The Gooner Forum

But that isn't thread hi-jacking and thus naked hypocirsy olgit - but then why should a hypocrite have a sense of propriety.

Now I chose to respond. But the fact is you post here then complain the thread is open you're just an immature ass who isn't adult enough not to deal with it and yes I'll remind that that is what you are being.

northbankbren wrote:None of that mentions the fact that Cashley had already held illegal talks with chelski.....this may have something to do with him being let go.

If that were the case why make an offer even, especially an insufficient one even just to maximize the return on his departure? Why not just let him rot in the reserves on 27 K a week? Why offer 55 K a week - or the 70 K a week we actually paid him to sign his last contract so he couldn't leave for free?

Plus the actual meeting which took place between Cole and Chelsea took place a week after the 55 K a week offer was made.

David Dein conveyed the Board's offer on 19 January. The meeting between Cole, Barnett, Pini Zahivi and Peter Kenyon and Jose Mourinho took place on 27 January. Indeed the first mention of Chelsea in all this came from David Dein stating he had been told Chelsea were not interested in the player in that 19 January meeting

USMartin wrote:

northbankbren wrote:None of that mentions the fact that Cashley had already held illegal talks with chelski.....this may have something to do with him being let go.

If that were the case why make an offer even, especially an insufficient one even just to maximize the return on his departure? Why not just let him rot in the reserves on 27 K a week?

Because we'd be a player short in the squad at considerable cost, at the time Gallas + cash was a good deal. Cashleys actions led to a lower offer, not the clubs.

northbankbren wrote:

USMartin wrote:

northbankbren wrote:None of that mentions the fact that Cashley had already held illegal talks with chelski.....this may have something to do with him being let go.

If that were the case why make an offer even, especially an insufficient one even just to maximize the return on his departure? Why not just let him rot in the reserves on 27 K a week?

Because we'd be a player short in the squad at considerable cost, at the time Gallas + cash was a good deal. Cashleys actions led to a lower offer, not the clubs.

Again his meeting with Chelsea took place a week after that offer was made - in fact over a week later. It's in the report, Bren.

The Gallas-plus-Cash deal is three transfer windows later. so while I agree we handled that as well as possibly could in that deal, I doubt it was in any relevant to what we offered Ashley Cole at the time.

USMartin wrote:But that isn't thread hi-jacking and thus naked hypocirsy olgit - but then why should a hypocrite have a sense of propriety.

Now I chose to respond. But the fact is you post here then complain the thread is open you're just an immature ass who isn't adult enough not to deal with it and yes I'll remind that that is what you are being.

I posted this single sentence........

"Similar, here. I ignore what USM writes........and just read the responses".

How did you manage to invent stuff about thread hijacking?
Where did I "complain the thread is open"?
Where exactly is the "naked hypocrisy" of which you speak?
Why do I have to be "adult enough to deal with it"?

It's total gobbledeegoop.

Your posts are normally a mile long. And merely go over old ground that you have already covered and recovered ad nausea. It's boring and unnecessary. So I only read your posts if they are (relatively) short.

Please don't get all upset at my comments. I'm just a twatish immature ass.

olgitgooner wrote:

USMartin wrote:But that isn't thread hi-jacking and thus naked hypocirsy olgit - but then why should a hypocrite have a sense of propriety.

Now I chose to respond. But the fact is you post here then complain the thread is open you're just an immature ass who isn't adult enough not to deal with it and yes I'll remind that that is what you are being.

I posted this single sentence........

"Similar, here. I ignore what USM writes........and just read the responses".

How did you manage to invent stuff about thread hijacking?
Where did I "complain the thread is open"?
Where exactly is the "naked hypocrisy" of which you speak?
Why do I have to be "adult enough to deal with it"?

It's total gobbledeegoop.

Your posts are normally a mile long. And merely go over old ground that you have already covered and recovered ad nausea. It's boring and unnecessary. So I only read your posts if they are (relatively) short.

Please don't get all upset at my comments. I'm just a twatish immature ass.

