John Boubepo

There must be Methodist in his Madness!

Good result for English football, a Man U win would have made them richer and worsened all that is wrong with the English game

[quote user="Lord Snooty"][quote user="Gunn Be Gone"]What about Cureton i suppose he gets to stay as he is Gunnys buddy , pathetic.[/quote] Good to see that you''re not allowing your anti Gunn obsession to cloud your judgement and prevent you from being constructive !   [/quote]Lol I was waiting for someone to slag Gunn off - obviously Cort is our best player so I can understand you all getting upsetAs for the Cureton theory- if you replace the C with a G in the name Cureton and drop a few more letters and add another N on the end it spells - GUNN - something very fishy there!No doubt Gunn the manager will play his namesake week in week out - just to get his own name on the team sheet! - Pathetic

Surely we can Clingon to him!

I''m for the appointment and glad Gunn kept his job, he has what it takes to be an excellent manager

[quote user="bleach"][quote user="Bungay Canary"]we need paul ince like a hole up the arse  because thats what he is[/quote] ahem, we all need holes up our arses - would be very uncomfortable otherwise   could just call paul ince an a***hole [/quote]That''s what I just said but I''m starting to see the bigger picture now - perhaps Paul Ince doesn''t have a hole in his arse - which would explain his miserable, constipated countenance

[quote user="Bungay Canary"]we need paul ince like a hole up the arse  because thats what he is[/quote]That''s a misleading statement - surely we all need a hole in our arse but we clearly don''t need Ince

Ok let''s pretend the whole squad was Gunns just so we can bash him some more, no doubt it was his decision to bring in over 30 loanees over the last 3 -4 years!A squad made up of loanees doesn''t work, pure and simple, It may have seemed the cheap way out for a club with no money but we have learnt the hard way,          Clubs with slightly less skillful players and youngsters they can call their own,  will do better than a club made up of supposedly more skillful players on loan.That''s the root of the problem folks and that''s your lesson for today.           

Big fat yes from me

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Even if that is true (and I have no idea whether it is), it still doesn''t make Gunn a proper manager.As for giving Gunn a break, why? The moment he decided, against all the evidence, that he could be a football manager was the moment I started judging him as a football manager. And only as a football manager. His past became instantly irrelevant.[/quote]If Gunn had gone down with his own players I would agree with you - most of the players he was blessed with were loans and most of them were cr@p  and his budget was pretty much zeroGunny  bravely joined the Titanic when it was already at a 45% angle, It didn''t work out but I''m not going to beat the guy up for that - I still believe he has what it takes - I believe he will keep the job and I believe he will prove me right

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]A truly excellent post, Graham. It highlights the crucial point that Gunn couldn''t even do the one thing he was supposed to have been chosen for, and that was motivate the team.I actually think appointing a "proper" manager would have saved us (it worked for Forest) but that is irrelevant now. What is undeniable is that the board must appoint a proper manager.As to what the board will actually do? Until a day or so ago I was almost sure Gunn would be kept on. I just get the sense now that the arguments may have shifted slightly against him. But even if that is so, and the directors would like to make a change purely on footballing grounds, the key question remains whether they feel they can afford another upheaval.   [/quote]Maybe the "proper" Forest manager also had some "proper" money and some "proper" full-time playersGive Gunn a break!

Well I think Gunn will be a good manager for Norwich City, he is actually one of the few positive things at the club at the moment

A big fat yes from me - Brian Gunn has the credentials to be a very good manager - The ship was sinking fast when he took over, the squad was very poor and some abysmal refereeing decisions have added the finishing touches. Disappointing results maybe? but scratch the surface a little deeper, look at the man not the  results and you will see Brian Gunn has what it takes.

Pre-Roeder Shax was pretty good - post Roeder Shax has been very good - it''s just the bit in the middle which coincides with Roeders tenure which wasn''t so good - thinking about it, did any player play well for more than a couple of games under Roeder - Kind of shows what a totally, totally cr@p manager Roeder was!

