Chandler's Transfer Targets

[Chandler]

PS:  TWAT

92994[/snapback]

I'll remind you you were not man enough to pick up the gauntlet when offered the opportunity before.

I'll also remind you that I'm within my rights to call for you to be suspended or banned for personal abuse.

[Chandler]

You did not answer his questions. You waffled and procrastinated with a load of gibberish that added no rational or login to your shallow little argument.

92993[/snapback]

Is that so Step?

Then why did he say...er 'some nice points and well thought out...' and words to the effect that I might be right about Levein? Clearly he feels I did answer his questions so why are you poking your snotty nose in?

I notice your criticism of my postings tend to be very generalised. You rarely point to a specific statement you disagree with, let alone explain exactly what is wrong with it.

This suggests your interventions are purely gratuitous. Do you have an inferiority complex or something? If so, I really wouldn't worry about it if I were you.

You have very right to have one.

[shen]

Hey Chandler! I can't help but wonder a bit about your 2nd point:

"2) It's not so much who we should be signing it's more about who we should not be signing. Bringing in minor league fodder (e.g. SPL) in bulk is not the answer."

I remember MON signing some of our best ever performing players like Elliott, Lennon and Savage from lower league clubs, yet they got us flying high in the Premiership and kept us there. Without comparing MON to Mr Levein, how can you already say that Hughes, Maybury and McCarthy won't turn out to be as big a success as them? Especially those three seem to me to be very ambitious players who are willing to give it their all to get Leicester back to the Premiership. Buying rejects, who Izzet, Savage and Sinclair effectively were, doesn't always have to work out, but don't you think some of CL's signings have potential?

[step]

I am no coward and I responded to every topic you raised and even kept the same refrence numbers so you could not worm your way out of this discusion like you normally do.

I then started to answer your responce and half way through I realised that you had managed to confuse the issues, blur the points of discusions again, screw up the refrence numbers you introduced. which was what I said at the begining of this post.

I am going to bury you with interlect, commen sense and logic and I insist that you respond in a manner that allows me to do it.

So

I have responded to every point you made to Hoof, and to help you to interact with another human, I have also stuck to using the refrence numbers that you used in your original responce to hoof.

You have responded to my comments but you ommited to respond to the first three, do it.

Ref four became Ref 1 and from then on I dont know what the fcuk are talking about so if you wish to continue this discusion and try to prove your point in a constructive manner that us mear mortals can understand and relate to. Please answer first set of responces to your responces but use the effing refrence numbers so we can understand what topic you are talking about

And another thing Chandler, please dont let all this negative reinforcment boost your feeling of self importance. It was not you, I insulted, it was a twat.

[shen]

I am no coward and I responded to every topic you raised and even kept the same refrence numbers so you could not worm your way out of this discusion like you normally do.

I then started to answer your responce and half way through I realised that you had managed to confuse the issues, blur the points of discusions again, screw up the refrence numbers you introduced.  which was what I said at the begining of this post.

I am going to bury you with interlect, commen sense and logic and I insist that you respond in a manner that allows me to do it.

So

I have responded to every point you made to Hoof, and to help you to interact with another human, I have also stuck to using the refrence numbers that you used in your original responce to hoof. 

You have responded to my comments but you ommited to respond to the first three, do it. 

Ref four became Ref 1 and from then on I dont know what the fcuk are talking about so if you wish to continue this discusion and try to prove your point in a constructive manner that us mear mortals can understand and relate to.  Please answer first set of responces to your responces but use the effing refrence numbers so we can understand what topic you are talking about

And another thing Chandler, please dont let all this negative reinforcment boost your feeling of self importance.  It was not you, I insulted, it was a twat.

93007[/snapback]

Without taking Chandler's side here, it seems you are losing your composure somewhat...I don't even understand what the 'ell you're talking about there.. and it's not the smartest thing to spell intellect and common wrong in this context

[Babylon]

Look guys we all know old Chandy boy is one hell of a screwed up individual. He and he alone believes the points he makes, I suggest everyone just stops replying to him. It's like a red rag to a bull and he takes great pleasure in winding people up.

