helm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 million? That’s over £350,000 per month since he took over last January yet we can’t pay a few grand for gas bills, coaches and pension contributions...

 

I’m not having that figure. The man is a pathological liar, you’re a fool if you believe him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Ryan said:

5 million? That’s over £350,000 per month since he took over last January yet we can’t pay a few grand for gas bills, coaches and pension contributions...

 

I’m not having that figure. The man is a pathological liar, you’re a fool if you believe him.

Perhaps he is including the purchase price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Say what you want about abdallah, most of it won’t be far off I’m sure. But he’s a fighter, most of these forgein owners are completely faceless. (Think Orient) Yes he controls his output, but at least he defends himself, which he has every right to do.  FWIW I still think Scholes left because the overall situation was so poor. IE shit squad/no money/erratic owner. All things he knew when he took the job. It was an easy out to just blame AL. 

 

I would still prefer him to go as I think things have become quite toxic. However I do believe abdallah wants the club to do well, he just has a very warped idea of how to achieve it IMO. 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, League one forever said:

Say what you want about abdallah, most of it won’t be far off I’m sure. But he’s a fighter, most of these forgein owners are completely faceless. (Think Orient) Yes he controls his output, but at least he defends himself, which he has every right to do.  FWIW I still think Scholes left because the overall situation was so poor. IE shit squad/no money/erratic owner. All things he knew when he took the job. It was an easy out to just blame AL. 

 

I would still prefer him to go as I think things have become quite toxic. However I do believe abdallah wants the club to do well, he just has a very warped idea of how to achieve it IMO. 

 

 

 

I wouldn't call it fighting I'd call it a spectacular lack of self awareness. He appears to not have any idea is doing anything remotely wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OAFCMIKE said:

Why on earth would I make things up? What would I possibly have to gain from it? Open your eyes. 

Doubt he's saying you're plucking things from thin air. More likely that people who pass info on don't necessarily pass 100% of info on or may have a reason for twisting things slightly.

 

Doesn't mean AL isn't full of shit though!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, OAFCMIKE said:

Why on earth would I make things up? What would I possibly have to gain from it? Open your eyes. 

 

Hang on.... aren’t you a journalist ? 😂

 

Look. I just think the absolute truth will be somewhere in the middle. Are you saying journalists aren’t guilty of the occasional hyperbole and sensationalism?  I’m not saying your story is entirely fabricated. 

 

Anyhow. You are saying your article is 100% true.  So obviously that means you are saying AL is lying in his Sky Sports interview.  If you are telling the truth then you are saying he is lying.  That’s fine. You are standing by your story, thank you for clearing it up. Good enough for me. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by kowenicki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mcfluff1985 said:

Doubt he's saying you're plucking things from thin air. More likely that people who pass info on don't necessarily pass 100% of info on or may have a reason for twisting things slightly.

 

Doesn't mean AL isn't full of shit though!

Mike is likely to be only passing on part of what has gone on being very careful about what he says. He will have to pass stringent tests with his editor about how true the allegations are.Eventhough it is the Mail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, laticsmarra said:

Mike is likely to be only passing on part of what has gone on being very careful about what he says. He will have to pass stringent tests with his editor about how true the allegations are.Eventhough it is the Mail.

Everyone hated mike because we were in denial! No one wanted to believe the truth! It is what it is, we move on. Hopefully ground ownership secures our long term future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kowenicki said:

 

Hang on.... aren’t you a journalist ? 😂

 

Look. I just think the absolute truth will be somewhere in the middle. Are you saying journalists aren’t guilty of the occasional hyperbole and sensationalism?  I’m not saying your story is entirely fabricated. 

 

Anyhow. You are saying your article is 100% true.  So obviously that means you are saying AL is lying in his Sky Sports interview.  If you are telling the truth then you are saying he is lying.  That’s fine. You are standing by your story, thank you for clearing it up. Good enough for me. 

 

 

 

You see this is why I keep saying it would have been very helpful for Scholes to add some meat to the bones of his original and all too brief statement when he walked out last week. He has left more questions than answers.

 

Maybe this would also add a little more credence to other similar stories about this current chairman which would in turn build up a more accurate picture.

 

As things stand , we don't really know what the truth is and probably never will and the soap opera will continue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, True Tic said:

You see this is why I keep saying it would have been very helpful for Scholes to add some meat to the bones of his original and all too brief statement when he walked out last week. He has left more questions than answers.

 

Maybe this would also add a little more credence to other similar stories about this current chairman which would in turn build up a more accurate picture.

 

As things stand , we don't really know what the truth is and probably never will and the soap opera will continue.

Point one I’m surprised he said as much as he did and won’t say more. Point two AL has virtually come out and called him a liar. If he is exaggerating he will stay quiet. If he isn’t is it not slander and a good case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my point, because of his ludicrously short stay with us, I think he owes us, the fans, a little more in the way of an explanation of the issues which led to him leaving.

 

I mean, to realise a long held ambition to manage your boyhood club, an 18 month contract, a plan? strategy etc only to ditch it all after a month.

 

It doesn't make sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, kowenicki said:

 

Quite. 

 

Also is Pete Wild a liar now?  I was reliably informed by this forum that he was under strict orders when ‘picking the team’. 

Pete Wild is saying what he needs to in order to keep his job. I don't blame him for a second. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Magic Mikey said:

Pete Wild is saying what he needs to in order to keep his job. I don't blame him for a second. 

 

I don’t buy that. He could easily dodge the question.  I credit him with more integrity and pride than you do. What you and others are saying is pretty disrespectful. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, yarddog73 said:

Pete Wild is unfortunately AL's puppet.

 

1 minute ago, deyres42 said:

Patsy Wild would be a more suitable moniker.

 

Wow. From ‘one of our own’ to this. Who needs friends eh.  Pretty disgusting this. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...