saintbletch

Amen.

Good spot Lets B Avenue, but I can assure you that as long as I live I will never forget that Toke's a ****.

I think it's important to document the events from this period as we each saw them so that this summer's activities aren't seen solely reviewed through 20-20 hindsight. Context is essential. So I'd like address the points in bold above because you seem to be painting those that interpreted the club's acts and statements differently from you as having some sort of agenda. At the very least, you suggest that people chose to not take statements on face value. I'm saying that given the poor quality of communication from the club, "face value" is subjective. The statements issued by the club were anything but clear and emphatic, and were open to interpretation especially when they were apparently contradicted by the club's actions. You say that there were emphatic statements by the club stating the position. Well the first time I felt that things might not be right was the contradictions I saw between the first major statement made by Les Reed in April and the resultant loss of players and the Manager. This statement from Les Reed included a phrase which is the very antithesis of clarity: I've emboldened the part of the statement I have a problem with. I guess you could point out that the use of the word "probably" in there was emphatic - in that the clear and unequivocal message that Les Reed wanted to get across was that players would probably not be sold. Semantically I can accept that, so in that sense, and with the benefit of hindsight, I guess I agree you were right. Yet, the context of this statement and the purpose the club felt it would serve was to communicate the club's position, and to quell speculation that our manager would leave and that key players were about to jump ship and join other clubs. So given the role this statement was expected to play in denying the veracity of media reports, it's not surprising that many fans took Les Reed's comments to mean that our players would stay - despite his use of the qualifier "probably". This interpretation was given more validity by Les Reed's own words earlier in the same statement: Now perhaps it is just me, but that certainly meets my definition of emphatic. That's pretty unequivocal. No club had been given permission and that will remain so. Happy days. At the time I felt that the term "probably" was a nod to the fact that we might sell Shaw, but keep our best players. This was backed up by Les Reed's closing remarks: Now I think Les Reed used the term "fire-sale" here to mean that assets weren't being sold ahead of the owner selling the club. But again, given the context of the statement and the purpose the club meant it to serve, many fans took that to mean that there would not be a mass-selling of players. The overall impression I took away was that the reports linking players with moves away from the club were not true, and that we'd likely start next season with the same manager and all our best players. By the time Calum Chambers joined Arsenal I had lost all faith in any communication from the club. You might want to maintain that the club communicated clearly and emphatically during this period. I disagree, yet I can easily see how you arrived at a different point of view. Do I think you are wrong? Yes. Do I think you are in some way not level-headed or that you are actively choosing to see things differently in holding these views? No. I can see how you've reached a different conclusion from viewing the same events. As for the frequency of communication being fine for level-headed people, again I fear that you're allowing your own view of the situation to stop empathy for others' positions. If you saw no contradiction throughout the summer, then you would not need more statements. This I understand. But when I saw actions that contradicted statements from the club, I wanted to see new statements that would help me reconcile the discrepancies. Trust is a fragile thing. It takes a long time to create and if treated carelessly it's gone. One clumsy interview followed by silence from key personnel whilst the club's actions apparently contradicted its words, was all it took for me to lose faith that the club was communicating openly with its fans. Hindsight helps me to see that this was cock-up and not conspiracy, but in the middle of the saga I couldn't tell if I were being lied to, or just communicated to by incompetents. Again, I'm not saying you were wrong to interpret things the way you did. Far from it; with the benefit of hindsight you were right. I'm asking you to consider how the non-level-headed amongst us might have seen the same events and reached different conclusions.

So if any of these 'breaders' were confronted with the output of a Reverse-Dougan practitioner, would they be pleased or disappointed? Is it mountains or morsels they're after? Is it the hunt or the hare? Jamie? I guess that on one hand you've probably got more nutella-nutrients, and on the other hand, well on the other hand you'd probably find a large quantity of $hit.

This is my favourite...

