Garry Cook

[moomba]

If it was in the clubs interests we would have kept him on.

We didnt and he moved on. So should we all.

 

[Skashion]

Oh, I spelt his name wrong, did I? Damn that pesky end of the week tiredness and first beer of the night... Mancini was lucky in Italy! Inter did NOT win that first trophy because they were handed it and the second was won because of the lack of threat from Juventus and Milan. His team did nothing in Europe (replicated with City) and he's won the Premiership on +/- with the U****d team being weak by their standards. We've got the biggest transfer budget in world football yet only just scraped a pot.

Yes, I trust Sheikh Mansour. I didn't trust Thaksin Shinawatra.

You have the gall to call a Garry Cook a slimeball but Mancini's reward for not engaging in match fixing is that he can't claim to have won the titles he won because he wasn't facing opposition who were cheating or had cheated? Is cheating not a bit of a slimeball thing to do? Did they not deserve to be punished? I don't see how being the best team to not fix matches somehow diminishes their claim to be rightful champions.

As for not earning his second title. They won it with 97 points and set a record for consecutive wins in the top flights of the five major footballing leagues in Europe! Milan were nowhere near even if there'd been no deductions. Mind you, there was no Juventus so obviously he can't claim to have really won it.

Then for his third you've run out of excuses haven't you? Juventus and Milan start the season on equal points and he still wins.

The rags may well be weak but they finished on the RECORD (over a hundred years of league football) number of points for a runners-up in the top flight - and that includes two-points-for-win adjusted up to three-points-for-a-win. Never in history has a manager required so many points to win a title, and yet you criticise him for being a record breaker - in several respects.

You are, at best, ignorant, and at worst so egotistical that you cannot cope with so many disagreeing with you and so have compensated by becoming a bitter, ultra-defensive, disingenuous slimeball.

 

[Damocles]

Oh, I spelt his name wrong, did I? Damn that pesky end of the week tiredness and first beer of the night... Mancini was lucky in Italy! Inter did NOT win that first trophy because they were handed it and the second was won because of the lack of threat from Juventus and Milan. His team did nothing in Europe (replicated with City) and he's won the Premiership on +/- with the U****d team being weak by their standards. We've got the biggest transfer budget in world football yet only just scraped a pot.

Yes, I trust Sheikh Mansour. I didn't trust Thaksin Shinawatra.

You have the gall to call a Garry Cook a slimeball but Mancini's reward for not engaging in match fixing is that he can't claim to have won the titles he won because he wasn't facing opposition who were cheating or had cheated? Is cheating not a bit of a slimeball thing to do? Did they not deserve to be punished? I don't see how being the best team to not fix matches somehow diminishes their claim to be rightful champions.

As for not earning his second title. They won it with 97 points and set a record for consecutive wins in the top flights of the five major footballing leagues in Europe! Milan were nowhere near even if there'd been no deductions. Mind you, there was no Juventus so obviously he can't claim to have really won it.

Then for his third you've run out of excuses haven't you? Juventus and Milan start the season on equal points and he still wins.

The rags may well be weak but they finished on the RECORD (over a hundred years of league football) number of points for a runners-up in the top flight - and that includes two-points-for-win adjusted up to three-points-for-a-win. Never in history has a manager required so many points to win a title, and yet you criticise him for being a record breaker - in several respects.

You are, at best, ignorant, and at worst so egotistical that you cannot cope with so many disagreeing with you and so have compensated by becoming a bitter, ultra-defensive, disingenuous slimeball.

Milan won the Champions League in that year so how they were "weakened", I have no idea.

 

[maineroadman]

Oh, I spelt his name wrong, did I? Damn that pesky end of the week tiredness and first beer of the night... Mancini was lucky in Italy! Inter did NOT win that first trophy because they were handed it and the second was won because of the lack of threat from Juventus and Milan. His team did nothing in Europe (replicated with City) and he's won the Premiership on +/- with the U****d team being weak by their standards. We've got the biggest transfer budget in world football yet only just scraped a pot.

Yes, I trust Sheikh Mansour. I didn't trust Thaksin Shinawatra.

You have the gall to call a Garry Cook a slimeball but Mancini's reward for not engaging in match fixing is that he can't claim to have won the titles he won because he wasn't facing opposition who were cheating or had cheated? Is cheating not a bit of a slimeball thing to do? Did they not deserve to be punished? I don't see how being the best team to not fix matches somehow diminishes their claim to be rightful champions.

