If Shaw's injury was the main reason for Depay's form falling off a cliff then he has no business being a professional footballer.
Man United Supporters Thread (Part 50)
211 of 387
Originally Posted by Bulge_:
“Yes the first actual goal.
Kick-abouts in training or 11-a-side matches at Carrington don't count either.”
“Yes the first actual goal.
Kick-abouts in training or 11-a-side matches at Carrington don't count either.”
So not the Community Shield?
If it is the game v Bournemouth, I will go for Martial.
Originally Posted by percygumtree:
“I dont think youll find my post was aimed at anyone person in particular but yes, if you wish, im having a go at people that constantly complain about something that has literally zero effect on their own lives beyond it being some crap celeb gossip.”
“I dont think youll find my post was aimed at anyone person in particular but yes, if you wish, im having a go at people that constantly complain about something that has literally zero effect on their own lives beyond it being some crap celeb gossip.”
I don't "constantly complain" about footballers' private lives, but I disagree (FWIW) with your point. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so. If it emerged that a player was say, a neo-nazi in his private life, it would not matter to me if he was "the new Maradonna"; he would have to go and good riddance.
Sex, politics, drugs/alcohol, crime or whatever, the club must make a judgement on a case by case basis. If they were content that Giggs' amorality would not disrupt the dressing room or the club's interests in other ways, then they were right not to get rid of him. However, if they had determined otherwise, I would have had no difficulty supporting that decision too, notwithstanding my opinion that Giggs was a great player.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“I don't "constantly complain" about footballers' private lives, but I disagree (FWIW) with your point. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so. If it emerged that a player was say, a neo-nazi in his private life, it would not matter to me if he was "the new Maradonna"; he would have to go and good riddance.
Sex, politics, drugs/alcohol, crime or whatever, the club must make a judgement on a case by case basis. If they were content that Giggs' amorality would not disrupt the dressing room or the club's interests in other ways, then they were right not to get rid of him. However, if they had determined otherwise, I would have had no difficulty supporting that decision too, notwithstanding my opinion that Giggs was a great player.”
“I don't "constantly complain" about footballers' private lives, but I disagree (FWIW) with your point. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so. If it emerged that a player was say, a neo-nazi in his private life, it would not matter to me if he was "the new Maradonna"; he would have to go and good riddance.
Sex, politics, drugs/alcohol, crime or whatever, the club must make a judgement on a case by case basis. If they were content that Giggs' amorality would not disrupt the dressing room or the club's interests in other ways, then they were right not to get rid of him. However, if they had determined otherwise, I would have had no difficulty supporting that decision too, notwithstanding my opinion that Giggs was a great player.”
Where do you stand on Rooney?
Originally Posted by JoTaylor:
“Where do you stand on Rooney?”
“Where do you stand on Rooney?”
If you're Ronaldo, his balls.
He never did get payback for that.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“I don't "constantly complain" about footballers' private lives, but I disagree (FWIW) with your point. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so. If it emerged that a player was say, a neo-nazi in his private life, it would not matter to me if he was "the new Maradonna"; he would have to go and good riddance.
Sex, politics, drugs/alcohol, crime or whatever, the club must make a judgement on a case by case basis. If they were content that Giggs' amorality would not disrupt the dressing room or the club's interests in other ways, then they were right not to get rid of him. However, if they had determined otherwise, I would have had no difficulty supporting that decision too, notwithstanding my opinion that Giggs was a great player.”
“I don't "constantly complain" about footballers' private lives, but I disagree (FWIW) with your point. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so. If it emerged that a player was say, a neo-nazi in his private life, it would not matter to me if he was "the new Maradonna"; he would have to go and good riddance.
Sex, politics, drugs/alcohol, crime or whatever, the club must make a judgement on a case by case basis. If they were content that Giggs' amorality would not disrupt the dressing room or the club's interests in other ways, then they were right not to get rid of him. However, if they had determined otherwise, I would have had no difficulty supporting that decision too, notwithstanding my opinion that Giggs was a great player.”
What or who is TPTB?
The board arent living in a cocoon, they obviously will have heard the stories and as you say decided its not worth their time to get rid of him from the club.
None of which though is my actual point. Which is it DOESNT BLOODY MATTER TO YOU PERSONALLY so get over it and move on. Save your mock outrage for things that actually matter to you personally.
Originally Posted by JoTaylor:
“Where do you stand on Rooney?”
“Where do you stand on Rooney?”
