Ground Hog day starring kimpioka

Just like maja he is being evasive about a new contract. Usual responses ..concentrating on my football etc etc.
Will we see him sold for eg 1m and replace him with some journeyman knacker whose use by date was 5 years ago and who will cost twice as much as what we get for kimpioka? Likely he will be on better wages.
No doubt the eagle eye of hill and coton will be on hand to ensure we get value for money.
A former favourite of PP , gary o'neil ( 36 yo) is available. Fits the bill.

 

Good morning Mr Happy

 

Ah here's Mr Positive to make everyone want to jump off the Northern Spire!! Please cross the line so I can ban you?

 

I'd be surprised if there was much interest in Kimpioka he's yet to force his way into the team let alone bang them in regularly like Maja did.

Who knows what he's up to but he'd be poorly advised to hold out for a big move because I don't see it happening.

 

Groundhog day starring 'Not full at all' Bri

 

Yet more negative drivel, give it a rest and support the lads

 

This. To be fair to the kid I think he's more likely waiting to see if he actually gets a fair chance in the first team. He won't get any big offer like Maja but equally I can understand why he might be reluctant to sign a long term deal at a third division side if he's still likely to be getting nothing more than twenty minute cameo appearances. This whole thing of "sign the deal then we might, or might not give you more football" is laughable, glad Parkinson seems to have ****ed it off

 

£1m on the back of one scrambled goal? No way m8, he wants to go? Let him, no big loss

 

I think that's abusing the mod powers there Marcus. Waiting for a poster to slip up, so you can immediately ban them.

Even if you think he's negative, he's stlll a safc fan, and does make a good point about kimpiokas contract.

The forum has picked up again, now you want to ban negative posters because they don't fit your agenda, I think you should re think your mod position mate.

 

You serious?

 

Yes mate.

Threatening to ban posters for being negative is taking away peoples freedom of speech.

If we all thought the same, the forum would be pretty pointless.

I like to keep things positive, but understand everyone is different and entitled to be so.

Channeling your negative to the players, management or owners at the ground, or directly to them via twitter or something online is something that needs to be stopped. But just moaning on here about a contract or a formation etc, that's one of the reasons the forum exists I guess.

 

He's never threatened anybody. I think with your freedom of speech you should be careful how you use it.

He made a play about him crossing a line so we can shot of the miserable negative sod. There was no malice in it.

Marcus has been here for 7, 8, 9 years like the rest of us. He's never once in that time abused, bullied or singled anybody out. Not ever. I don't usually defend people like this but Marcus is a good egg.

Pity he didn't just ban him. I'm not sure I've seen this Bri bring anything to the board other than negativity and leaving a bad vibe about the place.

He's never threatened to ban him for nothing, though. Only if the poster crosses a line.

 

Due to problems with A19 on Saturday had to come across the new bridge..v good

Tbf the team was woeful, especially Grigg, he has slow reactions, he is slow generally and cannot jump! We do not get enough players in the box for crosses, so it is not all Griggs fault.

That is why 09 is important, he busts a gut to get in the box, which is why he should play in midfield.

There were few positives from Saturday other than Kimpokia...

 

Optimist, gerrin, half full

Pessimist, bugger, this is half empty

The OP, this is p*ss isn't it

 

I get your point mate, but negative or positive, no poster should be made to feel as if they are closer to a ban, based on their opinions.

There's no rules on the forum as to being negative or positive, so I don't agree that the word 'negative' and 'ban' should be used in the same sentence by a mod.

 

Another one throwing the "don;t fit my agenda!" card. I am not threatening to ban him at all, I also won;t ban him as he has not crossed any lines at all. If he breaks rules I will ban him. He's a poster I don;t think we need on here regardless as his made up **** on the Methven thread indicated.

We don;t ban people on here for being negative - otherwise monty (aka ivorlot) would've been banned a long long time ago. I haven't threatened to ban him and I haven't said I would ban him. What I've done is begged him to cross a line so I can!

The OP is not reflective of just negativity, he is simply making stuff up to suit HIS agenda (Look at the motormouth methven thread where he gets caught out so runs away). I don;t think the board would be any worse off without him. But I will not ban him unless he breks rules.

Tell me what mod powers I am abusing?

Edit:

I would also ban anyone of the posters I know have been here years for breaking said rules - I just wouldn't want to - but it wouldn't stop me doing it

 

He didn't use them in the same sentence, in fact he didn't use the word "negative" at all. I'd also note that the OP takes "negative" to new depths.

 

I didn't threaten to ban him for being negative - I want hi to break one or more of the rules so I can ban him - 2 completely different things.

On this one:
Firstly
I have not advised he is closer to a ban for negativity - I have asked him to please break a rule so I can get rid of him. This place doesn't need him

Secondly
The words, in my first post on here - I used 2 separate sentences - and, as mentioned, I didn;t use the word negative once!! "ban" was in the second sentence - clearly separated.. I haven't threatened once to ban him at all. I want to ban him but I will only ban him if he breaks a rule - not sure why you have an issue with this. He will be as close to a ban as anyone else as I mentioned before

 

You just seemed a bit power happy to me.

If you don't like his negativity, just say. No need to chuck the ban word alongside your personal feelings.

 

??

Do you take everything so literally though? I can use the ban word all I want, my personal feeling are I would love for this dickhead to break a rule so I can ban him. As I say, the place will be no worse off without him. Not due to negativity - but simply because of his agenda against the club. I don't even think he is a SAFC fan from looking through his posts.

But, in reality, you are as close to a ban as he is - as is @Simple Saffy - (et al) simply because none of you have broken any rules.

Just because I want rid of him and would like a reason doesn't make me "power happy"