McCall delighted after good night all round for City (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

professional performance and great result, yes obly grimsby and no I wont get to excited but any 3-0 away win is an achievement. nice to see barry make me laugh again when he missed the ball when if he had controlled it he had a free shot on goal...

No Brandon and city win glad Stu has finally seen the light.James ob his 5 times the player Brandon is and at only 18 can only get better.Stick with the spine of this team injuries permitting and we won't be too far away. 2 points of playoffs in a poor league all we need is some consistency to turn these recent draws into a win like last night and we can still be in the hunt for the auto places.In saying that though Grimsby are a poor team but at least we have a platform to build from again and remember we still have Thorne, Boulding and Omar on the way back to full fitness we will soon have a bench as good as most teams we should soon be able to say bye bye to Brandon.COME ON CITY PUSH ON LADS

Shaun? Shau-aun? Where are you to enlighten us with your WIT AND INSIGHT!!!!!!!!????? Please.......DON'T MAKE US WAIT TOO LONG!!!!!!!.......be
fore you tell us what drivel we were last night!!!!!!!!! AND HOW CLUELESS MCCALL IS!!!!!!!! Or should we expect radio silence from sheepland today?

PS Well done Waynus on getting the result spot on. Please let me have your predictions for next Tuesday as I have a spare tenner I want to put to good use.

although i enjoyed it last night the most amusing part was remembering some city fans used to try and convince me Conlon was any good...LOL...i can't believe i was actually worried that he may score!!!

all in all a good performance and the team looked stronger - it's easy to criticise people like Chris when we win and he's not playing but what a player he is to have coming from the bench if the game needs changing.

guuted now that no game this weekend!!!!

and i must say grimsby were pretty dog doo!!!...the assit from their left back for our 2nd was excellent.

philthyr wrote:
Shaun? Shau-aun? Where are you to enlighten us with your WIT AND INSIGHT!!!!!!!!????? Please.......DON'T MAKE US WAIT TOO LONG!!!!!!!.......be fore you tell us what drivel we were last night!!!!!!!!! AND HOW CLUELESS MCCALL IS!!!!!!!! Or should we expect radio silence from sheepland today? PS Well done Waynus on getting the result spot on. Please let me have your predictions for next Tuesday as I have a spare tenner I want to put to good use.

STUART McCalls BRADFORD ARMY!!

PREMIERSHIP HERE WE COME!!!!

It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me.

Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie.

It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park.

Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night.

Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

waynus71 wrote:
This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

jb bantam wrote:
It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

You miserable, negative, glass half-empty, downbeat, sad pratt!!!
Not seen you on here much before jb bantam, but what a laugh you sound!
After some disappointing results lately, we have just won 3-0 away, moved up to 10th, are 2 points out of the play-offs and your reaction is:-
"It will take more than that".
I'm afraid the word NUMPTY was invented for people like you!

shaun from richmond wrote:

philthyr wrote: Shaun? Shau-aun? Where are you to enlighten us with your WIT AND INSIGHT!!!!!!!!????? Please.......DON'T MAKE US WAIT TOO LONG!!!!!!!.......be fore you tell us what drivel we were last night!!!!!!!!! AND HOW CLUELESS MCCALL IS!!!!!!!! Or should we expect radio silence from sheepland today? PS Well done Waynus on getting the result spot on. Please let me have your predictions for next Tuesday as I have a spare tenner I want to put to good use.

STUART McCalls BRADFORD ARMY!! PREMIERSHIP HERE WE COME!!!!

Humorous. Think a trip to PC world may be in order for you Shaun. Your caps lock is definitely stuck and you also seem to have a problem with the '!' key. Or do you overuse capital letters and exclamation marks as a substitute for actually bothering to think?

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

He says he went but it wont be the first time he says that he went but didnt.

Couldn't make the gane last night but listened to tim and stick's on the radio.Sounded a bit dull at first then city started getting their foot on the ball.short passing instead of the big boot to Hanson all the time.This worked well at start of the season but teams have done a little homework on us now. Great result away from home and well done Hanson and Williams scoring again. Williams has been the bargain of the decade for me.

jb bantam wrote:
It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

I have to sit next to Mr Bantam every week.He is a good man but what he knows about football you could write on the back of a stamp with a dry wipe marker.

GT Horton Bantam wrote:

jb bantam wrote:
It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

I have to sit next to Mr Bantam every week.He is a good man but what he knows about football you could write on the back of a stamp with a dry wipe marker.

Hahhaha.
Just watch he don't put something nasty on yer seat then next Tuesday after that comment :-)

philthyr wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

philthyr wrote: Shaun? Shau-aun? Where are you to enlighten us with your WIT AND INSIGHT!!!!!!!!????? Please.......DON'T MAKE US WAIT TOO LONG!!!!!!!.......be fore you tell us what drivel we were last night!!!!!!!!! AND HOW CLUELESS MCCALL IS!!!!!!!! Or should we expect radio silence from sheepland today? PS Well done Waynus on getting the result spot on. Please let me have your predictions for next Tuesday as I have a spare tenner I want to put to good use.

STUART McCalls BRADFORD ARMY!! PREMIERSHIP HERE WE COME!!!!

Humorous. Think a trip to PC world may be in order for you Shaun. Your caps lock is definitely stuck and you also seem to have a problem with the '!' key. Or do you overuse capital letters and exclamation marks as a substitute for actually bothering to think?

erm..... pot, kettle, black!

TheCoach wrote:

philthyr wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

philthyr wrote: Shaun? Shau-aun? Where are you to enlighten us with your WIT AND INSIGHT!!!!!!!!????? Please.......DON'T MAKE US WAIT TOO LONG!!!!!!!.......be fore you tell us what drivel we were last night!!!!!!!!! AND HOW CLUELESS MCCALL IS!!!!!!!! Or should we expect radio silence from sheepland today? PS Well done Waynus on getting the result spot on. Please let me have your predictions for next Tuesday as I have a spare tenner I want to put to good use.

STUART McCalls BRADFORD ARMY!! PREMIERSHIP HERE WE COME!!!!

