Behave mate. I got accused of that on ja & I can assure you that I was never Lettuce. I was always this name, until the very end when I changed my name for the last week or 2 I was never banned from the old 606 btw, over all of it's guises from the very start!
saint, there's really no point TB does not want to talk or debate in the usual sense of those words. He suffers from being a Bitter through and through. No comment can be made unless it at least has a 'sting' in it and certainly no praise could ever be expressed. He would be totally happy on the Everton board but it's such a wasteland that even he cannot stand the solitude- which merely adds to his bitterness. Sad really
I never had a problem with most on there tbf. However there were plenty who spent half their time hitting the complain button (usually because they didn't agree with you) & the admin admitted to me, that it was because of the level rather than the validity of these complaints, that they got the ban hammer out, which is an odd way of running a site, but their choice.
lol, given my response to the post that you've replied to here, I'm glad I used the caveat of 'most', as there's certainly a couple of exceptions. p.s. you clearly have a problem reading Dave. Either that or you allow your fat fingers to run away with themselves before allowing your eyes to digest the topic............
Suggest you read what I said again. Both comments are out of order and cast aspersions over the ref. The difference is that Allardyce has been blatant and stated outright there was bias, whereas SAF has tried to be a bit more subtle and thus may get away with it as Mancini did when questioning the ref's fitness. The same way experienced players commit fouls without it being obvious, experienced managers skirt the rules when they think it will help them get results. Of course he may not get away with it - as you say he has claimed the linesman gave Spurs everything which may be seen as an accusation of bias. Tho' he could simply claim he was talking about crowd pressure or a poor performance in a big game - plenty of managers have claimed there is no way an official would give a penalty to the home team at OT or Anfield or any big ground and not been charged. Either way, my point is that the rules are full of holes and need to be fixed to stop this sort of uncertainty. Personally I think it leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth when any manager questions officials, which they pretty much always do. I would change the rule to say you can question the decision but not the person who made it, but then that wouldn't make nearly as many juicy headlines...
Seems as though you are the one who can neither read or tell the time. Amazing that my posts throughout the day appear to have been inoffensive. Perhaps its your attitude that prompts reflux? Either that or it's too near to the truth for you to stomach.
Or perhaps I hadn't seen them, as I wasn't posting on the same threads Maybe I was only alerted to your presence by seeing (yet another) post aimed solely at having a pop at me. Leave it out Dave, it's got beyond boring.
Where did I do that in that post? The 'witchtrial' I refer to is the persecution of Suarez in the media over the Mansfield handball. The only relation to this issue, as far as I can see, was that Lawton in particular, and samuel to a lesser extent, were premature ejeculationalists who jumped in feet first on New Year's day and proclaimed that the 115 page report 'irrefutably PROVED', in the words of lawton, that Suarez had stood there in a crowded goalbox and repeatedly used the words negro and ****** (they obviously skim-read the self-serving summary in their hungover states), when even the FA never claimed they had actual 'proof' of any such thing.Ever since they've both been trying to paint Luis in the same shade of evil as Armstrong, Maradona and the Child Catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang to justify their initial knee-jerks. But then again, I never mention the racism thing at all in this thread - until now.
And I don't need to state the case again, but I will do. Luis Suarez is a bit of **** on the football pitch. So is Evra. That he got anything more than a 2/3 game ban for using innapropriate language with reference to race (and a contrite apology for his ignorance), and that Evra didn't get the exact same punishment was a ****ing scandal of the highest order to anyone who actually read that self-serving, contradictory sponk of 115 pages of a 'independent' report. The media vilification that followed for objecting to this disproportionate witchtrial, because they couldn't touch terry at the time, has set the battle lines - those of you that are opportunistically pious and vindictively happy that it wan't one of your players; and those of us who, without painting Suarez as some saintlike Evra figure, will consistently point out the hysterical injustice, bias and manifest flaws in the 'independent' report, as we said we would do at the time. It won't change anything, and certainly our spineless owners brought most of this on us with their craven capitulation to the bullying media/FA/United axis, but even when Luis has gone and this axis has got what they want some us (the few that read the report and not the Mail's summary of the summary) will not cease to point out the FA's inconsistencies in their approach for as long as the FA, in it's present, United-controlled form, exists. So again, Luis is no saint but he never deserved this act of partizan persecution that Thomas Cromwell would have been proud of.
No worries, didn't any offence, you just seem very similar. I had nothing against LETTUCE most of the time but he could be an absolute **** when he wanted
