JohnnyFartPants

I don't think Wolves have been putting out a side week in week out that is anything like as young as ours. That paperwork exercise you did in the previous post only shows what players we now have and are using. You know fair well that most of those experienced ones have not been used until recently.

I think you are missing the point. The point he made is that the booing will have done nothing to help the team. He is not lying, make stuff up or twisting anything. He has merely stated a fact which you can't argue with and don't like to read, yet is true.

Now you have really blown me out of the water. You had to go and mention high flying Forest didn't you. I can see them winning this league and not fearing relegation at all with all those extra points they currently have over us. All bloody three of them!!

Because it was incorrect or hard to take?

Firstly, thanks for the insult re my brain. I appreciate it. Secondly, perhaps you do not understand the basic way in which money works. Imagine this scenario. You have £5 in the bank yet you employ me to do a job. I haven't broken any rules of the comapny yet you now think I am not the man for the job. You seek legal advice and it says that to get rid of me requires me to have done something amounting to gross misconduct or you have to pay me off. I don't know how long his contract is but if it is 2 years, then you have to stump up 2 years pay. You go back to the bank account and see that you still only have £5 in there, "but we can't afford NOT to get rid of him", you tell the bank manager, who looks you in the eye and says, "Oh do work it out thicko."

Yes we can and now the picture is forming. Jan is Saints as Fergie is to Man Utd and Wooton is to Saints as Lampard is to Chelsea. They are all bargain basement. It is all we can afford. Our players and manager are evenly matched.

All pretty factual though. There was 44 + minutes to go, they were one goal behind, it didn't help the team and Rupert Lowe did get abuse. What part didn't you like? I wouldn't go as far as to say it was shameful though. Fans are entitled to do the predictable and boring anti-chairman chants.

So we can afford to pay up his contract and then appoint someone who will probably want more money? Brilliant news.

Who else has a team as young as ours? I thought we were leading the way with playing only kids, now it seems loads are doing it.

Maybe he is but the kids aren't.

1 Most fans act as if we are able to make many decisions still. We are so skint we can't. 2 He was offered a wage we could afford to pay him. He chose to seek work elsewhere.

1 They don't 2 He didn't

Normally it is aimed at people that use the word "is" either side of the word "exactly" I think.

So Craven Cottage and Selhurst park then?

:confused:

Too much yeast?

For the record, Marmite rocks.

Oh, believe me, it worked, and thanks for bringing it back in here again.

No it isn't but it isn't alone in that it is a pointless reason to get upset about Lowe, much in the same way that many of your posts are. It is a caricature of your type of posts. If Lowe gave a homeless person a free meal you would find a reason for that to be a nasty act. My thread, though stupid, was taking the rise out of you. I feel it worked.

It is wrong to enter debate with mirth now is it? This football debating is serious stuff isn't it?

This is my point exactly. Lowe is not my cup of tea at all. He has done some things before now that have been good and he is trying to address issues now, all be it badly. All this still allows me to think, however, that at the moment there is no other choice. This doesn't mean I want sex with Lowe or that I even agree on all he says and does. It is just me being a bit grown up about him and his involvement. Stanley chooses to make assumptions that everyone that doesn't post anti-Lowe filth is in favour of him. He should get a grip.

We are doing that already, yet you deem it okay to comment/put down/have a go at people that don't share your views. I am merely endorsing this approach by returning similar comments/replies to you about your posts. Is that okay?

Is telling the same people the same things about Lowe every day not boring then?

Have a look, you may well see that I posted things about Saints as recently as Friday. I try not to get all consumed in it or by the inner workings of Rupert Lowe though. It's better that way, as I don't come across as a demented bellend like some. Then again, why are you getting out of your pram about the content of what I post on here? Would you find me sexy if I wrote a lot of anti Lowe stuff. Can't you accept that others might have different opinions and don't need to be berated by you for it? You reap what you sow, bellend features.

Oh is that who he is, the same person with that website that you have to share his bath water and opinion to be allowed to post on?