Humorous. Think a trip to PC world may be in order for you Shaun. Your caps lock is definitely stuck and you also seem to have a problem with the '!' key. Or do you overuse capital letters and exclamation marks as a substitute for actually bothering to think?

erm..... pot, kettle, black!

Just a bit of irony in my first comment Coach

well done lads great to see we are back to wining ways again keep up the good work keep them goals flying in the onion bag

i think we can beat enyone on the right day as we have already shown this season

jb bantam wrote:
It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

What cracks? The only cracks around here are 'crack-pots' such as yourself and Shaun LOL.

If McCall keeps the same spine going forward and realises that O'Brien plays the role alongside Flynn better than Brandon, we won't be far away. Remember, we have 3 new signings to come in soon; Daley, Thorne & O'Leary!

The FACT is, when you compare this season's results to last season's (replacing the relegated with the promoted teams, i,e Chester/Burton and Brentford/Northampto
n etc) we are actually EIGHT points better off!!!!!

All I have ever wanted to see is a youthful side WANTING to play for this club, learning and developing together and PROGRESSION. I firmly believe we now have that in abundance. It is now just a case of pooling the correct permutation from all the players we have available. When we have a fully fit squad to choose from, I don't believe there are many squads in this league that are better.

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

Yes, didn't you!

Following up the comment i made earlier

"apparantly, Brandon went into Stuart McCalls office a couple of weeks ago and said play me more or il leave!"

I know this because a couple of games ago my cousin sponsored the match and through inside information was told this.

Keep up VALLEYOFSHAME!
Oh and disgraceful username!

g-daffi wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

He says he went but it wont be the first time he says that he went but didnt.

When (and I want proof) have I EVER said I had been but hadn't been?

I can name all the games I have been to this season. Didn't I get slated for having an opinion but CONFIRMING I hadn't been at a particular game? Why would I have reason to lie about going? There are posters on here that know me personally and can confirm my attendance at those games!

I'll stick to supporting my team. You stick to spending your evenings playing darts!

waynus71 wrote:

jb bantam wrote: It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

What cracks? The only cracks around here are 'crack-pots' such as yourself and Shaun LOL. If McCall keeps the same spine going forward and realises that O'Brien plays the role alongside Flynn better than Brandon, we won't be far away. Remember, we have 3 new signings to come in soon; Daley, Thorne & O'Leary! The FACT is, when you compare this season's results to last season's (replacing the relegated with the promoted teams, i,e Chester/Burton and Brentford/Northampto n etc) we are actually EIGHT points better off!!!!! All I have ever wanted to see is a youthful side WANTING to play for this club, learning and developing together and PROGRESSION. I firmly believe we now have that in abundance. It is now just a case of pooling the correct permutation from all the players we have available. When we have a fully fit squad to choose from, I don't believe there are many squads in this league that are better.

Yes Waynus our squad is strong, but we still need to sign a classy young striker, regretfully both Boulders and Thorne are nearing the end of their football careers, having said that Hanson~s goal strike rate is improving, and Evans needs a bit more guidance and experience.
I predict City to win against Rochdale next week, that is were my tenner is going LOL, have you a prediction for Citys finishing spot at the end of the season Waynus, I am thinking at least 5th, or maybe 3rd, City are not a mid table team, they have just been unlucky with there top strikers and other influential players being out with injuries or illness. Come on you Bantams

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

Yes, didn't you!

Its just that you go ON AND ON AND ON !!

Waynus at least I am consistant in being critical on City , yes I stand by my comment this morning one result doesnt paper over the cracks and like it or not that is the truth , look at the Grimsby stats , they are hardly world beaters.

Costly McCall decisions have cost us dear this season all I shall say is wait and see what Tuesday brings against the best "footballing team" in this division.

Also forget Thorne & O Leary , but I agree Daley could change the way we play football , with Daley in the side we have a very special player who on his day can win you a game of football.

I dont like McCall's way of management and dislike the fact Jacob's is his assistant thats just the way it is , that is my opinion , this web site is about opinions good and bad , some will agree with me they would be glad to see the back of McCall , others will disagree , but the ones who disagree never have an arguement to back up why he should stay "the ones I call give McCall ten years brigade" and wont have a bad word said about him.

How I would love a pair of Stuart Mccall rose tinted glasses , unfortunately I watch City in great detail and I know a good manager from a bad one

jb bantam wrote:
Waynus at least I am consistant in being critical on City , yes I stand by my comment this morning one result doesnt paper over the cracks and like it or not that is the truth , look at the Grimsby stats , they are hardly world beaters. Costly McCall decisions have cost us dear this season all I shall say is wait and see what Tuesday brings against the best "footballing team" in this division. Also forget Thorne & O Leary , but I agree Daley could change the way we play football , with Daley in the side we have a very special player who on his day can win you a game of football. I dont like McCall's way of management and dislike the fact Jacob's is his assistant thats just the way it is , that is my opinion , this web site is about opinions good and bad , some will agree with me they would be glad to see the back of McCall , others will disagree , but the ones who disagree never have an arguement to back up why he should stay "the ones I call give McCall ten years brigade" and wont have a bad word said about him. How I would love a pair of Stuart Mccall rose tinted glasses , unfortunately I watch City in great detail and I know a good manager from a bad one

Jb i dont agree with the comment about not thinking o leary can change a game from what we saw pre season even though it wasnt much but enough to show what potential and qualities the man has personnally out of all the injured he's the one i most look forward to. I understand what your saying about covering over the cracks but I finally beleive we have a cracking team which puts in so much effort but they are young and as long as we are not losing and getting beat easy every game i beleive with this team and the youthfulness this is the way forward even though im not mccalls greatest fan as a MANAGER he has improved and we do have a team which can have success its just getting the right players together in the right formation then we should be right up there come end of season

jb bantam wrote:
Waynus at least I am consistant in being critical on City , yes I stand by my comment this morning one result doesnt paper over the cracks and like it or not that is the truth , look at the Grimsby stats , they are hardly world beaters. Costly McCall decisions have cost us dear this season all I shall say is wait and see what Tuesday brings against the best "footballing team" in this division. Also forget Thorne & O Leary , but I agree Daley could change the way we play football , with Daley in the side we have a very special player who on his day can win you a game of football. I dont like McCall's way of management and dislike the fact Jacob's is his assistant thats just the way it is , that is my opinion , this web site is about opinions good and bad , some will agree with me they would be glad to see the back of McCall , others will disagree , but the ones who disagree never have an arguement to back up why he should stay "the ones I call give McCall ten years brigade" and wont have a bad word said about him. How I would love a pair of Stuart Mccall rose tinted glasses , unfortunately I watch City in great detail and I know a good manager from a bad one

