The 'other' two

[Heatwave]

So many names, so much information and misinformation - is this just a gigantic game of smoke and mirrors, aimed at keeping everyone (including potential suitors for the same man) guessing until Smurf's real target has put pen to paper?

[Rampant Zebra]

I expect there is far less to it than we imagine.

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

So many names, so much information and misinformation - is this just a gigantic game of smoke and mirrors, aimed at keeping everyone (including potential suitors for the same man) guessing until Smurf's real target has put pen to paper?

 

Best way to be so we don't lose our desired candidate. I'd still say I'd be more than happy with Coleman.

[pvfc.1988]

Best way to be so we don't lose our desired candidate. I'd still say I'd be more than happy with Coleman.

 

i'm not knocking the guys work at accrington stanley, but i'd be a little disappointed if it was coleman, only because there's been so much talk about the candidate's being 'unbelievable'

[pvfc.1988]

I'm going for a line down lol.

Seriously though I lost loads of time off work stressing over Dickov, so I've give over worrying about it.

What will be, will be.

 

i need to ask if that is true, the losing time of work stressing over dickov.

[butt lane vale fan]

To be fair Wiki is a bit misleading. Over 2 spells at Vitoria he got around 56 points from a total of around 54 games. It's just avoid relegation form, however that's in the same league as Porto and Benfica. Carlisle in the JPT is slightly less intimidating 😂😂😂. After his second spell at Vitora he started getting recommended for jobs and that's when Mourinho told him leave and join the club in the top Bulgarian League, where he won about 2 or 3 out of 7.

So other than Vitoria he had only managed about 11 games anywhere else so can't really judge.

Surely he wouldn't keep getting sacked after 4 or 5 games, so the question is why does he keep leaving unless he is a Gannon character. Lol

[werstayinup]

i'm not knocking the guys work at accrington stanley, but i'd be a little disappointed if it was coleman, only because there's been so much talk about the candidate's being 'unbelievable'

 

I just dont see Ribeiro as being unbelievable either tbh

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

I just dont see Ribeiro as being unbelievable either tbh

 

Out of the two I'd take Coleman but Bruno has officiated at a much higher level.

[Bea Smith]

Out of the two I'd take Coleman but Bruno has officiated at a much higher level.

 

 

If you must try and come over as a pompous judgemental know-all, please try to use the correct English - Bruno may have managed or even coached at a higher level but unless he has been secretly referring (like another of your own fantasies ?) he hasn't been officiating.

 

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/officiate

 

 

What an endless source of entertainment you are.

[Fosse69]

If you must try and come over as a pompous judgemental know-all, please try to use the correct English - Bruno may have managed or even coached at a higher level but unless he has been secretly referring (like another of your own fantasies ?) he hasn't been officiating.

 

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/officiate

 

 

What an endless source of entertainment you are.

Attack the post, not the person, please.

[Bea Smith]

Attack the post, not the person, please.

 

With all due respect, as you have always been fair, could you please have a look at post 847 by REP on the 'Who will be Vale's next manager' thread.

 

in this post, REP names 2 people and belittles and tries to humiliate them (one me, the other is the poster called Fatboysteve who I have never had any contact with but I would guess is not someone to provoke).

 

Not surprisingly, I replied in my usual vigorous style, as I had had no dialogue on this thread or others for a while, and naming people like that quite frankly deserves a written response.

 

My reply was removed by Geo, who left REPs post and said that was ok - I just cannot see any consistency. I,m sorry to have top say it smacks of favouritism on Geo's part, as your reply confirms that REP's original post 847 should ALSO have been removed.

 

It's no big deal, but he seems to be able to get away with more than other people, and his posts are deliberately provocative (I admit my replies are extremely insulting even if thoroughly deserved, but they are just responses).

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

Attack the post, not the person, please.

 

For reference in case the post you quoted was aimed at me I was referencing the word 'officiated' in terms of its meaning to perform.

 

Ie. The Pope (not Tom) performs / officiates etc.

[Bea Smith]

For reference in case the post you quoted was aimed at me I was referencing the word 'officiated' in terms of its meaning to perform.

 

Ie. The Pope (not Tom) performs / officiates etc.

 

 

Of course this post and what is written in it is correct when a dictionary definition of 'officiates' is not. The word officiates is never used to mean manage a football club.

 

It can mean perfrom duties when used with the clergy according to dictionary definitions, but in SPORTS terms it is made clear that it means referring, umpiring etc. and this is separated out in those definitions.

 

So REP's post is stupid and wrong, but of course he isn't.

[pvfc.1988]

With all due respect, as you have always been fair, could you please have a look at post 847 by REP on the 'Who will be Vale's next manager' thread.

 

in this post, REP names 2 people and belittles and tries to humiliate them (one me, the other is the poster called Fatboysteve who I have never had any contact with but I would guess is not someone to provoke).

 

Not surprisingly, I replied in my usual vigorous style, as I had had no dialogue on this thread or others for a while, and naming people like that quite frankly deserves a written response.

 

My reply was removed by Geo, who left REPs post and said that was ok - I just cannot see any consistency. I,m sorry to have top say it smacks of favouritism on Geo's part, as your reply confirms that REP's original post 847 should ALSO have been removed.

 

It's no big deal, but he seems to be able to get away with more than other people, and his posts are deliberately provocative (I admit my replies are extremely insulting even if thoroughly deserved, but they are just responses).

 

Why are you actually bothered what somebody think's of your post or if it has been deleted, or if there's favouritism towards a certain poster? you sound like a spoilt kid.

It's just a forum remember mate.

[geosname]

For reference in case the post you quoted was aimed at me I was referencing the word 'officiated' in terms of its meaning to perform.

 

Ie. The Pope (not Tom) performs / officiates etc.

 

Now your talking hollocks... you dropped one... put your hands up