typicalcity68
Well-Known Member
Had Souness been in the dugout/dressing room last night, Tevez might well be sporting some facial alterations this morning.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Graham Souness
- Thread starter Eric Wirral
- Start date
Clevers
Well-Known Member
typicalcity68 said:Had Souness been in the dugout/dressing room last night, Tevez might well be sporting some facial alterations this morning.
I certainly think Tevez would have needed a fresh pair of shorts last night.
DontLookBackInAnger
Well-Known Member
I think Hughes has just taken another step to making himself totally unemployable in the eyes of most owners...Great work
Mugatu
Well-Known Member
typicalcity68 said:Had Souness been in the dugout/dressing room last night, Tevez might well be sporting some facial alterations this morning.
Ha, yes. Something like:
"Hey pal, stitch THAT ya wee basa!"
Tevez doesn't speak eeengleesh so he'd have no chance with a wee bit o' Edinburgh brogue.
aka blue jambo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Nov 2008
- Messages
- 5,741
alway rumours on the go about him coming to Hearts asowner / manager .. was a bit meh about it but now I hope it happens
Zin 'messiah' Zimmer
Well-Known Member
Always loved him, did some work for him regularly over the past few years until he fucked off down south to be with his bezzy mate mr supermarket sweep, he knows how to spin a yarn to -
This infamous incident he told me about how he KO'd 3 feneabahce officials who tried invading the dressing room after planting the flag [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FO1EYhecdk&feature=related[/youtube]
Also how Bellamys arse shrunk when he offered him out 1 on 1 after bellamy called him a liar publicly on football focus, even jabbing him in the stomach to which he did fuck all!!!
One of footys great characters
This infamous incident he told me about how he KO'd 3 feneabahce officials who tried invading the dressing room after planting the flag [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FO1EYhecdk&feature=related[/youtube]
Also how Bellamys arse shrunk when he offered him out 1 on 1 after bellamy called him a liar publicly on football focus, even jabbing him in the stomach to which he did fuck all!!!
One of footys great characters
BufordUSABlue
Well-Known Member
Not always been a Souness fan, but loved him last night, top man!
Showed up the 2 ex-Scum (Once a rag - alwasy a rag!) for what they are, just 2 more bitches in Fergiescums hareem of bitches!!
Showed up the 2 ex-Scum (Once a rag - alwasy a rag!) for what they are, just 2 more bitches in Fergiescums hareem of bitches!!
Mr Blue Sky
Well-Known Member
Up to last night id always thought that Souness was a tosser but his verbal assault on Tevez was brilliant. Then watching those two rag muppets trying to condone his behaviour was cringeworthy
Carlos Tevez: Outrage of Graeme Souness the exception to pundits' rule
Fellow panellists Mark Hughes and Dwight Yorke came across as apologists for Manchester City's errant player on Sky Sports' Champions League show
Graeme Souness, the Sky pundit, described Carlos Tevez as a disgrace to his profession and the epitome of everything the man in the street thinks is wrong with football.
Rarely, if ever, do panels of pundits assembled in television studios get the chance to sink their teeth into a bone as juicily fresh and almost indecently tasty as a footballer on more than £200,000 a week disobliging his manager by refusing to come off the bench when requested during a game his team were losing.
On Sky's Champions League show immediately following the dramatic events in Munich, Graeme Souness responded magnificently, quivering with roughly the same amount of righteous indignation that his old pal Roberto Mancini had struggled to contain in his post-match interview, and pointing out helpfully, if a trifle unnecessarily, that the Manchester City manager had also been seething.
At one point Souness gave a passable impersonation of the inflatable headmaster, berating an inflatable Carlos Tevez for bringing a drawing pin into an inflatable classroom. "You've let me down, you've let the school down, but most of all you've let yourself down," is what he nearly said, except Souness was clearly past caring about whether Tevez had let himself down, describing him as a disgrace to his profession and the epitome of everything the man in the street currently thinks is wrong with football.