I have criticised Stuart's Tactics and decisions etc. and after the Morcambe Away-game last season, I had serious doubts about his abillity to get the best out of his squad of players. I expressed my opinion that he should have an assistant who 'had been there, worn the t-shirt' etc. I have a different opinion as to him on his Tactics etc this season. However, I have never called for him to be sacked -and never will!. Why?, because the hiring and firing is the job of the Chairman not the job of supporters. Most supporters have probably never played at a resonable standard of football, never coached at any level of any sport, never had the responsibillity of running a business and -going by some of the posts on here- seem interested only in posting disrespectful and nasty comments about players and officials who have done nothing wrong other than not perform to the 'standard' required. We all want City to be 'successful', and we all have a right to express our opinions, however, there is definitely no need to be abusive about the Manager, Staff and players. So, if their is an argument as to why Stuart should stay, I would say he should stay because we have 2 Chairmen who have the very best interests of Bradford City at heart who want him to stay and because they feel at this period of time it is best for Bradford City. My support and confidence is with them, because?.... well I think they know a little bit more about how to keep Bradford City alive than many of those who have called for the sacking of: S Mc; Jakes; Wetherall; the Goal-keeping Coach; the Physio etc. etc.

Good result last night,you can only beat whats in front you and City did that quite comfortably.
Not getting carried away though and starting to predict play off spots, we've been here before and a big failing for City in recent seasons is a lack of consistancy.
One point i would like to pick up on from was jb banatam's comment on O'Leary, the lad is a very very good player and when fully fit would be City's best midfielder and would walk into any side in this div and most in the one above, his only downside is as i said is that he's injury prone.

Great win against a worse than average side, and we only need to beat the average/worse than average to be there abouts at the end, the matches against what someone called the 'footballing' sides will decide whether its the playoffs or higher. Will a point agaist B'mouth come in handy? could do..but also the 2 points dropped in certain games could come back to haunt us.
Think people dont realise that we have only lost 4 out of 18, so a string of wins and not many will have a better record.
Evans just needs some coaching and abit of shooting practice and a bit of confidence could go a long with him.
glass still half full.

Good to read some of the doubters are supporting McCall for a change, while the usual suspects have nothing constructive to say. Grimsby are a poor side and the league doesn’t lie, but the weather conditions where blustery and the ball in the air could have gone anywhere. City’s game was mixed with ball on the floor and in the air to Hanson, as a unit City played the conditions well and was far too strong for Grimsby. The difference last night to other games is we converted our chances into goals; however we missed three times as many as we scored. Evo does everything right but score, although if he was a goal scorer he would be playing at a much higher level. I think the reason O’Brien has been missing is purely to rest him, just like Nielson needs a rest. The side last night is close to the one that had the unbeaten run, this does show that we have a small squad and injuries, suspensions etc will have a major effect. I think McCall has been reading all these comments and added this wealth of football knowledge to his locker especially Shaun’s from Richmond, keep up the good work lads. With my rose tinted glasses I can see McCall being Manager for the next ten years, at least.

y25ajb wrote:
Following up the comment i made earlier "apparantly, Brandon went into Stuart McCalls office a couple of weeks ago and said play me more or il leave!" I know this because a couple of games ago my cousin sponsored the match and through inside information was told this. Keep up VALLEYOFSHAME! Oh and disgraceful username!

Sorry I have just stopped laughing after reading this post................
....... your source is who exactly? The guy who arranges the executive packages, arranges the tables in the banqueting suite?
Plus the fact that you heard this through your cousin, so at best it has come 3rd hand and who knows before that, that IS if it ever happened!
My source is a player(s) of the club and I know that this isn't the case.
I wonder what other valuable nuggets of information they part when someone sponsors a match!
But like I siad if that was the case, how come Brandon was dropped last night and surely he should have put a transfer request in by now!
Thanks for your contribution anyway.

lonniejockstrap wrote:

jb bantam wrote: Waynus at least I am consistant in being critical on City , yes I stand by my comment this morning one result doesnt paper over the cracks and like it or not that is the truth , look at the Grimsby stats , they are hardly world beaters. Costly McCall decisions have cost us dear this season all I shall say is wait and see what Tuesday brings against the best "footballing team" in this division. Also forget Thorne & O Leary , but I agree Daley could change the way we play football , with Daley in the side we have a very special player who on his day can win you a game of football. I dont like McCall's way of management and dislike the fact Jacob's is his assistant thats just the way it is , that is my opinion , this web site is about opinions good and bad , some will agree with me they would be glad to see the back of McCall , others will disagree , but the ones who disagree never have an arguement to back up why he should stay "the ones I call give McCall ten years brigade" and wont have a bad word said about him. How I would love a pair of Stuart Mccall rose tinted glasses , unfortunately I watch City in great detail and I know a good manager from a bad one

I have criticised Stuart's Tactics and decisions etc. and after the Morcambe Away-game last season, I had serious doubts about his abillity to get the best out of his squad of players. I expressed my opinion that he should have an assistant who 'had been there, worn the t-shirt' etc. I have a different opinion as to him on his Tactics etc this season. However, I have never called for him to be sacked -and never will!. Why?, because the hiring and firing is the job of the Chairman not the job of supporters. Most supporters have probably never played at a resonable standard of football, never coached at any level of any sport, never had the responsibillity of running a business and -going by some of the posts on here- seem interested only in posting disrespectful and nasty comments about players and officials who have done nothing wrong other than not perform to the 'standard' required. We all want City to be 'successful', and we all have a right to express our opinions, however, there is definitely no need to be abusive about the Manager, Staff and players. So, if their is an argument as to why Stuart should stay, I would say he should stay because we have 2 Chairmen who have the very best interests of Bradford City at heart who want him to stay and because they feel at this period of time it is best for Bradford City. My support and confidence is with them, because?.... well I think they know a little bit more about how to keep Bradford City alive than many of those who have called for the sacking of: S Mc; Jakes; Wetherall; the Goal-keeping Coach; the Physio etc. etc.

