exactly. As none of us were around at the time (1913) or were present at any of the meetings it is all supposition and conjecture kept alive by the bitterness of Spurs fans, who's team also missed out on being the pet project of a **** Russian Mafiioso and all his ill gotten money and are doomed to be forever in our shadow.
The only time Norris' corruption has been mentioned is either by you or in response to you. Can't think why you'd be defensive about him, though...
The fact that Spurs didn't complain at the time (neither did anybody else) and then decided to make slanderous allegations some 15 years later when Arsenal began their domination of North London, tells you all you need to know. The fact that they are still digging it up over a century later, speaks volumes about our unbroken domination during that time
I can see why Hiag actively defends and supports both Spurs and Chelsea as his obvious favourite played for both teams. it must be difficult for him to be a fan of one team and a plastic fan of the other and not being able to decide which team is which. Does he also support Swindon Town and Monaco as equally as he does Spurs and Chelsea ? So many many teams to follow, and what with him being a top lawyer type in property and a semi pro rock god, how does he manage to be on here with all his **** win posts and threads !
HIAG is a sycophant. Sucking up to the chavs because he knows that Spurs are nowhere near Arsenal. That's the short of it
I think you 2 need some football to remind you what matters in all this. I think you are both going stir crazy with these very pointless arguments.
Says that nobody knows what happened back then, as it was so long ago. States his version of exactly what happened.
You agreed with G4E's post saying exactly that. You also claimed that nobody complained about Arsenal's promotion, which is clearly untrue.
So you're now saying that I didn't say nobody knows what happened. make your mind up. Also where did I agree with G4E's statement saying 'exactly that' ? What I said was that Spurs didn't make any allegations of corruption at the time and didn't do so until nearly 15 years later (conveniently when Arsenal were dominating, coincidence ?) As for complaining about us being promoted, it's irrelevant from a Spurs perspective, you finished in the relegation places and wouldn't have been promoted anyway. Try reading my comments properly before you respond
You agreed with a post that said it. Same thing. Pure speculation and you're claiming that Spurs didn't point out Norris' corruption until it had been proven, which is bloody stupid. Having people point something out as being dodgy and then connecting it to a source when he's shown to be dodgy is completely logical. Moaning about that happening isn't. I'm not the one with reading comprehension issues here, which I demonstrated well twice yesterday. Care to embarrass yourself with another Transfer League link?
You are tying yourself up in knots Where did I agree with G4E that nobody knew what happened ? Where has Norris' corruption linked to Arsenal's promotion been proven ?
You agreed with post 201. Keep up. When did I claim that Norris corruption had been proven to be linked with Arsenal's promotion? Didn't happen. It's so telling that you always have to try and claim that I'm saying something that I'm not, in order to prove any point. It's very easy to point out where you're wrong, though.
You are the one who needs to keep up. What part of my response to post #201 was me agreeing that 'nobody knew what happened, it was so long ago' ? and why would that be the case, when I have already outlined what was recorded as taking place back then ? As for the corruption issue, you're either trying to link it to the promotion, which I have pointed out to you several times there is no evidence whatsoever, or you're linking it to a totally unrelated issue, which was him being banned from football for making payments to himself from Arsenal's coffers. Which he was rightly chastised for. Either way you're making a non point.
You agreed and went on to point out even more useless reasons why he was right. Post 203. Point out your complete disagreement for me, if you like. You obviously think that he was wrong. Your second paragraph of gibberish highlights just how badly you've failed to keep up. I didn't bring up his corruption, you did. I pointed out that you were complaining about Chelsea's rich owner, something which your own club had benefited from in the past. It's nice to see Comrade Piskie sticking up for another bent Tory, by the way. It's funny how football seems to overcome your politics completely, as you back scumbag after scumbag, all of whom are utterly opposed to your beliefs.
What part of my response was agreeing that 'nobody knew what happened' ? I simply responded to the comment stating that Spurs didn't make any allegations of bribery at the time. I made no reference or inference to agreeing or disagreeing about who knew what. If you were smart you would have known that a previous comment of mine already outlined exactly what was recorded as happening at the time. It's pointless debating with you as you try to twist words to support your non argument.