[quote user="Beauseant"][quote user="John Boubepo"]Lets cut the emotional cr@p the papers feed us and go beyond the area that pussy  footed politicians were prepared to go - the plain truth is 96 people died because 5000 [mostly under the influence of alcohol] Liverpool fans forced their way into the back of a stand and killed their so-called fellow supporters, who were crushed at the front of the stand.The media, society, politicians, the Taylor Report - were too scared of an emotional backlash to point the finger where it belongs and instead blamed the police and the state of the Hillsborough stadium - 5000 scousers off the hook to milk public sympathy for 20 years from a naive public and press.3000 - 5000 people die on British roads every year, it''s a good guess more than 96 people die on Norfolk roads every year, just as tragic, just as horrific, - 179 British deaths in Iraq, - 52 deaths at Valley Parade, Bradford FC,  - 39 deaths and 600 injured at the heysel Stadium - surprise, surprise caused by drunken Liverpool supporters![/quote] You on the other hand seem to have swallowed the Sun''s dogma whole. I don''t doubt that Liverpool supporters acted badly and contributed to the situation, but to suggest that the South Yorks police were whiter than white in the face of known facts frankly beggars belief. I dislike Liverpool football club intensely, and certainly don''t buy the loveable scouser act or admire the propensity for self pity, but for God''s sake man, there are families who are still being denied information about how and when their children died, and, more importantly, whether everything possible was done to save them. Hate the club and the people if you wish, but show a little compassion for the families....would it really hurt you so much to do so. [/quote]Denied information on how their children died! - it was live on TV -  5000 drunken Scousers, with no tickets breaking into the back of a stand and crushed their own supporters to death! The police were not whiter than white, they made mistakes but ultimately 96 fans died at the hands of their own supporters.It''s not about denying the families compassion, it''s about being realistic, they want answers, the answers are pretty obvious but the media/politicians/reports have all sucked up to Liverpool supporters in general because of the potential emotional backlash if they said otherwise, it''s led the British public to believe it was the entire fault of the S.Y.Police Force and Liverpool supporters were 100% innocent.You can believe that if you want and many people do - But the truth is out there!

[quote user="foreva yella"]You really are a first class T**t for writing crap like that on this board, how would you have felt if it was your family you idiot.[/quote]Probably the same as a family who had lost somebody in a road accident or the same as a family who had lost somebody in Iraq, or same as a family who had lost somebody in the Heysel Stadium or Bradford Stadium - you naive T**t

Lets cut the emotional cr@p the papers feed us and go beyond the area that pussy  footed politicians were prepared to go - the plain truth is 96 people died because 5000 [mostly under the influence of alcohol] Liverpool fans forced their way into the back of a stand and killed their so-called fellow supporters, who were crushed at the front of the stand.The media, society, politicians, the Taylor Report - were too scared of an emotional backlash to point the finger where it belongs and instead blamed the police and the state of the Hillsborough stadium - 5000 scousers off the hook to milk public sympathy for 20 years from a naive public and press.3000 - 5000 people die on British roads every year, it''s a good guess more than 96 people die on Norfolk roads every year, just as tragic, just as horrific, - 179 British deaths in Iraq, - 52 deaths at Valley Parade, Bradford FC,  - 39 deaths and 600 injured at the heysel Stadium - surprise, surprise caused by drunken Liverpool supporters!

Liverpool supporters demanding justice - they have a cheek! they were responsible for the deaths.It would be a bit like driving after 15 pints, killing Innocent pedestrians and demanding justice because the police didn''t stop you  getting in your car!

It was and is a huge tragedy for the families who lost relatives in the disaster, my heart will always go out to them.Have to admit though I''m unsure why the country is mourning for the whole of Liverpool, it was after all their own supporters, breaking into the rear of the stadium who caused it in the first place.It would generally be nice if some of them came forward 20 years on and admitted their guilt and apologized for their part in the deaths of their fellow supporters - never going to happen though!