Top post................
.again.

gspot wrote:
although i enjoyed it last night the most amusing part was remembering some city fans used to try and convince me Conlon was any good...LOL...i can't believe i was actually worried that he may score!!! all in all a good performance and the team looked stronger - it's easy to criticise people like Chris when we win and he's not playing but what a player he is to have coming from the bench if the game needs changing. guuted now that no game this weekend!!!! and i must say grimsby were pretty dog doo!!!...the assit from their left back for our 2nd was excellent.

just remember who signed conlon the clown????? and mulin??

It was Roger Owen. So i will chose to believe him thanks.

COLATS wrote:

gspot wrote:
although i enjoyed it last night the most amusing part was remembering some city fans used to try and convince me Conlon was any good...LOL...i can't believe i was actually worried that he may score!!! all in all a good performance and the team looked stronger - it's easy to criticise people like Chris when we win and he's not playing but what a player he is to have coming from the bench if the game needs changing. guuted now that no game this weekend!!!! and i must say grimsby were pretty dog doo!!!...the assit from their left back for our 2nd was excellent.

just remember who signed conlon the clown????? and mulin??

Aye and didn't he also sign Thorne, Bully, Flynn, Evans, Hanson, Williams, Neilson plus the guys he brought on loan!

Hasn't Benitez and Ferguson also had some dodgy signings over the years???

balbrigganfc wrote:

waynus71 wrote:

jb bantam wrote: It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

What cracks? The only cracks around here are 'crack-pots' such as yourself and Shaun LOL. If McCall keeps the same spine going forward and realises that O'Brien plays the role alongside Flynn better than Brandon, we won't be far away. Remember, we have 3 new signings to come in soon; Daley, Thorne & O'Leary! The FACT is, when you compare this season's results to last season's (replacing the relegated with the promoted teams, i,e Chester/Burton and Brentford/Northampto n etc) we are actually EIGHT points better off!!!!! All I have ever wanted to see is a youthful side WANTING to play for this club, learning and developing together and PROGRESSION. I firmly believe we now have that in abundance. It is now just a case of pooling the correct permutation from all the players we have available. When we have a fully fit squad to choose from, I don't believe there are many squads in this league that are better.

Yes Waynus our squad is strong, but we still need to sign a classy young striker, regretfully both Boulders and Thorne are nearing the end of their football careers, having said that Hanson~s goal strike rate is improving, and Evans needs a bit more guidance and experience.
I predict City to win against Rochdale next week, that is were my tenner is going LOL, have you a prediction for Citys finishing spot at the end of the season Waynus, I am thinking at least 5th, or maybe 3rd, City are not a mid table team, they have just been unlucky with there top strikers and other influential players being out with injuries or illness. Come on you Bantams

I predicted a top 10 finish at the beginning of the season and haven't seen anything to change my mind. If we do get a play-off place, that would be remarkable.

However, with so many new young inexperienced signings, I just want to see improvement throughout the season. I predict 8th.

y25ajb wrote:
It was Roger Owen. So i will chose to believe him thanks.

Interesting that you post this name, but who do you believe?
Your cousin or 'Roger Owen' the Commercial Director? As surely you only heard it allegedly from your cousin!
Secondly, should this not be true then you have created a rather awkward position for yourself as you could be slandering the name of the player and possibly writing something libelous about Mr Owen.
I find it strange that Mr Owen would care to publicise this as I am not sure what message it would send out?
Either the player thinks he is better/bigger than the club or that the manager would be weak to fold to pressure from a player.
Either way I don't think it does the club any positive favours but I don't think the correct message is being delivered.
Brandon could have gone pre-season (and yes I understand from some fans you wish he did or does)and would have been entitled to a pay out by the club as the club had told him at that point to find another club. He stayed out of loyalty due to the fact he was injured most of last season. Some fans won't see it as that, but that's the truth.

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

Yes, didn't you!

Its just that you go ON AND ON AND ON !!

I haven't 'gone on-and-on'. I simply posted my observations on the game in ONE post. Hardly 'going on-and-on is it?

If you look at my posts from the last couple of days, you will see that one particular poster constantly goads me. He invited me for a drink, which I declined saying I was off to Grimsby. Then he tried to suggest that because I still posted on here, it meant I can't have gone. I replied again saying I had gone and could get certain posters on here to confirm.

So once again, hardly 'going on-and-on'!

I think you are trying to cause friction because of my LOL comment above, re 'cracks' and couldn't think of anything else to beat me with!!!

jb bantam wrote:
Waynus at least I am consistant in being critical on City , yes I stand by my comment this morning one result doesnt paper over the cracks and like it or not that is the truth , look at the Grimsby stats , they are hardly world beaters.

Costly McCall decisions have cost us dear this season all I shall say is wait and see what Tuesday brings against the best "footballing team" in this division.

Also forget Thorne & O Leary , but I agree Daley could change the way we play football , with Daley in the side we have a very special player who on his day can win you a game of football.

I dont like McCall's way of management and dislike the fact Jacob's is his assistant thats just the way it is , that is my opinion , this web site is about opinions good and bad , some will agree with me they would be glad to see the back of McCall , others will disagree , but the ones who disagree never have an arguement to back up why he should stay "the ones I call give McCall ten years brigade" and wont have a bad word said about him.

How I would love a pair of Stuart Mccall rose tinted glasses , unfortunately I watch City in great detail and I know a good manager from a bad one

Firstly, I want to make it clear I wasn't attacking your view. The comment about you being a 'crackpot' was tongue-in-cheek, hence the 'LOL'.

