Morally, I'm glad King is no longer with us. Footballwise, I wish he still was, he's a bloody good striker. I'm happy we have no dodgy idiots on our team and with Nick in charge we're unlikely to ever get any, though if I'm honest with myself, if we'd signed Ched Evans in January I'd still have been excited and my morals would probably have gone out the window.
i dont really buy the setting example for kids thing either personally, when i was a kid my 1st hero was gary lineker, this was because i saw him on the tele scoring goals and winning games for england, and this is what i used to try and emulate out in the park with my mates.....as it turns out he would have been a good off the field "role model" too, but i wasnt to know this, he could have been an alcoholic for all i knew, but as a kid i didnt care about this, i just saw him scoring goals and thats why he was a good role model, not because he turned up for training on time and never answered the manager back or caused a fuss etc...
marlon king is a massive arsehole, and id rather he wasnt here..but if he was id still celebrate as he scored the winning goal at wembley.. That wasn't the question. The thing is any City player who scores a winning goal at Wembley would get treat the same way regardless of what the get upto off the pitch. King is a twat, Kilbane isn't. King gets stick for being a ****, but praise for scoring goals. Kilbane gets stick for being ****, but praise for being a model professional and a role model for younger players. I'd rather we had Killer knocking around the place than King knocking some women around the KC.
I think it's fair to say that if we're talking about having an injured player around the camp, then Kilbane wins hands down.
why is he a role model, id rather the younger players saw quality footballers to work with and help improve there game, in some ways hes a very bad role model because he teaches youngsters you dont have to work hard to improve your game cos you can get lucky and blag it
Sorry, I don't subscribe to this "he's an arsehole but a good player so I'd have him back" ****. Maybe if that was our only alternative, I'd change my mind, but in fact, there are loads of decent blokes who are better footballers then the arseholes. So you can keep Marlon, I'd rather have Darren Bent for example, and don't tell me he isn't an option because I know he isn't, but nor is Marlon, and he's an arsehole! And Ipswich can keep their reserve team waste of money and oxygen, there are twenty better players than Bullard who we could get.
I don't want King back, I was just making the point that as football fans we often overlook what a shabby twat someone is, so long as they are good for the team. The reality is, that King was a shabby twat before we signed him and there weren't too many complaining back then.
That's bollocks. For a start you don't have to be a good footballer to be a good manager (Sir AF, Arsehole Wenger etc). You don't even have to have been a horse to be a good jockey, so give me a model professional like KK rather than a gifted genius like Paul Gascoigne for the youth team manager any day.
no way would I want King or Bullard back. We have a good, settled squad on salaries which the club can afford. When was the last time we heard of a Hull player behaving like one of those two off the pitch. No matter that we don't like it - Hull City is not one of the media's darlings, so we can't have players destroying what little good reputation we have by behaving either like a violent monster or like he only came to the city for the bars (bet he'll be at Huddersfield next season). And judging by what Barmby was like as a player and who he played with I suspect any signings we make him and his staff will be checking out how they conduct themselves off the pitch. Also wonder if Papa is one for signing players with morals.
For the debate on being a decent person/not such a decent person in relation to your abilities at your job, been in the final year of my degree i'm applying for jobs/training at the moment. The impression i've got from a lot of places is that you can be a fantastic applicant ability wise, but having a negative personality will seriously affect your prospects of landing the job in question. People obviously have to be good at what they do, or at least competent, but if you don't have the right personality it won't wash favourably with potential employers. If you have good personal qualities and a willingness to do the job and acknowledge and aim to improve on your weaknesses, you stand a better chance of getting the job.
Just wondering….. because this kind of argument puzzles me. If we accept that footballing ability is the only criteria, is there a limit to our tolerance. If say King was proved to be say an ex-*****phile, or ex-murderer, or an ex-Gadaffi torturer, or even a ex rugby league player, or all of those, that sort of thing,…… is there a limit. Just interested that’s all.
i agree. KK does not deserve all the she ite he gets from some. Why not appoint him as full time reserve manager then and he can play for the reserves at least ? Would be perfect solution for all. KK wont get a club above league one imo, so maybe player - manager of our PL(if we go up) reserve side would appeal to him. just saying like.
imo, Marlon King (purely as a footballer) is now past it. Hobbs and Chester had him in there pockets last week. as for anything else, King can join Ravel Morrison as a repulsive so and so who i dont want anywhere near our club.