I''m actually pleased he played for Ipswich, Imagine how they feel letting a quality striker go, who eventually turns out for us and saves us from relegation? - That''s one helluva bitter pill to swallow! should get nicely lodged in their fake cockney throats for years to come!

If Man Utd had scored that same goal at Old Trafford would it have stood? of course it would - why am I even asking such a stupid question. In the modern game the system needs to be changed referee''s are unreliable and in some cases biased - end of

I don''t think anyone is suggesting Gunn is a bad manager but the game was crying out for Lee and I believe it was a mistake not to have him on from the start - wise after the event? maybe but I was saying this at 2 30

[quote user="Houston Canary"]Yah, you can give it up now, John BoPeep. Being offensive is OBVIOUSLY your goal, as VIYAG pointed out originally. It wasn''t funny the first time, so that generally means it will not be funny after that either. It would be much better for us, if Southampton goes tits up, that they were ahead of us in the table, not behind.  SHould they fold, it will only give our present board (should we avoid relegation) more reason to not spend money on our team even though we are WAY more supported by the populace than Southampton or almost every other Coca Cola club. [/quote]Actually I wasn''t trying to be funny, I just made the comment that a name like St Marys sounds a bit naff for a football Stadium, nothing more, nothing less.If they had called their stadium St Ruperts, I would be saying the same thing, I have nothing against Ruperts or Marys, it''s just those kind of names don''t fire up the imagination when talking about a football stadium. I clearly wasn''t attacking the Catholic faith or church and I find it difficult to understand how it was interpreted as such, it did however, give the Vicar a window of opportunity to give his church a well needed plug, so I guess everyone''s happy.I would also like to apologise in advance to anyone called Rupert or Mary who may have taken offense by any of my remarks - There, you happy now Houston?

[quote user="book end"][quote user="John Boubepo"][quote user="the artist formerly known as VIYAG"] [quote user="John Boubepo"]It all went wrong when they named their new stadium St Mary''s - St Mary''s! Mother of Jesus! who''d want to be seen dead at a place called St Mary''s?Lets not get sentimental, lets nab in and buy their best players on the cheap, maybe tow their hot-dog stall back here too if it''s on wheels, if they have a statue of Mick Channon, we''ll have that too![/quote]   Ah well done! A great tradition continued. The totally unnecessary, under-the-belt, unpleasant, off topic and pointless post mocking the sincerely held beliefs of other people. Why the Pinkun wouldn''t be the same without it! So well done you! Why miss the opportunity to insult the Virgin Mary if it arises? Why not just join the last socially acceptable bigotry- Catholic bashing! It is so easy and unlike those scary Muslims they probably won''t come after you for it. So enjoy my friend. Let out all the hatred, bash away! Let us see how wonderfully enlightened you are and just how silly and ill educated those simple ''faith folk'' must be! Thank you so much for the contribution. As a man of faith it only insulted me as much as if you had mocked my earthly mother or friend- but hey- it was easy wasn''t it! [/quote] You know me Vicar, I''m always happy to share my ignorance with everyone [/quote] You said it! It was called St Mary''s in honour of their founder members who came from, not surprisingly, St Mary''s Church football team forming Southampton St Mary''s. Also from Wiki: The official ground name at opening was ''The Friends Provident St Mary''s Stadium''. Initially the club wanted the ground to be named purely after the sponsors, but fan pressure influenced the decision to include a non-commercial title, and hence the ground is now nearly always referred to simply as ''St Mary''s''. It is a rare example of fans successfully influencing club stadium naming policy in recent years, and one which earned Southampton fans respect amongst many other football fans.     [/quote]Good grief! you mean the Catholic church was allowed to run a boys football team? I only read  today, that there is such a shortage of priests these days....... alter boys have to grope themselves!... from Wiki

Try Flock, same engine as Firefox