IS Bobby Mancini THE MAN?

[mr_nool]

Even if we ended up a close 5th, I would be happy giving Mancini more time to build. I'm not saying we will end up 5th, but I think we have a good mentality now in the whole club.
It would be foolish to lose this, if we hang him for not reaching 4th place. as it happens, I do think we will make the top 4, but that should not be the overriding aspect in the future of Mancini's appointment, and I hope it doesn't all come down to Cappello's availability. Really, mancini should have been given 3 1/2 years from the off and none of this 6 months business

Well mate, its reasonable to say what you said, but the guy was brought in because the owners thought Hughes couldn't get us into the top four, so top four it has to be.

Hey Bob, why don't you make this a sticky - I thought you originally did and I thought it was a good idea, because its always going to be a big topic and saves lots of different threads about the manager after every match "I think Mancini is the bollox", "Mancini is gorgeous", "I knew the cunt wouldn't hack it", "Mancini would beat Hughes in a fight" etc...

Seriously though, its a daily topic pretty much, no?

I'm with you on the top four demand. That's what he was brought in to deliver.
But give him some time for fuck's sake! You gave Leslie 18 fucking months and were ready to give him pleny more still. Roberto's just landed, and you're on his throat (not only about this). Yes, you thought it was wrong sacking Hughes, that doesn't necessarily make Mancini the wronh choice. Slating Roberto is not a way to defend Hughes. He's gone, let him go.

Hold on for fuck sake, where did you get all that tripe from???!

All I did was state facts - Mancini was brought in because the hierarchy didn't think Hughes would achieve top four this season. Make no mistake about that. Of course I gave Leslie 18 fucking months because he was there AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT. Call it phase one if you like, I couldn't give a bollox what you call it.... but we're at a completely different phase in that we are now a piece or two away from being a complete side.

I'm not "on his throat" at all chief, in fact so far I think he's the bollox. Dapper, astute and fantastic in front of the media with the likes of the scàrf, arm around Bellamy and subsequent handshake... his "lack of english" in that horrible press conference (by God its improved dramatically!).... He also looks to be very tactically aware and his decisions have worked out perfectly so far. Whether or not that's down to new manager syndrome, luck, tactical nous or all three only time will tell, but so far so fucking brilliant and long may it continue.

As for Mark Hughes - everyone knows I was in favour of letting him complete what he started and I don't buy a lot of what Cook said about the "trajectory of results" meaning we wouldn't reach 70 points, when we were bang on target to do just that. I also don't buy into the media bullshit about how it was "disgraceful" the manner in which we sacked Hughes and the aftermath with the press going on like we were the first ones to do it - "How could they let the poor man sit in the dugout knowing he was going to be fired?!" Fuck all that, Ranieri took charge of loads of fucking games knowing he was getting the sack and they don't care now because the special came in and their decision can't be questioned anymore.

So I don't feel sorry for Mark Hughes the man. I also understand where the decision to replace him stemmed from and I was getting pretty fucking frustrated with that run of draws and more importantly how we rolled over and let Spurs destroy us on my fucking birthday! That said, we were/are a team that was in mid-gel and no one can say for a fact that Mark Hughes wouldn't have gotten us into the top four.

He is gone now and that's fine with me, because first of all, Mancini looks like a good choice and secondly the fans are more together as a result. The endless Hughes debates wrecked havoc on this board and gave total cockheads like R_I_G a platform to rant every second day.

Oh before I let you go Mr Nool, why don't you have a look back on this board to the day Mancini came and Hughes went - I'm the one who started the thread called "PLEASE" and it was to say to everyone that even though some don't agree with Hughes leaving, its done and we should all stop bickering and get behind the new man. So you got the wrong man here and if you're basing your views on the fact that I think signing Vieira and making a move for Veron was completely underwhelming then have another think because every pundit and journo seems to agree with me. It doesn't mean I hate Mancini, it just means that the one flaw I see SO FAR is his moves in the transfer market. I'm confident he'll rectify that, but there ain't no fucking way I'm gonna jump up and down because we moved for two players in their mid-thirties - one that couldn't cut it in his prime in the prem and the other who was faltering when he left 5 years ago.

Ciao.

