Sass: Rafa for England

[Sir X]

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport...d-job-11946104


Easy nuh man...hehe

[Gamma]

Yes I agree.

[Dunny]

That's who they should've gone for when they gave the job to Capello the clown

[Sir X]

I see Rafa with arsenal in the future ,then unnuh affi guh deal wid me and PJ.

[Jangle]

That's who they should've gone for when they gave the job to Capello the clown

Them want Wenger....yuh ok with that?

[Assasin]

Rafa would be a good coach for England. Rafa problem was he find it hard to work with club who can't spend what he want. Same problem with Jose. At the national level he will just have to accept it and go with it.

[Sir X]

Stop lie on Rafa,its about time you do that,not even Paul is subscribing to that lie .Newcastle had a negative net spend this season and every one is happy,I wonder why.

Klopp and Rafa cut from the same cloth- philosophy as it pertains with spending.Rafa problem was having owners who were broke,they wouldnt even let him spend money he brought in from sales.

The documented failings have been well publicized by all,when you reach a point where your owners can't pay the interest on the debt and they are using your sales money,that says it all,any coach who worked in that environment to achieve what Rafa did must be given the credit he deserves it,unless yuh a carry belly fi di man.... hehe

Mourinho is in a class by himself and your coach Big Sam he is a scammer.....lol.

No comment?

[Paul Marin]

Stop lie on Rafa,its about time you do that,not even Paul is subscribing to that lie .Newcastle had a negative net spend this season and every one is happy,I wonder why.

Klopp and Rafa cut from the same cloth- philosophy as it pertains with spending.Rafa problem was having owners who were broke,they wouldnt even let him spend money he brought in from sales.

The documented failings have been well publicized by all,when you reach a point where your owners can't pay the interest on the debt and they are using your sales money,that says it all,any coach who worked in that environment to achieve what Rafa did must be given the credit he deserves it,unless yuh a carry belly fi di man.... hehe

Mourinho is in a class by himself and your coach Big Sam he is a scammer.....lol.

No comment?

Donkey - no badda put me name pon nuttin. You too dyam fool. Newcastle's "negative spend" is specious, because, as I have told your concrete head 20,000 times, it is squad value and wage bill that matter. Spending is only a means to that end. Newcastle is by far the most expensive squad in the Championship, even after selling off key player and making a bit of money in the transfer market. Dyam eedyat.

[Sir X]

Specious because he sold as you stated to buy a better product without going into a postive net spend ? to top it off getting better value as you have stated ?

The fact that it is the most expensive squad isnt the issue, the issue is that he did it within the above parameters, getting more out off less ( a negative net spend )

Now what were you saying about idiot !...hehe

[Peter R]

Specious because he sold as you stated to buy a better product without going into a postive net spend ? to top it off getting better value as you have stated ?

The fact that it is the most expensive squad isnt the issue, the issue is that he did it within the above parameters, getting more out off less ( a negative net spend )

Now what were you saying about idiot !...hehe

Why isn't it the issue??? because you say so?

It's patently obvious you STILL don't understand!

[Sir X]

Or is it you two,maybe you do and you chose to promote your own specious agenda.

Is it not getting more out of less ? Here a coach like Klopp has cut his Deadwood and built a squad worth more than he inherited with a negative net spend! If he had done it with a positive we wouldn't be having this arguement would we,it wouldn't be seen as specious would we ?It would fit your paradigm of the only way to increase squad value,but then the joke is the wage bill....lol


Unnuh inna bind.

[Peter R]

Rafa could afford to do so because relative to his peers he was waaay ahead; Klopp, whom i pointed out did NOT have a negative net spend, could also have afforded to do so as his and my club are not in as many competitions as those whom we would like to challenge (for the title).

When cutting back on the value of your squad AND WINNING TITLES, or getting close, becomes the norm, go pat yourself on the back. Until any such thing happens, WITH REGULARITY, it's what you call in X-speak, the "anamoly" (sic).

Mi gawn! Tyad a try school yuh!

[Sir X]

Thanks Pet'y so its not the only way, glad you are admitting other factors are involved ,so when you cut back as you say, could you be cutting deadwood i.e those that are bought and not adding value but bringing down value e.g Shevchenko 40 million pounds,let go for crumbs and when you buy for less could you be adding value ?

I say that to state you must have noticed Chelsea had a positive net spend of a 100 million this summer and they are in the same position we are in ,in terms of commitments this season .

I wouldnt trade that Chelsea value for LFC at this moment would you,it looks like deadwood.Last but not least glad you scoured the internet to find a positive net spend by Klopp,how much was it ,every other site I checked had it in the negative.

Still caan touch di wage bill huh...lol

[Paul Marin]

Thanks Pet'y so its not the only way, glad you are admitting other factors are involved ,so when you cut back as you say, could you be cutting deadwood i.e those that are bought and not adding value but bringing down value e.g Shevchenko 40 million pounds,let go for crumbs and when you buy for less could you be adding value ?

I say that to state you must have noticed Chelsea had a positive net spend of a 100 million this summer and they are in the same position we are in ,in terms of commitments this season .

I wouldnt trade that Chelsea value for LFC at this moment would you,it looks like deadwood.Last but not least glad you scoured the internet to find a positive net spend by Klopp,how much was it ,every other site I checked had it in the negative.

Still caan touch di wage bill huh...lol

LOL!!! Lawks you fool!!! He he he...twit.

[Sir X]

..hehe....it is squad value and wage bill that matter....lol...vooodoo economics.


Chelsea spent what you required LFC to spend a 100 million plus ,lets see whose squad value and wage bill , climbs the table .