aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
Never victims
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.
Media Thread 2020/21
- Thread starter mccity
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
If he was burning to death in front of me and I had a pint I’d pour it awayI'd drink petrol then drench the disgusting mess
then glass him
maccieblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2008
- Messages
- 1,494
Am I allowed to piss on him before he catches fireIf Custis was burning I'd hold my bladder.
Barcon
Well-Known Member
I hope you're not insulting my cat.Two twisted mouths and two twisted brains.
gordondaviesmoustache
Well-Known Member
Only if I can watch.Am I allowed to piss on him before he catches fire
aguero93:20
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2013
- Messages
- 90,256
- Location
- Hunting Cats.
- Team supported
- Some gobshites in day-glo green and black.
NoAm I allowed to piss on him before he catches fire
PrezIke
Well-Known Member
See Pep chose to respond to media criticisms about being a "chequebook manager." Good for him with his answers...yet...
I was watching our last game (FA Cup v. Sweansea) broadcast here in the States on ESPN.
After we were up 3-0 dominating with the match commentors with little to discuss about the game itself, Taylor Twellman, the colour commentor, perhaps triggered by boredom thought it wise to create some interest in a game that was clearly over by raising questions about the validity of Pep's attributes as a manager under the guise of this critique.
He began musing with the return of cliche'd questions about whether Pep could manage a lower level side.
Pushing the idea through questions, that he would like to to see if Pep could do what he does at a lower level club without the money.
Suggesting this would be a true test of whether he was truly a great manager. We've heard this before, but not for at least a year. It's part of the deal for us, we all know as City fans.
We don't have the alleged "background" of Liverpool to some, and/or sized fanbase as other sides so it is the primary critique.
No one asks this of Real Madrid and whilst United can be critiqued, it's often portrayed under the cloak of xenophobia against those Yank owners ruining football, so the club, its "history" and reputation remain intact. Even criticisms at Liverpool and of course Arsenal are thrown in the same manner, so there's no real way to criticise the club itself.
We are not given the benefit of this "luxury."
The funny thing is every time this point about being a "chequebook manager" is made to jab at Pep no one ever considers how MANAGING a large squad of "big players" is a HIGHLY underrated skill that other "good" managers who can take a lower quality side and win more than normal may lack.
This bit has forever been the biggest flaw of the "chequebook manager" claim.
Zidane and even Ole also may have man management skills with with top players.
Yet, Pep is also a tactical icon. Go see Swansea's manager and how he worships him. In the pre-game on ESPN they referenced this. Do these other managers get such love? Hardly. Do they care if they "overachieved" with a lower level side? No, they want to observe, learn and emulate THE BEST.
The "questioning" of Pep's quality, frequently masked as asking if he can manage a weaker side, has always been been a false narrative as a result of this evidence, but it strikingly goes unchequed on the regular.
The man is a genius, a top human being from what I see and hear, and is a brave man to take the job with us and stay even after he has been ridiculed by the media since day 1 he joined because he's THAT good and has had some difficult spells.
I beyond appreciate the man for everything he has given us as fans, and every fan of the game.
Those seeking some kind of "narrative" to jab at him may not really be looking for a "story" but simply don't like City and what we represent.
He's going to be associated with that (if he took the job at United I HIGHLY doubt he would get the same criticism) and he has stayed with us and fought through the storm of ups and downs and for that I am appreciative and grateful.
The rest is just smoke or hot air, which always dissipates with time.
I was watching our last game (FA Cup v. Sweansea) broadcast here in the States on ESPN.
After we were up 3-0 dominating with the match commentors with little to discuss about the game itself, Taylor Twellman, the colour commentor, perhaps triggered by boredom thought it wise to create some interest in a game that was clearly over by raising questions about the validity of Pep's attributes as a manager under the guise of this critique.
He began musing with the return of cliche'd questions about whether Pep could manage a lower level side.
Pushing the idea through questions, that he would like to to see if Pep could do what he does at a lower level club without the money.
Suggesting this would be a true test of whether he was truly a great manager. We've heard this before, but not for at least a year. It's part of the deal for us, we all know as City fans.
We don't have the alleged "background" of Liverpool to some, and/or sized fanbase as other sides so it is the primary critique.
