Fergie's Grudge - Why he keeps trying to nick our best players
Thursday, May 27, 2010 at 2:45PM There's a bit of noise about the place regarding Luka Modric as a potential transfer target for 'Yoonited.' Most of us can laugh this off as a bit of slow news day, pre-World Cup nonsense, but then we've been here before haven't we? Harry's been swift to nip it in the bud this time, although there are some that can't help asking why he would bother making a statement on something that is supposedly untrue. I guess the only way to kill the story is to get the chequebook and the specially engraved contract-signing pen and give the boy a bit of a raise. Just ask Gareth Bale.
But why is it always Fergie that comes batting his eyelids at our prize assets every year? Sheringham, Berbatov and Carrick succumbed to his wily charm just as we were starting to build a team around them, and we were a much weaker side for it. Yes the lure of playing for the self-appointed 'greatest team in the world' must be quite exciting for any professional. As is the chance to clock up a few medals to show the grandkids. But you rarely hear of Chelsea or Liverpool doing the same. At least with not such brazen consistency.
Well I think I've found the answer. Today I was ambling through youtube electronically jizzing my pants at various video compilations of our most recent season when I came across (figuratively, not electronically) an interview with 'Ol Red Nose talking about the talented Mr. Gascoigne. Besides being quite an interesting interview, if you watch to the end you might finally understand why Surralex is hell-bent on signing any decent player we manage to get hold of.
What a sad, bitter old man he is.
by guest-blogger Fox Mulder
Reader Comments (70)
It's Dave Whelan isn't it?
Lucifer, how long you followed this blog for, because you appear to be missing the point of it you daft twit.
Lucifer - I'm here if you want to talk. Sounds like you've had a hard time of it recently.
Why don't you explain exactly what you think "the point" is Jep? At the moment it appears as though you've idiotically waded in and started tossing invective around despite having absolutely no clue what it is you're talking about.
And yes "Author of Comment", ignore the person who doesn't toe the party line. He doesn't agree so he must be "trolling" (y'know, on a blog devoted to hypocritical [non-]rhetoric, empty posturing, and "ironic" would-be-shit-stirring; ie the very definition of trolling). No dissent permitted. As per usual.
Massive yawn for Lucy.
Naturally - first disdain, then mockery, but always a total failure to interface with the substance of my comments.
The textbook method of marginalising those who do not subscribe to the group-think.
Do you work in politics Hazard?
Remind me again, what's your beef?
Attention-seeking.
What is the point of you?
I'm asking in all seriousness.
Jerky.
I've articulated "my beef" quite clearly, and several times Hazard. A simple perusal of the comments following this blog entry will familiarise yourself with the nature of my criticisms, assuming that's not too much work.
You see, I'm not like Jep, who threatens to respond, pointing only to the circular (il-)logic of self evidence, and then retreats to safe ground of facile, two word quipping when challenged.
Oi! I do that n all ya cunt, ave a go at me shitnuts!!! I demand attention! you are my hero!
Lucy, can we have you views and opinions on all other blog articles, you know, the ones you've probably read in the past and not commented on because there is no argument for you to lambaste them with, you insufferable bore. Or perhaps link us to wherever you frequent so we can understand the type of quality assurance you require to be intellectually turned-on.
Lucifer is Matthew Norman. Let's see if you can work that one out for yourself.
Don't take life too serio...err, oh hold up, I've already posted that one.
Killjoy, great point - but Django...soz, I mean Lucifer is very selective. Oh, and 'insufferable bore' is one of mine, get your own fighting words.
Lucifer, a couple of points; your complaining of being marginalized by supposed group thinking is a very weak. You manufactured this situation yourself by referring to readers of this blog as a 'coterie of sycophants', a crass generalization that immediately turned everyone against you. Using this to score points against people while avoiding any attempt to back up your comments by casting yourself as the victim is pathetic, self-pitying and betrays a certain degree of self-loathing. If you're so concerned about group thinking then you wont mind being a lone voice, surely? What if someone agrees with you, are they then sycophantic to you? And to think you are accusing this blog of being hypocritical.
Creating such a smokescreen also suggests that you are not convinced by your own comments.
Secondly, you can not seriously compare a blog to any media outlet that provides the news. Journalists are paid to provide truth through reportage and should be taken seriously whereas blogs are a means for an individual to express their thoughts on any subject of their choosing and should be taken with a pinch of salt. I've found that blogs are generally hypocritical and, as you pointed out, fundamentally useless. No different from a bit of banter down the pub and certainly not worth getting quite so wound up about.
Maybe use your energies and enormous intellect to rail against one of the big boys like Fox News, or maybe do something useful such as campaigning against child poverty or violence against women.
Lucifer was raped as a boy thus the anger . Go read Harry hotspurs blog . Kisses fro
across the ocean
Django is Lucifer, posts on rumourwhores.com. Supports Hull.