This was strong stuff, as it needed to be, yet sitting alongside the outspoken Souness fellow-panellists Mark Hughes and Dwight Yorke more or less sat on their hands. They will be disappointed with that, when they see the replays. Hughes was already in a slightly awkward position before being billed as the man who signed Tevez for City. He shares the same representative, Kia Joorabchian, as Tevez, but was on the show as an ex-player and manager not as a corporate spokesman.
The situation and Jeff Stelling's question demanded something much more strident than a mumbled response along the tiresomely familiar lines about Tevez needing to be somewhere in the world where he can be closer to his family. Smiling doltishly in front of the TV lights in Bayern Munich's car park as if he had done nothing wrong, Tevez himself had the nerve to offer the same feeble mantra. Speaking through an interpreter even though he has now been in this country for five years, Tevez only had to utter the word "familia" to render the subsequent translation irrelevant. If proximity to his family is his main consideration, indeed now his only consideration, what on earth was he doing sitting on a substitutes' bench in Germany if not waiting to get on the field?
Yorke was even worse than Hughes, claiming Tevez as a pal through meeting him from time to time "in the village" (presumably in one of its two restaurants) and arguing that all he ever wanted to do was play. Well, Dwight, looking at the pictures coming in he's got a funny way of showing it. Yorke also said Mancini had some work to do to sort out the problem, which is certainly true, but what was conspicuously not being said was the extent to which this most indulged of players was himself the problem.
Except by Souness, of course. Souness said that most people began playing football because they loved the game so much, and that the vast majority of people who were not fortunate enough ever to be paid a cent for playing would struggle to understand how a club's most highly paid player could act so disloyally in a time of need. You could tell Yorke was beginning to feel a little sheepish at this point, because the next time he spoke it was to make clear he didn't condone Tevez's actions. Ouch.
Souness has not always been a clear-eyed and sharp-tongued critic – in his time he has taken the money and said sweet FA like the rest of them – but his stints with the pirate crew in Ireland appear to have given him an appetite for a more swashbuckling style and confronted with a major news story he was not about to let it pass him by. The other two looked disappointed, actually a little bit uncomfortable, about being asked to form opinions about something other than missed chances and marginal offsides.
After the immediate drama will come the repercussions and recriminations. Mancini has said, not before time, that Tevez has played his last game for the club. Tevez, for his part, has claimed that he has always acted professionally and did not refuse to play at all, but was merely misunderstood. Tevez probably has played his last game for City because he is undeserving of a starting place and Mancini would be mad to let him anywhere near the substitutes' bench again. Not only would the seat be better offered to someone within City's ranks who might actually want to get on to the field to show what he could do, the sight of Tevez on the sidelines is likely to incite a riot at Etihad (the word means unity, ironically) at any time in the near future.
Yorke was right about one thing. Mancini has a mess to clear up and it is not entirely of his own making. That is not to point the finger at Hughes instead, because no one could have predicted in July 2009 that the striker City were about to sign (not buy) from their biggest rivals would have been quite such a long-running fiasco. All Hughes saw was an effective striker capable of scoring a good few goals, and if there were questions about the player's ownership, wage demands and general attitude then a club of City's size and wealth could probably absorb them without too much trouble. Wrong.
The question now, with all the hindsight of the past two years, is whether in their eagerness to snatch a prized asset from Manchester United and use him as the poster boy for the blue revolution, City overlooked the possibility that they were signing the very last player who would contribute to club unity and represent a totem for the side, a fixed point around which other acquisitions could assemble themselves. A club attempting to go a long way in a short time need a firm identity, something solid upon which to build.
