Gus on talksport Friday @ 7

[ROSM]

It would be totally pointless to.

The followers of Saint Gus require internet links to verify everything, and if you don't have them then your words mean nothing, and indeed just mean you have an agenda.

Personnal conversations with people who would know are not admissible evidence in the court of NSC

The same goes for both sides here as b.w. so eloquently demonstrates. He may not be the messiah but I'm sure he's not the only naughty boy.

 

[glasfryn]

I know what Gus did.

It would be totally pointless to.

The followers of Saint Gus require internet links to verify everything, and if you don't have them then your words mean nothing, and indeed just mean you have an agenda.

Personnal conversations with people who would know are not admissible evidence in the court of NSC

probably because nobody in this little fiasco can be trusted

 

[B.W.]

If it's definitely true, why not post it?

You know I can't.

 

[keaton]

It would be totally pointless to.

The followers of Saint Gus require internet links to verify everything, and if you don't have them then your words mean nothing, and indeed just mean you have an agenda.

Personnal conversations with people who would know are not admissible evidence in the court of NSC

Actually if anyone's acting like religious followers it's the people on here claiming accusations and rumour as truth and getting riled at any questioning of Bloom and the Club.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

... not worth getting drawn in...

 

[Icy Gull]

I can't imagine he is going to say anything that we don't already know.

 

[B.W.]

Moaning about budgets? Most managers complain about budgets.
Do WE know that he refused to deal with retained? And if so do we know why?
Flirting with other clubs and putting himself first is nothing. 99% of the people in football put themselves first. Also i'd say our getting Oscar is pretty suspicious.
We know the club claim he wanted to leave in March, again why?

Most managers know how to handle the media. Gus made repeated gaffes in this element of his job, including over-stepping the mark re his budget.
Yes, we know that he refused to do his job. Why? Toys out pram? Ask him.
Again, his flirting went well beyond most reasonable people's view of acceptable. Why is Oscar's appointment suspicious?
Why he wanted to leave? Because his oversized ego suggested to him he could do better. So far, he has been proved wrong.

 

[glasfryn]

Most managers know how to handle the media. Gus made repeated gaffes in this element of his job, including over-stepping the mark re his budget.
Yes, we know that he refused to do his job. Why? Toys out pram? Ask him.
Again, his flirting went well beyond most reasonable people's view of acceptable. Why is Oscar's appointment suspicious?
Why he wanted to leave? Because his oversized ego suggested to him he could do better. So far, he has been proved wrong.

but nobody has ever answered the question WHY
even Gus has not said why he apparently done these things,its only people like yourself and a few others that seem to actually care that others question why was there a row and these pro club, pro Tony statements can only add to peoples questions.
as I have said before TRUST nobody.

I did TRUST them all of them less and less
now I don't TRUST any of them

 

[B.W.]

In that case, you are betraying a confidence by saying that someone high up in the club has made available some material which needs to remain strictly confidential. Imagine is Gus' lawyers got wind of the fact that this confidentiality is being breached. However if, as you claim, that information is in the public domain, why not post it?

I suspect that real point is that you were told one or two things, and despite not being one of the club's nor Gus' representatives, nor were you at the hearings, nor being party to sensitive material, you've deluded yourself into being your own little judge, jury and executioner.





I think you're the last person to lecture anyone on bias.

The majority of people are looking for evidence before deciding who is culpable. In other words, they're sitting on the fence - as am I.

You on the other hand, have damned Gus, based on what you have convinced yourself is 'enough'. Anyone who challenges your Walter Mitty stance has a 'pro-Gus bias', as if that means anything. Stop embarrassing yourself, and get some perspective.

No. I have not betrayed anyone at all. Stop saying that please. I have not, and will not, provide any details of what Gus did that resulted in him being charged with, and found guilty of, gross misconduct.

To repeat (do pay attention please), the reason for Gus' gross misconduct charge is NOT in the public domain. Other unpalatable Gus' actions at the end of his career with the Albion are.

