Contracts...or lack of.

[spaldy]

I think they are going to sign a high dollar striker or CB. Have no idea who but they've cleared money to do so.

If it's a striker then they traded out. If they don't, I think thinks it as much of a vote of confidence on bamford as MB thinks that the other players will score.

if it's a solid CB then he's counting on the mids to score. He may even go with one of the youngsters at striker. bamford won't make it 10 games before he's injured again.

[joellufcprice]

I think they are going to sign a high dollar striker or CB. Have no idea who but they've cleared money to do so.

If it's a striker then they traded out. If they don't, I think thinks it as much of a vote of confidence on bamford as MB thinks that the other players will score.

if it's a solid CB then he's counting on the mids to score. He may even go with one of the youngsters at striker. bamford won't make it 10 games before he's injured again.

If we sell Roofe and rely solely on Bamford I'm done with backing their decisions. We will never go up with one striker.

[cress]

If we sell Roofe and rely solely on Bamford I'm done with backing their decisions. We will never go up with one striker.

...and we haven't even talked about the fact that we don't have a defence.

[whitestomper45]

It happens much more now, agents have a lot to do with it.

Club can't win, wasn't long ago folk were moaning we had too many on long term contracts. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.. hey ho

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

Missed.the point of HGRs question, unsurprisingly.

The query was relating to how many players are in, or approaching, the final year of their contract, not how long new contracts might be.

Answer from the Oracle came there none.

Yet again you insult someone for giving an opinion to someone else’s post. Good work fella are a great example of ALAW - not.

[Hugh_G_Rection]

Yet again you insult someone for giving an opinion to someone else’s post. Good work fella are a great example of ALAW - not.

Why would you post this?
What purpose does it serve other than to annoy and antagonise?
If you can't be an adult or stick to the topic I'd suggest you don't bother posting.
The constant tit-for-tat sniping just rubs people up the wrong way and ends up with less people wanting to contribute.

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

So I respond to a post insulting me by calling out the poor behaviour and it is me that should stop posting? Hmmmn thanks but I think your advice might be better directed towards someone else but thanks anyway

[Hugh_G_Rection]

So I respond to a post insulting me by calling out the poor behaviour and it is me that should stop posting? Hmmmn thanks but I think your advice might be better directed towards someone else but thanks anyway

As I pointed out: You both missed the point.
I will, however, admit that was probably due to my original post not being particularly clear.

The difference between his post and yours is that he at least tried to point out where he thought you'd gone wrong on the topic at hand (albeit in an overly antagonistic way)

Your post had absolutely nothing to do with the subject being discussed and was just about trying to hit back.

I've said the same thing to WTF on a different thread.

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

Hmmmn no it was a direct dig at me. There is an easy solution if WTF choses not to insult people then the problem goes away.

[WTF11]

Hmmmn no it was a direct dig at me. There is an easy solution if WTF choses not to insult people then the problem goes away.

Oh grow a pair FFS! If you put all the insults that have been thrown my way in a single post you'd break Footymad! If you and Flint would care to READ what I posted (in this particular instance) there was NO insult, nor any particularly contentious comment, just a none-too-sly dig at the club for producing what many supporters think is a really crap away kit. Flint chose to take exception by either deliberately misconstruing what I wrote, or simply not reading it and actually understanding it, I neither know nor care which.

What I did care about, and the reason for my response, insulting or not, was the reaction I got in his reply, which was as daft as anything I have seen here, and made simply because it was me doing the original post. You make the point regularly about "taking the ball, not the man", go back, read my ORIGINAL post again, and those that sought to lift the scales from the eyes of those who choose not to understand, and see just where I was "insulting" to anyone, before the predictable and wholly inaccurate criticism came back at me.

Debate the subject by all means, but START with the insults, and I'll give as good as I get (and I won't bleat about being called names, simply "call out" the stupidity that sometimes get displayed in doing so)

And if you and others don't like what I post, don't reply (how often have I suggested that!)

Shame that discourse of the sort on the "Roofe Leaving" thread cant extend here.