I was never banned on BBC 606, not as far as I can remember anyway. It was a reasonable question, Josh, and you've now explained your position. What percentage are you in terms of agreeing with him?
More importantly than anything the players seem to be a unit psychologically. They win and lose as a team, they seem to really be keeping it together. The divide in the dressing room of last season seems so very far away.
You're the one ranting and swearing. How am I behaving like a nutcase? I'm just trying to find out where Josh is on the manager.
He disagrees with some actions and agrees with others. This is generally how sane human beings decide how they feel about how good a job somebody is doing, it's called pros and cons. You don't put it into percentages. Just **** off you ****ing boring ****.
It was Josh who put it into percentages. If the pros and cons are about the same then you're at 50%. It's pretty straightforward. What am I doing that will see me banned? You're the ones throwing abuse at me because you don't like my opinion.
My whole point is that its hard to work out because he's saying the obvious is not being done yet he still supports him. I personally couldn't support a professional football manager who I didn't think could see the obvious.
Its getting too frustrating talking to you... You need simple easy answers to understand, ya know something you'd need to do if you were talking to a 3 year old child. This is why you were banned last time
In the end, yes. I said he should be sacked around a month before he did get sacked. Thats not to say that he couldn't have got us promoted with backing, he just lost the plot in the end and run out of ideas on how to fix the problem, the second that happens you need to be sacked. But then you believe that Warnock was our saviour when he was one of the worse managers in the history of the club. I also said when it was rumoured he was being signed as manager that I'd have preferred we didn't sack Grayson in favour of warnock, in fact my preference was McCarthy at the time.
Well you were the same with me when I was speaking out against Grayson. I was basically banned for wanting Grayson sacked. And now you're saying I was right. So why can't I be right about McDermott especially when you think he can't see the obvious? Why do you keep contradicting yourself? If he'd lost the plot what difference would it make if he had backing? Surely you shouldn't give backing to a manager you think has lost the plot and should be sacked?
Clive, there is this thing called time. So certain events happened in certain order, he got us to second in the league without any players who had previous experience of getting promotion from the league or even any particularly good experience of the league at all. Had he got backed properly in either that January window or the summer after that I think he would've been capable of getting us promotion. He kind of struggled with the expectation the season after of getting promoted but he didn't have any backing so it was always a tough job then. He got to January and then lost the plot because he didn't know how to fix the problems with the team, he then appeared out of his depth, not before then. You were calling for his head the season before and in fact the season before that when he got us promoted (why you would ever want a manager sacked for getting you promotion I don't know). I was just reading ja606 (I never go on there but am bored so thought why not) and there are so many ******s on there it is actually phenomenal. They are complaining about McD but all there complaints are completely unjustified, saying things like McD has spent more than Warnock but hasn't improved the team and he brought in 3 players into the team against Burnley that he shouldn't have. They offer no opinions on what could've been done differently or anything, just complaints like you. Firstly, he hasn't spent anywhere near the amount of Warnock. Warnock spent 3.5m (and thats being conservative and was all spent before the sale of Snoddy) just in the summer and not counting loans and January. McD has spent 1m. Secondly, McD brought in Byram, White and Diouf into the team. Warnock is suspended, Drury injured so who else other than White is going to play, Pugh? They woulda complained just as much if Pugh had played. Peltier is injured, everyone has been waiting and anticipating Byram's return, had he been on the bench and not the first team, they woulda complained saying if he is fit enough for the bench he's fit enough for the first team and everyone has been calling to bring Diouf in for Hunt, the exact same story there. This is the thing, bring some solutions to the problems to the table and I'll start to listen (whether I agree or not) but you don't bring solutions, you say you think McD needs to be sacked but you haven't even justified why at all. So either do this and you'll become welcome here or **** off because this same post, written differently rubbish is getting old.
But where were we after Grayson was given time? All our best players had left and there were hardly any players at all left, and you admit yourself that he had lost the plot. People talk about hindsight but you have to have a bit of foresight if you're going to be successful. I saw things in Grayson that were alarming and meant I knew we'd never get anywhere under him. You know, Josh, the truly perverse thing is that I was banned from ja606 for wanting McDermott sacked. I come on here and you're saying there's people on there who are mad for criticising him. And this is where it gets really crazy because you've just been criticising him on here saying he can't see the obvious, yet somehow you think that doesn't matter. I've got plenty of reasons to justify why McDermott should be sacked but you and others would just make up excuses for him. You've already justified it yourself anyway!
