Loan Signings

[beag_teeets]

My decline occured at precisely the wrong time to get laid by Kylie Minogue and the further I fell and my poor financial clout have lead me to accept that it may not happen. However I would still bend it in if she asked me really nicely.

 

The value of shares can go up as well down.

Your house is at risk if you do not keep up repayments.

Three teams go up, three teams go down.

Sun goes up, sun goes down.

Many a mickle makes a mockle.

A Stitch in time saves 9 whereas Bunn gets 6.

[Inspiral_Carpet]

My decline occured at precisely the wrong time to get laid by Kylie Minogue and the further I fell and my poor financial clout have lead me to accept that it may not happen. However I would still bend it in if she asked me really nicely.

 

The value of shares can go up as well down.

Your house is at risk if you do not keep up repayments.

Three teams go up, three teams go down.

Sun goes up, sun goes down.

Many a mickle makes a mockle.

A Stitch in time saves 9 whereas Bunn gets 6.

 

Good to see that even Happy Clappers can be as mad as a box of frogs.

 

Btw, forget about Kylie. Between me and Michael Hutchence, we've spoiled her for other men.

[edhunteruk]

Seems to me that he's done alright with our money in the scheme of things. For every Ricketts (was he Shez's man or TTA's?) there's a Davies. For every Thompson there's a Gregan. Even Crossley has managed to prove his worth to most fans.

 

This 'patience is wearing thin in the corridors of power at BP' nonsense is unproven rumour until substantiated. Shez's comments about not signing players that he doesn't feel are right for the club possibly costing him is job is based on the known fact that the TTA would like to see us in the Championship sometime soon and maybe, just maybe said players could have come to the club and done a great job. He's speculating and I'd rather he speculated like that than risk throwing our budget away on a player who can't wait to snuggle up under his 2-year deal, maybe never to be seen again.

 

In the meantime, while there's money on the table, Shez's job is safe. It's when the purse strings are pulled tight that he should be looking in the job ads.

 

 

trust me....the corridors of power are getting frustrated,and people are talking about a lack of improvement.

 

shez job would still be safe if we didnt have any money,he would have to do what many other managers do and beg steal or borrow to get players in,its called doing your job,and many other managers manage to do it quite well.

 

the time he will lose his job is if were sat at the wrong end of the table with only a handfull of points and a crowd that has dwindled to under 3k

Edited February 26, 2008 by edhunteruk

[beag_teeets]

Good to see that even Happy Clappers can be as mad as a box of frogs.

 

Mad!?!?! Mad!!?!? I'm hoping!!!

 

Btw, forget about Kylie. Between me and Michael Hutchence, we've spoiled her for other men.

 

Lets see Kylie decide eh? I'l have her walking like John Wayne in next to no time.

[eddyblue]

Shez is right not to pay inflated wages in my opinion. Its his judgement and he recognises that he is responsible for his decisions. I believe longer term planning is right, sooner miss out this year and do it next, than risk big money to make play offs but still not go up. Its disappointing if we fall away again, but long term I believe the future is bright (happy clapper?)

Corporal Jones, whose opinion I respect but disagree with, reckons with some justification that the punters wont return till the team improves..so we should sign someone (or two) quickly. History shows that the Oldham public need long term improvement to convince them to attend BP regularly and the last 10 years have been grim. So its a long term job and one striker on loan for a quick fix wont do it. We have no choice but to hope the TTA are genuine, and that Shez is the right manager. I think they are and he is....but next close season is key for me

[Corporal_Jones]

Absolutely not Corp.

 

But then again, you do tend to twist people's words to suit your purpose as has been proven ad infinitum. When do I get accused of hating the Oldham public again? I'll pop back for a read when you post that little nugget.

If it's not the case that the only valid opinion is a blandly optimistic one, why the regular innuendo about 'fishing'?

 

I never said you hated anybody-I said that your bemoaning the lack of a rapid influx of new/returned fans during the Chris Moore days for the club's lack of financial clout seemed to betray a bitterness towards those in the town who refuse to pay inflated prices (not the club's fault) for mediocre/dreadful football, when the reality is that the club needs to find a way of attracting those extra fans by somehow making the product on the pitch attractive and successful. Or words to that effect.