No one asks this of Real Madrid and whilst United can be critiqued, it's often portrayed under the cloak of xenophobia against those Yank owners ruining football, so the club, its "history" and reputation remain intact. Even criticisms at Liverpool and of course Arsenal are thrown in the same manner, so there's no real way to criticise the club itself.
We are not given the benefit of this "luxury."
The funny thing is every time this point about being a "chequebook manager" is made to jab at Pep no one ever considers how MANAGING a large squad of "big players" is a HIGHLY underrated skill that other "good" managers who can take a lower quality side and win more than normal may lack.
This bit has forever been the biggest flaw of the "chequebook manager" claim.
Zidane and even Ole also may have man management skills with with top players.
Yet, Pep is also a tactical icon. Go see Swansea's manager and how he worships him. In the pre-game on ESPN they referenced this. Do these other managers get such love? Hardly. Do they care if they "overachieved" with a lower level side? No, they want to observe, learn and emulate THE BEST.
The "questioning" of Pep's quality, frequently masked as asking if he can manage a weaker side, has always been been a false narrative as a result of this evidence, but it strikingly goes unchequed on the regular.
The man is a genius, a top human being from what I see and hear, and is a brave man to take the job with us and stay even after he has been ridiculed by the media since day 1 he joined because he's THAT good and has had some difficult spells.
I beyond appreciate the man for everything he has given us as fans, and every fan of the game.
Those seeking some kind of "narrative" to jab at him may not really be looking for a "story" but simply don't like City and what we represent.
He's going to be associated with that (if he took the job at United I HIGHLY doubt he would get the same criticism) and he has stayed with us and fought through the storm of ups and downs and for that I am appreciative and grateful.
The rest is just smoke or hot air, which always dissipates with time.
Last edited:
Dodge
Well-Known Member
Brilliant post.See Pep chose to respond to media criticisms about being a "chequebook manager." Good for him with his answers...yet...
I was watching our last game (FA Cup v. Sweansea) broadcast here in the States on ESPN.
After we were up 3-0 dominating with the match commentors with little to discuss about the game itself, Taylor Twellman, the colour commentor, perhaps triggered by boredom thought it wise to create some interest in a game that was clearly over by raising questions about the validity of Pep's attributes as a manager under the guise of this critique.
He began musing with the return of cliche'd questions about whether Pep could manage a lower level side.
Pushing the idea through questions, that he would like to to see if Pep could do what he does at a lower level club without the money.
Suggesting this would be a true test of whether he was truly a great manager. We've heard this before, but not for at least a year. It's part of the deal for us, we all know as City fans.
We don't have the alleged "background" of Liverpool to some, and/or sized fanbase as other sides so it is the primary critique.
No one asks this of Real Madrid and whilst United can be critiqued, it's often portrayed under the cloack of xenophobia against those Yank owners ruining football, so the club, its "history" and reputation remain intact. Even criticisms at Liverpool and of course Arsenal are thrown in the same manner, so there's no real way to criticise the club itself.
We are not given the benefit of this "luxury."
The funny thing is every time this point about being a "chequebook manager" is made to jab at Pep no one ever considers how MANAGING a large squad of "big players" is a HIGHLY underrated skill that other "good" managers who can take a lower quality side and win more than normal may lack.
This bit has forever been the biggest flaw of the "chequebook manager" claim.
Zidane and even Ole also may have man management skills with with top players.
Yet, Pep is also a tactical icon. Go see Swansea's manager and how he worships him. In the pre-game on ESPN they referenced this. Do these other managers get such love? Hardly.
"Questioning" of Pep's quality, frequently masked as asking if he can manage a weaker side has always been been a false narrative as a result of this, but it goes unchequed on the regular.
The man is a genius, a top human being from what I see and hear, and is a brave man to take the job with us and stay even after he has been ridiculed by the media since day 1 he joined because he's THAT good and has had some difficult spells.
I beyond appreciate the man for everything he has given us as fans, and every fan of the game.
Those seeking some kind of "narrative" to jab at him may not really be looking for a "story" but simply don't like City and what we represent.
He's going to be associated with that (if he took the job at United I HIGHLY doubt he would get the same criticism) and he has stayed with us and fought through the storm of ups and downs and for that I am appreciative and grateful.
The rest is just smoke or hot air, which always dissipates with time.
dronefromsector7G
Well-Known Member
PervertOnly if I can watch.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.