Ignore him and he will soon get bored.

[Ric Flair]

Look guys we all know old Chandy boy is one hell of a screwed up individual. He and he alone believes the points he makes, I suggest everyone just stops replying to him. It's like a red rag to a bull and he takes great pleasure in winding people up.

Ignore him and he will soon get bored.

93020[/snapback]

I actually enjoy his posts. I don't agree with most of them but it's good for the forum. Infact although I don't agree with him, he does have a point. You can look at things rationally and irrationally and I think that's what's happening. The fact is considering the squad of players we have, sitting 16th in the league is disgusting. Levein has been here long enough to stamp his authority and can't completely escape the reasons for the league position.

I'm fully behind Levein (support wise) though and I can see that performances have improved and that he's building something here so I can kind of accept what's going on. But when a team under-achieves whatever the reasons, you've got to expect criticism as it's inevitable. Chandler has some good points, it's a shame he doesn't take other people's views on board as such. Whilst we lie procariously close to the basement of a shocking league with a squad stronger than the majority of the teams in the league then I can see why the knives are out.

Ever the optimist me though, football is a strange game and often success isn't instant. Things can get worse before they get better and that's the case at Leicester, I can feel it in my lager'y piss.

[Dunc]

I actually enjoy his posts. I don't agree with most of them but it's good for the forum. Infact although I don't agree with him, he does have a point. You can look at things rationally and irrationally and I think that's what's happening. The fact is considering the squad of players we have, sitting 16th in the league is disgusting. Levein has been here long enough to stamp his authority and can't completely escape the reasons for the league position.

I'm fully behind Levein (support wise) though and I can see that performances have improved and that he's building something here so I can kind of accept what's going on. But when a team under-achieves whatever the reasons, you've got to expect criticism as it's inevitable. Chandler has some good points, it's a shame he doesn't take other people's views on board as such. Whilst we lie procariously close to the basement of a shocking league with a squad stronger than the majority of the teams in the league then I can see why the knives are out.

Ever the optimist me though, football is a strange game and often success isn't instant. Things can get worse before they get better and that's the case at Leicester, I can feel it in my lager'y piss.

93036[/snapback]

I enjoy his posts as well, its challenging stuff some of the time. However, I don't believe a lot of what he says and I'm interested to know if I am wrong on that.

[Chandler]

I am no coward and I responded to every topic you raised and even kept the same refrence numbers so you could not worm your way out of this discusion like you normally do.

I then started to answer your responce and half way through I realised that you had managed to confuse the issues, blur the points of discusions again, screw up the refrence numbers you introduced.  which was what I said at the begining of this post.

I am going to bury you with interlect, commen sense and logic and I insist that you respond in a manner that allows me to do it.

So

I have responded to every point you made to Hoof, and to help you to interact with another human, I have also stuck to using the refrence numbers that you used in your original responce to hoof. 

You have responded to my comments but you ommited to respond to the first three, do it. 

Ref four became Ref 1 and from then on I dont know what the fcuk are talking about so if you wish to continue this discusion and try to prove your point in a constructive manner that us mear mortals can understand and relate to.  Please answer first set of responces to your responces but use the effing refrence numbers so we can understand what topic you are talking about

And another thing Chandler, please dont let all this negative reinforcment boost your feeling of self importance.  It was not you, I insulted, it was a twat.

93007[/snapback]

I think you are becoming a bit of an embarrassment to your own cause Step. Even your allies are wanting to distance themselves from your comments.

It is perfectly obvious which of your points I am referring to in my reply. I ignored some of your points (like my loose reference to the term 'Jocks') because they were trivial or you were being confrontational just for the sake of it.

It might be a good idea to count to ten before you reply to any of my posts in future.

[davieG]

I am no coward and I responded to every topic you raised and even kept the same refrence numbers so you could not worm your way out of this discusion like you normally do.