I haven't been on this site very frequently over the holidays and it's very likely that I've gotten it wrong. In that case I sincerely appologise. However, you do express you views quite - in the lack of better words - fantically and bluntly, which is what made me react to this particular post. Being a cold blooded Swede, I'm more prone to fence sitting and diplomacy, and frankly, you've had me reaching for the rope, the pills and the revolver just as many times as R_I_G &co during the first half of the season.

For the record, Socrates got me wrong. I agree that Mancini was brought in to achieve a very specific target, the 4th spot (or better). Should he fail to do this, his future at the club should very much be put under scrutiny. However, I do thibnk that we should give him - and his signings - more time before we slag them off.

[Original Dub]

Even if we ended up a close 5th, I would be happy giving Mancini more time to build. I'm not saying we will end up 5th, but I think we have a good mentality now in the whole club.
It would be foolish to lose this, if we hang him for not reaching 4th place. as it happens, I do think we will make the top 4, but that should not be the overriding aspect in the future of Mancini's appointment, and I hope it doesn't all come down to Cappello's availability. Really, mancini should have been given 3 1/2 years from the off and none of this 6 months business

Well mate, its reasonable to say what you said, but the guy was brought in because the owners thought Hughes couldn't get us into the top four, so top four it has to be.

Hey Bob, why don't you make this a sticky - I thought you originally did and I thought it was a good idea, because its always going to be a big topic and saves lots of different threads about the manager after every match "I think Mancini is the bollox", "Mancini is gorgeous", "I knew the cunt wouldn't hack it", "Mancini would beat Hughes in a fight" etc...

Seriously though, its a daily topic pretty much, no?

I'm with you on the top four demand. That's what he was brought in to deliver.
But give him some time for fuck's sake! You gave Leslie 18 fucking months and were ready to give him pleny more still. Roberto's just landed, and you're on his throat (not only about this). Yes, you thought it was wrong sacking Hughes, that doesn't necessarily make Mancini the wronh choice. Slating Roberto is not a way to defend Hughes. He's gone, let him go.

Hold on for fuck sake, where did you get all that tripe from???!

All I did was state facts - Mancini was brought in because the hierarchy didn't think Hughes would achieve top four this season. Make no mistake about that. Of course I gave Leslie 18 fucking months because he was there AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROJECT. Call it phase one if you like, I couldn't give a bollox what you call it.... but we're at a completely different phase in that we are now a piece or two away from being a complete side.

I'm not "on his throat" at all chief, in fact so far I think he's the bollox. Dapper, astute and fantastic in front of the media with the likes of the scàrf, arm around Bellamy and subsequent handshake... his "lack of english" in that horrible press conference (by God its improved dramatically!).... He also looks to be very tactically aware and his decisions have worked out perfectly so far. Whether or not that's down to new manager syndrome, luck, tactical nous or all three only time will tell, but so far so fucking brilliant and long may it continue.

As for Mark Hughes - everyone knows I was in favour of letting him complete what he started and I don't buy a lot of what Cook said about the "trajectory of results" meaning we wouldn't reach 70 points, when we were bang on target to do just that. I also don't buy into the media bullshit about how it was "disgraceful" the manner in which we sacked Hughes and the aftermath with the press going on like we were the first ones to do it - "How could they let the poor man sit in the dugout knowing he was going to be fired?!" Fuck all that, Ranieri took charge of loads of fucking games knowing he was getting the sack and they don't care now because the special came in and their decision can't be questioned anymore.

So I don't feel sorry for Mark Hughes the man. I also understand where the decision to replace him stemmed from and I was getting pretty fucking frustrated with that run of draws and more importantly how we rolled over and let Spurs destroy us on my fucking birthday! That said, we were/are a team that was in mid-gel and no one can say for a fact that Mark Hughes wouldn't have gotten us into the top four.

He is gone now and that's fine with me, because first of all, Mancini looks like a good choice and secondly the fans are more together as a result. The endless Hughes debates wrecked havoc on this board and gave total cockheads like R_I_G a platform to rant every second day.

