It will be interesting to see how he copes at Anfield - presuming he isn't suspended! He was never the brightest of footballers - he struggled to speak English years after joining - and his disciplinary record made Julian Dicks look like a Lineker type, but the guy always had a huge heart; which, Parker apart, our current team lacks terribly.
We desperately need another Repka, a mean bastard at the back who intimidates the opposition players. Tomkins is polished but lacks the rough edge; Upson allows opposition players to impose themselves on him rather than the other way around; Gabbidon is just shite; Reid plays like a junior intimidated by the seniors; Jacobsen is short and looks like he could work in a library; Bridge wouldn't even thump Terry after he shafted his missus; and Da Costa only hits women - allegedly.
How this team needs a Tomas Repka. Or, better still, an Alvin Martin or Billy Bonds!
Indeed! Or a manager that can motivate and bring the best out of the players we have! Perhaps we should let AG go and assign Parker as player-manager. He can't do any worse and there will be a substantial financial benefit if not a points one. I hope G,S, and B are reading this!
ReplyDeleteDo'nt forget the much overlooked and my favourite West Ham player little Stevie Potts...he had steel and drive...so much drive he now drives a black cab for a living. A crying shame when the likes of Kovac,Dyer will retire to a life of swimming pools and caviar mid 30's.
ReplyDeleteSuper, super Tom...!
ReplyDeleteI watched the game and I couldn't beleieve he was still playing. It also made me think how much we miss a player like him at the back. He's never been one for taking sh*t from others and would always make sure you know that you did something wrong. How I wish he was still at the club... ;)
ReplyDeletePerhaps we could do with a manager like him to keep us up this season.
ReplyDeleteBig Sam had some interesting survival ideas in an interview not so long ago.I think it boils down to the choice play the football to stay up, if not, we will be playing similar football to get back up. Personally I would rather get it over with now and save all the hassle. Look what a change of manager has done for Ipswich.
Sorry HF - Repka was mostly crap. Going back home must have rejuvenated him. Yeah I know he 'loved' the club, but most red cards - 15 I think. No real skill, a chopper type. Is that the [[by now, fabled] 'West ham Way' again ?
ReplyDeleteSo Sav, how much will it cost G&S to 'let AG go' ? No substantial finacial benefit there. Apart from that, probably Parker could do the job
gateman
If you ignore his first 3 games for the club, he only collected two red cards in 184 games mate. Mind you, he picked up yellows at a faster rate that Parker! About 60 in total!
ReplyDelete17:49, The compensation from letting AG go cannot be more than the salary he will be receiving if he stays on as manager. Moreover, since he is basically useless, there will be an additional benefit from not being in position to do further damage. If Parker can motivate the team as he did at half time at the Hawthorns then we will be better off keeping AG away (despite having to pay part of his salary). But, that's just my opinion. HF and others would probably disagree.
ReplyDeleteI agree Sav. Grant out!
ReplyDeleteIf people are wondering why things on the blog are a little slow, it's because HF's trying to sort the twitter feed out. Bless him.
Or it could be that we don't play until Monday and sweet FA Cup is happening in the world of Claret & Blue! Mind you Stani, things they are kicking off in the Middle East! But maybe we shouldn't open that can of worms in Dispatches! ; }
ReplyDeleteAnd, of course, in 10 minutes time, this will be the most visited article on the News Now board! So quiet it is deafening!
ReplyDeleteAs usual the answers were all there HF, you just needed to find them, as you need to do in life. But of course, when you fear something you don't do it do you? Just like the feed.
ReplyDelete? Don't understand that one Stani. Did you watch Dispatches? As it is quiet on the football front, what do you make of what is happening in Bahrain, Lybia etcetera?
ReplyDeleteit's all been stirred up by the C1A
ReplyDeleteThanks Stani. I knew you would agree with me on this (I mean it doen't take a genius to see how hopeless AG as a manager). The mystery is why a certain HF still can't see it!
ReplyDeleteI don't think they would be that stupid! There is a very real danger of the situation getting hopelessly out of hand. We are already seeing arms deals being questioned and the price of oil climbing. The removal of Saddam shows the dangers inherant in taking the cork out of the bottle in the region - the Jinn is uncontrollable. These are very dangerous times.
ReplyDeleteUnrest and fear and great ways to divert attention away from home and a good way to keep control of the masses.
ReplyDeleteThe arms business is a fantastic cash cow - all in all a win win situation for the West.
I suppose you'd prefer, like the rest of the Labour party that good old Gaddafi stays exactly where he is getting his army to shoot demonstrators with sniper rifles?
The point is that arms contracts are at risk because we cannot be seen to be selling weapons to regimes that are murdering their own citizens.
ReplyDeleteThe Gaddafi question is interesting. How many died in Iraq under Saddam compared to how many haver died in the removal of Saddam, and subsequent to his removal? Those who die at the moment have a choice. Choose to go on the streets to protest and you risk getting shot. If Gaddafi goes, there may be no choice involved; there may be carnage. And that carnage may spread, like a contagion.