I then started to answer your responce and half way through I realised that you had managed to confuse the issues, blur the points of discusions again, screw up the refrence numbers you introduced.  which was what I said at the begining of this post.

I am going to bury you with interlect, commen sense and logic and I insist that you respond in a manner that allows me to do it.

So

I have responded to every point you made to Hoof, and to help you to interact with another human, I have also stuck to using the refrence numbers that you used in your original responce to hoof. 

You have responded to my comments but you ommited to respond to the first three, do it. 

Ref four became Ref 1 and from then on I dont know what the fcuk are talking about so if you wish to continue this discusion and try to prove your point in a constructive manner that us mear mortals can understand and relate to.  Please answer first set of responces to your responces but use the effing refrence numbers so we can understand what topic you are talking about

And another thing Chandler, please dont let all this negative reinforcment boost your feeling of self importance.  It was not you, I insulted, it was a twat.

93007[/snapback]

I think you are becoming a bit of an embarrassment to your own cause Step. Even your allies are wanting to distance themselves from your comments.

It is perfectly obvious which of your points I am referring to in my reply. I ignored some of your points (like my loose reference to the term 'Jocks') because they were trivial or you were being confrontational just for the sake of it.

It might be a good idea to count to ten before you reply to any of my posts in future.

93182[/snapback]

1,

2,

3,

4,

5,

6,

7,

8,

9,

10

nah can't be bothered

[Chandler]

Hey Chandler! I can't help but wonder a bit about your 2nd point:

"2) It's not so much who we should be signing it's more about who we should not be signing. Bringing in minor league fodder (e.g. SPL) in bulk is not the answer."

I remember MON signing some of our best ever performing players like Elliott, Lennon and Savage from lower league clubs, yet they got us flying high in the Premiership and kept us there. Without comparing MON to Mr Levein, how can you already say that Hughes, Maybury and McCarthy won't turn out to be as big a success as them? Especially those three seem to me to be very ambitious players who are willing to give it their all to get Leicester back to the Premiership. Buying rejects, who Izzet, Savage and Sinclair effectively were, doesn't always have to work out, but don't you think some of CL's signings have potential?

93003[/snapback]

If I was a very generous person Shen I might say touche (sorry, but I can't get the froggy accent thing to go on the e). But I am not a very generous person. However there is some truth in what you write.

As you may know, I have a very dim view of the SPL. Bar the 'Auld Firm', all of the rest would struggle to get out of the Championship and some wouldn't make it out of Division One.

So, in my book, I don't think it's a wise move to go on raids north of the wall. And it is more than a little reckless to pillage players who, for one reason or another, are considered expendable by SPL clubs.

Levein's problem is, of course, his lack of connections with good English clubs and players. Virtually his entire career as player and manager has been spent in Scotland. This is a massive handicap for us - but it is a situation which might improve. Some of his recent signings may indeed be very influential as they acclimatise to a faster, more physical league.

OK, now on to MON. MON was a great cherry picker. But he was very fussy. He bought players that a lot of big clubs were watching (Elliott was watched by everyone - but the big boys hedged because of his lack of pace). And he introduced them gradually.

Sinclair may have been a reject but he was a reject from a very big club which was one of the first to buy European players en masse. Muzzy was just a baby at the time. And by Chelsea's lofty standards (even then) he would never have been more than a squad player.

But all this happened a decade ago. Football has changed enormously in that time. The quality required to stay in the Prem is infinitely greater than it was then (as we found out last season). In those days you could get by by bringing in domestic quality. Five years ago you needed more European quality. Now it seems you need quality from all over the world.

But Levein's approach so far has been centred on a tiny league that has very little quality in it. Instead of looking at the world outside his window, he mooches by the bins in his backyard.

Derby have been very adventurous in their transfer dealings. They have cast their net far and wide and brought in what I would call second tier talent - but from across a continent. This is the true MON approach ten years on.