However, I do think you are being harsh on the club. From February of last year, I started airing my concerns in McCall's abilities to build a squad and change tactics. I was even more upset that he couldn't get his squad motivated.

I was told to shut up, support the team and give McCall time to learn from his mistakes. At the start of this season, I was happy with the majority of the players he signed. He brought in experience in key areas and blended it with youth, which is what we were crying out for.

I wasn't happy he retained Clarke, failed to bring in a recognised keeper and then started Hanson on the left of midfield. I wasn't too down-hearted after the County game, but was very unhappy with the tactics instilled during the Forest game.

But, this is the key part..... we are improving and the football is now a joy to watch. It is exciting and we are never over-run or dominated against. We always look like having a chance.

McCall still has lots to learn, that is a fact, but at last he looks like he IS learning. Just as Bateson, Evans, Hanson, Neilson, O'Brien (both of them) and Williams are rookies at this level and are on a steep learning curve, so too is our manager. All we can ask for is an improvement and signs that we are learning together. Personally, I believe we are.

I see you didn't comment on the facts I quoted. Against the same sides as last season, (replacing the sides that left this league - up and down), we are actually 8 points better off. THAT IS PROGRESSION!

I hope you see that I'm not a 'give McCall 10 seasons' or a wearer of 'rose-tinted glasses', but I do offer both sides to the argument. As you say above, 'I have given you plenty of reasons to back up why he should stay'. Your turn to say why he should go........ and I don't mean, because "I dont like McCall's way of management and dislike the fact Jacob's is his assistant" or "I know a good manager from a bad one"!

perhaps roger owen ought to be made aware of these statements: there could be some legal issues here.

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

Yes, didn't you!

Its just that you go ON AND ON AND ON !!

I haven't 'gone on-and-on'. I simply posted my observations on the game in ONE post. Hardly 'going on-and-on is it? If you look at my posts from the last couple of days, you will see that one particular poster constantly goads me. He invited me for a drink, which I declined saying I was off to Grimsby. Then he tried to suggest that because I still posted on here, it meant I can't have gone. I replied again saying I had gone and could get certain posters on here to confirm. So once again, hardly 'going on-and-on'! I think you are trying to cause friction because of my LOL comment above, re 'cracks' and couldn't think of anything else to beat me with!!!

Its just that you are so boring!! but you seem to think you are really interesting!!
Just cut down the length of your posts, and get to your point!! thats all Im saying...........

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:

waynus71 wrote: This was a professional performance and only a short period of play, just after hafltime and again when they brought on Akpro, worried me. Eastwood made some very good and important saves, although he also concerned me when he went flapping a couple of times. Other than that and a couple of missed headers from Rehman, they never really threatened us. They are really that poor and the league table doesn't lie. It was great to see J O'Brien back in the side. I don't know if McCall has been giving him an enforced rest or not, but he clearly is a better player than Brandon (in that role anyay). He links up much better with Flynn & Bully and we look stronger in the middle of the park. Hanson didn't have it all his own way up front, but in difficult conditions, he still managed to win lots of ball. Whaley was quite simply sensational and everytime he got the ball, you could sense the excitement amongst the City fans. He seems to have it all; vision, pace, crossing ability & shooting. Can we extend the loan until the end of the season please! The only downside was the performance (again) of Evans. His workrate is excellent but he simply doesn't carry a threat. When he gets put through for a one-on-one with the keeper, you just know he won't make it count. I am certain that had he been replaced with Boulders last night, we could be celebrating having hit 4 or 5 last night. Next Tuesday sees a much harder ask, when Rochdale come to town. The only change I would make would be for Evans to replace Boulders on the bench with the latter starting up front with Hanson. My prediction for next week is 1-1 (get your "spare tenners" on it LOL).

So you went then??

Yes, didn't you!

Its just that you go ON AND ON AND ON !!

I haven't 'gone on-and-on'. I simply posted my observations on the game in ONE post. Hardly 'going on-and-on is it? If you look at my posts from the last couple of days, you will see that one particular poster constantly goads me. He invited me for a drink, which I declined saying I was off to Grimsby. Then he tried to suggest that because I still posted on here, it meant I can't have gone. I replied again saying I had gone and could get certain posters on here to confirm. So once again, hardly 'going on-and-on'! I think you are trying to cause friction because of my LOL comment above, re 'cracks' and couldn't think of anything else to beat me with!!!

Its just that you are so boring!! but you seem to think you are really interesting!! Just cut down the length of your posts, and get to your point!! thats all Im saying...........

With you being a 'sheep', I know you like being cloned, but don't try cloning me into another 'Shaun the sheep'!

If I am going to post, I will cover all things good and bad and not just post rubbish such as "McCall 'hoof it' is not up to the job" etc!

We can all keep it short, but when it is neither constructive nor focused, what is the point!

valleyofshame wrote:

y25ajb wrote: It was Roger Owen. So i will chose to believe him thanks.

Interesting that you post this name, but who do you believe? Your cousin or 'Roger Owen' the Commercial Director? As surely you only heard it allegedly from your cousin! Secondly, should this not be true then you have created a rather awkward position for yourself as you could be slandering the name of the player and possibly writing something libelous about Mr Owen. I find it strange that Mr Owen would care to publicise this as I am not sure what message it would send out? Either the player thinks he is better/bigger than the club or that the manager would be weak to fold to pressure from a player. Either way I don't think it does the club any positive favours but I don't think the correct message is being delivered. Brandon could have gone pre-season (and yes I understand from some fans you wish he did or does)and would have been entitled to a pay out by the club as the club had told him at that point to find another club. He stayed out of loyalty due to the fact he was injured most of last season. Some fans won't see it as that, but that's the truth.

Valley, just in case you missed my response to your previous post (on another story).

"Errr, Waynus, lets not start this again as you came off a poor second last time and if I had have been a vindictive person Waynus would have been no more.
If you think that I have my d!ck up his arse then thats your opinion and we have often seen before how your opinions turn out.

