Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
 |
« Reply #105 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 21:48:16 » |
|
I think my Geoffrey Boycott idea was better in all honesty.
Well I guess the board have got what they wanted, for the meantime anyway
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
 |
« Reply #106 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 21:53:03 » |
|
Chill Hertha Different views, thats all mate 
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
 |
« Reply #107 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 21:53:23 » |
|
Herthab
I think I've made it abundantly clear that I wont be attending....and reserve the right to argue the case why others shouldn't ....if you feel differently then I would suggest you attempt a coherent argument rather than going off on one.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
 |
« Reply #108 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 21:55:31 » |
|
I had the same trouble when I announced I wouldn't be attending games Reg
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
 |
« Reply #109 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:00:54 » |
|
I had the same trouble when I announced I wouldn't be attending games Reg Personally I'm totally against not attending games, but its up to the individual....certainly by attending games there's no chance of having to share the same space as the Board members listed.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
herthab
TEF Travel
Offline
Posts: 12020
|
 |
« Reply #110 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:02:10 » |
|
I might have used a couple of 'fucks' too many, but the main thrust of my point still stands.
(I think the fucks can be atributted to me going to the pub and having a few.)
Apart from my abusive language (Sorry) I feel I made my position very coherent.
Reg, your stance would allow the board to say whatever they wanted and not be objected to.
If Fred and others with a differing view, attended the meeting and asked the 'difficult' questions, then surely the wavering fans would be more inclined to support the consortium?
|
|
|
Logged
|
It's All Good..............
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
 |
« Reply #111 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:06:50 » |
|
If Fred and others with a differing view, attended the meeting and asked the 'difficult' questions, then surely the wavering fans would be more inclined to support the consortium?
My thoughts exactly
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
 |
« Reply #112 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:08:31 » |
|
I think if Geoffrey Boycott attended people would be more inclined to support the consortium.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
mattboyslim
|
 |
« Reply #113 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:12:06 » |
|
Only if he had an orange band on his panama hat,a matching orange tie with his sports blazer.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OOH! SHAUN TAYLOR
- FACT!
Offline
Posts: 15073
|
 |
« Reply #114 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:14:23 » |
|
I'm going to go the meeting but not the game.
No that's wrong, I'm going to go to the game but not the meeting.
I mean I'm going to both.....
Oh, bollocks to it. I'm confused. I'm not going to go to either :?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
STFC_Gazza
|
 |
« Reply #115 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:16:59 » |
|
Agreed Fred a boycott would be in principle good, but the aforementioned apologists would be able to utilise it to say the consortium etc had no backing. A few well chosen questions from those with the right inclination could make Stanres et al look a bit daft. All it needs is the right knowledge and some awkward wording making them hard to wriggle out of, that shouldn't be too tricky. On the contrary the Board will doubtless use anybody that turns up as a stooge for their propaganda machine.....if you wish to be exploited in that way, its entirely your decision......is it possible to make the Board look any more incompetent? So your idea reg is to not turn up and let the pro board supporters (Yes there's still some about) have the floor. Then the board can issue an honest statement regarding the meeting with no criticism levelled at them? Why not.....I'm sure there are very few pro board supporters, they might get Gazza to drag along a few retards....but its an irrelevance...the damage for them is long done and there can be no way back. Can you imagine a more nauseating charade than Smarmes, Gray, Blodwyn, Diamandis, Holt, Carson .....(can't imagine they'll get a Wills) all getting feely touchy with Sturrock :chunder: I really don't know what you have against me and calling me a retard. I'll just ignore you now because no matter how much I try to make peace with you, who has already had it out for me, you take another jab at me. I cant fucking stand people like you who always think they are right. You say its only an opinion which your right, if someone else has a different one to you they are wrong. I explained in my other post which you didnt read obviously, or maybe it made sense so you thought you wouldnt slate me for a moment. I'll just pretend you don't exist much the way you want me to get hit by a bus or something. I'm not even going to the meeting before the match anyway it doesn't interest me in the slightest.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
 |
« Reply #116 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:17:54 » |
|
I might have used a couple of 'fucks' too many, but the main thrust of my point still stands.
(I think the fucks can be atributted to me going to the pub and having a few.)
Apart from my abusive language (Sorry) I feel I made my position very coherent.
Reg, your stance would allow the board to say whatever they wanted and not be objected to.
If Fred and others with a differing view, attended the meeting and asked the 'difficult' questions, then surely the wavering fans would be more inclined to support the consortium? Have you ever been to any of these type of meetings? These people are skilled in being economical with the actualite...they wont answer any questions. They will however use PS to suggest that everything is rosy and there are some horrid people out there trying to destabilise their 5 year plan.....so why don't you go away and leave Mr Blodwyn to try and make some money for our shareholders.
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OOH! SHAUN TAYLOR
- FACT!
Offline
Posts: 15073
|
 |
« Reply #117 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:21:37 » |
|
I might have used a couple of 'fucks' too many, but the main thrust of my point still stands.
(I think the fucks can be atributted to me going to the pub and having a few.)
Apart from my abusive language (Sorry) I feel I made my position very coherent.
Reg, your stance would allow the board to say whatever they wanted and not be objected to.
If Fred and others with a differing view, attended the meeting and asked the 'difficult' questions, then surely the wavering fans would be more inclined to support the consortium? Have you ever been to any of these type of meetings? These people are skilled in being economical with the actualite...they wont answer any questions. They will however use PS to suggest that everything is rosy and there are some horrid people out there trying to destabilise their 5 year plan.....so why don't you go away and leave Mr Blodwyn to try and make some money for our shareholders. But isn't that all the more reason for some of our more eloquent supporters who can see through the bullshit (perhaps those such as your good self Reg) to actually turn up and at least attempt to give them a hard time?
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
 |
« Reply #118 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:22:26 » |
|
I suspect Reg has probably done this before...
I also suspect that he knows it will be of little use (from his perspective).
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
 |
« Reply #119 on: Wednesday, January 17, 2007, 22:23:09 » |
|
Gazza
Reg didnt call you a retard mate !
And could I ask you why the meeting wouldn't interest you at all ?
Just asking like
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|