However, as I have stated before, important as acquisitions are, this is not the main problem facing us at this time. Levein can't get any end product out of his team. It continues to play in fits and starts. And there are no signs that this is going to end any time soon.

So some of us like Hoof hope and others like me despair.

[Katy]

Hey Chandler! I can't help but wonder a bit about your 2nd point:

"2) It's not so much who we should be signing it's more about who we should not be signing. Bringing in minor league fodder (e.g. SPL) in bulk is not the answer."

I remember MON signing some of our best ever performing players like Elliott, Lennon and Savage from lower league clubs, yet they got us flying high in the Premiership and kept us there. Without comparing MON to Mr Levein, how can you already say that Hughes, Maybury and McCarthy won't turn out to be as big a success as them? Especially those three seem to me to be very ambitious players who are willing to give it their all to get Leicester back to the Premiership. Buying rejects, who Izzet, Savage and Sinclair effectively were, doesn't always have to work out, but don't you think some of CL's signings have potential?

93003[/snapback]

If I was a very generous person Shen I might say touche (sorry, but I can't get the froggy accent thing to go on the e). But I am not a very generous person. However there is some truth in what you write.

As you may know, I have a very dim view of the SPL. Bar the 'Auld Firm', all of the rest would struggle to get out of the Championship and some wouldn't make it out of Division One.

So, in my book, I don't think it's a wise move to go on raids north of the wall. And it is more than a little reckless to pillage players who, for one reason or another, are considered expendable by SPL clubs.

Levein's problem is, of course, his lack of connections with good English clubs and players. Virtually his entire career as player and manager has been spent in Scotland. This is a massive handicap for us - but it is a situation which might improve. Some of his recent signings may indeed be very influential as they acclimatise to a faster, more physical league.

OK, now on to MON. MON was a great cherry picker. But he was very fussy. He bought players that a lot of big clubs were watching (Elliott was watched by everyone - but the big boys hedged because of his lack of pace). And he introduced them gradually.

Sinclair may have been a reject but he was a reject from a very big club which was one of the first to buy European players en masse. Muzzy was just a baby at the time. And by Chelsea's lofty standards (even then) he would never have been more than a squad player.

But all this happened a decade ago. Football has changed enormously in that time. The quality required to stay in the Prem is infinitely greater than it was then (as we found out last season). In those days you could get by by bringing in domestic quality. Five years ago you needed more European quality. Now it seems you need quality from all over the world.

But Levein's approach so far has been centred on a tiny league that has very little quality in it. Instead of looking at the world outside his window, he mooches by the bins in his backyard.

Derby have been very adventurous in their transfer dealings. They have cast their net far and wide and brought in what I would call second tier talent - but from across a continent. This is the true MON approach ten years on.

However, as I have stated before, important as acquisitions are, this is not the main problem facing us at this time. Levein can't get any end product out of his team. It continues to play in fits and starts. And there are no signs that this is going to end any time soon.

So some of us like Hoof hope and others like me despair.

93198[/snapback]

Dont know whether its because im ill or what Chandler but I actually agree with most of your points there, but I believe CL is casting his potential player net further afield which may result in him missing a few games - as detailed in a previous post.

[Ric Flair]

If I was a very generous person Shen I might say touche (sorry, but I can't get the froggy accent thing to go on the e). But I am not a very generous person. However there is some truth in what you write.

As you may know, I have a very dim view of the SPL. Bar the 'Auld Firm', all of the rest would struggle to get out of the Championship and some wouldn't make it out of Division One.

So, in my book, I don't think it's a wise move to go on raids north of the wall. And it is more than a little reckless to pillage players who, for one reason or another, are considered expendable by SPL clubs.

Levein's problem is, of course, his lack of connections with good English clubs and players. Virtually his entire career as player and manager has been spent in Scotland. This is a massive handicap for us - but it is a situation which might improve. Some of his recent signings may indeed be very influential as they acclimatise to a faster, more physical league.