Whilst, as a man, I must admit to feeling a little exploited by this thread, you are forgiven KRG. That fatwa has been lifted, and you may now remove the orange boiler suit.

What other thread, Toke? I ran through the main bored naked the other day in fact. I even took on some of the forum heavyweights - you'd have been proud of your old Dad. I gave a couple of them dead-arms, tripped them up on the school field, pushed freshly cut grass into their mouths, pulled their jumpers over the faces and farted on their heads*. *None of that ever happened to me while I was at school. I was popular. Yes I was. Shut it Toke. Messi. I suppose you've posted this too have you Toke? I find it strangely alluring if I'm honest.

A fiasco indeed, Toke. Glad Keane has had a shave. A beard can really chafe.

True Toke. Remember when the three of us went to see Utd v Arsenal? We all agreed to drink something related to the goal scorers. You had a pint of Skol when Scholes scored. I had a pint of Becks when Beckham scored. And Bear had to be rushed to hospital for a stomach pump when Arsenal's keeper scored from a late corner. Still at least he got to see Seaman coming out of his box.

I'm only yanking your tail KRG; more power to you. I just hope you don't expect to get a fair hearing here.

But while I'm here, I suppose it would be churlish not to comment I think you'll find that many of the celebs, not being the most technically aware, had not actively uploaded things to The Cloud, but had instead not turned off the auto-backup facility. I believe that others also claim to have deleted the files from their phones and are speculating that the files were recovered in some way. Your point is valid though, taking those sort of pictures means you run a risk of them being seen by a third-party. Forget The Cloud, what if you were to simply leave your unlocked phone on the train? Well, yes and no. Assuming these things are encrypted - mine are, then if your average hacker were to try to break very strong encryption using a desktop machine, on average it would take millions of years. We shouldn't feel smug and complacent about this, but it shows the efforts people would have to go to to crack just one piece of encrypted information. Organised criminal gangs could theoretically create a grid of cooperating computers and bring more power to the job, but again you're looking at a lot of processing power and a lot of time. [pap to TMS please...] Now, if your government were to put a concerted effort into accessing your information, then they could certainly bring the sort of resources required to significantly shorten the time required to crack encryption. Not that they'd ever do that. Ever. Over time computing power will increase and this will make it viable to crack older encryption methods in near real-time. But something like a 2048 bit encryption would, on average, still take quadrillions of years to decrypt using standard computing power. That's 10 raised to the power 15 or a thousand, million, million years. BTW, did you know that exporting very strong strong encryption software is managed by the same laws in the US that pertain to exporting nuclear elements. Why would that be? BTW2, did you know that reputable sites never actually store your passwords. Even if there servers are hacked, your plain text passwords are not exposed. I find that non-technical people that I talk to often assume that somewhere there is a big database with all of their passwords sitting there in plain sight waiting for any hacker to steal. Instead, some really smart maths is used to check that the password you enter is the one you registered with the site. Non-technical people often then ask, "how can that be?", and I then go on to bore them to death with the answer. You have been spared. Apple are saying that it wasn't their service that was breached, but inistead the celebs' passwords were instead inferred or cracked. Personally I feel that amounts to much the same thing. Toke's a ****.

Oh how nature abhors a vacuum. [clears throat...eherm] In case anyone has misplaced their navigational device, this is People's Republic of The Muppet Show. Just like ISIS, ISL or IS, but remove body parts below the waist, we fought hard for this territory to be run according the rules of anarchy. We see TMS as being like TORing round the dark web, and Barry Sanchez (or Dune) started this thread so that the seedy pictures and videos could be 'enjoyed'. I think his idea was that this would be some sort of penile dysfunction treatment... Men would come here and view these images, and whilst attempting to become 'aroused' their mind would wander to all the other Muppets that were at that same time delicately touching themselves waiting for the blood to arrive. Then, like some spooky demonstration of a strange male sixth sense that connects men telepathically, the thought that other men around the south coast of England and further afield would also be touching themselves allowed each of them to simultaneously and mutually achieve erection. So take your morals to the infidels in The Lounge and let the masturbators masturbate. Or there will be consequences. Please. The PRoTMS!

