IanBishopsHaircut
Well-Known Member
You should try reading the article again as the author even states "silly" about it being called the Emptihad.
Why mention it at all?
You should try reading the article again as the author even states "silly" about it being called the Emptihad.
Because he appears to be claiming (quite correctly) that we are on the up with our attendances.Why should he mention the expansion,the cups over the last 4 years we`ve won (more than United HIS WORDS), last 2 seasons we`ve finished higher than United etc ,etc.Why mention it at all?
Because he appears to be claiming (quite correctly) that we are on the up with our attendances.Why should he mention the expansion,the cups over the last 4 years we`ve won (more than United HIS WORDS), last 2 seasons we`ve finished higher than United etc ,etc.
Some people cant (or dont want to) see the wood for the trees.Thin skinned and sheep followers are aplenty on this forum.
Of course it is.Anyone would have to be a little naive to think otherwise.However there are far many good things than bad things to say and lets be honest has it really spoilt the start to your week,when we have more positive things to look forward to.I still don't see the relevance of using the obviously derogative term...we already know he's a rag Oakie...do you not even acknowledge he may well be getting in snide little digs?
It's not outside the realms of possibility is it really?
Because he appears to be claiming (quite correctly) that we are on the up with our attendances.Why should he mention the expansion,the cups over the last 4 years we`ve won (more than United HIS WORDS), last 2 seasons we`ve finished higher than United etc ,etc.
Some people cant (or dont want to) see the wood for the trees.Thin skinned and sheep followers are aplenty on this forum.
awaits oakie defending them.
Touche.told ya .