OK, now on to MON. MON was a great cherry picker. But he was very fussy. He bought players that a lot of big clubs were watching (Elliott was watched by everyone - but the big boys hedged because of his lack of pace). And he introduced them gradually.

Sinclair may have been a reject but he was a reject from a very big club which was one of the first to buy European players en masse. Muzzy was just a baby at the time. And by Chelsea's lofty standards (even then) he would never have been more than a squad player.

But all this happened a decade ago. Football has changed enormously in that time. The quality required to stay in the Prem is infinitely greater than it was then (as we found out last season). In those days you could get by by bringing in domestic quality. Five years ago you needed more European quality. Now it seems you need quality from all over the world.

You definately make some good points there, football has changed immensly and it's increasingly harder for managers to manage at the level we are because they are expected to come in, steady the ship and build a team to get up and stay up. It was thought to be a miracle to do that 10 years ago, now it's impossible, well nearly anyway.

Levein has admitted, he knew about every single player in Scotland and that his knowledge of english football was limited but he's learning. He's got Rob Kelly who is well thought of and he knows the young talent that is available in this country, especially in the north west. That's one of the reasons why we got McCarthy, although Levein was watching him at Hearts as he'd seen him when he played for Ireland Under 21's. Levein's is also keen to look abroad and that's why he has and is off on plenty of scouting missions ala Derby you could say. When did you hear about Micky flying off to check out talent? Very rarely i'll tell you that, but I suppose that doesn't mean he didn't.

There are plenty of managers who come to the english game with little knowledge of it, but it's amazing how some of them adapt. I imagine Alex Ferguson was lacking in knowledge of the english game when he came here, although i'm not for one minute comparing them!!!

Levein signed from the SPL at first as he knew the players there and knew which players could play at this level, very shrewd if you ask me. You can't say that Maybury and Hughes aren't good enough because they've been solid in the games i've seen them play. de Vries i'll give you that one, he's been crap but again his goals in europe for Hearts show he can't be just a one trick pony.

Time will tell Jackie Chan-dler, I sense a little 'easing' up in your posts and i'm pleased to see it. Nothing short of a win tomorrow though and I expect you back with your slipper

Have a good weekend boss.

[Chandler]

If I was a very generous person Shen I might say touche (sorry, but I can't get the froggy accent thing to go on the e). But I am not a very generous person. However there is some truth in what you write.

As you may know, I have a very dim view of the SPL. Bar the 'Auld Firm', all of the rest would struggle to get out of the Championship and some wouldn't make it out of Division One.

So, in my book, I don't think it's a wise move to go on raids north of the wall. And it is more than a little reckless to pillage players who, for one reason or another, are considered expendable by SPL clubs.

Levein's problem is, of course, his lack of connections with good English clubs and players. Virtually his entire career as player and manager has been spent in Scotland. This is a massive handicap for us - but it is a situation which might improve. Some of his recent signings may indeed be very influential as they acclimatise to a faster, more physical league.

OK, now on to MON. MON was a great cherry picker. But he was very fussy. He bought players that a lot of big clubs were watching (Elliott was watched by everyone - but the big boys hedged because of his lack of pace). And he introduced them gradually.

Sinclair may have been a reject but he was a reject from a very big club which was one of the first to buy European players en masse. Muzzy was just a baby at the time. And by Chelsea's lofty standards (even then) he would never have been more than a squad player.

But all this happened a decade ago. Football has changed enormously in that time. The quality required to stay in the Prem is infinitely greater than it was then (as we found out last season). In those days you could get by by bringing in domestic quality. Five years ago you needed more European quality. Now it seems you need quality from all over the world.

You definately make some good points there, football has changed immensly and it's increasingly harder for managers to manage at the level we are because they are expected to come in, steady the ship and build a team to get up and stay up. It was thought to be a miracle to do that 10 years ago, now it's impossible, well nearly anyway.

