what's a matter terror..hit a raw nerve with my comments .. I will write as i want to rite this is not a skool leson..
Exact same arguments could of been (and were) used for Laudrup. Only difference is there aren't nearly as many factors going against Monk as Laudrup had to deal with and our style has disappeared altogether.....You, and representatives of the club claimed that Monk had to be installed to protect our principles! You haven't got any evidence that people on here thought we were going down then? Best stick a plug in that butt of yours, windbag.
Why would anyone who can write to a decent standard choose to write in an inferior manner? It's not a choice.
For me that is the biggest disappointment. He is Mr Swansea they said, He knows the Swansea way they said and we will have a seamless change over, the football will be great. Well I afraid he has showed that he doesn't.
same as Laudcrap In his fist season he finished bottom but one in the form league with only fulham behind us and even they beat us 3-0.and his second season was a disaster from start to his sacking now gobby why now are some of you know alls who said monk will take us down and wont get out of the bottom 3 all season are now saying as we have not been out of the top half its not good enough . Is it because he has made you look like a bunch of mugs.. I reckon so..
Can I ask how over the season we were bottom but 1 in the form league, surely if that was the case we would have been relegated. But this isn't about ML it is about the football we are playing under gm which is poor at best.
selective remembering i think'''' We had the second worst form in the premiership and if it was not for certain clubs hitting form that kept us from relegation mix. we hardly picked up any points towards the end of the season but results elsewhere saved us from dropping like a stone...
After 24 games in Laudrup's first season, we had 34pts (same as Monk's record this season). From the final 14 games, we gained "only" 12pts. Is this what you mean, Dai?
But logic says if we had the second worst form over all the season we would have finished second bottom. Can someone else tell me am I missing something here.
Taff Dai is saying the second worst for over the season. So surely with that we should have finished 19th and been relegated.
When we finished laudcraps first season the stats for that season showed we won a cup and we finished last but one on form. we were bad in the league from just after the cup final. We were even thrashed at home by fulham who had the worst form of the season. You all know how our second season went, it carried on from where we left off and that's why Laudcrap was sacked...
What utter nonsense, If we were last but one in the form guide over the season then we would have finished 19th, I have never read something so absolutely ridiculous. Very strange comment. Can someone with more intelligence than me explain it to him.
Mate, I don't think anyone anywhere ever taught this arsehole a thing. A walking talking penis if ever there was one. Question: Dai 'Box Office' likes to kid people on that he is someone important, wealthy and connected in Swansea. So why do the ideas he expresses (incoherently) make him sound like he has a similar IQ to the average participant on 'Benefits Britain'? Answers on a postcard please.