If MUFC are content to pay him, I'm content to let them LOL
Originally Posted by percygumtree:
“What or who is TPTB?”
“What or who is TPTB?”
The Powers That Be
Quote:
“The board arent living in a cocoon, they obviously will have heard the stories and as you say decided its not worth their time to get rid of him from the club.
None of which though is my actual point. Which is it DOESNT BLOODY MATTER TO YOU PERSONALLY so get over it and move on. Save your mock outrage for things that actually matter to you personally.”
“The board arent living in a cocoon, they obviously will have heard the stories and as you say decided its not worth their time to get rid of him from the club.
None of which though is my actual point. Which is it DOESNT BLOODY MATTER TO YOU PERSONALLY so get over it and move on. Save your mock outrage for things that actually matter to you personally.”
I will decide for myself would does or does not matter to me personally, but where have I suggested I'm "outraged" ("mock", or otherwise) by anything?
Originally Posted by mindset:
“The Powers That Be
I will decide for myself would does or does not matter to me personally, but where have I suggested I'm "outraged" ("mock", or otherwise) by anything?”
“The Powers That Be
I will decide for myself would does or does not matter to me personally, but where have I suggested I'm "outraged" ("mock", or otherwise) by anything?”
Why does it matter to you personally then?
Originally Posted by percygumtree:
“Why does it matter to you personally then?”
“Why does it matter to you personally then?”
Because I have my own moral compass which may, from time to time, cause me to be offended.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“Because I have my own moral compass which may, from time to time, cause me to be offended.”
“Because I have my own moral compass which may, from time to time, cause me to be offended.”
Fine. Discuss it in Hello magazine where it belongs.
Originally Posted by percygumtree:
“Fine. Discuss it in Hello magazine where it belongs.”
“Fine. Discuss it in Hello magazine where it belongs.”
I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.”
“I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.
”
If it concerned MUFC they'd have fired him for it.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.”
“I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.
”
It doesn't concern MUFC or they would have removed him from the club as you said previously.
The only people it concerns are those involved and the celeb gossip mongers.
Originally Posted by TheMunch:
“If it concerned MUFC they'd have fired him for it.”
“If it concerned MUFC they'd have fired him for it.”
Yes, that is what I said. Thanks.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so.
.”
“. If TPTB deemed a player's private life had brought the club into disrepute, they would have every right to sack him and IMO would actually be right to do so.
.”
Originally Posted by mindset:
“I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.”
“I'm pretty sure if "it" concerns MUFC, it can be talked about here.
”
Originally Posted by TheMunch:
“If it concerned MUFC they'd have fired him for it.”
“If it concerned MUFC they'd have fired him for it.”
Originally Posted by mindset:
“Yes, that is what I said. Thanks.”
“Yes, that is what I said. Thanks.”
What you actaully said was that if it concerned the club they would have fired him which you then agree they havent done so it cant have concerned the club. But also you state that it does concern the club so you are ok to discuss it here.
The two are incompatible with each other.
Though obviously your moral compass you brought up earlier doesnt involve rooney cheating with a prostitute as you are more than happy for him to remain at the club and keep being paid.
Very easy to choose which one triggers your moral compass isnt it.
For the record i have as little interest in rooneys past as i do any footballers as none of it concerns anyone unless directly involved.
Originally Posted by percygumtree:
“It doesn't concern MUFC or they would have removed him from the club as you said previously.
The only people it concerns are those involved and the celeb gossip mongers.”
“It doesn't concern MUFC or they would have removed him from the club as you said previously.
The only people it concerns are those involved and the celeb gossip mongers.”
It is entirely your choice not to make a judgement on the behaviour of people employed by MUFC. I respect that. I just don't happen to agree with it.
Originally Posted by percygumtree:
“What you actaully said was that if it concerned the club they would have fired him which you then agree they havent done so it cant have concerned the club. But also you state that it does concern the club so you are ok to discuss it here.
The two are incompatible with each other.
Though obviously your moral compass you brought up earlier doesnt involve rooney cheating with a prostitute as you are more than happy for him to remain at the club and keep being paid.
Very easy to choose which one triggers your moral compass isnt it.
For the record i have as little interest in rooneys past as i do any footballers as none of it concerns anyone unless directly involved.”
“What you actaully said was that if it concerned the club they would have fired him which you then agree they havent done so it cant have concerned the club. But also you state that it does concern the club so you are ok to discuss it here.
The two are incompatible with each other.
Though obviously your moral compass you brought up earlier doesnt involve rooney cheating with a prostitute as you are more than happy for him to remain at the club and keep being paid.
