He is nicey nicey with the press, they love him. And he gets really poor results, that's the whole point! Why do you expect Grayson to learn lessons that regular fans don't need to learn, and he couldn't learn from the season before? You have no idea how much or how little Grayson has had to spend. It's obviously not a lot, but Bates has said there's a pot of money there, and Grayson hasn't denied it. Most of the money Grayson has spent has been on players he doesn't play. Why have three players sitting in the reserves when you could have one who would enhance the team?
And do you not think that copying posts and then adding 'idiot' is disruptive, pointless and childish, and something you should be addressing rather than moving my posts from where they're most relevant?
why has this pointless waste of time thread been dug up? For the last time, Clive, Grayson does not get poor results. A 60% success rate (as in, 60% points gained from points possible) is not poor results.
It's been dug up because Donald likes to throw any reference I make to Grayson in here. He gets poor results, some of the worst in our history at the lowest level we've been at.
****ing glass is half ****ing empty every ****ing day jesus I thought my life was miserable get a ****ing grip you spaz. 60% success rate and you still find fault. You're a ****ing dipshit and nobody wants you here. But I suppose you spend all your time on here slagging off Larry because noone in the real world wants to listen to you. Having no mates must ****ing suck.
well that was an exciting thread....reckon poor old Clive must sit in a box all on his lonesome - he's probably singing to himself .....'no one likes me - I don't care' Nite nite little weeds!
Well that was an illuminating thread.....Poor old Clive must sit all on his lonesome....probably singing to himself...... 'no one likes me - I don't care' Nite Nite little Weeds can feel a 'Soppy Bollock' award coming my way again - thought I'd lost the last post(207) in the ether somewhere...must be tired
Grayson is the second best manager we have ever had in the 60 years I have been watching if that Clivetime had been around when Revie was appointed he would have had him out after first season he has spent little or no money on players he didn,t buy Brolin Sharpe or sell Cantona for a £!M now if you said Blackwell was the worst then I would agree he was on a par with Lambton.How do we vote for this please
He's having trouble seeing that Grayson is a quality manager because while the good results have been good, the bad results have been tremendously bad at times. 4-0 at home to Cardiff, 6-4 to preston, 5-2 away at barnsley and 2-0 away at the blunts spring to mind. Somehow forgetting we did the double over the team that until the last few games practically walked the league, and also gave Swansea and Forest a right doing at home.
We've never dominated a game from start to finish under Grayson and I don't believe we've ever won by a margin of more than 3 clear goals. If Grayson is the 2nd best and Blackwell is the worst, how come Blackwell finished 5th and got to the play-off final and Grayson could only manage 7th?
"Grayson is the second best manager we have ever had in the 60 years I have been watching" Possibly the worst load of ****e I have ever read on this forum. (apart from the thread that started proclaiming he was the best, I couldn't bring mesen to post on that I'd be banned) The way 90% of you blindly follow SG is fine, you walk off your own cliff lemmings, but the way anyone who wants to raise an issue about him is immediately shot down with a barrage of pink handbags is ****in pathetic. Massive questions about his ability and any **** with a tracksuit could have got us out of League 1 with that squad, without leaving it until the last game of the season. Why call anyone who criticises him a WUM? And tell me that CliveTime just repeats the same old ****, he only does it cos you lot do the exact same. Southampton 3-2 Leeds
So you'd rather go back to McAllisters way of playing attractive football with no real killer instinct and lack of results, than playing maybe a bit of uglier football and perhaps having a few games where we are "the worse team", but still getting results? And you're wrong. We beat Scunthorpe 4-0. A single team rarely dominates a game from start to finish, unless the class margin is huge. With that in mind your pointless redundant point is wrong anyway, I've seen us boss games from start to finish plenty of times. Also if he's so terrible, I guess it's just coincidence that in the 2 and a half years he's been at Leeds he's managed to bring in a decent amount more than 50% of the points available. Blind ****ing luck is it? You're clearly delusional if you can't even realise that attractiveness of football isn't among the important aspects that wins leagues. Goalscoring ability, never-say-die attitude and ability to shut up shop and see games off when required are the qualities I expect to see in a league winning side. We had the first 2 of those last season, not bad. Might use you as a punching bag clive. Not like I'll do any brain damage since you're so bone idle.