Oh before I let you go Mr Nool, why don't you have a look back on this board to the day Mancini came and Hughes went - I'm the one who started the thread called "PLEASE" and it was to say to everyone that even though some don't agree with Hughes leaving, its done and we should all stop bickering and get behind the new man. So you got the wrong man here and if you're basing your views on the fact that I think signing Vieira and making a move for Veron was completely underwhelming then have another think because every pundit and journo seems to agree with me. It doesn't mean I hate Mancini, it just means that the one flaw I see SO FAR is his moves in the transfer market. I'm confident he'll rectify that, but there ain't no fucking way I'm gonna jump up and down because we moved for two players in their mid-thirties - one that couldn't cut it in his prime in the prem and the other who was faltering when he left 5 years ago.

Ciao.

I haven't been on this site very frequently over the holidays and it's very likely that I've gotten it wrong. In that case I sincerely appologise. However, you do express you views quite - in the lack of better words - fantically and bluntly, which is what made me react to this particular post. Being a cold blooded Swede, I'm more prone to fence sitting and diplomacy, and frankly, you've had me reaching for the rope, the pills and the revolver just as many times as R_I_G &co during the first half of the season.

For the record, Socrates got me wrong. I agree that Mancini was brought in to achieve a very specific target, the 4th spot (or better). Should he fail to do this, his future at the club should very much be put under scrutiny. However, I do thibnk that we should give him - and his signings - more time before we slag them off.

You're right, I do express my views bluntly. And if you felt that strongly about me to suggest I contribute to this site similarly to R_I_G, perhaps it would have been better if you adapted my approach and said something to me at the time instead of this little rant.

I can't say you've had the same effect on me as I seem to have had on you. Maybe you should get off the fence a bit more.

Anyway, it was interesting to have someone apologise for being wrong and comparing me to R_I_G all in one post. Hopefully I'll be hearing more from you because I can't really remember an awful lot from before and you are now a legend, so I must be missing something.

Off topic master maybe?

Anyway, back ON topic, I think Mancini looks to be the man so far and I'll back him all the way. I also didn't "slag off" his signings I merely said I found his targets thus far to be underwhelming and I think I've every reason to feel that way. That doesn't mean I'll be booing Vieira or Mancini.

The anti/pro manager debates are gone so I'd appreciate if you didn't try to make out that I still want them to continue because I don't.You got it wrong and you apologised and that's that as far as I'm concerned, so you can leave your rope, gun and pills in the cabinet... or use all three...

Slan anois.

[mr_nool]

Mate, and I appreciate your contribution to the board and think your a much better poster than R_I_G and the likes. You know what you 're talking about and you have a very clear opinion, but you can be/come across as quite rabid. So rabid that I smoetimes wanted to hang myself ;-) But your in good company, NQDP, Socrates, KK, have all have the same effect on me, and I think they're all top posters.

You're totally correct that I probably don't post enough on topic to be a "legend". I didn't elect myself ... I do however read pretty much everything that's written (bar the last few weeks). But most of the time, I feel that what I want to say has already been said - a lot of times even said better than I could myself - and thus keep my mouth shut. I don't see any reason repeating an argument, just to show off what I think in a certain matter. I think it's also down to the language barrier a bit. Writing posts does take longer for me, which I why I tend not to get too involved in heated debates.

[Original Dub]

Mate, and I appreciate your contribution to the board and think your a much better poster than R_I_G and the likes. You know what you 're talking about and you have a very clear opinion, but you can be/come across as quite rabid. So rabid that I smoetimes wanted to hang myself ;-) But your in good company, NQDP, Socrates, KK, have all have the same effect on me, and I think they're all top posters.

You're totally correct that I probably don't post enough on topic to be a "legend". I didn't elect myself ... I do however read pretty much everything that's written (bar the last few weeks). But most of the time, I feel that what I want to say has already been said - a lot of times even said better than I could myself - and thus keep my mouth shut. I don't see any reason repeating an argument, just to show off what I think in a certain matter. I think it's also down to the language barrier a bit. Writing posts does take longer for me, which I why I tend not to get too involved in heated debates.

PM'd you chief.

[john68]

The whole point behind the sacking of hughes was the importance of getting a top 4 finish.
The Sheiks believ and mancini says he can achieve that.

if we fail to finish top 4, then a whole new scenario opens. A) Does this make it impossible to meet the new reules of the CL in 3 years? and B) Who is the best man to take us forward from this point.