Very easy to choose which one triggers your moral compass isnt it.
For the record i have as little interest in rooneys past as i do any footballers as none of it concerns anyone unless directly involved.”
My position as stated is that if the club is content to pay them, I am content to let them. That may mean I approve of them as players, but not necessarily as men. Indeed in this exchange of posts, I have described Ryan Giggs as both a great player and amoral. I maintain there is room in this thread for discussion of both.
Slightly disappointed that we didn't make a bid for Kante. We clearly have the spare change and £30 mill is a snip for a player that really doesn't look like a one-season wonder. If I'm honest, I'm slightly disappointed in Kante as well for taking the money. Can't really blame him, but I would have thought having a first-time shot at the CL would be enough of a draw for anyone to stay put.
Originally Posted by mindset:
“If MUFC are content to pay him, I'm content to let them LOL”
“If MUFC are content to pay him, I'm content to let them LOL”
I mean in judgement?
Originally Posted by Makosi's pants:
“Slightly disappointed that we didn't make a bid for Kante. We clearly have the spare change and £30 mill is a snip for a player that really doesn't look like a one-season wonder. If I'm honest, I'm slightly disappointed in Kante as well for taking the money. Can't really blame him, but I would have thought having a first-time shot at the CL would be enough of a draw for anyone to stay put.”
“Slightly disappointed that we didn't make a bid for Kante. We clearly have the spare change and £30 mill is a snip for a player that really doesn't look like a one-season wonder. If I'm honest, I'm slightly disappointed in Kante as well for taking the money. Can't really blame him, but I would have thought having a first-time shot at the CL would be enough of a draw for anyone to stay put.”
Yeah definitely seems like a missed opportunity, our midfield is still lacking somewhat
Originally Posted by mindset:
“My position as stated is that if the club is content to pay them, I am content to let them. That may mean I approve of them as players, but not necessarily as men. Indeed in this exchange of posts, I have described Ryan Giggs as both a great player and amoral. I maintain there is room in this thread for discussion of both.”
“My position as stated is that if the club is content to pay them, I am content to let them. That may mean I approve of them as players, but not necessarily as men. Indeed in this exchange of posts, I have described Ryan Giggs as both a great player and amoral. I maintain there is room in this thread for discussion of both.”
Well with Giggs, when the whole affair came out he was long past his best. The hypocrisy of football allows great players to get away with stuff. I'm a Liverpool fan so I know of the hypocrisy with us letting Suarez get away with murder. We'd have sacked a lesser player for just one of his episodes.
When it came out that Giggs had this affair he was long overstaying his welcome. If it bothered the club, professionally, they wouldn't have lost a world class player if they sacked him.
Originally Posted by JoTaylor:
“I mean in judgement?”
“I mean in judgement?”
I think post #5268 states my position.
I have previously posted this:
"If a man isn't willing to mug his own granny on her way home from the Post Office simply on the off-chance she is hiding 3 points in her purse, then I don't wish to see him anywhere near MUFC."
I certainly wouldn't like such a man. But I don't necessarily have to like them as men (Giggs, Rooney), after all, I'm definitely never going to know them. What I want from them is 3 points from every game. I simply don't agree that the 'other' issues shouldn't be talked about here.
Welcome to my hypocrisy LOL
Originally Posted by TheMunch:
“Well with Giggs, when the whole affair came out he was long past his best. The hypocrisy of football allows great players to get away with stuff. I'm a Liverpool fan so I know of the hypocrisy with us letting Suarez get away with murder. We'd have sacked a lesser player for just one of his episodes.
When it came out that Giggs had this affair he was long overstaying his welcome. If it bothered the club, professionally, they wouldn't have lost a world class player if they sacked him.”
“Well with Giggs, when the whole affair came out he was long past his best. The hypocrisy of football allows great players to get away with stuff. I'm a Liverpool fan so I know of the hypocrisy with us letting Suarez get away with murder. We'd have sacked a lesser player for just one of his episodes.
When it came out that Giggs had this affair he was long overstaying his welcome. If it bothered the club, professionally, they wouldn't have lost a world class player if they sacked him.”
I am an avowed hypocrite. I don't apologise for it. If Suarez had the privilege (
) of being a United player he would have been deeply misunderstood, in my eyes. But since he played for LFC, he is a cannibal and deserves to be executed at dawn LOL
For he first time in ages I'm really looking forward to the new season and feel quietly confident of a decent challenge for major honours.
211 of 387
