he's twitching now, the fcuker

he's a slimey twat

 

every club he's ever managed has gone bust

 

 

and to compare eddie davis with redknapp

 

its not only inaccurate, it's totally out of fcuking order

 

I must have missed the news the day Spurs went bust.

 

Im struggling to see how you can pin West Hams demise on him as well (did they actually go bust anyway?)

 

Ok Pompey went bust, not the managers fault in my opinion as the chairman gives the manager a budget to work with.

 

If we go down and go bust with a huge ?110M debt will that be BSA / Megson / OC fault.

 

Give over

I must have missed the news the day Spurs went bust.

 

Im struggling to see how you can pin West Hams demise on him as well (did they actually go bust anyway?)

 

Ok Pompey went bust, not the managers fault in my opinion as the chairman gives the manager a budget to work with.

 

If we go down and go bust with a huge ?110M debt will that be BSA / Megson / OC fault.

 

Give over

 

Its not all about money spent on players we are talking about here. Its money spent on "other" things.

I hate twitcher, AND fooking Spurs.

 

That Club have spent so much money, and when they do get in the top 4, everyone is wanking over how good a job the manager is doing. FFS, give me a break.

 

Any other manager walks into a new club and says, Right, I want to biy back the 4 players you have just sold, but for more money, would be laughed at !!!

 

Even that special player twitcher has "discoverd" cost almost ?15 Million!!!!!

 

At the last world Cup, he was in every paper telling the whoever would listed, "we dont give kids a chance in England", and as soon as he can, he gives a 34 year old a n 80k a week contract and spendfs 10 million on a Brazilian, to play in place of Spurs "Wonder Kids" !

Assuming you're on about Bale there

 

Jol bought him and it was for no where near ?15m, more like ?5/6m up front then they bought out the clause for bonuses relating to appearances etc because Southampton were skint

Hughes had a fortune spent for him in the summer (take robinho out if the equation and his spending suddenly gets a lot less) and was out of the door pdq after that.

 

The Twitchy Faced Cunt is a decent manager but he's nowhere near as good as he nor the mainstream media think.

 

He sold Berbatov and others which has brought in some dough. But he has folk in his reserves on nigh on twice as much as our top paid players.

Well he's the best English manager there is, off top of my head hes the only English manager to have won the FA cup of late or managed in the champions league at all

 

All managers would spend the money spurs have if they had it, and he has made some decent money back - if his chairman gives it him, he'll spend it, reckon spurs are more financially comfortable than most and bring 3rd ahead of Chelsea, arsenal and Liverpool is a job well done for them, they'd have still been in a title race had Defoe scored late on yesterday

 

Not sure if it'd put him in good stead for the England job given he can't buy anyone

 

And he most certainly is bent as fuck

I must have missed the news the day Spurs went bust.

 

Im struggling to see how you can pin West Hams demise on him as well (did they actually go bust anyway?)

 

Ok Pompey went bust, not the managers fault in my opinion as the chairman gives the manager a budget to work with.

 

If we go down and go bust with a huge ?110M debt will that be BSA / Megson / OC fault.

 

Give over

 

i said managed

 

hes still managing spurs

 

pompey, saints, west ham, bournemouth

 

all fcuked

Most football teams finances are a mess and many have gone bust at some point, you could say the same thing about many managers.

 

I dont agree that HR is to blame for the demise of those clubs. You will be blaming Darlington on him next because he didn't pay for his ticket that bonfire night.

Hughes had a fortune spent for him in the summer (take robinho out if the equation and his spending suddenly gets a lot less) and was out of the door pdq after that.

 

The Twitchy Faced Cunt is a decent manager but he's nowhere near as good as he nor the mainstream media think.

 

He sold Berbatov and others which has brought in some dough. But he has folk in his reserves on nigh on twice as much as our top paid players.

He didn't sell berbatov, Ramos did

Hughes had a fortune spent for him in the summer (take robinho out if the equation and his spending suddenly gets a lot less) and was out of the door pdq after that.

 

The Twitchy Faced Cunt is a decent manager but he's nowhere near as good as he nor the mainstream media think.

 

He sold Berbatov and others which has brought in some dough. But he has folk in his reserves on nigh on twice as much as our top paid players.

He didn't sell berbatov, Ramos did

i said managed

 

hes still managing spurs

 

pompey, saints, west ham, bournemouth

 

all fcuked

i said managed

 

hes still managing spurs

 

pompey, saints, west ham, bournemouth

 

all fcuked

 

you know he left Bournemouth in 1992 don't you?

 

and West Ham in 2001

 

and since then they've had many managers/owners

 

I think you do

 

though you missed Southampton off your list as well

Surely there's a more fundamental point here. Tax evasion is currently the reason for the case.

However, money was paid to him for profit on transfer dealings- this, for any manager, must represent a potential conflict of interest. Sell your best players for a healthy profit and make a wedge as part of the deal could seriously screw up your team's chances- it's immoral, and I'm amazed managers are allowed to have this in their contracts. The profit from dealings should be the clubs'.

Moreover, he could buy a shit load of kids from lower division clubs with no intention of playing them, then sell them later for a profit to line his own pockets-.

The tax is a separate issue.