A good summary.

Yep, that's a valid response Puggins and Monkeys, but it wasn't my intention to re-write history. I was simply documenting one side of the argument. You've now provided the balance, so thank you. But I'd stand by that statement; there was cause for concern and debate. By implication there was no cause for personal attacks. That behaviour wasn't justified, but then again, when can it ever be justified? Did you really feel it needed condemning? Did I need to say it? As for the communication vacuum, again that's a valid qualification you make. I probably was lazily grouping Les Reed's initial communication into the silence that preceded it.

Thanks Sarb/Jeff/DPS, but surely IF I was belittling anyone it was CB Fry that I was belittling? Forgive me if I've got you all wrong, but what you appear to have done is wrap a like-minded comfort blanket of other people's posts around you to somehow validate your commonly held views. By then representing yourself as a group and no longer an individual you then appear to have gone on to take offence on behalf of another poster. That's OK, we've all done it when we feel threatened and I would imagine it's human nature to band together in such times, but I really was only replying to CB Fry about the posts of his that I'd read. So if my post gave you some sort of problem, then I apologise. It wasn't my intention to compel you to post - unless of course you are CB Fry's official spokesperson. Again, not sure why you feel so defensive about my reply to another poster, and I also, wonder why you would try to cast me in a camp other than the "happies", let alone why you think I would want to discredit any of the individuals you've grouped in that nebulous camp. I do actually have a theory why you might try to throw a ring around yourself and other posters and cast me as outside of that ring. You see, by doing that, it makes it easier to superficially ignore the grey so that you can debate with me on easier, black and white terms. My advice to you would be to read the words I use, assume I'm an individual with complex and sometimes contradictory views and emotions, and reply to me on that basis. You really do come across as an intelligent bloke, but do you really think it's possible to draw a line of demarcation such that posters on one side are always "happies" on all issues, and that those on the other side are always "bedwetters"? I'd actually say that if those camps did exists, then I'd likely be in the "happy" camp with you, rubbing balm into your tense and hunched shoulders whilst giving you a slightly disconcerting look with a queer smile on my face. x

You're more than welcome, but your obsession with upcoming soft-porn films isn't germane here. Warning. Potential strawman approaching. What is perhaps germane is your tolerance of debate, and your apparent refusal to respect the right of others to hold differing opinions from yours. So given your new position, can I assume that you'll stop having a go at those that, seeing all shades the grey you've been talking about all summer, simply reached a different conclusion from you?

A very good summary Saxon. Not sure I'd say we are strengthened defensively, but we certainly aren't as weakened as I feared we might have been, and we also have more defensive formation options. One other concern is the latent creativity of Gaston that we will be 'missing'. Other than that, and as you stressed, given the situation we were in with players that had left or wanted to leave, it's been a really good transfer window. And the new Board has started to build some trust with some supporters.