RH, It is quite obvious waht Socrates is saying (and he doesn't really need me to defend him) but you are somewhat twisting his words. Shopuld we fail to finish top 4, then when the Sheiks make the decision of who will then lead us, Mancicnui's record, even though he may have failed a top 4 finish, will have to be taken into consideration. If Mancini's record shows that from the point he took over, we were top 4 on form. then it would be uite acceptable for him to be allowed to continue.

I know from previous posts that you favour Mourinho as manager, maybe that coloured your opinion.

[Socrates]

The whole point behind the sacking of hughes was the importance of getting a top 4 finish.
The Sheiks believ and mancini says he can achieve that.

if we fail to finish top 4, then a whole new scenario opens. A) Does this make it impossible to meet the new reules of the CL in 3 years? and B) Who is the best man to take us forward from this point.

RH, It is quite obvious waht Socrates is saying (and he doesn't really need me to defend him) but you are somewhat twisting his words. Shopuld we fail to finish top 4, then when the Sheiks make the decision of who will then lead us, Mancicnui's record, even though he may have failed a top 4 finish, will have to be taken into consideration. If Mancini's record shows that from the point he took over, we were top 4 on form. then it would be uite acceptable for him to be allowed to continue.

I know from previous posts that you favour Mourinho as manager, maybe that coloured your opinion.

He doesn't even read properly mate you are wasting your time. If we fail to make 4 this season and next then Mourinho would be the worst possible manager we could have. Imagine spending half a billion pounds on the Academy and leaving the product of it to rot while Mourinho plays favourites with his megastars. Not going to happen. Forget it.

[Rag_hater]

The whole point behind the sacking of hughes was the importance of getting a top 4 finish.
The Sheiks believ and mancini says he can achieve that.

if we fail to finish top 4, then a whole new scenario opens. A) Does this make it impossible to meet the new reules of the CL in 3 years? and B) Who is the best man to take us forward from this point.

RH, It is quite obvious waht Socrates is saying (and he doesn't really need me to defend him) but you are somewhat twisting his words. Shopuld we fail to finish top 4, then when the Sheiks make the decision of who will then lead us, Mancicnui's record, even though he may have failed a top 4 finish, will have to be taken into consideration. If Mancini's record shows that from the point he took over, we were top 4 on form. then it would be uite acceptable for him to be allowed to continue.

I know from previous posts that you favour Mourinho as manager, maybe that coloured your opinion.

What rules are these?
The rules that "could" or might come about in a few years time?
Its quite obvious that what Socrates is saying in this thread is contradictory to what he has said in other threads.He doesn't need me to twist his words he does a good enough job himself.
Mancini's record can be stellar as far as I'm concerned,(and you say that will be taken into consideration)but if he doesn't achieve what he has publically stated in front of the press,he will have failed as badly as Hughes.And for not meeting his targets he should be treated the same as Hughes and given the sack.



He doesn't even read properly mate you are wasting your time. If we fail to make 4 this season and next then Mourinho would be the worst possible manager we could have. Imagine spending half a billion pounds on the Academy and leaving the product of it to rot while Mourinho plays favourites with his megastars. Not going to happen. Forget it.[/quote]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.

[Wonderwall]

Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.

the whole mourinho jibe comes from the fact that Mourinho bought his team and didnt bring anyone through the academy. However, How many players have come through Chelseas academy in the last 10 years, never mind just mourinho's reign?

Spindoctors playing mind games.

[Socrates]

The whole point behind the sacking of hughes was the importance of getting a top 4 finish.
The Sheiks believ and mancini says he can achieve that.

if we fail to finish top 4, then a whole new scenario opens. A) Does this make it impossible to meet the new reules of the CL in 3 years? and B) Who is the best man to take us forward from this point.

RH, It is quite obvious waht Socrates is saying (and he doesn't really need me to defend him) but you are somewhat twisting his words. Shopuld we fail to finish top 4, then when the Sheiks make the decision of who will then lead us, Mancicnui's record, even though he may have failed a top 4 finish, will have to be taken into consideration. If Mancini's record shows that from the point he took over, we were top 4 on form. then it would be uite acceptable for him to be allowed to continue.

I know from previous posts that you favour Mourinho as manager, maybe that coloured your opinion.