As for not earning his second title. They won it with 97 points and set a record for consecutive wins in the top flights of the five major footballing leagues in Europe! Milan were nowhere near even if there'd been no deductions. Mind you, there was no Juventus so obviously he can't claim to have really won it.

Then for his third you've run out of excuses haven't you? Juventus and Milan start the season on equal points and he still wins.

The rags may well be weak but they finished on the RECORD (over a hundred years of league football) number of points for a runners-up in the top flight - and that includes two-points-for-win adjusted up to three-points-for-a-win. Never in history has a manager required so many points to win a title, and yet you criticise him for being a record breaker - in several respects.

You are, at best, ignorant, and at worst so egotistical that you cannot cope with so many disagreeing with you and so have compensated by becoming a bitter, ultra-defensive, disingenuous slimeball.

Brilliant post Skashion. Your final paragraph beautifully sums up what I suspect the vast majority of posters are thinking.

 

[Didsbury Dave]

Whats really amusing about this thread is that you've all missed the crucial point in your rush to deify Sir Garry and demonize Peoffrey and anyone else with the courage to see beyond the official line of the forum Thought Police.

Cook himself admitted that he embarrassed the club too often and couldn't continue.

The end.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Oh dear.

Whats really amusing about this thread is that you've all missed the crucial point in your rush to deify Sir Garry and demonize Peoffrey and anyone else with the courage to see beyond the official line of the forum Thought Police.

Cook himself admitted that he embarrassed the club too often and couldn't continue.

The end.

 

[Lucky13]

[bigimg]http://72.mm.g-media.com/454634.jpg[/bigimg]

Whats really amusing about this thread is that you've all missed the crucial point in your rush to deify Sir Garry and demonize Peoffrey and anyone else with the courage to see beyond the official line of the forum Thought Police.

Cook himself admitted that he embarrassed the club too often and couldn't continue.

The end.

-- Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:02 pm --

 

[Shaelumstash]

Whats really amusing about this thread is that you've all missed the crucial point in your rush to deify Sir Garry and demonize Peoffrey and anyone else with the courage to see beyond the official line of the forum Thought Police.

Cook himself admitted that he embarrassed the club too often and couldn't continue.

The end.

You've embarrassed yourself and the club too often on here, but you continue to post nonsense.

Do the honourable thing and apologise.

 

[TGR]

Oh, I spelt his name wrong, did I? Damn that pesky end of the week tiredness and first beer of the night... Mancini was lucky in Italy! Inter did NOT win that first trophy because they were handed it and the second was won because of the lack of threat from Juventus and Milan. His team did nothing in Europe (replicated with City) and he's won the Premiership on +/- with the U****d team being weak by their standards. We've got the biggest transfer budget in world football yet only just scraped a pot.

Yes, I trust Sheikh Mansour. I didn't trust Thaksin Shinawatra.

You have the gall to call a Garry Cook a slimeball but Mancini's reward for not engaging in match fixing is that he can't claim to have won the titles he won because he wasn't facing opposition who were cheating or had cheated? Is cheating not a bit of a slimeball thing to do? Did they not deserve to be punished? I don't see how being the best team to not fix matches somehow diminishes their claim to be rightful champions.

As for not earning his second title. They won it with 97 points and set a record for consecutive wins in the top flights of the five major footballing leagues in Europe! Milan were nowhere near even if there'd been no deductions. Mind you, there was no Juventus so obviously he can't claim to have really won it.

Then for his third you've run out of excuses haven't you? Juventus and Milan start the season on equal points and he still wins.

The rags may well be weak but they finished on the RECORD (over a hundred years of league football) number of points for a runners-up in the top flight - and that includes two-points-for-win adjusted up to three-points-for-a-win. Never in history has a manager required so many points to win a title, and yet you criticise him for being a record breaker - in several respects.

You are, at best, ignorant, and at worst so egotistical that you cannot cope with so many disagreeing with you and so have compensated by becoming a bitter, ultra-defensive, disingenuous slimeball.

Brilliant post Skashion. Your final paragraph beautifully sums up what I suspect the vast majority of posters are thinking.

+1

 

[Skashion]

Whats really amusing about this thread is that you've all missed the crucial point in your rush to deify Sir Garry and demonize Peoffrey and anyone else with the courage to see beyond the official line of the forum Thought Police.

Cook himself admitted that he embarrassed the club too often and couldn't continue.

The end.

But the thread was never about his resignation/sacking so well done for making a totally irrelevant point.