When Chelsea reinvented themselves with Roman Abramovich's money they did so around a core or nucleus of players – John Terry, Frank Lampard, Didier Drogba, Petr Cech – who are still there to this day. With Tevez, City were always attempting to build a house upon sand. What is perfectly clear today is that no one needs such a selfish, divisive and troublesome individual, but least of all a club spending millions trying to establish themselves as new players at Europe's top table. From start to finish, with a healthy goal haul offering only slight mitigation, Tevez has been an expensive disaster for City, a player they would have been much better doing without.
Of course it is easy to say that now. Everyone is saying it now. Well, everyone except Hughes and Yorke, that is. But could anyone have known it two years ago? Was there no one in the summer of 2009 who thought Tevez just might have been more trouble than he was worth? Perhaps there was one person, in the same city. For as Souness perceptively pointed out on Sky, not worrying too much about any pain it might have caused the nearby Hughes, Sir Alex Ferguson evidently did not fancy Tevez enough to keep him at United.
A number of United supporters were unhappy to see him go and Ferguson himself appeared to be in two minds over Tevez, who eventually received a counter offer from United too late to change his mind. Yet the salient fact is that Ferguson had doubts, and that is how Tevez ended up where he did. There must have been times in the past couple of years when the United manager has agonised over whether he did the right thing. This week will not be among them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/sep/28/carlos-tevez-graeme-souness-sky-sports
Fellow panellists Mark Hughes and Dwight Yorke came across as apologists for Manchester City's errant player on Sky Sports' Champions League show
Graeme Souness, the Sky pundit, described Carlos Tevez as a disgrace to his profession and the epitome of everything the man in the street thinks is wrong with football.
Rarely, if ever, do panels of pundits assembled in television studios get the chance to sink their teeth into a bone as juicily fresh and almost indecently tasty as a footballer on more than £200,000 a week disobliging his manager by refusing to come off the bench when requested during a game his team were losing.
On Sky's Champions League show immediately following the dramatic events in Munich, Graeme Souness responded magnificently, quivering with roughly the same amount of righteous indignation that his old pal Roberto Mancini had struggled to contain in his post-match interview, and pointing out helpfully, if a trifle unnecessarily, that the Manchester City manager had also been seething.
At one point Souness gave a passable impersonation of the inflatable headmaster, berating an inflatable Carlos Tevez for bringing a drawing pin into an inflatable classroom. "You've let me down, you've let the school down, but most of all you've let yourself down," is what he nearly said, except Souness was clearly past caring about whether Tevez had let himself down, describing him as a disgrace to his profession and the epitome of everything the man in the street currently thinks is wrong with football.
This was strong stuff, as it needed to be, yet sitting alongside the outspoken Souness fellow-panellists Mark Hughes and Dwight Yorke more or less sat on their hands. They will be disappointed with that, when they see the replays. Hughes was already in a slightly awkward position before being billed as the man who signed Tevez for City. He shares the same representative, Kia Joorabchian, as Tevez, but was on the show as an ex-player and manager not as a corporate spokesman.
The situation and Jeff Stelling's question demanded something much more strident than a mumbled response along the tiresomely familiar lines about Tevez needing to be somewhere in the world where he can be closer to his family. Smiling doltishly in front of the TV lights in Bayern Munich's car park as if he had done nothing wrong, Tevez himself had the nerve to offer the same feeble mantra. Speaking through an interpreter even though he has now been in this country for five years, Tevez only had to utter the word "familia" to render the subsequent translation irrelevant. If proximity to his family is his main consideration, indeed now his only consideration, what on earth was he doing sitting on a substitutes' bench in Germany if not waiting to get on the field?
Yorke was even worse than Hughes, claiming Tevez as a pal through meeting him from time to time "in the village" (presumably in one of its two restaurants) and arguing that all he ever wanted to do was play. Well, Dwight, looking at the pictures coming in he's got a funny way of showing it. Yorke also said Mancini had some work to do to sort out the problem, which is certainly true, but what was conspicuously not being said was the extent to which this most indulged of players was himself the problem.
