villadude Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I always find bickering between rival fans about whose club is best so so tedious. Yeah maybe you're right dude, and I've never quite understood why anyone would want to post on a football message board that had no connection to their chosen team? I remember when a few Villans off here tried to join that Spudz site not too long back, and a certain poster made sure that wasn't possible by grassing them up to the site admin, resulting in them being kicked off the forum because they weren't Spudz fans. I would welcome that attitude on our site, however it's not up to me so that's that, I know the deal and I either accept it, or move on. You have to admit though LL, when you have other fans on here posting smart arsed comments about theirs and our team, you should expect our lot to get a bit pissed and give it some back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlastonSpur Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 I'd imagine that Villa have spent more in net terms than Spurs over the last two years This is because our manager isn't a cheating, bung-taking, fraudulent word removed If Harry is responsible for Villa's large net expenditure over these two years, then his powers are truly far more than I imagined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 If Harry is responsible for Villa's large net expenditure over these two years, then his powers are truly far more than I imagined. the net spend is pure bollocks though .. Harry has spent more than MON , just Harry had saleable assets to generate some money that MON didn't have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlastonSpur Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 The last 2 seasons when you have sold Keane and Berbatov for over £50 million? ... Correct (amongst other player sales). Like it or not, player sales do actually factor into net spending ... so what is your point? So how many times have spurs finished in the top 6 of the prem? A typical response. The original argument was the silly view are Spurs are "laughable" for spending a lot in recent years yet failing so far to reach top 4. When it's pointed out that Spurs have come closer to top 4 than Villa in these recent years, and when it's further pointed out that Villa have spent far more in net terms than Spurs in the last two years, and thus when that original argument is shot down, then ..... .... the original argument is dropped, the subject quietly changed and a new line of attack opened up. If you wish me to acknowledge that Villa have finished top 6 more times that Spurs during the Prem era, then I'm quite willing to (again) do so. Happy now? Unlike some on here, I don't shy away from facts, nor desperately seek endless, ground-shifting, argument-changing, subject-changing opportunities - usually based on false facts and silly claims - to rubbish rival clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 If it's so frustrating for you then tootle along old bean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 The last 2 seasons when you have sold Keane and Berbatov for over £50 million? ... Correct (amongst other player sales). Like it or not, player sales do actually factor into net spending ... so what is your point? So how many times have spurs finished in the top 6 of the prem? A typical response. The original argument was the silly view are Spurs are "laughable" for spending a lot in recent years yet failing so far to reach top 4. When it's pointed out that Spurs have come closer to top 4 than Villa in these recent years, and when it's further pointed out that Villa have spent far more in net terms than Spurs in the last two years, and thus when that original argument is shot down, then ..... .... the original argument is dropped, the subject quietly changed and a new line of attack opened up. If you wish me to acknowledge that Villa have finished top 6 more times that Spurs during the Prem era, then I'm quite willing to (again) do so. Happy now? Unlike some on here, I don't shy away from facts, nor desperately seek endless, ground-shifting, argument-changing, subject-changing opportunities - usually based on false facts and silly claims - to rubbish rival clubs. TBH I have no idea why you are on this site. You get nothing but abuse! Are you some kinda masochist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlastonSpur Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 the net spend is pure bollocks though .. Harry has spent more than MON , just Harry had saleable assets to generate some money that MON didn't have Net spend is pure bollocks? On the contrary, it's of vital importance to any club's balance sheet and is the best measure of overall expenditure: money out minus money in. And so what if Spurs had more saleable assets than Villa? It shows that Spurs transfer spending is not - contrary to the claim of the original poster - so "laughable" after all. PS. Harry wasn't at Spurs when Berbatov and Keane were sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 . When it's pointed out that Spurs have come closer to top 4 than Villa in these recent years, and when it's further pointed out that Villa have spent far more in net terms than Spurs in the last two years, and thus when that original argument is shot down, then .... Recent years as in the last 2, er no Spurs haven't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Boyo wanks over opta-stats I tells ya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jod1 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 He is just a toadier version of Daniel Levy. Glaston i'll ask you again. Did you or did you not get villa fans (who post on this site) banned from a spurs site? We already know the answer but just have the cojones to admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted February 5, 2010 Moderator Share Posted February 5, 2010 I tell you what I find 'interesting' Glaston, its how you manage to twist everything to back your opinion, you are very selective. For instance when you want to talk about Spurs having got closer to the top 4 than Villa you use 'recent years' and then when you want to talk about net spend you talk about the 'last two years' somewhat handy that don't you think. How about we turn that on its head, Villa have got closer to the top 4 in the last two years and in the last 4 years your net spend has been higher than Villa's. There you go, easy. There are some facts for you. If you want to go around accusing people of shifting arguements take a look at yourself and your shifting time frame's and goal posts. You need to start accepting that people on here don't like Spurs very much, in part because of your manager and I would say increasingly because of your insistance on coming on here with your endless defence of everything Spurs related beyond the point of reason. We welcome opposition fans on this site we really do, unlike your version of VT but if you don't like the fact people aren't overly fond of Spurs, aren't totally convinced about some of your 'facts' and you don't like the fact people have a pop at Spurs then I suggest this may be a poor choice of place for you to discuss football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMFy Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Unlike some on here, I don't shy away from facts You appear to do just that, and regularly. May I ask where you are from, GS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Glastonbury? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villadude Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 The original argument was the silly view are Spurs are "laughable" for spending a lot in recent years yet failing so far to reach top 4. When it's pointed out that Spurs have come closer to top 4 than Villa in these recent years, and when it's further pointed out that Villa have spent far more in net terms than Spurs in the last two years, and thus when that original argument is shot down, then ..... .... the original argument is dropped, the subject quietly changed and a new line of attack opened up. This veiled dig is aimed at me I would assume? The argument was dropped for the same reason I dropped it in the other thread you were talking bollocks on, you bore me and fail to answer what is asked, and when you do finally answer you twist and manipulate everything to support your argument. Well, that and the fact I don't have as much time as you do to spend waffling and winding up rival supporters on message boards. Like I said in the other thread, I'm bored of this, and I'm bored of you. Laters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myb Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 How about we turn that on its head, Villa have got closer to the top 4 in the last two years and in the last 4 years your net spend has been higher than Villa's. There you go, easy. There are some facts for you. That my friend, is how to put someone on your mantlepiece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morkery Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 stick it in the phunnay pic thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlastonSpur Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 He is just a toadier version of Daniel Levy. Glaston i'll ask you again. Did you or did you not get villa fans (who post on this site) banned from a spurs site? We already know the answer but just have the cojones to admit it. Anyone who has been thrown off a Spurs site has done it themselves by seeking to: (a) sneak in under false pretences, with false motives and intentions. ( join a site that didn't want them, despite knowing the policy of that site I post here without seeking to tell lies about my allegiance, without seeking to break site policy and with a genuine interest in discussing football with rival fans. The ones who lack "cojones" are those who lack the guts to be open and honest. Moreover, I hear that at least one Villa fan temporarily gained access and posted a torrent of racist abuse before being thrown out. I don't know who that was, but I'm sure the Villa fan concerned does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juantastic9 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 ( join a site that didn't want them Point B is an interesting one. All hail the return of the keyboard warrior extroadinaire! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hycus-flange Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 point B, you joined this site, do you think you are wanted here, because looking through this and other threads involving you I can see that you are not wanted, maybe there should be a poll to see, but then again, if/when shittenham tosspur loose tomorrow you wont be around for a while anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts