TheFrog
Coach
- Messages
- 14,300
Except over the dinner table.The opposition can’t even talk to him yet.
Except over the dinner table.The opposition can’t even talk to him yet.
Except over the dinner table.
Of course teams have already had a word with Nathan
This almost reads like Cleary is certainly gone. I could be mistaken but seems off.
If we sacrifice Gould, Cleary might stay. We can throw Griffin on the fire too if needed. Provided he stays fit and decent I'd take Cleary over both of the others.
I'll bite Did Gus run off with your wife and or steal ya beer. By the tone of your post you have issues with Gussy and Hook too. I'd hate to think what shape the place would be in without Gus, I fear we might have even had to merge......
Or the 2nd thought is this your attempt to wind people up, and I've walked right in (come in spinner)
Pay no attention to the Gus bashing. It’s usually for no good reason.
I get if you don't agree with it, I sometimes don't, but it's not for no reason.
I get if you don't agree with it, I sometimes don't, but it's not for no reason.
Care to share your reasoning ? If not, I'll begin to think your just attempting to shit-stir.
I’m yet to see a good reason. Most of it is nonsense.
There is a multitude of reasons. Good, bad or indifferent is a matter of opinion.I’m yet to see a good reason. Most of it is nonsense.
Usually best to take the "Gus-bashing" with a grain of salt. It is typically opinions from those that are convinced they know how the club is, or should be, run better than anyone else (including Gus). The problem is that we all have a minute fraction of the information and typically it is from media where there is a level of distortion applied.
Unfortunately when this is conveyed to those criticising the club, you can count on at least 1 regular poster to accuse the conveyor of providing intimate relations to Gus. The retaliation is typically that crticisers are not true fans/supporters and then the more moderate posters need to wade through pages of retaliatory crap by both sides before we get back to sane discussion.
The latest defense of the retaliatory crap is that this forum would be boring otherwise, although I'm sure we could all find something else to discuss if posters weren't slinging shit back and forth. The other "solution" to block posters is also counter-productive in that when sanity prevails, posters can raise salient and well informed points. This is when the true value of this forum is realised.
I'm sure others could add more. Some of these could be defended depending on your point of view, but anyone that thinks they aren't up for debate is either blind, stupid or has an agenda of their own.
Relax OP. My post was not directed at you. Your inference that it may have been is another issue posters need to recognise - not to take personally comments that are intended to be general.I can see two things that relate to things I've posted here.
Yes I said someone was "close to Gus" and I owned up afterwards that I was in the wrong for saying it(I'm not the only one obviously)
I also said disagreement is what keeps things interesting but I also said in the same sentence that this applies to civil discussion(I don't know if anyone else made this point)