Levein has admitted, he knew about every single player in Scotland and that his knowledge of english football was limited but he's learning. He's got Rob Kelly who is well thought of and he knows the young talent that is available in this country, especially in the north west. That's one of the reasons why we got McCarthy, although Levein was watching him at Hearts as he'd seen him when he played for Ireland Under 21's. Levein's is also keen to look abroad and that's why he has and is off on plenty of scouting missions ala Derby you could say. When did you hear about Micky flying off to check out talent? Very rarely i'll tell you that, but I suppose that doesn't mean he didn't.

There are plenty of managers who come to the english game with little knowledge of it, but it's amazing how some of them adapt. I imagine Alex Ferguson was lacking in knowledge of the english game when he came here, although i'm not for one minute comparing them!!!

Levein signed from the SPL at first as he knew the players there and knew which players could play at this level, very shrewd if you ask me. You can't say that Maybury and Hughes aren't good enough because they've been solid in the games i've seen them play. de Vries i'll give you that one, he's been crap but again his goals in europe for Hearts show he can't be just a one trick pony.

Time will tell Jackie Chan-dler, I sense a little 'easing' up in your posts and i'm pleased to see it. Nothing short of a win tomorrow though and I expect you back with your slipper

Have a good weekend boss.

93217[/snapback]

Well spotted sir. I am reasonable with reasonable people. Re. Levein there isn't a great deal of difference in our analysis of the current situation. We both accept that the table doesn't lie. We both accept that the form guide tells us the real truth and that our assessments of individual performances ultimately count for very little.

The real difference between us are our solutions for the the current situation. I may post more on this dilemma in the weeks ahead as we face some unpalatable choices.

A secondary consideration is how we view our recent pass. I feel that Adams was very badly treated by City fans (particulalrly the so called die hards who post on forums like this) who hounded him out. Now they are bent on rubbishing his legacy.

At a time like this I turn to Shakespeare:

"The evil that a man does lives on after him. The good is oft' interred with their bones."

Mark Anthony in Julius Caesar

[MADLEVEIN]

(particulalrly the so called die hards who post on forums like this) who hounded him out.

adams quit because he lost his sparkle.... didnt he ????

i also remember 30'000 people chanting " you dont know what your doing"

at him so you cant really say it was people like us, it was nearly every city fan who had clearly had enough .

[SamuearlJackson]

Good thread this.

Chandler makes some pretty reasonable points.

I'll add into the mix the following points (taken of course with a pinch of salt as I can't go to the matches at the mo but listen to them all online, watch the highlights and rely on 2nd hand info from my trusted sources who are my brother and Dad):

1. Adams was not hounded out in my opinion. Micky had 'lost the sparkle' and this in turn was reflected in what seemed to be an unmotivated squad and a generally apathetic fan base. As is always said, Micky resigned. He was not forced out. If he was really motivated to do the job still (which I feel is crucial being a manager!) then why quit? The fact that he did quit shows to me that he had lost the will to continue the job here.

2. Levein was a good appointment, very much along the lines of recent LCFC appointments (Little, McGhee, O'Neill, Taylor and Adams). As a supporter Levein looks to be doing the things he should be doing with the major exception of winning lots of games! Does the team not seem hungrier, more motivated and appear to be playing 'better' football (though that depends on your definition - I'm sure Chandler will say good football is winning games and I agree with that to some extent), and don't most of the signings look pretty good so far?

3. I'd like to know what a better course of action than getting behind the manager now and through next season would be? If we fail to make the play-offs with one of the biggest wage bills in the divsion next season and after Levein has had time to build his squad I will not be pleased.

SamJ

[SamuearlJackson]

By the way Chandler, as I'm sure you know most of the criteria we laid down on Talking Balls for getting rid of/losing MA have not been met yet, though I still think it was the right move for all involved.

SamJ

[step]

Shen, if you read the whole topic you will see the point I am making.

Chandler you persist in writing long rambling messages that ridicule CL and his supporters, and when someone responds you simply will not discus any point to a conclusion, ignoring the counter arguments being made by other people.