I'm not upset I just don't understand how you can say with any real honesty that you are somehow the victim of my forcing you to do anything when you choose to open these threads and say you don't even read them or how you can honestly claim its anything but censorship to say I just don't want these views expressed and then cry you're the victim?

No I can understand - you'll do it as long as you can get away with it.

As for thread hi-jacking that's simple you aren't here to discuss anything being discussed but to disrupt its discussion with you're bitching and moaning that it's being discussed and that you are the victim of it being discussed.

By definition that is thread hi-jacking. Its a lousy job of it but that is what it is, and I ought to know since I've been accused of it enough times - some of them rightly so.

USMartin wrote:

olgitgooner wrote:

USMartin wrote:But that isn't thread hi-jacking and thus naked hypocirsy olgit - but then why should a hypocrite have a sense of propriety.

Now I chose to respond. But the fact is you post here then complain the thread is open you're just an immature ass who isn't adult enough not to deal with it and yes I'll remind that that is what you are being.

I posted this single sentence........

"Similar, here. I ignore what USM writes........and just read the responses".

How did you manage to invent stuff about thread hijacking?
Where did I "complain the thread is open"?
Where exactly is the "naked hypocrisy" of which you speak?
Why do I have to be "adult enough to deal with it"?

It's total gobbledeegoop.

Your posts are normally a mile long. And merely go over old ground that you have already covered and recovered ad nausea. It's boring and unnecessary. So I only read your posts if they are (relatively) short.

Please don't get all upset at my comments. I'm just a twatish immature ass.

I'm not upset I just don't understand how you can say with any real honesty that you are somehow the victim of my forcing you to do anything when you choose to open these threads and say you don't even read them or how you can honestly claim its anything but censorship to say I just don't want these views expressed and then cry you're the victim?

No I can understand - you'll do it as long as you can get away with it.

You need help. Seriously.


How are you "forcing" me to do something?
How am I a victim?
How the fuck am I guilty of censorship?

I did a one sentence piss-take post, because you are boring the pants off people with your obsession. That is all.

Either lighten up (and shorten your posts) or try to find some other place where nobody will criticise your masterpieces.

May I also say that it's quite dishonest of you to a thread title about Groundhog Day when your sole intention is to start yet another marathon debate on your favourite subject.

USMartin wrote:As for thread hi-jacking that's simple you aren't here to discuss anything being discussed but to disrupt its discussion with you're bitching and moaning that it's being discussed and that you are the victim of it being discussed.

By definition that is thread hi-jacking. Its a lousy job of it but that is what it is, and I ought to know since I've been accused of it enough times - some of them rightly so.

Does anyone else understand what USM is saying??????

olgitgooner wrote:

USMartin wrote:As for thread hi-jacking that's simple you aren't here to discuss anything being discussed but to disrupt its discussion with you're bitching and moaning that it's being discussed and that you are the victim of it being discussed.

By definition that is thread hi-jacking. Its a lousy job of it but that is what it is, and I ought to know since I've been accused of it enough times - some of them rightly so.

Does anyone else understand what USM is saying??????

We're in the basement now so I doubt anyone is paying attention. You certainly are not.

And you, Martin, are paying no attention whatsoever to the requests of many people on here for you to turn down the volume.

Brief point of order; I didn't put this one in the basement. I always post an explanation if I basement threads.

It was probably that lickspittle Rebel!

DB10GOONER wrote:Brief point of order; I didn't put this one in the basement. I always post an explanation if I basement threads.

It was probably that lickspittle Rebel!

my bet is I Hate Hleb

marcengels wrote:

DB10GOONER wrote:Brief point of order; I didn't put this one in the basement. I always post an explanation if I basement threads.

It was probably that lickspittle Rebel!

my bet is I Hate Hleb

hmmm, yes... Hlebby, our sympathy mod. As in; we gave him the job out of sympathy, much like you will buy a cup of tea for the local brain damaged alcoholic, even though he smells of piss.

wasnt me. im old school and try to leave everything in arsenal chat