What rules are these?
The rules that "could" or might come about in a few years time?
Its quite obvious that what Socrates is saying in this thread is contradictory to what he has said in other threads.He doesn't need me to twist his words he does a good enough job himself.
Mancini's record can be stellar as far as I'm concerned,(and you say that will be taken into consideration)but if he doesn't achieve what he has publically stated in front of the press,he will have failed as badly as Hughes.And for not meeting his targets he should be treated the same as Hughes and given the sack.



He doesn't even read properly mate you are wasting your time. If we fail to make 4 this season and next then Mourinho would be the worst possible manager we could have. Imagine spending half a billion pounds on the Academy and leaving the product of it to rot while Mourinho plays favourites with his megastars. Not going to happen. Forget it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.[/quote]

Dear Hater. Go to dictionary. Look up word "IF."

[Rag_hater]

Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.

the whole mourinho jibe comes from the fact that Mourinho bought his team and didnt bring anyone through the academy. However, How many players have come through Chelseas academy in the last 10 years, never mind just mourinho's reign?

Spindoctors playing mind games.

I'm not 100% sure but didn't Terry come from their youth set up.Your probably right Jose didnt bring him through but he persevered with him which shows a little faith in academies.I dont think he can be accused of ignoring young players.He has developed winning teams most places he has worked and in that time maybe he hasnt come across any young players who could achieve what he wanted.
And if Chelski didnt have young players that were good enough to win the Prem then surely Mourinho can't be lambasted too much for buying a team that won the Prem especially as funds were available to him.

[mr_nool]

Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.

the whole mourinho jibe comes from the fact that Mourinho bought his team and didnt bring anyone through the academy. However, How many players have come through Chelseas academy in the last 10 years, never mind just mourinho's reign?

Spindoctors playing mind games.

I'm not 100% sure but didn't Terry come from their youth set up.Your probably right Jose didnt bring him through but he persevered with him which shows a little faith in academies.I dont think he can be accused of ignoring young players.He has developed winning teams most places he has worked and in that time maybe he hasnt come across any young players who could achieve what he wanted.
And if Chelski didnt have young players that were good enough to win the Prem then surely Mourinho can't be lambasted too much for buying a team that won the Prem especially as funds were available to him.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Terry already and England CB when Jose took Chelsea over?

[Rag_hater]

The whole point behind the sacking of hughes was the importance of getting a top 4 finish.
The Sheiks believ and mancini says he can achieve that.

if we fail to finish top 4, then a whole new scenario opens. A) Does this make it impossible to meet the new reules of the CL in 3 years? and B) Who is the best man to take us forward from this point.

RH, It is quite obvious waht Socrates is saying (and he doesn't really need me to defend him) but you are somewhat twisting his words. Shopuld we fail to finish top 4, then when the Sheiks make the decision of who will then lead us, Mancicnui's record, even though he may have failed a top 4 finish, will have to be taken into consideration. If Mancini's record shows that from the point he took over, we were top 4 on form. then it would be uite acceptable for him to be allowed to continue.

I know from previous posts that you favour Mourinho as manager, maybe that coloured your opinion.

What rules are these?
The rules that "could" or might come about in a few years time?
Its quite obvious that what Socrates is saying in this thread is contradictory to what he has said in other threads.He doesn't need me to twist his words he does a good enough job himself.
Mancini's record can be stellar as far as I'm concerned,(and you say that will be taken into consideration)but if he doesn't achieve what he has publically stated in front of the press,he will have failed as badly as Hughes.And for not meeting his targets he should be treated the same as Hughes and given the sack.



He doesn't even read properly mate you are wasting your time. If we fail to make 4 this season and next then Mourinho would be the worst possible manager we could have. Imagine spending half a billion pounds on the Academy and leaving the product of it to rot while Mourinho plays favourites with his megastars. Not going to happen. Forget it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.

Dear Hater. Go to dictionary. Look up word "IF."[/quote]

I'll do IF you look up hypocrite

[Good Times]

Hughes wasnt sacked because of anything Platini is proposing as you would like to kid people into believeing.It wasn't because we need to get CL money on the books.He was sacked because he failed to live upto the results he had promised after being given sufficient time and money.
You say Mourinho would be the worst manager we could have.I hope thats an opinion and not something else your trying to pass of as a fact because if it is you really are deluded.

the whole mourinho jibe comes from the fact that Mourinho bought his team and didnt bring anyone through the academy. However, How many players have come through Chelseas academy in the last 10 years, never mind just mourinho's reign?

