by melonhead » 21 Oct 2013 11:09
by Extended-Phenotype » 21 Oct 2013 11:36
Woodcote RoyalExtended-Phenotype
It's not SJM staying on that's the problem. It's SJM's staying on that is a sign of a problem.
Utter drivel
by Woodcote Royal » 21 Oct 2013 11:43
Ian Royal Interesting that you see SJM staying on as Chairman for two years as another sign of a problem. Personally I'd say it's a sign of the opposite.
by Extended-Phenotype » 21 Oct 2013 11:58
by Norfolk Royal » 21 Oct 2013 12:03
by Uke » 21 Oct 2013 12:07
by Extended-Phenotype » 21 Oct 2013 12:16
Norfolk Royal
In terms of whether money is tight, the signings of Baird, Drenthe, Bridge, on high wages, Sharpe's loan signing, point in the other direction.
by Nameless » 21 Oct 2013 12:31
Extended-PhenotypeNorfolk Royal
In terms of whether money is tight, the signings of Baird, Drenthe, Bridge, on high wages, Sharpe's loan signing, point in the other direction.
Unless of course the club could afford these players without Anton via parachute payments and prem money.
by HoneyRoastHoax » 21 Oct 2013 12:34
Extended-Phenotype blah blah blah
by Extended-Phenotype » 21 Oct 2013 12:38
HoneyRoastHoaxExtended-Phenotype blah blah blah
by Ian Royal » 21 Oct 2013 13:17
Extended-Phenotype Little signals.
No money spent in January window. Anton says Brian didn't spend the money. Brian says that was bullshit.
Summer promises not met. Lots of backtracking by club. Adkins clearly not satisfied. Forced to dip into emergency loans.
Buyout deadline missed. No comment from club regarding a new completion date. Radio silence as to why buyout deadline missed.
Accounts failed to be submitted.
SJM suddenly announces that, in defiance of previous plans, he will stay on as chairman for another two years. No explanation given as to why.
Not saying the above is definitive proof of something catastrophic. But with the clubs bizarre aversion to talking about anything, it does seem to point to a problem, even if it might be a small or temporary one.
RTG's new stance seems to be "it's none of our business", but I don't really see that being a counter argument to whether there is a problem or not.
by Nameless » 21 Oct 2013 13:29
Ian Royal Lots of that is your view of very ambiguous information. I'd instantly reject half of it as total supposition or deliberately skewed to fit your already formed view.
Not sure I understand your previous post as it seemed to be countering what I'd said, but actually just repeatted it.
by SPARTA » 21 Oct 2013 13:53
Extended-Phenotype Little signals.
No money spent in January window. Anton says Brian didn't spend the money. Brian says that was bullshit.
Summer promises not met. Lots of backtracking by club. Adkins clearly not satisfied. Forced to dip into emergency loans.
Buyout deadline missed. No comment from club regarding a new completion date. Radio silence as to why buyout deadline missed.
Accounts failed to be submitted.
SJM suddenly announces that, in defiance of previous plans, he will stay on as chairman for another two years. No explanation given as to why.
Not saying the above is definitive proof of something catastrophic. But with the clubs bizarre aversion to talking about anything, it does seem to point to a problem, even if it might be a small or temporary one.
RTG's new stance seems to be "it's none of our business", but I don't really see that being a counter argument to whether there is a problem or not.
by Hoop Blah » 21 Oct 2013 14:34
SPARTAExtended-Phenotype Little signals.
No money spent in January window. Anton says Brian didn't spend the money. Brian says that was bullshit.
Bang on!
by winchester_royal » 21 Oct 2013 14:53
Hoop BlahSPARTAExtended-Phenotype Little signals.
No money spent in January window. Anton says Brian didn't spend the money. Brian says that was bullshit.
Bang on!
This one for starters isn't true though is it?
IIRC Brian only ever said he spent all the money available to him over the summer when it was a club decision to basically go with what they had.
by Green » 21 Oct 2013 15:00
Cobiwinchester_royalOne8Seven1 Jamie Harden @MrCompo 1h
Really hope #readingfc fans ask for answers from the stands on Saturday, pressure needs to be applied to TSI. Know I will be!
What is he expecting? A silent sit down protest?
I'd like to protest against him. Deary me, the comparisons to Portsmouth and the like are so woefully ill-informed and inaccurate based on current 'evidence' that I'd happily back RFC in any legal actions they might be tempted to take.![]()
by melonhead » 21 Oct 2013 15:07
Norfolk Royal
The only real fact is that SJM has been asked to stay on for two more years.
.
by Extended-Phenotype » 21 Oct 2013 15:25
by Norfolk Royal » 21 Oct 2013 15:29
melonheadNorfolk Royal
The only real fact is that SJM has been asked to stay on for two more years.
.
tbf to EP- who i like to disagree with
all of things he listed were FACTS
by Extended-Phenotype » 21 Oct 2013 15:30
Norfolk RoyalmelonheadNorfolk Royal
The only real fact is that SJM has been asked to stay on for two more years.
.
tbf to EP- who i like to disagree with
all of things he listed were FACTS
I'll take your word for that as I didn't really read it.
Users browsing this forum: Christof, mumbo-jumbo, RG30 and 303 guests