You quote facts that contradict you argument as if the confirm it, you are equally likely to quote untruths as if they are facts, then when someone puts forward the true facts as a counter argument, more often than not, you just make some other unconnected irrelevant point and detracts from the original point.

Yes you make good points but they are insular and you never ever consider all the circumstances surrounding that point. Which is why the logic you apply is a nonsense, it is not based on rational thought, a must if you are going to discus any point in a constructive manner.

But the most infuriating thing you do is to responds to a question or discussion point, by disagreeing and in some cases attacking the person for making that point, But. Never actually disproving the point or answering that person point.

All in all a series of traits that I very iterating and is why so many people end arguing with you.

Shen. Read his messages and workout what he does. It is quiet clever in a strange kind of way,

.

[Simon]

Shen, if you read the whole topic you will see the point I am making. 

 

Chandler you persist in writing long rambling messages that ridicule CL and his supporters, and when someone responds you simply will not discus any point to a conclusion, ignoring the counter arguments being made by other people. 

You quote facts that contradict you argument as if the confirm it, you are equally likely to quote untruths as if they are facts, then when someone puts forward the true facts as a counter argument, more often than not, you just make some other unconnected irrelevant point and detracts from the original point. 

Yes you make good points but they are insular and you never ever consider all the circumstances surrounding that point.  Which is why the logic you apply is a nonsense, it is not based on rational thought, a must if you are going to discus any point in a constructive manner. 

But the most infuriating thing you do is to responds to a question or discussion point, by disagreeing and in some cases attacking the person for making that point, But. Never actually disproving the point or answering that person point. 

All in all a series of traits that I very iterating and is why so many people end arguing with you.

Shen.  Read his messages and workout what he does. It is quiet clever in a strange kind of way,

.

93336[/snapback]

The reason I gave up bothering...

[Chandler]

By the way Chandler, as I'm sure you know most of the criteria we laid down on Talking Balls for getting rid of/losing MA have not been met yet, though I still think it was the right move for all involved.

SamJ

93301[/snapback]

It won't come as a surprise to you SJ that I don't agree that losing Adams was a good thing. But it comes as a (slight) surprise to me that you don't think that the post Adams criteria has been met.

Many of the 'Adams Out' brigade are now trying to revise their expectations downwards. This is why they wax lyrical on here about individual performances instead of focusing on the table. They pretend they never expected promotion this season when Adams left. Begs the question though doesn't it?

Why hound him out in the first place then?

[Chandler]

Shen, if you read the whole topic you will see the point I am making. 

 

Chandler you persist in writing long rambling messages that ridicule CL and his supporters, and when someone responds you simply will not discus any point to a conclusion, ignoring the counter arguments being made by other people. 

You quote facts that contradict you argument as if the confirm it, you are equally likely to quote untruths as if they are facts, then when someone puts forward the true facts as a counter argument, more often than not, you just make some other unconnected irrelevant point and detracts from the original point.  Yes you make good points but they are insular and you never ever consider all the circumstances surrounding that point.  Which is why the logic you apply is a nonsense, it is not based on rational thought, a must if you are going to discus any point in a constructive manner. 

But the most infuriating thing you do is to responds to a question or discussion point, by disagreeing and in some cases attacking the person for making that point, But. Never actually disproving the point or answering that person point. 

All in all a series of traits that I very iterating and is why so many people end arguing with you.

Shen.  Read his messages and workout what he does. It is quiet clever in a strange kind of way,

.

93336[/snapback]

Step,

Can't you see that your natural supporters are deserting you in droves? In election terms, the swing votes are heading towards me. And they aren't natural Chandler supporters: Dunc, Hoof, Katy, SJ -even Shen.

I have highlighted a typical piece of your less than purple prose. You provide no evidence to back up this opinion. You make no mention of actual events. It's just waffle.

And you have the cheek to accuse me of writing long rambling messages.

