The Warnock post match moan thread

Harold · by **Harold** » 22 Jan 2007 16:57

Warnock is good value for money though - some of you may hate him, but there's always some entertainment with him.

M4 Junction 11 · by **M4 Junction 11** » 22 Jan 2007 16:58

Page 11

Royal Rother · by **Royal Rother** » 22 Jan 2007 17:00

Royal Lady RR - you seem to completely dismiss the words of Mr Coppell. I've watched him on SSN, heard him on radio berks and read the words attributed to him in the sunday papers and each time he has more or less said that he believed Warnock was telling his player to stamp on one of ours. I do hope this helps.

It doesn't particularly, because he didn't actually say he heard Warnock say it did he?

Coppell obviously feels the need to support Downes but as he has not said he himself heard what Warnock said we can only assume he did not hear it and is therefore basing his words around what Downes thought he heard.

He did specifically say in one interview (or words to this effect) that he did not know what Warnock was really refrring to with the stamping action, but that he considered it an inappropraite thing to be doing in the immediate aftermath of a highly charged sending off incident, which was absolutely right of course.

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 22 Jan 2007 17:07

On radio berks he asked Tim Dellor "what do you think Warnock was doing?" and Dellor said he thought he was telling his player to stamp on one of ours - and Coppell said something along the lines of "there you go then". WHY are you trying to stick up for Warnock here?

SpaceCruiser · by **SpaceCruiser** » 22 Jan 2007 17:09

Royal Lady On radio berks he asked Tim Dellor "what do you think Warnock was doing?" and Dellor said he thought he was telling his player to stamp on one of ours - and Coppell said something along the lines of "there you go then". WHY are you trying to stick up for Warnock here?

Something about his sense of neutrality or some such bollocks.

Harold · by **Harold** » 22 Jan 2007 17:11

it was blatently obvious Warnock was referring to Sidwells tackle...

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 22 Jan 2007 17:13

That's the whole point though Harry my old mucker - it's not blatently obvious at all. as has been said previously, when he's doing the stamping gesture and shouting out, Halsey's back is to Warnock. I hardly think Wally is going to go mental if Warnock was merely moaning about a challenge that Sidwell made, and that he was booked for.

Harold · by **Harold** » 22 Jan 2007 17:15

it was obvious to those who were watching the game properly.

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 22 Jan 2007 17:16

Gosh. did you go?

Harold · by **Harold** » 22 Jan 2007 17:18

Royal Lady Gosh. did you go?

No.

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 22 Jan 2007 17:19

I rest my case then. I may have been in the loo for Shane's goal but I jolly well saw all of what happened on the touchline. Are you going to stop posting soon as well?

SpaceCruiser · by **SpaceCruiser** » 22 Jan 2007 17:20

Harold it was blatently obvious Warnock was referring to Sidwells tackle...

Blatantly not.

Harold · by **Harold** » 22 Jan 2007 17:20

Of course I was there.

Royal Rother · by **Royal Rother** » 22 Jan 2007 17:22

I'll tell you why RL. Virtually the only time I get involved in this way on HNA these days is when I see what I consider to be the pathetic one-eyed view of incidents involving either England or Reading players and officials.

From what I saw on TV (not close enough in the North Stand to get any clear idea of what happened) there was not a jot of evidence to support the view that Warnock either sent Gillespie on to have a shot at Hunt or that he encouraged his players to break any Reading players' legs.

The ONLY person who reckons he heard that being said is Downes. I refuse to believe that Warnock (or anyone else) would shout those instructions to his players in full view and hearing of the 4th official or anyone else. It is just lunacy to suggest otherwise IMHO.

Certainly the first time he did the stamping thing he was pointing over to the far touchline where the Sidwell foul had taken place - why would it be any different the second time? He might be an odd bod who gets right up people's noses on occasions, but Warnock is not some psycho surely?

He was misheard / misinterpreted by people who WANT to think the worst of him of that I am almost 100% certain, but if you lot want to believe something else altogether then don't let me stop you. I have seen this sort of unbalanced lynch-mob view emanating on this board too many times to be swayed by the weight of numbers I can assure you.

SpaceCruiser · by **SpaceCruiser** » 22 Jan 2007 17:24

Up your own arse.

Yorkshire Royal · by **Yorkshire Royal** » 22 Jan 2007 17:25

Warnock is stupid, but not stupid enough to publicly encourage his team to break opponents legs... I mean, maybe in the dressing room, but on the sidelines...? He's not that stupid.

Wally was out of order here, I'm afraid, and if people took off there Reading tinted glasses they might see this...

Royal Rother · by **Royal Rother** » 22 Jan 2007 17:26

Hooray!

Royal Lady · by **Royal Lady** » 22 Jan 2007 17:26

Well, he is "Yorkshire" Royal - he's probably been "got at" by United fans up there!

SpaceCruiser · by **SpaceCruiser** » 22 Jan 2007 17:28

Yorkshire Royal Warnock is stupid, but not stupid enough to publicly encourage his team to break opponents legs... I mean, maybe in the dressing room, but on the sidelines...? He's not that stupid.

Wally was out of order here, I'm afraid, and if people took off there Reading tinted glasses they might see this...

Er, we're not talking about Downes behaviour (which wasn't acceptable), but what Warnock did or did not say.

Yorkshire Royal · by **Yorkshire Royal** » 22 Jan 2007 17:30

In which case ignore the 2nd sentence and concentrate on the 1st. It's not difficult.

The Warnock post match moan thread

Who is online