If anyone has been aggressive here then I will find it is you, chill out and was it not you the other day when someone commented on a post made by G-daffi mocking you that you asked the other poster to keep out of it? Clearly another case of double standards on your part".

RESPONSE

The difference being, my friend, is that this set of opinions was based on MY original post. Therefore, I am not butting in on other people's spats, I am adding. Furthermore, I know macca69 well and I found your response to him to be;
A) Aggressive and
B) Vindictive.

You say it is me that is being aggressive, yet it was YOU that suggested Brandon had slept with Macca69'swife. Even though we all know that is unlikely to have happened, I don't suppose your comment was meant to be complimentary!

So if you want to report me for asking you to "take your d!ck out of Brandon's ar5e", go ahead. I will counter that with your slanderous comment about macca69's wife. He who casts the first stone etc etc !!!!

Ive noticed the dull of mind come up with this...."shaun the sheep stuff"?? when they try to attack me!
I have to say Im surprised you too have fallen into this camp!
For the record.....I tend to agree with most of your posts..........but they go on forever!!! Which kind of makes you into a bit of a TRAINSPOTTER TYPE !
Thats all Im saying,
just get to your point!!

no more penalty blasts please!!
hitting fans is not the way to score!!

shaun from richmond wrote:
Ive noticed the dull of mind come up with this...."shaun the sheep stuff"?? when they try to attack me! I have to say Im surprised you too have fallen into this camp! For the record.....I tend to agree with most of your posts..........but they go on forever!!! Which kind of makes you into a bit of a TRAINSPOTTER TYPE ! Thats all Im saying, just get to your point!!

Just as you have done...... you wanted to make a point that my posts go 'on-and-on', yet start waffling about 'sheep'?!?!

Which brings me back yo your post on the Rehman story. Yet again you are posting your views (and I'm not attacking them or your right to make them) and claiming them to be fact.

I promise to try to be more direct if you post matter-of-fact comments instead of heresay!

Finally, my attempt at wit was obviously wasted (my fault not yours). I simply wanted to make a point that you shouldn't try to clone us...... like 'dolly'.

waynus71 wrote:

shaun from richmond wrote:
Ive noticed the dull of mind come up with this...."shaun the sheep stuff"?? when they try to attack me! I have to say Im surprised you too have fallen into this camp! For the record.....I tend to agree with most of your posts..........but they go on forever!!! Which kind of makes you into a bit of a TRAINSPOTTER TYPE ! Thats all Im saying, just get to your point!!

Just as you have done...... you wanted to make a point that my posts go 'on-and-on', yet start waffling about 'sheep'?!?!

Which brings me back yo your post on the Rehman story. Yet again you are posting your views (and I'm not attacking them or your right to make them) and claiming them to be fact.

I promise to try to be more direct if you post matter-of-fact comments instead of heresay!

Finally, my attempt at wit was obviously wasted (my fault not yours). I simply wanted to make a point that you shouldn't try to clone us...... like 'dolly'.

I think you may be just a bit of a pillock!! My opinion of course!!

Oh well!!

waynus71 wrote:

balbrigganfc wrote:

waynus71 wrote:

jb bantam wrote: It will take more than a win over a very poor Grimsby side to paper over the cracks

What cracks? The only cracks around here are 'crack-pots' such as yourself and Shaun LOL. If McCall keeps the same spine going forward and realises that O'Brien plays the role alongside Flynn better than Brandon, we won't be far away. Remember, we have 3 new signings to come in soon; Daley, Thorne & O'Leary! The FACT is, when you compare this season's results to last season's (replacing the relegated with the promoted teams, i,e Chester/Burton and Brentford/Northampto n etc) we are actually EIGHT points better off!!!!! All I have ever wanted to see is a youthful side WANTING to play for this club, learning and developing together and PROGRESSION. I firmly believe we now have that in abundance. It is now just a case of pooling the correct permutation from all the players we have available. When we have a fully fit squad to choose from, I don't believe there are many squads in this league that are better.

Yes Waynus our squad is strong, but we still need to sign a classy young striker, regretfully both Boulders and Thorne are nearing the end of their football careers, having said that Hanson~s goal strike rate is improving, and Evans needs a bit more guidance and experience.
I predict City to win against Rochdale next week, that is were my tenner is going LOL, have you a prediction for Citys finishing spot at the end of the season Waynus, I am thinking at least 5th, or maybe 3rd, City are not a mid table team, they have just been unlucky with there top strikers and other influential players being out with injuries or illness. Come on you Bantams

I predicted a top 10 finish at the beginning of the season and haven't seen anything to change my mind. If we do get a play-off place, that would be remarkable.

However, with so many new young inexperienced signings, I just want to see improvement throughout the season. I predict 8th.

This is a very fair comment Waynus, improvement is all that really can be expected of this young inexperienced side with a coach with little experience of coaching.

However, I still think that by the start of January City will start to play better as a team get the results needed to get to 3rd or 5th place, would still like to see them sign a classy young striker.

Come on you Bantams

waynus71 wrote:

valleyofshame wrote:

y25ajb wrote: It was Roger Owen. So i will chose to believe him thanks.

Interesting that you post this name, but who do you believe? Your cousin or 'Roger Owen' the Commercial Director? As surely you only heard it allegedly from your cousin! Secondly, should this not be true then you have created a rather awkward position for yourself as you could be slandering the name of the player and possibly writing something libelous about Mr Owen. I find it strange that Mr Owen would care to publicise this as I am not sure what message it would send out? Either the player thinks he is better/bigger than the club or that the manager would be weak to fold to pressure from a player. Either way I don't think it does the club any positive favours but I don't think the correct message is being delivered. Brandon could have gone pre-season (and yes I understand from some fans you wish he did or does)and would have been entitled to a pay out by the club as the club had told him at that point to find another club. He stayed out of loyalty due to the fact he was injured most of last season. Some fans won't see it as that, but that's the truth.