Spindoctors playing mind games.

I'm not 100% sure but didn't Terry come from their youth set up.Your probably right Jose didnt bring him through but he persevered with him which shows a little faith in academies.I dont think he can be accused of ignoring young players.He has developed winning teams most places he has worked and in that time maybe he hasnt come across any young players who could achieve what he wanted.
And if Chelski didnt have young players that were good enough to win the Prem then surely Mourinho can't be lambasted too much for buying a team that won the Prem especially as funds were available to him.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Terry already and England CB when Jose took Chelsea over?

You are indeed correct. John Terry had made his international debut in 2003, a year before Jose was installed as manager of Chelsea.

Socrates and Rag_Hater. Relax guys!

[Socrates]

I'll do IF you look up hypocrite

I think you need to look it up first, your incorrect arguments above would (IF they were true and they aren't) amount to inconsistency rather than hypocrisy.

If you wanted to acuse me of hypocrisy then you would need instead to point to the fact that I tolerated your utter drivel while you happened to be on the right side of the Hughes debate but am no longer prepared to do so. On that count I may well be a hypocrite yes.

[Rag_hater]

I'll do IF you look up hypocrite

I think you need to look it up first, your incorrect arguments above would (IF they were true and they aren't) amount to inconsistency rather than hypocrisy.

If you wanted to acuse me of hypocrisy then you would need instead to point to the fact that I tolerated your utter drivel while you happened to be on the right side of the Hughes debate but am no longer prepared to do so. On that count I may well be a hypocrite yes.

In the financial results thread you say you anticipate(which according to the dictionary means:expect)the worst case scenario.
You also go onto say we need to be in the CL the next season so we can get the money from it in the accounts for the following year.
Its not the only thread youve come out with this BS but I'm just using it as an example.
In this thread you say that it is not imperative that we get in the CL and Mancini should be given as much time as Hughes at least.You also say Platini plans are something that "could" happen.Not the same as anticipating them is it?
I'm glad you realise your a hypocrite I think its just the degree of it your suffering with.

[Socrates]

I'll do IF you look up hypocrite

I think you need to look it up first, your incorrect arguments above would (IF they were true and they aren't) amount to inconsistency rather than hypocrisy.

If you wanted to acuse me of hypocrisy then you would need instead to point to the fact that I tolerated your utter drivel while you happened to be on the right side of the Hughes debate but am no longer prepared to do so. On that count I may well be a hypocrite yes.

In the financial results thread you say you anticipate(which according to the dictionary means:expect)the worst case scenario.
You also go onto say we need to be in the CL the next season so we can get the money from it in the accounts for the following year.
Its not the only thread youve come out with this BS but I'm just using it as an example.
In this thread you say that it is not imperative that we get in the CL and Mancini should be given as much time as Hughes at least.You also say Platini plans are something that "could" happen.Not the same as anticipating them is it?
I'm glad you realise your a hypocrite I think its just the degree of it your suffering with.

Erm no, I said that if we don't make the Champs League even IF it becomes imperative that we do so that that doesn't mean the current manager should be dispensed with - plan B would heavily involve the Academy and he has a good record with young players. I also said that the club has to assume the worst case scenario at every stage so as to not do so is way too risky. I'm sure evryone reading this except for two or three cerebrally challenged awkward bastards can understand that distinction.

[Rag_hater]

I'll do IF you look up hypocrite

I think you need to look it up first, your incorrect arguments above would (IF they were true and they aren't) amount to inconsistency rather than hypocrisy.

If you wanted to acuse me of hypocrisy then you would need instead to point to the fact that I tolerated your utter drivel while you happened to be on the right side of the Hughes debate but am no longer prepared to do so. On that count I may well be a hypocrite yes.