 

Corporal Jones, whose opinion I respect but disagree with, reckons with some justification that the punters wont return till the team improves..so we should sign someone (or two) quickly. History shows that the Oldham public need long term improvement to convince them to attend BP regularly and the last 10 years have been grim. So its a long term job and one striker on loan for a quick fix wont do it. We have no choice but to hope the TTA are genuine, and that Shez is the right manager. I think they are and he is....but next close season is key for me

Fair points-although I have called for no panic signings.

Edited February 26, 2008 by Ackey

[Ackey]

Are you nine?

Ten.

 

I use this ludicrous example to point out who and where we are. We're a 3rd tier club and to complain about the lack of big name signings is just daft.

 

Someone posted a list of players we'd "missed out on" the other day and about half had gone to Championship clubs.

 

We live in a dream world if we think we can afford to spend more and more to buy our way out of this league. Forest and Leeds have both shown that does not work and they have significantly deeper pockets than we do!

[Inspiral_Carpet]

If it's not the case that the only valid opinion is a blandly optimistic one, why the regular innuendo about 'fishing'?

 

That makes no sense whatsoever. The innuendo about "fishing" however is because you are a fisherman just looking for a few bites.

 

I never said you hated anybody-I said that your bemoaning the lack of a rapid influx of new/returned fans during the Chris Moore days for the club's lack of financial clout seemed to betray a bitterness towards those in the town who refuse to pay inflated prices (not the club's fault) for mediocre/dreadful football, when the reality is that the club needs to find a way of attracting those extra fans by somehow making the product on the pitch attractive and successful. Or words to that effect.

 

I just wish the holier-than-thous like you and Shankly would admit that you have a grudge against the Oldham public.

 

But the point is that you were the one bemoaning the size of the Crowds and wrongly linking that to spending money. You can't even keep your argument consistent on one thread so I shouldn't be surprised that you have got the wrong end of the stick from one 3 weeks ago. By the way, that ridiculous left-field quote came shortly after your point had been blown out of the water and was an incredibly weak response. What you were actually doing was making things up in order to perpetuate the debate.

 

.........Because you are a fisherman just looking for a few bites.

 

Let's go round again.

[Corporal_Jones]

That makes no sense whatsoever. The innuendo about "fishing" however is because you are a fisherman just looking for a few bites.

You would be better admitting to an hostility towards non-happy clapper opinion.

 

Ten.

 

I use this ludicrous example to point out who and where we are. We're a 3rd tier club and to complain about the lack of big name signings is just daft.

Sorry-I missed the Wildean subtlety.

[Inspiral_Carpet]

You would be better admitting to an hostility towards non-happy clapper opinion.

 

But that would not be true. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I agree with a fair bit of what is written on here - positive and negative. Particularly where the poster can back up their argument with fact or reasoning. In the latter case, while I may not agree, I can understand where the other person is coming from.

 

Where I don't agree (positive or negative) then I'll occasionally challenge the view and hopefully debate it in a sensible manner. What disappoints me is when the poster twists other people's words, resorts to insults/ labelling (ie happy clapper) or changes their tune when their arguments are proved wrong with fact.

 

When those individuals keep perpetuating their unfounded arguments across multiple threads over a period of weeks, then I (maybe wrongly) see it as fishing. Others (maybe wrongly) see it as trolling.

 

Clearly you see it differently. Chacun a son gout.

[Corporal_Jones]

That makes no sense whatsoever. The innuendo about "fishing" however is because you are a fisherman just looking for a few bites.

But the point is that you were the one bemoaning the size of the Crowds and wrongly linking that to spending money. You can't even keep your argument consistent on one thread so I shouldn't be surprised that you have got the wrong end of the stick from one 3 weeks ago. By the way, that ridiculous left-field quote came shortly after your point had been blown out of the water and was an incredibly weak response. What you were actually doing was making things up in order to perpetuate the debate.

 

.........Because you are a fisherman just looking for a few bites.

 

Let's go round again.

Let's go round again? You are the one raising arguments from a month or so ago.

 

What I was actually doing then was pointing to the damage done in the here and now by the club's continually treading water, resulting in falling attendances, further financial weakness and ever less ability to compete. I offered no definitive solutions, but merely pointed out the nature of the club's dilemma.