Valley, just in case you missed my response to your previous post (on another story). "Errr, Waynus, lets not start this again as you came off a poor second last time and if I had have been a vindictive person Waynus would have been no more. If you think that I have my d!ck up his arse then thats your opinion and we have often seen before how your opinions turn out. If anyone has been aggressive here then I will find it is you, chill out and was it not you the other day when someone commented on a post made by G-daffi mocking you that you asked the other poster to keep out of it? Clearly another case of double standards on your part". RESPONSE The difference being, my friend, is that this set of opinions was based on MY original post. Therefore, I am not butting in on other people's spats, I am adding. Furthermore, I know macca69 well and I found your response to him to be; A) Aggressive and B) Vindictive. You say it is me that is being aggressive, yet it was YOU that suggested Brandon had slept with Macca69'swife. Even though we all know that is unlikely to have happened, I don't suppose your comment was meant to be complimentary! So if you want to report me for asking you to "take your d!ck out of Brandon's ar5e", go ahead. I will counter that with your slanderous comment about macca69's wife. He who casts the first stone etc etc !!!!

Ha ha, you really are a plonker.
You seem to try and argue with anyone and everyone.
I am glad you are friends with Macca and that you came to his aid like the knight in shining armour that you are.
I believe that he came back with a witty reply that leads me to believe that he took the comment in the merit it was intended.
Just because I didn't put LOL (like I pointed out to you before is akin to a gushing teenager) when you make a comment to people, doesn't mean that things can't be said in jest.
In your post you put that it is 'unlikely' that Brandon has slept with his wife - well you're Macca's friend and you have your doubts! (Waynus this also a sarcaastic comment in case you missed it with your sense of humour bypass).
Talking of aggressiveness and use of !!!!! which you pointed out to me previously comes across aggressive. Well it just so happens that many of your posts have been in this vain recently. I wanted to pick you up on it at the time, but thought that would be petty.
As for reporting you for your d!ck comment you are way wide of the mark AGAIN.
No the reference there was for your melt down the other month where you went off on one and amazingly sent a mildly grovelling apology - still not managing to come out completely but atleast it was somewhere close.
A problem that you seem to have is involving yourself in everything, when you are not necessarily involved. It's upto you if you do, but atleast live by your own standards.
Oh and by the way, if you want to see me in court for slanderous comments - crack on, however, it would have to be Maccca's wife that made the complaint as she would be the alleged victim (that is had it not been a tongue in cheek comment), you can't be the victim in life for everything!

tyker wrote:
perhaps roger owen ought to be made aware of these statements: there could be some legal issues here.

Same here, although I wouldn't expect Mr Owen to make a comment on the matter as it would be embarassing on behalf of the club.
Surely if people are going to be quoted, then you should ask for their permission.

Dont need to sign a classy young striker! we already have 1 the boy from the coop!

Need to revert to 4-4-2 formation especially at for home games.
Keep banging the goals in Jimbo
I predict at least 18 this season,
I will be proud to present your top goal scorer trophy at end of season.
See you at the presentation big man.

First of all, how do you determine the difference between your 'tongue in cheeks' comments to mine? You claim your post towards macca69's wife was meant, tongue-in-cheek, whereas it sounded very sarcastic and only came out after he had slagged off Brandon again. Something you really don't approve of.

I said she couldn't have slept with Brandon because you had beaten her to it (now that was tongue in cheek). I then told you to take your d!ck out of his ar5e as it was becoming boring reading you attack everybody else's views of Brandon. It is clear you like the player and I wouldn't be surprised to hear you was a close friend/family member.

Finally, where did I suggest taking you to court? What I actually said was that if you report me (to the T&A) for the 'take your d!ck out of his ar5e comment", I will report you for the comment you made about macca69s wife (which was slanderous), even if you now CLAIM it to be tongue-in-cheek!

I don't believe we will see eye-to-eye on many subjects so in order to stop the bickering, I suggest you refrain from commenting on my posts and I will pay you the same respect.

Seal??

waynus71 wrote:
First of all, how do you determine the difference between your 'tongue in cheeks' comments to mine? You claim your post towards macca69's wife was meant, tongue-in-cheek, whereas it sounded very sarcastic and only came out after he had slagged off Brandon again. Something you really don't approve of. I said she couldn't have slept with Brandon because you had beaten her to it (now that was tongue in cheek). I then told you to take your d!ck out of his ar5e as it was becoming boring reading you attack everybody else's views of Brandon. It is clear you like the player and I wouldn't be surprised to hear you was a close friend/family member. Finally, where did I suggest taking you to court? What I actually said was that if you report me (to the T&A) for the 'take your d!ck out of his ar5e comment", I will report you for the comment you made about macca69s wife (which was slanderous), even if you now CLAIM it to be tongue-in-cheek! I don't believe we will see eye-to-eye on many subjects so in order to stop the bickering, I suggest you refrain from commenting on my posts and I will pay you the same respect. Seal??

waynus, you are worse than a hormonal pregnant woman.
I had hoped you were an intellectual person.
You mentioned slander in your post- which I thought you would understand - a slanderous/defamator
y/liabelous comment could only be decided on in a court of law - therefore if you were accussing me of slander then you would have to take me to court! Simple facts surely you should understand that? The T&A could not decide on whether something was slanderous, etc, unless the law of tha land has changed whilst I have been asleep?
But seen as you were not the victim as previously explained, you couldn't make any complaint. I won't 'bore you' with the other facts that you would have to prove in order to get it home - which you wouldn't. Chin up.
However, IF, I had have upset Macca and he made this aware to me, then I would have provided him with an unreserved apology and show you how a real man can apologise - atleast this would give you some sort of example to follow in the future.
Anyway, you would have been able to see that it was a tongue in cheek reply due to the fact when Macca replied to the post with his witty response, I actually acknowledged it, only for you to come on and attack me some time AFTER my acknowledgement.
It seems to me that you took more offence to it than he did (maybe you should be taking your little man out of his a$$).
As I have told you before if I had wanted to get you kicked off of here as Waynus then I could have quite easily have done it when you had your meltdown.
I find it more amusing to keep you on here as Waynus and I think I may have worked out your alter ego, but I am not 100% confident yet.
If you want to stop commenting on my posts then so be it (I willl believe it when I see it) but you seem to want to argue with a larger number of people than me, so why stop commenting on my posts? Why not stop commenting on everyone else's posts that you fall out with? I think I know why.
I don't approve of many players getting 'slagged off' if I feel it's unjustified in my eyes. If some people don't like a person or player and can do it constructively then I am unlikely to put my two pence in.
Anyway in closing - Macca - if I offended you please let me know.

