I'd wager that if we'd played the bottom 8 of 9 teams in our first 10 games, and were riding higher in the league as a result, those labelling the current reverse scenario as an "excuse" would by now be telling us that our high position was artificial due to the fact we hadn't played any of the top teams yet...
Echo that.
Without wishing to point score or dwell on the negative side, if people want to read about the lack of sensitivity toward the victim then this is probably a better place to start: http://m.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-boss-admits-forward-was-not-ready-for-cup-clash-1-4442478
Tucked away in the Sun (apologies if already posted):
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4627008/Dan-Kings-Sport-Uncovered-Man-City-fans-pay-the-price.html
First time I've read that the Trust are disputing Birch's fees. What is there to argue about? I thought the Trust wanted to start in an honourable fashion...? From where i'm sitting they appear to want to start off by not paying new debt, let alone writing off the old debt.
Same old....
Perhaps not. I agree that he does seem to be covering a scenario that he hopes will never happen (i.e. putting money aside from the "good" premier league years in case we ever get relegated). There again, I've got all sorts of personal and household insurances despite taking measures to try and make sure I'll never need to call upon them. But if all we're doing here is accusing Cortese of covering a scenario he hopes will never happen then I'm sure there are worse things that he could be accused of.
Ah...someone who can articulate my interpretation much better than I can! Thank you kind sir. Time for me to return to the comfort zone of the PTS thread me thinks