I'm not biased. I'm basing my stance on Gus on more info than you have. Get over it.

As usual, you resort to insults, and have nothing meaningful to say.

Stay on the fence if you like, but don't criticize me for taking the side of the club I support.

 

[glasfryn]

no. I have not betrayed anyone at all. Stop saying that please. I have not, and will not, provide any details of what gus did that resulted in him being charged with, and found guilty of, gross misconduct.

to repeat (do pay attention please), the reason for gus' gross misconduct charge is not in the public domain. Other unpalatable gus' actions at the end of his career with the albion are.

i'm not biased. I'm basing my stance on gus on more info than you have. Get over it.

As usual, you resort to insults, and have nothing meaningful to say.

Stay on the fence if you like, but don't criticize me for taking the side of the club i support.

then shut up about it

 

[B.W.]

As WS says, if you think that's evidence for dismissing him, I hope I'd never sit anywhere near you on a jury.

So, you don't think, for example, the club might use a recording of Gus' (BS) TV comments on the day of his sacking as evidence? How about the LMA statement the club have already threatened legal action on?

The face-palm is unjustified (not for the first time).

 

[B.W.]

Now you're re-writing history.

Not a word from them since. Not a single word. Silence. Zip. No need to rewrite history here.

 

[glasfryn]

B.W.
would you like me to buy you a shovel to dig yourself out of this large hole you have dug yourself into

 

[B.W.]

You carry on thinking that.

All I will say is that there a few people who have been offered outside by the club (metaphorically) who have decided to not defend the point but concentrate on the bigger picture despite being 100% sure of their accuracy.

Now that's interesting. I'm sure you can't say, but any more detail you can share?

 

[B.W.]

I'm sure they club knew that poyet wanted to leave much earlier than march (perhaps maybe last July) but it was in march that he said he would resign at the end of the season.

Just to clarify - in March, he said he would prefer an immediate departure.

 

[The Large One]

No. I have not betrayed anyone at all. Stop saying that please. I have not, and will not, provide any details of what Gus did that resulted in him being charged with, and found guilty of, gross misconduct.

Refusing to acknowledge your guilt. That sounds familiar.

To repeat (do pay attention please), the reason for Gus' gross misconduct charge is NOT in the public domain. Other unpalatable Gus' actions at the end of his career with the Albion are.

The unpalatable stuff in the public domain would have nothing to do with his hearing, or it wouldn't be in the public domain. Therefore, they're irrelevant to the point being made.

I'm not biased. I'm basing my stance on Gus on more info than you have. Get over it.

You are biased, as you are basing your supposition on the say of one person. You then accuse others who challenge your bias as being biased. Do you see where this is going?

You have no idea what info I have on all this. Just because I'm just not going around claiming I know 'enough', it doesn't follow that you have info that I don't. I just choose to retain perspective, and not listen to just one person. Corroboration of what you're told adds perspective.

As usual, you resort to insults, and have nothing meaningful to say.

Insults? Like being called a presumptuous clown?

Stay on the fence if you like, but don't criticize me for taking the side of the club I support.

Taking sides? I thought you said you weren't biased.

Get some perspective.

 

[B.W.]

there you go again
I am ITK and you lot are not
if you know something then post it or shut up


just a small question
do you work for the club?

No.

 

[keaton]

So, you don't think, for example, the club might use a recording of Gus' (BS) TV comments on the day of his sacking as evidence? How about the LMA statement the club have already threatened legal action on?

The face-palm is unjustified (not for the first time).

Evidence of what?

 

[The Large One]

Not a word from them since. Not a single word. Silence. Zip. No need to rewrite history here.

No, that's arrogant presumption of guilt your part, based on your ongoing bias.

Why should the LMA make a statement? Perhaps there is no statement to make ahead of a possible court case.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

You know I can't.

Of course you can ( unless you're an employee of the club or one of Gus' advisors ) unless of course what you claim is factually untrue. You can't be sued for telling the truth ! Which leads us nicely to pointing out that you must be a liar.