valleyofshame wrote:

waynus71 wrote: First of all, how do you determine the difference between your 'tongue in cheeks' comments to mine? You claim your post towards macca69's wife was meant, tongue-in-cheek, whereas it sounded very sarcastic and only came out after he had slagged off Brandon again. Something you really don't approve of. I said she couldn't have slept with Brandon because you had beaten her to it (now that was tongue in cheek). I then told you to take your d!ck out of his ar5e as it was becoming boring reading you attack everybody else's views of Brandon. It is clear you like the player and I wouldn't be surprised to hear you was a close friend/family member. Finally, where did I suggest taking you to court? What I actually said was that if you report me (to the T&A) for the 'take your d!ck out of his ar5e comment", I will report you for the comment you made about macca69s wife (which was slanderous), even if you now CLAIM it to be tongue-in-cheek! I don't believe we will see eye-to-eye on many subjects so in order to stop the bickering, I suggest you refrain from commenting on my posts and I will pay you the same respect. Seal??

waynus, you are worse than a hormonal pregnant woman. I had hoped you were an intellectual person. You mentioned slander in your post- which I thought you would understand - a slanderous/defamator y/liabelous comment could only be decided on in a court of law - therefore if you were accussing me of slander then you would have to take me to court! Simple facts surely you should understand that? The T&A could not decide on whether something was slanderous, etc, unless the law of tha land has changed whilst I have been asleep? But seen as you were not the victim as previously explained, you couldn't make any complaint. I won't 'bore you' with the other facts that you would have to prove in order to get it home - which you wouldn't. Chin up. However, IF, I had have upset Macca and he made this aware to me, then I would have provided him with an unreserved apology and show you how a real man can apologise - atleast this would give you some sort of example to follow in the future. Anyway, you would have been able to see that it was a tongue in cheek reply due to the fact when Macca replied to the post with his witty response, I actually acknowledged it, only for you to come on and attack me some time AFTER my acknowledgement. It seems to me that you took more offence to it than he did (maybe you should be taking your little man out of his a$$). As I have told you before if I had wanted to get you kicked off of here as Waynus then I could have quite easily have done it when you had your meltdown. I find it more amusing to keep you on here as Waynus and I think I may have worked out your alter ego, but I am not 100% confident yet. If you want to stop commenting on my posts then so be it (I willl believe it when I see it) but you seem to want to argue with a larger number of people than me, so why stop commenting on my posts? Why not stop commenting on everyone else's posts that you fall out with? I think I know why. I don't approve of many players getting 'slagged off' if I feel it's unjustified in my eyes. If some people don't like a person or player and can do it constructively then I am unlikely to put my two pence in. Anyway in closing - Macca - if I offended you please let me know.

This is my last post on the matter (I can hear your cries of joy from here, LOL *oops that's my gushing teen impression again).

Firstly, you can 'report' any post on this website by clicking on the link. I'm not a legal representative so will not comment on who or how a 'slanderous' comment can be proved. However, the T&A state you can report someone for making such a comment and it was this that I was referring to.

Secondly, you have got the incidents in the wrong chronological order, as I replied to your post BEFORE macca69 did. I think he replied with a humourous post because I had already responded. I know for a fact that he didn't take it to be 'tongue-in-cheek', but as you keep pointing out, he is probably more man than either of us.

I only post as 'waynus', so don't know what the 'alter ego' refers to. However, at the beginning of the season, when I was coming in for some particularly harsh stick, I changed my name for a couple of weeks, yet posted the same views. The responses I got were very responsive. Amazing how the username of 'waynus' can stir up so much tension instead of his actual views!

Finally, my suggestion that you do not respond to my posts (going forward) and that I won't respond to yours has nothing to do with 'falling out' with you. The simple fact is you don't agree with any of my views and I have reason not to agree with some of yours. In order to stop this turning into the 'waynus' and 'valleyofshame' website, I suggested we agree to disagree and simply not respond.

I don't 'slag-off' brandon or for that matter, 'hate' him. However, even when I backed up my point that he doesn't fit in the role he is being asked to play (as well as J O'Brien), you still felt the need to try to rubbish my views/stats. This despite agreeing yourself that he is 'playing out of position'.

Waynus, I think your problem is that (and I have said it beforre) you involve yourself in things that don't really concern you. For example the comment I made to Macca. Why should you think that you need to reply on their behalf? As I have posted, if Macca had a problem with that comment then he should address it - I am not going to bite his head off if he says he was offended.
You also make comments like 'I think he', which clearly shows that it is in your head and Macca has not asked you to do it on his behalf. Anyway that matter is becoming tedious.
As for the disagreement over Brandon, you presented figures that you said backed up your argument. All I did was change the parameters of the figures to include all games rather than just league and presented them again. This is hardly an attempt to rubbish your argument, it is a fact of life in business that figures can be manipulated to show a different argument. In my case it was to show that it wasn't a clear case of saying O'Brien was a clear starter. And if you read further down on the post thread I even say I accept your comment (might not whole heartedly agree with it - but accept it), which you will find is not tryiing to find an argument with everything you say.
In truth I like O'Brien and think he is an asset to the squad and if he is playing the better football he should start. I think it will be even bettter once Omar and O'Leary are fit as competition for places is great and if it means Brandon falls to 4th choice as the others are playing better, so what? As long as City benefit from it I don't care.
What I do object to as stated is outright hatred to player or lies as it is counter productive to the team.
As for turning this into the Waynus/Valleyofshame
, debate, I think you have already created the circus, I purposely stay off here every so often as I find it distracting and thats why I might not post for a few weeks, whereas you are constantly on here bickering with certain people.