It still just seems like backwards logic to me. If he gets chosen, he is going to play, and to the best of his ability. I agree his ability was never great but to say it is HIS fault and HE was the reason for our demise just smacks of taking your own dislike for the man and placing all the wrongs that happened at our club on his shoulders. Personally I think it was the terrible management that hurt this club the most. I'd say the majority would agree.
No, I said he was a major contributor to our demise and it was the managers fault for picking him. Plus, my statement was "player" not manager or board. I don't didlike Doherty at all, I'm sure he's very pleasant. Doesn't make him a worthy player (although ironically Worthy signed him).
Yes, anyone who disagrees doesn't know what they are talking about (see your post on this page). It must be brilliant being you Carrubah, always right, never wrong, pious and above everything. Doherty was not the worst ever, indeed he was actually far from the worst in that team / squad, it was as a whole a very poor squad and on that there is little disagreement. At that time we also had Fotheringham and Croft among many other journeymen and the rodent to boot. In that context Doherty was a trier and was in may ways let down by the tosh around him.
Again, I didn't say he was the worst ever. You totally misunderstand (quite deliberately it seems) what point is being made here, he caused us the most damage, based on the amount of games he played (over 3 years) and the influence on the defence and team. Fotheringham, Croft, Pattison et al were here and gone in no time and were hardly regulars. They had no where near the influence on our fortunes than Doherty. I made the statement, you don't get to pick and choose the context to change it.
I thought you realised by now THURNBY that carrabuh is ´ the font of all knowledge´ on here , or at least he thinks he is.
I'm quite open to suggestions of alternatives? Nobody has come up with a decent argument to suggest I am wrong.
Not in the slightest, firstly the subject doesn´t interest me enough to get into a discussion, and secondly I´m not prepared to waste my breath on you, as I´ve generally found that those who shout loudest and longest are mostly full of hot air anyway, and as I´m sure you know, it´s the empty barrels that make all the noise. I repeat, shouting loudest and having the last word, doesn´t make your opinion right.
No, creating a viable argument is the key to that. But that is something you are not very good at. So given you are not even providing a counter argument, I think that makes you the one with empty comment. Best stick to the poems, at least everyone can pretend to be interested.
Why don't you just stick to being a sanctimonious, self-righteous arsehole - oh sorry, you already did, apologies
So typical of many on here. You don't like what somebody says then resort to childish name calling. Brilliant. Grow up little Munky.
Carrubah, you said on page 1 of this thread "I can't think of a player who caused so much damage to this club to be honest" bu above at 6.54 p.m. on Saturday you say "Again, I didn't say he was the wost ever" . In between you accuse me of misinterpreting your comments. I think you have argued with yourself and on that basis I now give up as I doubt you will be man enough to admit that those two statements cancel each other out and that you may be wrong when accusing me of reading things into them.
Just calling as I see it, like I always do. So are you saying there wasn't even a tinge of nastiness in what you said to RBF? There was absolutely no need for you to say what you did, firstly because you're wrong, and secondly you don't speak for the rest of us on this forum - in fact you do don't speak for anyone but yourself - so what gave you the right to say that?
No they don't, you just do not understand the difference. Michael Theoklitos was a far worse player, and there are plenty more, Strihavka, Tudor Jones, loads of them. They however made little or no difference to our fortunes.
The point I was making earlier was that you simply can't blame Doc for our demise because he wasn't picking himself. He may have been part of a poor team, a consistent part even, but several managers came in, had the chance to change things and to get rid of him, but never did. He wasn't on ridiculous wages and he wasn't some prima donna who upset the dressing room. He was just a player that always gave his all, unfortunately it wasn't good enough. You may argue the semantics of your comments, but unless a single player financially bankrupts a club, deliberately scores goals in his own net or beats up his team mates, you can't accuse him of damaging the club.
Well, no player (that I know) at the club has done any of those things so it is irrelevant. You also seem to be implying that to cause damage it has to be deliberate.