The extreme Islamists are licking their lips in hope as all this happens. Sunnis and Shias will be looking to exact pay back, according to which has been oppressed in each respective regime, and Jihad will possibly become a cry to unite a whole region. Israel is sweating with good reason. And if Israel is threatened, the USA and Britain will be involved.
Western governments don't want this. They can't be seen to be opposing uprisings against oppressive regimes but they have been supporting those regimes for a reason; they are terrified of the alternative!
So if you ask the Iraqis they'd prefer to go back to the way thing were?
ReplyDeleteI think it's great for all, as they say a change is as good as a rest. Bring it on.
Ask the dead Iraqis!
ReplyDeleteIn a lot of these middle eastern countries democracy is not an option. The populations are completely tribal and the only way law and order can be maintained is by a strong dictatorship or military government. However, what the populations can achieve by mass rallies is a much fairer share of the enormous wealth received from oil. A perfect example of this Qatar
ReplyDeleteDemocracy is a foreign concept to those that still live in the dark ages, ten to a penny that a far worse regime will end up in power.... stoning, beheading, dismembering, honour killings, Jihad, same religion factions and all the other stuff that goes on is the only thing that makes sense out there.
ReplyDeleteWe'll never get our heads around it and nor should we waste time trying to do so.
11:56 another extremely poor and weak argument (but not surprising) - perhaps we should ask those who put their lives down in the second world war for the freedoms we enjoy today?
ReplyDeleteIf you can't be arsed to take the time to make an intelligent response, then I suggest you save us all time and don't bother.
1749, it is you who presents weak arguments. Try asking the Germans who died in defence of the Nazi regime if they believe their sacrifice was worthwhile! You presume that something good will come of these "revolutions". What has happened in Egypt exactly? The military have conducted a coup and the regime remains in place, minus Mubarak. What has happened in Iraq? The synagogue in Baghdad no longer exists and civil order has evaporated. Afghanistan? Are the people any better off? Of course not.
ReplyDeleteOnce again you try smoke and mirrors to divert attention from the original question which was "So if you ask the Iraqis they'd prefer to go back to the way things were?"
ReplyDeleteAnd who are you to say who is better off or not. Have you been there and barring Stani and fred do you actually know any asians?
Tony Blair's handshake with the Libyan leader in 2004 means that all Labour supporters now have Yvonne Fletcher's and the recent demonstrators blood on their hands.
ReplyDeleteFred's asian?
Is Fred Asian? Unusual name for an Asian! And I don't know Stani, I've never even met him. But yes, I know lots of Asians actually, not that Iraqis are "Asian" in the usual sense of the term. Arabs or Semites would be a more commonly used classification, albeit I accept that Iraq is technically in Asia so the term is not wrong.
ReplyDeleteI know two Iraqis and two Iranians thinking about it. No Libyans, no Egyptians and no Saudis, although I once had a business arrangement with a Saudi prince, sourcing property for him in London's Docklands. He was a great guy and was very amusing on the subject of alcohol, happily downing pints on the basis of "When in Rome...or London actually!"
The majority of Iraqis would not vote for Saddam to return, but would exchange the present situation for another Saddam figure who could restore peace and order to a country that is still tearing itself apart, albeit it is not front page news because our soldiers are not dying there.
2142 Yvonne Fletcher? That was the Iranian Embassy wasn't it? The blood of Lockerbe mate.
ReplyDeleteHow much blood do the Tories have on their hands? How many of Thatcher's cabinet had links with the "defence" industries? And what about the activities of her son?
WPC Yvonne Joyce Fletcher (15 June 1958 – 17 April 1984) was a British police officer who was shot and killed in London's St James's Square while on duty during a protest outside the Libyan embassy!
ReplyDeleteThe Tories are supposed to do stuff like that, new labour were not, they failed on every level, taking us in to a war that none of us wanted. At least when the Tories did we all wanted the Argies our of the Falklands.
I stand corrected. It was a long time ago.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with your Falklands argument is that the Argentinians only occupied the Falklands because Thatcher's government gave the impression that we were no longer interested in defending them. You could, therefore, argue that Thatcher was as much responsible for the occupation as Galtieri. Indeed, some argue that Thatcher invited the occupation so she could manufacture an international conflict to dig herself out of her domestic hole. She won the next election on the back of the Falklands.
Of course, it was a Thatcher government that allowed Yvonne Fletcher's murderers to leave the embassy and return to Libya.
Blimey you must be on the ropes, you're the last person I imagined to defend yourself with dubious conspiracy theroies.
ReplyDeleteDiplomatic immunity, nothing you, I or indeed Thatcher could have done about it.
Whereas in stark contrast the Lockaby Bomber was released on "compassionate" grounds so the Labour party could whore the UK for some Petrochemical Libyan Dinars.
Labour were worse than the Tories in my book.... they bought in more laws and did away with many liberties. Even had people arrested for wearing t-shirts with political slogans on. Make you proud does it HF? It's certainly starting to make sense why you're so angry all the time.
ReplyDeletehear hear
ReplyDelete