Would you sack Hodgson?

[Kenneth]

you can't ignore the inflows, how can you. Would you buy something if you didn't have the money.

He wouldn't have purchased any player without the guarantee that he could sell.

ffs

[red g]

You can't ignore the inflows, how can you. Would you buy something if you didn't have the money.

He wouldn't have purchased any player without the guarantee that he could sell.

talk about changing the goalposts .......he SPENT 40million, yes he recouped more than that but he had moneyy to SPEND....and he SPENT it BADLY !

[Tee]

You can't ignore the inflows, how can you. Would you buy something if you didn't have the money.

He wouldn't have purchased any player without the guarantee that he could sell.

So going back to the property analogy that keeps being used as an example for this ****e nett/gross spend argument, are you telling me that if you sold your house for £300k and purchased a new property for £500k you would tell everyone your house cost £200k?? No, it would still be £500k. I rest my case.

[Guest]

I can't believe I've had to go through that argument all over again, it's like talking to school kids.

[red g]

I can't believe I've had to go through that argument all over again, it's like talking to school kids.

the more you talk the more stupid you look............

[RichC]

You can't ignore the inflows, how can you. Would you buy something if you didn't have the money.

He wouldn't have purchased any player without the guarantee that he could sell.

The sale of Alonso was his mis-management of the situation, sad but true - his treatment of Xavi prior to last season was awful - he bought badly, Aquaman was injured and wouldn't have been coming in if Xavi hadn't of left and I still think Johnson would have arrived.

So all the talk of net spends etc.... come back to the fact he was the designer of his own fall to a certain respect.

Don't get me wrong the owners are complete tools and certainly didn't help him but he got it wrong not just with purchases but with his man management ethos - look at the players it was fairly clear they weren't enjoying playing for him.

[Chrono]

He spent 40m. No maths, no calculations, he spent £40m. It's not complicated in the slightest.

[Kenneth]

I can't believe I've had to go through that argument all over again, it's like talking to school kids.

You are either a deliberately awkward cunt or a cretinously thick cunt. As well as a tiresome cunt. So at least two levels of cuntery there. 2nd and 3rd I think.

[Guest]

So going back to the property analogy that keeps being used as an example for this ****e nett/gross spend argument, are you telling me that if you sold your house for £300k and purchased a new property for £500k you would tell everyone your house cost £200k?? No, it would still be £500k. I rest my case.

The house could cost 500k but you would have spent only 200k to buy a new one, that's not rocket science mate. How can't you take into account the value of the house you're selling?

Unless you're flushed with cash and don't need to sell then the argument would hold. It doesn't in that case.

[Kenneth]

The sale of Alonso was his mis-management of the situation, sad but true - his treatment of Xavi prior to last season was awful - he bought badly, Aquaman was injured and wouldn't have been coming in if Xavi hadn't of left and I still think Johnson would have arrived.

So all the talk of net spends etc.... come back to the fact he was the designer of his own fall to a certain respect.

Don't get me wrong the owners are complete tools and certainly didn't help him but he got it wrong not just with purchases but with his man management ethos - look at the players it was fairly clear they weren't enjoying playing for him.

It's Xabi, bit Xavi FFS

[red g]

I can't believe I've had to go through that argument all over again, it's like talking to school kids.

if Jack bought 3 apples for £1 how much did he spend?

£3

if jack bought 3 apples for £1 and sold 1 apple to peter for £2 how much was his net spend?

£1

comprende?

[Tee]

The house could cost 500k but you would have spent only 200k to buy a new one, that's not rocket science mate. How can't you take into account the value of the house you're selling?

Unless you're flushed with cash and don't need to sell then the argument would hold. It doesn't in that case.

Bakwaas bund kar

[Guest]

You are either a deliberately awkward cunt or a cretinously thick cunt. As well as a tiresome cunt. So at least two levels of cuntery there. 2nd and 3rd I think.

No you cock, it's simple maths that you're failing to understand.

[red g]

He spent 40m. No maths, no calculations, he spent £40m. It's not complicated in the slightest.

its fredo we are talking about here.....

[red g]

No you cock, it's simple maths that you're failing to understand.

I point you to Chrono's post or mine if you want it in 5yr old speak!!