FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

127 posts
readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 15:38

I'll go to the back of the queue.

User avatar
Royal Lady
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 13748
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 10:17
Location: Don't mess with "my sort". Cheers then.

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royal Lady » 03 Nov 2009 15:41

Do you know what, you're all right - all of you. I'm wrong. I'm just a silly old woman with her own opinions. You go pat each other on the back when we're mid table and higher in a few weeks. Well done. Truly.

User avatar
brendywendy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12059
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 15:29
Location: coming straight outa crowthorne

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by brendywendy » 03 Nov 2009 15:42

youre not that old RL

what are you 40?

Sun Tzu
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3996
Joined: 08 Oct 2008 10:00

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Sun Tzu » 03 Nov 2009 15:50

Royal Lady Do you know what, you're all right - all of you. I'm wrong. I'm just a silly old woman with her own opinions. You go pat each other on the back when we're mid table and higher in a few weeks. Well done. Truly.


Where does that come from ?

You really do not like having your views challenged do you....

rhroyal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2639
Joined: 02 Apr 2008 10:19

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by rhroyal » 03 Nov 2009 15:56

brendywendy youre not that old RL

what are you 40?

However old she is, she acts like a little kid when people disagree with her. What's the point of a messageboard if you can't debate?


readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 15:56

Why isn't he playing Marek?
Uh-huh, yeah.
I'll tell you why, yeah.
and so on...

User avatar
brendywendy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12059
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 15:29
Location: coming straight outa crowthorne

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by brendywendy » 03 Nov 2009 15:57

just leave her alone you oxf*rd bullys

shes a grandmother,and fought in two world wars for you you little oiks

have some oxf*rd respect

Royalee
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6470
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:58
Location: Reading, hazar

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royalee » 03 Nov 2009 15:58

Just LOL.

Gordons Cumming
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:52
Location: All Good Things Come To An End

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Gordons Cumming » 03 Nov 2009 16:04

rhroyal
brendywendy youre not that old RL

what are you 40?

However old she is, she acts like a little kid when people disagree with her. What's the point of a messageboard if you can't debate?


Tit. :roll: (just debating, but not on mass though. HTH)


User avatar
Super Kevin Bremner!
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 Jul 2004 18:07
Location: Just oxf*rd OFF!

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Super Kevin Bremner! » 03 Nov 2009 16:12

FAO RL removed!

Only on there as the last time I posted about Rodgers keeping his job, the point was made by RL about his signings.

I understand that when that was posted the stats weren't as good as they are now but I think therein lies the real point. 10 or 11 games in you really can't judge Rodgers or his new squad. You have to allow for some numbers to happen and the new boys haven't been able to prove themselves either way, so why slate them?

readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 16:20

BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

User avatar
Super Kevin Bremner!
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 Jul 2004 18:07
Location: Just oxf*rd OFF!

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Super Kevin Bremner! » 03 Nov 2009 16:22

That's right.

User avatar
Royal Lady
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 13748
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 10:17
Location: Don't mess with "my sort". Cheers then.

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royal Lady » 03 Nov 2009 16:58

rhroyal
brendywendy youre not that old RL

what are you 40?

However old she is, she acts like a little kid when people disagree with her. What's the point of a messageboard if you can't debate?

Erm that was my point wasn't it? Just because the originator of this thread didn't agree with my own thoughts on BR and his team earlier on, he felt the need to highlight the fact. I wasn't the only one who wasn't happy, but I'm made out to be some demented old fool who is all on her own with her opinions of Rodgers and the team!

I don't care if no-one agrees with me, but in this actual instance, LOTS of people agreed with me and I was singled out as being the lone voice. Thanks SKB for changing the title anyhow.


readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 17:02

I feel sick.

User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13864
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Hoop Blah » 03 Nov 2009 17:12

RL, you, Ideal and Ian Royal are three that I've noticed being most vocal in their displeasure with Rodgers over the last month or so.

You seemed particularily keen to jump on him because he wasn't Steve Coppell and, the impression I got, was that you were going to hold that against him to somehow show your loyalty to Coppell or prove that we should've kept him on after last season.

I know there were plenty of others who also gave Rodgers plenty of stick, and I can understand why, but as more regular posters and, for want of a better term, 'higher profile nobbers' you have to accept that if you're going to dish it out some of it's going to come back your way at some point.

You do seem to throw more of a hissy fit than others when your opinions are challenged...maybe that has something to do with why you supposedly get singled out.

willz_royal
Member
Posts: 924
Joined: 09 Jan 2006 19:28

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by willz_royal » 03 Nov 2009 17:14

:)

User avatar
Royal Lady
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 13748
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 10:17
Location: Don't mess with "my sort". Cheers then.

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royal Lady » 03 Nov 2009 17:26

Hoop Blah RL, you, Ideal and Ian Royal are three that I've noticed being most vocal in their displeasure with Rodgers over the last month or so.

You seemed particularily keen to jump on him because he wasn't Steve Coppell and, the impression I got, was that you were going to hold that against him to somehow show your loyalty to Coppell or prove that we should've kept him on after last season.

I know there were plenty of others who also gave Rodgers plenty of stick, and I can understand why, but as more regular posters and, for want of a better term, 'higher profile nobbers' you have to accept that if you're going to dish it out some of it's going to come back your way at some point.

You do seem to throw more of a hissy fit than others when your opinions are challenged...maybe that has something to do with why you supposedly get singled out.
Hmm, maybe I haven't made myself clear in the past, I knew that Coppell would be wrong for us this season - it doesn't stop me wishing he was still here, but I'm under no illusions that he SHOULD be here. I haven't been impressed with Rodgers, and yes I have been vocal about it, to counteract the likes of Royalee who was pontificating the other side! I just failed to see why this thread had to be for my attention solely - it's much better now he's changed it - it encompasses more than just myself. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong with my thoughts on Rodgers and the team - I really do - we all want the same thing at heart and that's our club to do well and not suffer monetarily or on the pitch. It's the idiots who jump on bandwagons just to have a go at the likes of me and Ideal that I object to and this thread was only going to help their cause. Little boys of about 12 who can only post emoticons, however, aren't worth fussing over.

willz_royal
Member
Posts: 924
Joined: 09 Jan 2006 19:28

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by willz_royal » 03 Nov 2009 17:41

Royal Lady Little boys of about 12 who can only post emoticons, however, aren't worth fussing over. :roll:

Gordons Cumming
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:52
Location: All Good Things Come To An End

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Gordons Cumming » 03 Nov 2009 17:44

Royal Lady but I'm made out to be some demented old fool



I don't think you're old, demented maybe :wink:

HTH

readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 17:47

Vomit.

127 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

It is currently 11 Dec 2019 06:11