You could only categorically say things if your source was a board member. I trust a few people who have said bits and pieces but I'd never say it's categorically true unless I'd heard directly from someone who would be in the room.
Surely, technically, the full backs become part of the attack if the DMs have to cover their positions? Thus giving us 5 forward options? Just wondering mind as I am only level 1 coaching qualified to coach kids up to 16 - my course said nothing of stuff like that!!
Nah, it means I'm not going to accept anything that he says. Especially not when you have a good few posters across two boards all saying the exact opposite of him. Thankfully, this place isn't like RTG and he won't get away with posting ****e for too long as the ban hammer will drop on him. That's the reason I post on here and not RTG as I can't be arsed with all the childish games some folk seem to thrive on.
I'm saying you're a liar, something I rarely do and only if I'm sure. I'll say no more because it's obvious you're just after arguments.
Not as much as you enjoy being a lying mood hoover. Edit; this was a response to Quinn's dad, not the poster above me.
Like others have said I’m not sure how you can categorically say there is no exclusivity but Barnes has never once changed his tune about a group being in exclusivity he has only speculated, probably while knowing, who it is.
Guess a lot of people are upset I’ve rocked the boat and upset their little ‘sucking up’ party and now because the big ITK is unhappy as it goes against his opinion I’m a liar... judge, junior and executioner We’ll no one else here has divulged their ‘source’ and the info has been accepted without any Hesitation as it’s positive and they want it to be true. Here we are though after Sunday night, it’s now Thur and still nothing. My ‘source’ maybe a board member, it might even be Donald Duck himself, but just remember when these ‘advanced’ talks fail to materialise a takeover, just remember the way you all acted like kids.... who who was ultimately correct (I hate to say it as I want the club to succeed, and I wish it was positive info I’d heard) I’ll keep posting little bits and pieces on here, same as every other ITK accounts, And we’ll see who’s accurate A takeover will happen and SD will be forced to step down, but it certainly isn’t happening now or in the near future...
I take it my bad gateway error was due to Quinn's Dad getting the ban hammer? Still here being a ****box, just **** off man. Edit; no ban hammer yet then
I havent acted like a bairn so you cant say you all. If you're right which I hope you're not mind then fair play cheers for info. I'd rather magnus was right as we all do being Sunderland fans.
Tbf hes only posted what hes been told. But his last post seemed like a one looking for argument IMO with all acting like children comment.
reet, i do tend to try to keep out of these 'discussions' and am not one to 'take sides' (usually)... what we have here is posters who have, in the past, been reliable (i will not say 'spot on' as we all know things tend to change at the last minute), we do tend to believe or at least hope their source(s) are genuine also...track record across both forums tends to confirm this. as for yourself, now i will also not join in any name calling or put downs (usually) so this is what i have noticed...you do seem to be pretty well versed about RTG yet appear to have never heard of kittenmittens who has had some stick on there and keeps coming back for more, ANY 'dweller' will have heard the name many times. despite being a lurker on RTG for a while you have never felt the urge to sign up and join in yet on this particular subject you decided that this forum was better so 'suddenly' decided to sign up just to post an opposing thought/source but ignored RTG threads. i am pretty sure you are clever enough to see why some would be a tad suspicious, personally, i obviously hope you are wrong and the others are correct...other than that you could post under 100 different usernames and i would never click as i do not scrutinise posts...now, defending yourself is all well and good and all i am trying to do here is clear up how 'regulars' can/will/sometimes scrutinise the 'noobs' as there has been a host of name calling on RTG and that is the reason a good number of us migrated here, most of this name calling type stuff started with someone just throwing in an opposing view, getting called out over it then they go on some mega rant like they are defending a castle.