 

Or is this why OC has been touting Cahill for a while?

can't see coyle beneffiting from the sale of cahill

 

he didn't sign him so achieved no profit

 

and whatever else coyle is, he's no fcuking twitch

can't see coyle beneffiting from the sale of cahill

 

he didn't sign him so achieved no profit

 

and whatever else coyle is, he's no fcuking twitch

Fair point

Surely there's a more fundamental point here. Tax evasion is currently the reason for the case.

However, money was paid to him for profit on transfer dealings- this, for any manager, must represent a potential conflict of interest. Sell your best players for a healthy profit and make a wedge as part of the deal could seriously screw up your team's chances- it's immoral, and I'm amazed managers are allowed to have this in their contracts. The profit from dealings should be the clubs'.

Moreover, he could buy a shit load of kids from lower division clubs with no intention of playing them, then sell them later for a profit to line his own pockets-.

The tax is a separate issue.

 

Or is this why OC has been touting Cahill for a while?

Surely there's a more fundamental point here. Tax evasion is currently the reason for the case.

However, money was paid to him for profit on transfer dealings- this, for any manager, must represent a potential conflict of interest. Sell your best players for a healthy profit and make a wedge as part of the deal could seriously screw up your team's chances- it's immoral, and I'm amazed managers are allowed to have this in their contracts. The profit from dealings should be the clubs'.

Moreover, he could buy a shit load of kids from lower division clubs with no intention of playing them, then sell them later for a profit to line his own pockets-.

The tax is a separate issue.

 

Or is this why OC has been touting Cahill for a while?

 

i heard (admittedly about 3 people down the line but originating from reputable sources)

 

he allegedly never used to take brown envelopes with cash in

 

always, allegedly, demanded property deeds, allegedly

 

same source said feguson used to demand cash for after dinner speaking, whereas when they asked joe royle he asked which charity should he donate his fee too (allegedly)

However, money was paid to him for profit on transfer dealings- this, for any manager, must represent a potential conflict of interest. Sell your best players for a healthy profit and make a wedge as part of the deal could seriously screw up your team's chances- it's immoral, and I'm amazed managers are allowed to have this in their contracts. The profit from dealings should be the clubs'.

 

 

Totally agree with that. He could also pick up frees as squad players then move them on a year or 2 later for profit. You would have thought he'd be paid well enough as it is.

He didn't sell berbatov, Ramos did

 

Ramos didnt get a say in any transfers in/out, so in fact Berbatov was sold my Comolli

One man went to bank,

went to bank in Monaco

One man and his dog

went to bank in Monaco.

Totally agree with that. He could also pick up frees as squad players then move them on a year or 2 later for profit. You would have thought he'd be paid well enough as it is.

 

 

You're looking at this on a sentimental football fan basis. In reality these days a manager is an employee who's job it is to deliver shareholder value. As an owner it probably makes more sense to incentivise a manager to "cash in" on players & take profit rather than encouraging them to go out & spend.

LiterallyJamie

So flying to Monaco to deposit a ?250 bung in an account you opened in your dogs name is a crime now?! This trial is a farce.

 

LiterallyJamie

Brainstormng the case with Dad. So far, i've wrote "Rosie the dog ate tax return" on a flip chart. Dad's sobbing gently in the corner.

Rosie45

 

sounds more like a fucking twitter account than a bank account

 

I'm not tuning in to the finer points of the trial, but how does one open a bank account with a name that includes a number???

You're looking at this on a sentimental football fan basis. In reality these days a manager is an employee who's job it is to deliver shareholder value. As an owner it probably makes more sense to incentivise a manager to "cash in" on players & take profit rather than encouraging them to go out & spend.

 

This may be true- but what represents best value for the club?- building a good squad and where possible keeping good players to provide better on pitch performance, thus improved gate receiptes etc.

 

Or

 

Continually, having a rotating door policy to continue an income stream whilst reducing the chances of success on the pitch.

They have done fuck all !

 

I know success is relative. But in 20 / 30 years time, all's Moyes will have against his name at Everton is an FA CUp losesr medal.

Unless they have won trophies, they have both done fuck all.

 

Finishing 4th, wins you NOTHING, and 20 years time, it will NOT be in the Clubs honours list.

 

Sorry to go back in the thread but this is nonsense.

 

Which is the bigger achievement? Getting Bolton into the top 6 or winning the Cup with a top four club, for example Mancini at City last season?

Mancini is better than Allardyce then? No chance!

 

Similarly with Moyes, his achievements at Everton wont be measured by how many cups he has won. He has kept them in the top half (or better) whilst losing his best players regularly (Rooney, Arteta, Lescott, etc) and being given relatively little to re-invest.

Rosie45

 

sounds more like a fucking twitter account than a bank account

 

I'm not tuning in to the finer points of the trial, but how does one open a bank account with a name that includes a number???

 

The presumption seems to be that "47" refers to his (and my) year of birth, but they've not yet found any other Rosie accounts yet!

 

Accounts with numbers in are not, in themseves, unusual but naming accounts after a dog?

.... but naming accounts after a dog?

 

my ex-wife's got one.

In Twitcher's defence, we have a trust fund for my little angel.