 

All this was in reply to the suggestions of yourself and others, that lack of progress now matters little when set against the projected advances to be made when the supposed plan based on the stadium redevelopment is in place. I went on to suggest that continuing failure in the period between now and then could see 'the plan' revised towards enabling the club's survival at the current level, as opposed to promotion and survival at a higher one (assuming that it actually gets off the paper where it allegedly resides at present.)

 

Then, as now, you respond not to any points made but with repeated and increasingly desperate claims regarding the arguments of others being 'blown out of the water' (love the cliched imagery, by the way.)

 

But that would not be true. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and I agree with a fair bit of what is written on here - positive and negative. Particularly where the poster can back up their argument with fact or reasoning. In the latter case, while I may not agree, I can understand where the other person is coming from.

 

Where I don't agree (positive or negative) then I'll occasionally challenge the view and hopefully debate it in a sensible manner. What disappoints me is when the poster twists other people's words, resorts to insults/ labelling (ie happy clapper) or changes their tune when their arguments are proved wrong with fact.

 

When those individuals keep perpetuating their unfounded arguments across multiple threads over a period of weeks, then I (maybe wrongly) see it as fishing. Others (maybe wrongly) see it as trolling.

 

Clearly you see it differently. Chacun a son gout.

 

 

 

 

I am desperately sorry that I ever coined the term happy clapper now that I see the damage it has evidently done to countless innocent lives.

 

Since when has throwing all your eggs in the basket of an hypothetical notion ('The Plan') been fact?

Edited February 26, 2008 by Corporal_Jones

[Inspiral_Carpet]

Let's go round again? You are the one raising arguments from a month or so ago.

 

What I was actually doing then was pointing to the damage done in the here and now by the club's continually treading water, resulting in falling attendances, further financial weakness and ever less ability to compete. I offered no definitive solutions, but merely pointed out the nature of the club's dilemma.

 

All this was in reply to the suggestions of yourself and others, that lack of progress now matters little when set against the projected advances to be made when the supposed plan based on the stadium redevelopment is in place. I went on to suggest that continuing failure in the period between now and then could see 'the plan' revised towards enabling the club's survival at the current level, a opposed to promotion and survival at a higher one (assuming that it actually gets off the paper where it allegedly resides at present.)

 

Then, as now, you respond not to any points made but with repeated and increasingly desperate claims regarding the arguments of others being 'blown out of the water' (love the cliched imagery, by the way.)

 

No. I brought the old thread up because I was showing that just like on this topic, you have in the past twisted people's words and made things up to suit your purpose.

 

What you are doing is repeating your piss and wind "non-factual" arguments and totally misunderstanding what others were saying in the debate against you. For a start, you can't even remember what your initial point was and are now attributing it to your "happy clapper" adversaries! Not going to go over old ground (thankfully that post is dead and buried) as you clearly have a need to have the last word and you are welcome to it.

 

Either you are doing it deliberately (ie fishing/ trolling) or you are just not really up to the old debating game.

 

Enjoy yourself.

[Frankly Mr Shankly]

Let's go round again? You are the one raising arguments from a month or so ago.

 

Woah, hold on a sec comrade. You're the one who's continued the rumbling on in every other post with a sniping remark about people happy to accept mediocrity. Let's have it straight.

[Corporal_Jones]

No. I brought the old thread up because I was showing that just like on this topic, you have in the past twisted people's words and made things up to suit your purpose.

 

What you are doing is repeating your piss and wind "non-factual" arguments and totally misunderstanding what others were saying in the debate against you. For a start, you can't even remember what your initial point was and are now attributing it to your "happy clapper" adversaries! Not going to go over old ground (thankfully that post is dead and buried) as you clearly have a need to have the last word and you are welcome to it.

 

Either you are doing it deliberately (ie fishing/ trolling) or you are just not really up to the old debating game.

 

Enjoy yourself.

 

So obsessed do you seem to be with me supposedly 'twising other people's words' (although you never demonstrate how), that you fail to see that this is precisely what you do with me.

 

It seems that, on here, it's only yourself and a small band of others who can't take what I've said as merely another opinion to be accepted or rejected. Instead you have to resort to innuendo about so-called trolling and 'fishing.'

 

As for the need to have the last word-again, that's a good one coming from you.