It might be convenient to paint this black and white picture of a polarised fan base, but that's just lazy CB Fry. There's grey. Lots of grey. I remember sitting on a train coming back from London and a mate had just texted me that we had sold our iconic striker, and I struggled to believe this was possible. Then many other players were rumoured to want a move or were refusing to sign new contracts, and the same players used backchannels to the press and on here to paint Les Reed as the villain of the piece. At the same time many of those players were out of club control on holiday or with the England squad in Brazil, where they either made no comment or refused to give reassurances about their future in interviews. At first, what the fans got to address their growing concerns was zero communication from the club - a club whose new Board had just made being more communicative with fans a central tenet of their new administration. Les Reed was put forward as a spokesperson, but given that many felt that Les Reed might be the problem, this didn't carry much sway at the time. Les Reed gave assurances about players leaving, but the language he used was interpreted by many as disingenuous when important players started to be sold. Questions were asked of our new and inexperienced Chairman who seemed to have disappeared on 'vacation' for the entire summer. "Where's Ralph" was asked again and again, and instead of the Chairman we were given more Les Reed. Rumours started to appear that the Chairman had left and gone back into ice hockey, whilst articles in certain parts of the press spread rumours that our enigmatic (some might say secretive) owner wanted to divest herself of her father's plaything. This again was set against a backdrop that our previous Executive Chairman, who had delivered amazing success during his time, was rumoured to have moved on over financial tensions with the owner. Given that backdrop you must be rightfully proud that you instantly saw the truth through all the emotion, contradiction, silence and obfuscation. Perhaps you are simply better than us all? That being the case, perhaps you could see through the hubris to cut some slack to the rest of us that didn't have your prescience? For the avoidance of doubt, I'm simply saying that at times during the summer there was cause for concern and debate. And at times, arriving at the fire-sale hypothesis was a valid theory on route to understanding the facts, given the communication vacuum from the club. I'm also delighted with the dealings the club has done over the summer given where we were, and I'm starting to build some trust in the new Board. I also fully understand that certain personality types might need to rub a few noses in a few wet duvets.

I see you tried to get your hob nobs trending BTT, but I note with not a little mirth that you couldn't get it up! Actually, I'll take the blame for your biscuit dysfunction. You see, I've had to send the ZSM pixies home for the night as the forum is just too busy to respond in a timely and polite way to my requests. It was just about hanging in there, but then Gaston went and got loaned to Hull and somewhere in Austria there was a tear in the fabric of spacetime that sent out such a shockwave that all the ZSM dials went blank.

Not only are you being a very silly boy BTT, but you are also demonstrating a shocking ignorance as to how the ZSM pixies perform their magic. I imagine it might have been a little while since you've been able to make your 'knob' big, but flashing it all over The Muppet Show isn't going to satisfy Mrs BTT. Now, if you were to flash your 'knob' all over The Saints forum, then you might see a small bump in the ZSM bed sheets. If you look at posts 2, 4 and 7 in this thread you'll see that they are being automagically edited every 10 minutes by ZSM. You'll also see that post 4 monitors The Saints forum and not The Muppet Show. Child.

For what it's worth Sky's reporter at Staplewood just said it was definitely not happening.

...automatically posted by ZeitgeiStMarys. Saints-related trends on Twitter and The Saints Web... Most mentioned... ① ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ everton ② ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ depay ③ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ put ④ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ man ⑤ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #ggmu ⑥ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #mufcfamily ⑦ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ twitter ⑧ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ mirror ⑨ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #manunited ⑩ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ memphis ⑪ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #mufcc ⑫ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #mufc_family ⑬ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ follow ⑭ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ van ⑮ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ 2015 Trending up... ① ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #mufcc ② ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ 1gyuovrx7 ③ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ multicam ④ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ men's ⑤ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ 50c ⑥ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ gtamzn ⑦ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ regular ⑧ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ trouser ⑨ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ acu ⑩ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ propper ⑪ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ 50n ⑫ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ large ⑬ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ pay ⑭ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ £130,000 ⑮ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ hummels Trending down... ① ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #mufcfamily ② ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #manunited ③ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #ggmu ④ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ follow ⑤ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ twitter ⑥ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ iimanutdii ⑦ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ sta ⑧ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ mufc_family ⑨ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ recommend ⑩ ▷▷▷▷▷▷▶ #mufc_family ⑪ ▷▷▷▷▶ chelsea ⑫ ▷▷▷▶ everton ⑬ ▷▷▷▶ player ⑭ ▷▷▷▶ bayern ⑮ ▷▷▶ season Updated on: Thursday 23 April, 2015 @ 8:34pm Pedantically moulded by ZeitgeiStMarys...

I guess not then. Unless we're bringing in a ****load before Monday...

Could it be that it suits us to let him go as we've missed our other permanent targets and this frees up a place for another loanee?