Except by Souness, of course. Souness said that most people began playing football because they loved the game so much, and that the vast majority of people who were not fortunate enough ever to be paid a cent for playing would struggle to understand how a club's most highly paid player could act so disloyally in a time of need. You could tell Yorke was beginning to feel a little sheepish at this point, because the next time he spoke it was to make clear he didn't condone Tevez's actions. Ouch.
Souness has not always been a clear-eyed and sharp-tongued critic – in his time he has taken the money and said sweet FA like the rest of them – but his stints with the pirate crew in Ireland appear to have given him an appetite for a more swashbuckling style and confronted with a major news story he was not about to let it pass him by. The other two looked disappointed, actually a little bit uncomfortable, about being asked to form opinions about something other than missed chances and marginal offsides.
After the immediate drama will come the repercussions and recriminations. Mancini has said, not before time, that Tevez has played his last game for the club. Tevez, for his part, has claimed that he has always acted professionally and did not refuse to play at all, but was merely misunderstood. Tevez probably has played his last game for City because he is undeserving of a starting place and Mancini would be mad to let him anywhere near the substitutes' bench again. Not only would the seat be better offered to someone within City's ranks who might actually want to get on to the field to show what he could do, the sight of Tevez on the sidelines is likely to incite a riot at Etihad (the word means unity, ironically) at any time in the near future.
Yorke was right about one thing. Mancini has a mess to clear up and it is not entirely of his own making. That is not to point the finger at Hughes instead, because no one could have predicted in July 2009 that the striker City were about to sign (not buy) from their biggest rivals would have been quite such a long-running fiasco. All Hughes saw was an effective striker capable of scoring a good few goals, and if there were questions about the player's ownership, wage demands and general attitude then a club of City's size and wealth could probably absorb them without too much trouble. Wrong.
The question now, with all the hindsight of the past two years, is whether in their eagerness to snatch a prized asset from Manchester United and use him as the poster boy for the blue revolution, City overlooked the possibility that they were signing the very last player who would contribute to club unity and represent a totem for the side, a fixed point around which other acquisitions could assemble themselves. A club attempting to go a long way in a short time need a firm identity, something solid upon which to build.
When Chelsea reinvented themselves with Roman Abramovich's money they did so around a core or nucleus of players – John Terry, Frank Lampard, Didier Drogba, Petr Cech – who are still there to this day. With Tevez, City were always attempting to build a house upon sand. What is perfectly clear today is that no one needs such a selfish, divisive and troublesome individual, but least of all a club spending millions trying to establish themselves as new players at Europe's top table. From start to finish, with a healthy goal haul offering only slight mitigation, Tevez has been an expensive disaster for City, a player they would have been much better doing without.
Of course it is easy to say that now. Everyone is saying it now. Well, everyone except Hughes and Yorke, that is. But could anyone have known it two years ago? Was there no one in the summer of 2009 who thought Tevez just might have been more trouble than he was worth? Perhaps there was one person, in the same city. For as Souness perceptively pointed out on Sky, not worrying too much about any pain it might have caused the nearby Hughes, Sir Alex Ferguson evidently did not fancy Tevez enough to keep him at United.
A number of United supporters were unhappy to see him go and Ferguson himself appeared to be in two minds over Tevez, who eventually received a counter offer from United too late to change his mind. Yet the salient fact is that Ferguson had doubts, and that is how Tevez ended up where he did. There must have been times in the past couple of years when the United manager has agonised over whether he did the right thing. This week will not be among them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/sep/28/carlos-tevez-graeme-souness-sky-sports
B
B
blueinsa
Guest
He was a beacon of light last night in a studio full of City fucking hating twats.
Hughes had to sit crossed legged to hide his boner whilst trying his best to defend Munster due to them sharing an interest in Kia and him "obviously" hating Bob.
Kudos to Souness though.
Hughes had to sit crossed legged to hide his boner whilst trying his best to defend Munster due to them sharing an interest in Kia and him "obviously" hating Bob.
Kudos to Souness though.