blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Discuss all things Rovers related except...
Post Reply
User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 17940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Gibbon » Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:39 pm

Jim wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 5:37 pm
I'm curious to know if you still have the designs/plans/blueprints/schematics of Roar in your archives somewhere to share with us.

I always liked Roar/Roarina for the record.
Afraid not. I did that while working inhouse somewhere and never managed to grab a copy. :(

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27155
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:39 am

mcteeth wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 5:20 pm
Rover the Top wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 4:13 pm
mcteeth wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 3:11 pm
I think Toppers is really on to something. I think we should get rid of Dack, Smallwood, Mulgrew, Lenihan and Nyambe and get some loanees instead.
You seem to be willfully ignoring some significant factors, but if you really want to dumb it down, then why not? Isn't the aim to have as strong a side as possible? Just because you're happy with a certain player, it doesn't mean you stop looking for ways to improve your team. A Charlie Mulgrew without the injury problems would be better than Charlie Mulgrew, for instance. We didn't need to bring in Adam Armstrong, but it's looking like a smart piece of business, strengthening our promotion push. But just because he's doing well now, it doesn't mean we should do all we can to sign him in the summer, as we're hoping we'll go up and therefore will need another of level of quality to compete.
You seem to be overlooking the obvious sarcasm in my post as well as willfully ignoring the only actual point I ever refer too.
And which point is that? I took it as sarcasm when you said I had a point and that we should get rid of some of our players, since that seemed grossly disingenuous. I responded accordingly. You didn't say anything else... :shrug:

User avatar
theadore
Inexperienced manager
Posts: 9722
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:25 pm

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by theadore » Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:58 am

Gibbon wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 9:39 pm
Jim wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 5:37 pm
I'm curious to know if you still have the designs/plans/blueprints/schematics of Roar in your archives somewhere to share with us.

I always liked Roar/Roarina for the record.
Afraid not. I did that while working inhouse somewhere and never managed to grab a copy. :(
I hope that your original vision for Roar was a 60 storey steel lion who breathed fire.

If memory serves you claimed no part in Roarina?

User avatar
Ethiaa
Site Admin
Posts: 13596
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:22 am
Location: Preston
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Ethiaa » Tue Mar 13, 2018 9:09 am

theadore wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 8:58 am
If memory serves you claimed no part in Roarina?
Totally read that as Rochina. Which worked too.

User avatar
Dan
Unemployed ex-pro
Posts: 6858
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 11:08 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Dan » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:06 am

If Gibbon designed Rochina, he's got some explaining to do.

User avatar
Gibbon
Promising manager
Posts: 17940
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:54 am
Location: Location: Location
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Gibbon » Tue Mar 13, 2018 11:28 am

Both of those were nothing to do with me, you’re getting them mixed up with Rigters.

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27155
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:19 pm

Who?

User avatar
Ethiaa
Site Admin
Posts: 13596
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:22 am
Location: Preston
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Ethiaa » Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:06 pm

Rover the Top wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:19 pm
Who?
Image
Rigters

mcteeth
Ageing international
Posts: 3826
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 9:44 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by mcteeth » Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:11 pm

mrblackbat wrote:
Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:53 pm
Haven't read the rest of the thread. But the point still stands: that's never been my argument. :shrug:

I'd also refute that his loan spell was definitely a success.
In the broad sense of our transfer dealings I have no issue with either loans or signing players to a contract. Either situation is dependent on a variety of factors and both come with differing pros and cons.

Signing Graham after his loan spell was a good idea, likewise loaning Gallagher that summer from Southampton was a good idea. Signing Dack and Smallwood was brilliant business and getting Armstrong in on loan this January has also proven an excellent idea. There are many example of when things do and don't work out.

You specifically thought the signing of Graham was poor business at the time and that just simply hasn't been the case.

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27155
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:57 pm

mcteeth wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:11 pm

You specifically thought the signing of Graham was poor business at the time and that just simply hasn't been the case.
Yeah just imagine, we could have been relegated last season if we hadn't have signed him... no, wait... :doh:

It takes some serious suspension of disbelief to say all has worked out well. Graham may not be directly the reason we went down, but as our most high profile and presumably one of the higher earning signings, he didn't make up for the deficiencies elsewhere in the team to keep us up. So should we have diverted the chunk of the wage bill paid to him to fund other signings in an attempt to avoid the drop? Absoultely, when the worst that could happen is what happened anyway. :shrug:

User avatar
Ethiaa
Site Admin
Posts: 13596
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:22 am
Location: Preston
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Ethiaa » Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:00 pm

Or we would have gone down without his goals and we could then ask should we have diverted the chunk of the wage bill paid to fund other signings to him to in an attempt to avoid the drop? Absoultely, when the worst that could happen is what happened anyway. Pointless whatiffing boys.

User avatar
Ethiaa
Site Admin
Posts: 13596
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:22 am
Location: Preston
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Ethiaa » Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:20 pm

Rover the Top wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:16 pm
Ethiaa wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:00 pm
Or we would have gone down without his goals and we could then ask should we have diverted the chunk of the wage bill paid to fund other signings to him to in an attempt to avoid the drop? Absoultely, when the worst that could happen is what happened anyway. Pointless whatiffing boys.
Well, no, because we know that we were relegated after signing Graham, that's a certainty, it actually happened. That's not true if you try to reverse the argument. :lol:
Correct - it's a total uncertainty. You are therefore arguing we should have magically seen into the future in order to do something for which we still don't know the outcome. I have rarely seen such a pointless waste of finger movement.

*** and deleting it afterwards compounds that waste - think of the children! :D

User avatar
Rover the Top
Experienced manager
Posts: 27155
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:39 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Rover the Top » Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:23 pm

Ethiaa wrote:
Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:00 pm
Or we would have gone down without his goals and we could then ask should we have diverted the chunk of the wage bill paid to fund other signings to him to in an attempt to avoid the drop? Absoultely, when the worst that could happen is what happened anyway. Pointless whatiffing boys.
Well no, because in one case we know the outcome is a certainty, in the other it's just an assumption to suit your argument. :lol:

User avatar
Ethiaa
Site Admin
Posts: 13596
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:22 am
Location: Preston
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by Ethiaa » Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:39 pm

As yours is an assumption to suit your argument - that was exactly the point of my post - to highlight what a FUCKING WASTE OF TIME IT IS. Oh look, my fingers fell off in protest at the stupidity of it all.

Image

mcteeth
Ageing international
Posts: 3826
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 9:44 am
Contact:

Re: blackburn Rovers v Blackpool Sat March 10

Post by mcteeth » Tue Mar 13, 2018 2:52 pm

I think Toppers needs some straws to clutch.

Post Reply