This messageboard is for Adults 18 years and over.
If you are under this age please leave the board.
Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any other
content posted on it.
Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.
What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks.
If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.
Any potentially libellous comments that might jeopardise the future of this messageboard will therefore be deleted, and the person posting them will receive a
ban.Enjoy.
Show me where that was a "policy". Rather than 'preferred not to' or 'only at the right time'?
One thing that pees me off in life is people being misquoted and that being used in a context that's the complete opposite of what was meant. It's a Sun journalist trait.
Mick Harford says, "The players are really pleased Nathan has gone on to the Premier League" Journo reports his quote, "The players are really pleased Nathan has gone..."
I'll hold my hands up, I did say the other day that I thought GS had said something along these lines when NJ left first time around, although I couldn't remember exactly what he said. I did then remember that Sir John Still joined us from Dagenham though, which kind of blew that out of the water! So as you suggest, what he said must have been a bit more nuanced than that.
I think Sweet's biggest beef when Jones left for Stoke was that it was during the transfer window. He described that as being a little "unethical" and suggested a rule should be made against it.
Probably more along the lines that we wouldn't be underhand about it in the way Stoke were, but would do it properly like Southampton did. (and only when we're approaching a long international break due to a winter world cup)
Although there is no break for Leagues One & Two, so that doesn't apply to some of the names being suggested. But as you say, the overall idea must have been to do with the manner of it rather than just the timing - although I wish I could remember the actual quote! Not that it matters, it just bugs me that I can't remember, that's all.
A quick Google reveals that they'd openly said (in February) that they had identified their chosen successor for and with Ralph Wotsit for when he retired in a couple of years time. His departure came a lot earlier of course but I'd guess they meant NJ. Whether he was 'tapped up' a while ago we'll not know, but news gets round doesn't it...
I imagine it was done as professionally as it gets in football. I'm not having that Jones' first personal contact with them wasn't until the Wednesday though!
Anyway, it's done, I for one am glad the Nathan Jones show is over. He did a great job but we move on
It’s Bedford to MK via the airport so has the potential to be late! It does have a 5 min wait at the airport presumably to compensate for delays. We shall see!
You are too defensive Vinny and come across like you are spoiling for a fight a lot of the time when it’s clear the tone people have posted. So much genuine discussion gets closed down by people like you on here.
People's "genuine discussion" is usually saying something completely over the top and without any factual basis, and then getting sensitive when people call them out on it.
If you're going to write bullshit on the internet, don't get upset when someone calls you an idiot.
Posted by Osmosis on 26/9/2022, 12:16:54, in reply to "Shorting the pound" Who does the chancellor have a close relationship with, who bets against the pound? (Odbey) he should be hung as a traitor to the British people.
Calling out inaccuracies is not 'closing down genuine discussion' though is it Osmosis? If we're going to discuss stuff it's essential to get the facts right (or we'll end up like the kids playground that is parliament at Question Time!)
WSV obviously has a connection with the club and to my knowledge has never posted anything inaccurate about their actions or policies, whereas some posters (not that one) seem to go out of their way to misrepresent and claim opinion as fact. They do much more damage to discussion I'd say.
Or maybe something *like* "poaching managers currently employed by another club is not our way of doing things" ?? From memory, but I may be wrong.
He certainly seems to be watering down certain things that the club once seemed to take a moral stance on - accepting money for promoting gambling being the other one.
If there's room for misinterpretation or misrepresentation people will find it. Not necessarily meant in this case, but it often is. Look at all the 'no information about Power Court' and 'not being honest about when they knew' guff.
One category we're probably not looking at is those managers who've got a lot of experience, have a certain way of doing things and have maybe been around the block a little bit. That's not our profile," said Sweet.
The posts made on this board are the opinions of the people posting them and do not always reflect the opinion of the board
administration.
Luton Outlaws is a totally independent forum, paid for and run by supporters of Luton
Town and is not associated with Luton Town Football Club, lutontown.co.uk, lutonfc.com, Loyal Luton Supporters Club, Trust in Luton, Luton Town Supporters Club or
anyone else for that matter and is declared a 100% Tombola Free Zone.
Luton Outlaws accepts no responsibility for the content of this messageboard nor any
other content posted on it. Luton Outlaws disclaims all liability for such content to the fullest extent permitted by law.
What you read on here is 100% conjecture, fiction, lies, bullshit and complete bollocks. If you want to be taken seriously, you are in the wrong place.
Enjoy. Admin contact - dilligaf.outlaws@gmail.com.
