Tony Gale - thick, jelous scumbag

[Royaloak]

What a Cnut. Interviewed on SSN about the transfer window. Thinks Robinho deal was bad business. Bought for £32m, sold for £22m, so according to him, 'taking a loss of £17-£18m is bad business. apart from being thick, which I suppose you can excuse from a very mediocre ex- footballer, he then goes on to have a go at the rest of City's signings. What made me laugh was that he was defending Spurs position in going for Van Der Vaart, a player who plays in a position where they are well covered, rather than sign a centre half. His rationale for this was that 'top defenders cost £17-£18m. He then goes on to criticize us for spending £17m on Kolarov. The twat then goes on to say that Stoke and Sunderland have made good signings and to cap it all, when asked if he thought Utd's lack of activity, particularly no action on signing a ball playing midfielder, was down to lack of money, he says 'they don't need a ball player, they have Scholes Carrick and, wait for it, Fletcher. He just couldn't bring himself to answer the question.

I know I shouldn't watch it etc, but you can't turn the tv on thsee days without some nobody having a dig. I wish we'd get on with it and become successful to rub these arse holes noses into the ground.

 

[kinkysleftfoot]

What a Cnut. Interviewed on SSN about the transfer window. Thinks Robinho deal was bad business. Bought for £32m, sold for £22m, so according to him, 'taking a loss of £17-£18m is bad business. apart from being thick, which I suppose you can excuse from a very mediocre ex- footballer, he then goes on to have a go at the rest of City's signings. What made me laugh was that he was defending Spurs position in going for Van Der Vaart, a player who plays in a position where they are well covered, rather than sign a centre half. His rationale for this was that 'top defenders cost £17-£18m. He then goes on to criticize us for spending £17m on Kolarov. The twat then goes on to say that Stoke and Sunderland have made good signings and to cap it all, when asked if he thought Utd's lack of activity, particularly no action on signing a ball playing midfielder, was down to lack of money, he says 'they don't need a ball player, they have Scholes Carrick and, wait for it, Fletcher. He just couldn't bring himself to answer the question.

I know I shouldn't watch it etc, but you can't turn the tv on thsee days without some nobody having a dig. I wish we'd get on with it and become successful to rub these arse holes noses into the ground.

he's right it was bad business..........even my thick blue tinted glasses can't hide that fact!!

 

[GOATERLEGEND]

What got me was when he said " I could have played with xavi and iniesta yaya is massively over priced " then says about Gyan to sunderland for £13 million " steve bruce doesnt get it wrong " cracks me up !!!

 

[BatleyBlue]

Anyone else who has a brain and listened to him will come to the same conclusion as you and ignore the dumb fuck. Fuck them, we should just ignore it and then give them a the V's when we've done our talking on the pitch.

 

[scowy68]

Just the latest in a long,long, que of ex footballers and pundits to put the boot into City.One things for certain,he would never have got anywhere near our current first team squad had he been around at the time of our new owners taking over.Perhaps he knows this, and just chooses to put the boot in like a lot of other has beens.

 

[Manc in London]

I used to listen to his weejkly tips. They were hilarious. During Mark Hughes' first season, he only had us down for a win once during the season. LOL

We could have signed Messi, Xavi and Iniesta but the media would make it look like whoever Spurs signed was better.

No-one has questioned the signing of Sandro. He's the Braiklian version of Gelson Fernandes. But doesn't have the great attitude that the ex-Blue has. I am confident that Sandro will be one of the biggest flops in the PL.

 

[johnny crossan]

We let him down badly last season - he praised us frequently and he tipped us to beat Spurs and get 4th -

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klKNHzRMOVE[/youtube]

after the stick he took I'm not surprised he's a little wary now - especially after Sunderland

 

[darrenwassall]

Tony who?

 

[Royaloak]

What a Cnut. Interviewed on SSN about the transfer window. Thinks Robinho deal was bad business. Bought for £32m, sold for £22m, so according to him, 'taking a loss of £17-£18m is bad business. apart from being thick, which I suppose you can excuse from a very mediocre ex- footballer, he then goes on to have a go at the rest of City's signings. What made me laugh was that he was defending Spurs position in going for Van Der Vaart, a player who plays in a position where they are well covered, rather than sign a centre half. His rationale for this was that 'top defenders cost £17-£18m. He then goes on to criticize us for spending £17m on Kolarov. The twat then goes on to say that Stoke and Sunderland have made good signings and to cap it all, when asked if he thought Utd's lack of activity, particularly no action on signing a ball playing midfielder, was down to lack of money, he says 'they don't need a ball player, they have Scholes Carrick and, wait for it, Fletcher. He just couldn't bring himself to answer the question.

I know I shouldn't watch it etc, but you can't turn the tv on thsee days without some nobody having a dig. I wish we'd get on with it and become successful to rub these arse holes noses into the ground.

he's right it was bad business..........even my thick blue tinted glasses can't hide that fact!!

Wrong - we had a player who didn't want to be here, wasn't playing and despite the big reputation, wasn't up to the physical demands of the Premier League. If he'd stayed, he'd have been worth nothing to us and in addition, we'd have been caught with salary and loyalty bonuses etc. Any asset is worth what the market is prepared to pay - it would have been bad business if we sold him for £22m, if in fact we could have sold him for £30m to another team. That was not the case - it seems that £22m was the best offer in the market - we wanted shut and didn't need him anymore, therefore - good business.

Fact is, the arse has fallen out of the transfer market (do you think the filth would get £32m for Berbaflop if they sold him) and £22m for a player who can't hack it in our league doesn't seem like a bad deal under the circumstances.

 

[Chippy_boy]

What a Cnut. Interviewed on SSN about the transfer window. Thinks Robinho deal was bad business. Bought for £32m, sold for £22m, so according to him, 'taking a loss of £17-£18m is bad business. apart from being thick, which I suppose you can excuse from a very mediocre ex- footballer, he then goes on to have a go at the rest of City's signings. What made me laugh was that he was defending Spurs position in going for Van Der Vaart, a player who plays in a position where they are well covered, rather than sign a centre half. His rationale for this was that 'top defenders cost £17-£18m. He then goes on to criticize us for spending £17m on Kolarov. The twat then goes on to say that Stoke and Sunderland have made good signings and to cap it all, when asked if he thought Utd's lack of activity, particularly no action on signing a ball playing midfielder, was down to lack of money, he says 'they don't need a ball player, they have Scholes Carrick and, wait for it, Fletcher. He just couldn't bring himself to answer the question.

I know I shouldn't watch it etc, but you can't turn the tv on thsee days without some nobody having a dig. I wish we'd get on with it and become successful to rub these arse holes noses into the ground.

he's right it was bad business..........even my thick blue tinted glasses can't hide that fact!!

I think the bad part was letting the twat leave. We should have told him, you are under contract, now knuckle down and get on with it or you are boot cleaning for the next 2 years.