[Chandler]

(particulalrly the so called die hards who post on forums like this) who hounded him out.

adams quit because he lost his sparkle.... didnt he ????

i also remember 30'000 people chanting  " you dont know what your doing"

at him so you cant really say it was people like us,  it was nearly every city fan who had clearly had enough .

93279[/snapback]

Like when he brought on Craig Hignett to equalise against Arsenal?

[Babylon]

By the way Chandler, as I'm sure you know most of the criteria we laid down on Talking Balls for getting rid of/losing MA have not been met yet, though I still think it was the right move for all involved.

SamJ

93301[/snapback]

It won't come as a surprise to you SJ that I don't agree that losing Adams was a good thing. But it comes as a (slight) surprise to me that you don't think that the post Adams criteria has been met.

Many of the 'Adams Out' brigade are now trying to revise their expectations downwards. This is why they wax lyrical on here about individual performances instead of focusing on the table. They pretend they never expected promotion this season when Adams left. Begs the question though doesn't it?

Why hound him out in the first place then?

93343[/snapback]

I don't think the "hounding out" as you put it, of Adams had anything to do with the position we were in the table. I can't remember one person who said get rid of adams as we should be near the top. What I do remember is a lot of people moaning because the team lacked any kind of passion and the football actually being played was the worst most could remember. Adams was tactically found wanting time and time again.

At least under Levein the team seems to care, they also seem to be able to string a few passes together. Levein is also buying young and hungry players who given a little time can progress and improve along with the team and its results. With adams team of older players what progress could we make?

I was very much pro Adams and at the time didn't want him to go, anyone on here can vouch for that. Aftering seeing the performances of his and Leveins teams, it's the performances of the latter that give me some hope. Granted the results haven't been great, but the style of play has improved and squad age has reduced drastically. What hope did we have under Adams, Mid table team, old players, team changing every season, no passion and absolutly dire football.

[SamuearlJackson]

Here's a post I made just after Adams resigned in a fickle boneheads vs Chandler thread on the other website (dated October 12th):

----------------------------------------

Another quick question...Chandler, what criteria will need to be fulfilled for you to admit you were wrong about the situation?

I suggest:

1) We average more points per game for the rest of the season than we did under MA

2) We get in a play-off spot

3) We begin playing exciting football!!!

Likewise, if

1) We average the same or fewer points per game for the rest of the season than we did under MA

2) We finish in a lower league position than we are currently in

3) We continue to play dour, crap football (just from other opinions - not my own, I haven't seen us play live since last season Sad )

you will be proven correct and can shame the fickle boneheads.

To suggest that forum users are directly responsible for MA's resignation seems a little odd to me. Repeating many arguments here...

MA tendered his resignation (perhaps there might have been an amicable agreement over a partial pay-off, who knows?) he was not sacked.

Did MA really still have the bottle for the job if he was prepared to resign after one chant of "You don't know what you're doing?" As far as I know there was never an "Adams out" chant which is the real sign of trouble.

Since when does a manager read a forum and let it influence his decisions?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

SamJ

----------------------------------------

This is the criteria I was talking about. Only the subjective point 3 on each of these can be argued in favour of Adams leaving. However, I feel the atmosphere about LCFC is more positive than it has been for a long time, and hopefully by next year we will be the better for the change. As I said previously, poor performance next year should, and I think will, be deemed unacceptable. Up the City.

SamJ

[MADLEVEIN]

(particulalrly the so called die hards who post on forums like this) who hounded him out.

adams quit because he lost his sparkle.... didnt he ????

i also remember 30'000 people chanting  " you dont know what your doing"

at him so you cant really say it was people like us,  it was nearly every city fan who had clearly had enough .

93279[/snapback]

Like when he brought on Craig Hignett to equalise against Arsenal?

93358[/snapback]

i forgot that one piece of genius by adams ,

that worked for him that time shame it didnt work against wolves, spurs, middlesborogh but to name a few when his substituion's in late stages of the game cost us our premiership status.