I thought the athletic article cleared up it was indeed Murtough careless with the funds?
Who else reported it?
Potentially £300m that’s how much ?Just imagine how much we can be rinsed for now.
Who said it had to be. He clearly has some kind of source.Feck knows, it's not a big development. That doesn't mean he knows significant information.
Just imagine how much we can be rinsed for now.
I think for someone to give a post insinuating this man-child to know useful information, I'd expect there to be some actual development or breaking info.Who said it had to be. He clearly has some kind of source.
Credit where it’s due. He said Ratcliffe would be in Manchester. Also said that Brailsford would be at the villa game. Both before anyone else did.I think for someone to give a post insinuating this man-child to know useful information, I'd expect there to be some actual development or breaking info.
Not reporting that Ratcliffe is coming to OT, which probably the tea lady knew anyway.
Brailsford was expected to be at the Villa game. Ratcliff will be at the next home game at OT. Am I in the know? Is that even relevant useful information? No.Credit where it’s due. He said Ratcliffe would be in Manchester. Also said that Brailsford would be at the villa game. Both before anyone else did.
Spin that how you like.
You come across bitterBrailsford was expected to be at the Villa game. Ratcliff will be at the next home game at OT. Am I in the know? Is that even relevant useful information? No.
No, I'm still finding it funny how gullable you are about him.You come across bitter
Interesting..Chris Wheeler reporting it.
How is it gullible if he says two specific things that will happen before anyone else and they do happen?No, I'm still finding it funny how gullable you are about him.
Interesting..
He is not the first person to know that Ratcliff was coming to Old Trafford, you know that right? Many journalists are likely already aware and one had already reported it in Wheeler.How is it gullible if he says two specific things that will happen before anyone else and they do happen?
You just don’t like the guy and refuse to accept he has some kind of source giving him information no matter how big or small it is.
He said it yesterday, Wheeler nearly 12 hours later.He is not the first person to know that Ratcliff was coming to Old Trafford, you know that right? Many journalists are likely already aware and one had already reported it in Wheeler.
In any case, him getting an insignificant nugget correct doesn't mean he knows anything remotely substantial to be given an iota of respect. It's gullable because you have fallen into constant briefs of intricate information which is rehashed public information and it's been evidenced to you in the past.
So wait because he reported that Ratcliff is visiting OT he's suddenly credible? Just to understand the argument.He said it yesterday, Wheeler nearly 12 hours later
If it's not publicly available information then he has information yes. Which it wasn't.So wait because he reported that Ratcliff is visiting OT he's suddenly credible? Just to understand the argument.
So are you saying Ratcliff coming to OT today was a big secret?If it's not publicly available information then he has information yes. Which it wasn't.
Who else reported he was coming specifically today? Nobody.So are you saying Ratcliff coming to OT today was a big secret?
So it must have been a secret? Or more likely, it wasn't such a big piece of development for it to be granted as a soundbite?Who else reported he was coming specifically today? Nobody.
So it must have been a secret? Or more likely, it wasn't such a big piece of development for it to be granted as a soundbite?
Lets assume that he did know that Ratcliffe was due to come through his own source. What suggests that source knows anything more than that?
My point being, knowing OT is getting a visitor is not exactly a smoking gun in evidencing a "reporter" has sources that can provide intricate and detailed information about the thought process and legalities of club management and boardroom.
Where have I suggested otherwise? You are suggesting a source is giving him information but also that he doesn't know anything. Can't be both can it make your mind up.So it must have been a secret? Or more likely, it wasn't such a big piece of development for it to be granted as a soundbite?
Lets assume that he did know that Ratcliffe was due to come through his own source. What suggests that source knows anything more than that?
My point being, knowing OT is getting a visitor is not exactly a smoking gun in evidencing a "reporter" has sources that can provide intricate and detailed information about the thought process and legalities of club management and boardroom.
Where have I suggested otherwise? You are suggesting a source is giving him information but also that he doesn't know anything. Can't be both can it make your mind up.
You went from claiming he knows nothing, to the validity of the information, now to whether you find the information informative or relevant. Constantly moving the goalposts man.
Give it a rest.
Timo Werner says hello.See this is what happens when we don't have money and aren't linked to any players.
Timo Werner says hello.
True.I think he probably says Guten Tag or Hallo.
I just said he knows feck all, and knowing something the tea lady would doesn't change that, regardless of whether he reported it 12 hours before.Where have I suggested otherwise? You are suggesting a source is giving him information but also that he doesn't know anything. Can't be both can it make your mind up.
You went from claiming he knows nothing, to the validity of the information, now to whether you find the information informative or relevant. Constantly moving the goalposts man.
Give it a rest.
That's something you keep imagining mate.I just said he knows feck all, and knowing something the tea lady would doesn't change that, regardless of whether he reported it 12 hours before.
Anyaya we can move on, my stance is consistent. Only gullable folk would believe a man child pretending to know useful information.
#MuddedVP89 in the mud.
I think the only thing I'd agree on from our debate is that I can't spell.That's something you keep imagining mate.
Also it's spelt gullible.
Which is fine but you keep trying to have a sly dig at me soI think the only thing I'd agree on from our debate is that I can't spell.
Don't be so gillableWhich is fine but you keep trying to have a sly dig at me so
It's okay I'm not going to rise to it. I got a ban the other day for calling someone a cnut in the ETH thread at half-time in the Villa game when emotions were running high.Don't be so gillable
Pure jealousy.What's the reason VP89 has turned green-eyed monster over Muppetiers?