soggy biscuit The most annoying part is that if Pompey get saved somehow, their fans will immediately revert back to the smug mongtards that they have always been
Read your sentence again and tell me why it is incorrect.
by Uke » 19 Feb 2010 14:03
soggy biscuit The most annoying part is that if Pompey get saved somehow, their fans will immediately revert back to the smug mongtards that they have always been
by soggy biscuit » 19 Feb 2010 14:14
Ukesoggy biscuit The most annoying part is that if Pompey get saved somehow, their fans will immediately revert back to the smug mongtards that they have always been
Read your sentence again and tell me why it is incorrect.
by Uke » 19 Feb 2010 14:33
soggy biscuitUkesoggy biscuit The most annoying part is that if Pompey get saved somehow, their fans will immediately revert back to the smug mongtards that they have always been
Read your sentence again and tell me why it is incorrect.
yeah yeah I know. You know what I meant though
by Barry the bird boggler » 19 Feb 2010 14:44
by Dirk Gently » 19 Feb 2010 14:45
Ukesoggy biscuitUke Read your sentence again and tell me why it is incorrect.
yeah yeah I know. You know what I meant though
They're still smug enough to think they can get round HMRC and FIFA rules, imagine what they'll be like if they do! They will become ubersmug hypermongtards.
by Uke » 19 Feb 2010 15:09
Dirk GentlyUke They're still smug enough to think they can get round HMRC and FIFA rules, imagine what they'll be like if they do! They will become ubersmug hypermongtards.
Not all of them by a long, long, way, and fewer every day ... they're no different to any other club in that they have some supporters who understand and some who demand the moon on a stick and someone else to pay for it.
We have our own fair share of mongtards here, of course - just see some of the posts on "The Team" if you don't believe it.
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 19 Feb 2010 16:10
by Uke » 19 Feb 2010 16:39
Smoking Kills Dancing Doe So again who is THEY?
THEY deserve, THEY did this, THEY need to be made an example of.
Burn in hell? What the fcuk are you talking about?
by Compo's Hat » 19 Feb 2010 22:41
Revised HMRC court schedule
With the various adjournments granted and a couple of strikings out (Hinckley and Accrington paid their debts), I thought it might be useful to publish the revised list of when cases are next due in court:
24 February – Notts County
1 March – Portsmouth
3 March – Burscough (‘final’); Cardiff City; Southend United
10 March – Chester City (although that assumes the company still exists by then)
by Royal With Cheese » 20 Feb 2010 07:42
by TFF » 20 Feb 2010 08:14
Royal With Cheese Breaking news on Sky. FA reject Portsmouths plan to sell players outside the transfer window.
With them effectively needing 22m just to fulfil fixtures I think they're just about fcuked.
The Guardian A total of £22m is required for Portsmouth to continue as a going concern until the end of season, otherwise they will fold. However, this depends on the Premier League's bottom-placed team finishing 17th as all the club's forecasts have been based on avoiding relegation. If the club finish 20th then around £26m will be required to keep Portsmouth afloat. Even if Portsmouth were to enter administration, a total of around £14m would be required.
by exileinleeds » 20 Feb 2010 08:15
Royal With Cheese Breaking news on Sky. FA reject Portsmouths plan to sell players outside the transfer window.
With them effectively needing 22m just to fulfil fixtures I think they're just about fcuked.
by Royal With Cheese » 20 Feb 2010 10:40
That Friday FeelingRoyal With Cheese Breaking news on Sky. FA reject Portsmouths plan to sell players outside the transfer window.
With them effectively needing 22m just to fulfil fixtures I think they're just about fcuked.The Guardian A total of £22m is required for Portsmouth to continue as a going concern until the end of season, otherwise they will fold. However, this depends on the Premier League's bottom-placed team finishing 17th as all the club's forecasts have been based on avoiding relegation. If the club finish 20th then around £26m will be required to keep Portsmouth afloat. Even if Portsmouth were to enter administration, a total of around £14m would be required.
Which presumably means that entering administration effectively writes off £12m of non-football debt. That stinks.
by Uke » 20 Feb 2010 11:03
Ideal Jesus Christ, RFC WILL NOT GO BUST, BECAUSE OUR CHAIRMAN IS NOT A TOTAL SMEGHEAD LIKE THE PFC BOARD IS/HAVE BEEN.
We cut our cloth. They did not. Look what it did to them. They can fcuk right off, they deserve what they get.
They bought their cup win by financial doping, and now they are paying the price. I have ZERO sympathy for them.
I hope they go BUST BUST BUST BUST BUST.
by Smoking Kills Dancing Doe » 20 Feb 2010 12:02
Ideal Jesus Christ, RFC WILL NOT GO BUST, BECAUSE OUR CHAIRMAN IS NOT A TOTAL SMEGHEAD LIKE THE PFC BOARD IS/HAVE BEEN.
We cut our cloth. They did not. Look what it did to them. They can fcuk right off, they deserve what they get.
They bought their cup win by financial doping, and now they are paying the price. I have ZERO sympathy for them.
I hope they go BUST BUST BUST BUST BUST.
by Jimmy the Tree » 20 Feb 2010 12:37
by Pseud O'Nym » 20 Feb 2010 13:37
by Ian Royal » 20 Feb 2010 13:59
by Arch » 20 Feb 2010 14:29
Pseud O'Nym Yet another twist?
http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=744356&sec=england&cc=3888
I don't quite understand as I thought that was already the situation.
by SLAMMED » 20 Feb 2010 18:08
Users browsing this forum: BRO_BOT and 72 guests