-
Posts
3,610 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
62
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Onthefringes
-
đ Scrambling for relevance returns. Itâs really not that difficult.
-
Itâs not the lack of sponsor which may or may not delay unveilingâŚ
-
He may well have the ear of some at the club. Plenty involved in academy and parents wonât entertain that thinkingâŚ
-
Time has told? Over 50 appearances in last 2 seasons. Been lucky enough to be in company hearing our recent managerial appointments give expert opinion that heâs got the attributes to progress.
-
Quite the take. Think most will trust Kettlewellâs judgement over yours right enough - heâs been open in his assessment too. This warming the bench you speak of, at least be factual - Slattery retained his position after securing a point at Kilmarnock, Kid reclaimed his place before picking up a knock pre-split, then got back in on full fitness.
-
Turn it up. Hardly immaterial given theyâre asked to perform very different roles, hence, apples and oranges quip. May be some merit in individual points you make, but, can discount your headless chicken claim. Suppose itâs all in the understanding of the game. Don't think his inclusion when Hammell (who rated him highly) was emptied can be understated. Certainly wasnât coincidence the upturn in form of Goss and the freedom afforded to Spittal. Itâs all a moot point anyway.
-
Comparing apples with oranges.
-
One doth protest too much⌠For me, the tribute act are beyond parody- theyâve become everything they hated about the other and then some. Just to echo sentiment of others, 2 cheeks, same arse.
-
Fair comment. Worked in our favour.
-
𤣠Nae bother. Read what is being said and not just look at the words⌠Nothing said was a slight on the person. To think he didnât look after himself to fit the narrative of being Motherwell minded is a bit of a stretch.
-
Yeah, out of context. Not disputing all of what youâve said either, certainly not a slight on the player himself. His signing of that contract protected his interests post injury every bit as much as ensuring the club who developed him were looked after. He didnât walk away from that contract for nil for example, hence, David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.
-
Lots of variables in an ever difficult process. Hypothetical for now as we donât know playersâ intention. Iâd expect those with the grasp on development football and particularly those involved in this player would argue club havenât moved enough to protect their asset. In reality, itâs more than signing of a contract which youâve correctly said canât be forced. Any development monies are questionable despite set fees as the terms of future incomes are negotiable. Iâll rely on club accounting. David Turnbull was David Turnbull minded.
-
Not sure that would be accurate.
-
In your mind? Suppose so. Aye, itâs no wonder the club find it difficult, not enough Ăźber fans like you. Tragic. As for your closing statements, stop the world the free thinking amongst us want to get off! Just from experience home & abroad, injury is highly unlikely. Thatâs why many donât get bent out of shape over it. Goes back to why you and others have chosen to reference pyro and its use. Thatâs another debate which bears no relevance to current protest or representations to the Society leadership & Club. Makes your dribblings a moot point at any rate.
-
Nearly as bad as your holocaust patter on here then. âfootball factoryâ tsk. Give your head a wobble. Got a grip.
-
đ Am I? Sides are splitting. Nobody has professed the Bois are angels. You and others constant reference to them show the lack of understanding on the subject also. A denial as you put it by the evil villain/employee mentioned has little to no bearing on the protest, but, itâs not fitting your agenda - suspect the information which is will be known as the proposed meeting happens. Away and throw shite at the moon? Really? Act your age and not your shoe size never more apt. As for the personal slate? Whatâs a bammer? Nobody was injured, has there ever been? The disabled fan himself would take you to task too, he even laughed what is your version of any incident off online. Iâd say it would be unfortunate but, not the target practice you seem to think it is. Rightly, the culprit (in a worse case scenario) should be called out and be suffice - no issue with that. But, running to the powers that be (the club have enough as it is Iâm told) is behaviour worth the watching. itâs grassing. Remember snitches get stitches đ
-
Right, so youâve gone from âlobbing intoâ then âthrowingâ to âthey threw them indiscriminately in a direction towardsâ. Well, now that youâre sure⌠took you three goes to decide. A lot of facts there. Pissing yourself at someone being injured as you alleged? I bet, you go down a storm at a party. On your media outlets quip, fair to return the pedantic baton to yourself. Burn injury would have received exposure on plenty of platforms. It didnât & not for the reason youâve given. Get real? Have been throughout, much to your chagrin obviously - not once have I defended throwing pyro devices so your rambling is erm, pointless. 100%. Nobody likes a grass either.
-
No they never. Read what they said & not just look at the words! Nobody threw anything âintoâ the crowd⌠Wheres the evidence of this burnt hand? Befuddled. Given the scaremongering going on this wouldâve made the media outlets without a doubt.
-
In your opinion. Suspect if they acted like you say they do the powers that be would have âem disbanded toot sweet. Flying with the crows is way off in this instance.
-
đ I knew you would. Gepetto? Deary me. Pedantic as I am, point me to where I am defending the matter? You claim âfactâ - when all that was asked was to keep things factual. Recall it being mentioned real time, felt it was exaggerated then as I do now. Poster above gives fair reasoning though. Tell your friend Iâm definitely not in the group, never have been nor ever will be. I certainly donât mind their company on occasion and understand their aims. It happens when you expand your mind.
-
Fair comment.
-
Youâre peddling that again⌠We get youâre not in favour. And for your information they were pilloried for the action in plenty of circles. Youâll see itâs never happened again even when similar situations arose.
-
Your opening gambit is where they are. Discussion is planned I hear, those wishing to chair are basing any talks on âsocial mediaâ output and not on behaviours including that of employee(s) so itâs felt by many the tone that will likely be taken. Think the requests by others to be represented who have no links to any group is pretty telling. Those who are in support of the groups and action being taken arenât disagreeing that groups should be complying with rules, the constant reference to release of pyro is for another debate, as Iâve mentioned issues are not inextricably linked. Fairly balanced reply although off on a tangent for me. Not in reply to yourself, anybody saying âlobbing flares into your own supportâ give off heavy Pinocchio vibes.
-
Youâre on the right trackâŚ