In the financial results thread you say you anticipate(which according to the dictionary means:expect)the worst case scenario.
You also go onto say we need to be in the CL the next season so we can get the money from it in the accounts for the following year.
Its not the only thread youve come out with this BS but I'm just using it as an example.
In this thread you say that it is not imperative that we get in the CL and Mancini should be given as much time as Hughes at least.You also say Platini plans are something that "could" happen.Not the same as anticipating them is it?
I'm glad you realise your a hypocrite I think its just the degree of it your suffering with.

Erm no, I said that if we don't make the Champs League even IF it becomes imperative that we do so that that doesn't mean the current manager should be dispensed with - plan B would heavily involve the Academy and he has a good record with young players. I also said that the club has to assume the worst case scenario at every stage so as to not do so is way too risky. I'm sure evryone reading this except for two or three cerebrally challenged awkward bastards can understand that distinction.

You say "that youre making no assumptions just anticipating" that if we dont make the CL this year we will not be able to get the money from it on the books.For a cerebrally challenged awkward b*****d like me that infers that youre trying to tell me with your mighty intellect, that by assuming you mean you are taking for granted and expecting (by anticipating) that we will not be allowed in the CL unless we make it this year.Then you go on to say that because we now have Mancini top 4 is not a priority this year because the Chosen one has to be given as much time as he needs.The emerency to get in the CL this year has somehow dissappated.
So dont lie Bastard.

[Socrates]

You say "that youre making no assumptions just anticipating" that if we dont make the CL this year we will not be able to get the money from it on the books.For a cerebrally challenged awkward b*****d like me that infers that youre trying to tell me with your mighty intellect, that by assuming you mean you are taking for granted and expecting (by anticipating) that we will not be allowed in the CL unless we make it this year.Then you go on to say that because we now have Mancini top 4 is not a priority this year because the Chosen one has to be given as much time as he needs.The emerency to get in the CL this year has somehow dissappated.
So dont lie Bastard.

Oh for Sky Fairies sake you are just too fucking thick for me to waste my time on. Happily our owners do understand these issues that are so obviously beyond you. You cannot understand a concept as simple as recognising a threat and responding by preparing for the worst case scenario that that threat could produce. I am embarrassed for you.

[Rag_hater]

You say "that youre making no assumptions just anticipating" that if we dont make the CL this year we will not be able to get the money from it on the books.For a cerebrally challenged awkward b*****d like me that infers that youre trying to tell me with your mighty intellect, that by assuming you mean you are taking for granted and expecting (by anticipating) that we will not be allowed in the CL unless we make it this year.Then you go on to say that because we now have Mancini top 4 is not a priority this year because the Chosen one has to be given as much time as he needs.The emerency to get in the CL this year has somehow dissappated.
So dont lie Bastard.

Oh for Sky Fairies sake you are just too fucking thick for me to waste my time on. Happily our owners do understand these issues that are so obviously beyond you. You cannot understand a concept as simple as recognising a threat and responding by preparing for the worst case scenario that that threat could produce. I am embarrassed for you.

The feelings mutual.
A threat that doesn't exist, at the moment and is not going to be around for years.
A threat that can be easily overcome.So easily overcome that you want your Chosen one to be given as much time as it takes for him to be a success,because the threat is so minor.

[edge275]

You say "that youre making no assumptions just anticipating" that if we dont make the CL this year we will not be able to get the money from it on the books.For a cerebrally challenged awkward b*****d like me that infers that youre trying to tell me with your mighty intellect, that by assuming you mean you are taking for granted and expecting (by anticipating) that we will not be allowed in the CL unless we make it this year.Then you go on to say that because we now have Mancini top 4 is not a priority this year because the Chosen one has to be given as much time as he needs.The emerency to get in the CL this year has somehow dissappated.
So dont lie Bastard.

Oh for Sky Fairies sake you are just too fucking thick for me to waste my time on. Happily our owners do understand these issues that are so obviously beyond you. You cannot understand a concept as simple as recognising a threat and responding by preparing for the worst case scenario that that threat could produce. I am embarrassed for you.

The feelings mutual.
A threat that doesn't exist, at the moment and is not going to be around for years.
A threat that can be easily overcome.So easily overcome that you want your Chosen one to be given as much time as it takes for him to be a success,because the threat is so minor.

Mate I think what Socrates is trying to say is that although it is of great importance we get in the Champions League this year if for any reason we didn't Mancini may well still be one of (if not the) the best managers we could have to go into next season with.