Printable View
Is it just me, or is this the maddest thing that has been said about football in a long, long time?
I know that a short time double knockout can hit you hard (April 2004, anyone), but really not even Wenger ever spouted such utter drivel
For 'Poch' read 'cock'
Oliver Holt's latest column :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Insider
No, a direct Pochi****to quoteQuote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
He's 100% right :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Insider
And he obviously means winning sh*t trophies.
Of course, what he says is 100% right. He's just wrong to say it. If only because it's really not what paying supporters want to hear. It always comes across as self-serving and defeatist. You know, "So long as I get my eight million a year, I couldn't give a stuff about trophies." It simply doesn't sound good.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
I suspect only a manager who felt extremely, even too, secure in his job could get away with it for long. After all, if the boss of a big club doesn't believe his team is good enough to win the big trophies, then the obvious response from the club would be to get a manager in that does. And Wenger's experience seems to show that patience isn't eternal, even for a great coach who's making lots and lots of money for his employers.
And it's not obvious at all he means **** trophies. Unless you think not bothering to win the domestic cups each year frees the team to concentrate on the winning the Champions League and the Prem. Oh, wait; you do think that, don't you :homer:
https://www.football365.com/news/quo...h-place-trophyQuote:
Originally Posted by The Insider
“It's really not what paying supporters want to hear.”Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Really? I’m a paying supporter and it’s *exactly* what I want to hear. You may say I'm unusual, but no I'm not the only one. Take a quick look at Simb and you’ll see plenty of fans fighting Poch’s corner, justifying his comments on exactly the same grounds that I would.
You admit he’s right, yet you think he should pander to the Spurs fans who are too thick/immature/sentimental to face reality by bare-faced lying to their faces. This is akin to telling a bloke in a frock that he's a bird just to spare his feelings. Since when did you think this was the right thing to do? :shrug:
"Unless you think not bothering to win the domestic cups each year frees the team to concentrate on the winning the Champions League and the Prem".
No, I think not risking your best available player (Erikksen) in a winnable domestic cup game at Selhurst Park when you've already got key injuries to contend with, plus vital league games and a money-spinning CL tie around the corner, is by any rational and objective measure a decision that is in the best interests of the club.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
It could be a manager who is very secure in his job.... it could also be a manager who is, you know, preparing an exit strategy.
Anyway, it's football; like love, the unreality, sentimentality, of the thing is the whole point :shrug:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
Or perhaps he has agreed a high-paying pledge with the lenders, along with the club, to remain in place until the stadium move is completed, thereby killing those two birds with the same stone :sherlock:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberto Balsam Rodriguez
You talk as if it’s a binary choice between sentiment andpragmatism, but the truth is that it’s entirely possible to immerse yourself in the sentimentality of football while keeping enough of a grip on reality to not act like a pathetic child when your club’s manager makes a decision that is in the best long term interests of the club, even if it risks short term disappointment.
We know this to be true because I am living proof of it.
There’s no better way of demonstrating this than saying that were I a spurs fan I’d have been hugely disappointed that Erikkson didn’t start yesterday. But in my heart of hearts I’d have known it was the right decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
Yes, but don't forget you are also the chap who refused to believe a manager would toe the party line on finances merely in order to keep .. His job :-\Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
This is nonsense. If George Graham had kept Charlie Nicholas on the bench in 1987, we'd not have won that 'shít' cup and it's arguable that for the last 30 years we'd have basically been Aston Villa.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
Look at Ferguson in 1990. Wrighty makes his hat-trick and it's game over. No Treble, no 'greatest club in the world', no 'Theatre of Dreams.
You think Wenger is still in the job in 2003 with an empty trophy cabinet? Bóllocks.
Winning 'shít' cups is what great managers and ambitious clubs do on the way to somewhere better. Vulgar or not, trophies are the currency of footballing success. Without them, you're an also-ran.
:rolleyes: You seem to be arguing against a position that noone has actually taken.
Every manager wants to win **** cups. Every manager *tries* to win **** cups.
Pochettino tried to best Palace. Wenger tried to win cups with Fabianski and Ospina in goal.
They just balanced their efforts to do so against other, more important ambitions :shrug:
Your point would be valid if I or anyone was advocating that managers deliberately don’t try to win **** cups. But no-one on earth is doing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Sure, but if I were to ask who that says more about, me or Him, we both know what the answer would be.
But thanks for reminding me of another reason why forcing him out was not only harsh in its execution but fundamentally immoral.
Quote:
Originally Posted by redgunamo
That Palace final still irks you doesn't it bQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Well, we know you got it wrong and that he outstayed his welcome so long that even our notoriously tone-deaf board noticed it and felt compelled to act.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty92
Harsh? Fundamentally immoral? I would suggest you show your workings, but your use of "immoral", especially, suggests you don't actually have any :-|