Sorry Sid, anyway in fairness this thread has been largely full of absolute nonsense for at least a year. If you want to know anything you can read the bitesize thread, and if anything actually worth knowing becomes available it'll either be put in the thread title or (praise the lord) we actually get taken over, there will probably be 100 new threads about it celebrating.
I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
If you think they are supposed to be hilarious then there's no helping you. The basic premise is just to garner a chuckle, grin, the merest hint of a smile, a guffaw or even a groan.
So what got you up so crabby today?
So start a fucking pun thread then, you can guffaw yourself 24/7 without filling this one up with shit.
Well something has sardinely got your back up.
I agree with you though, i absolutely hake it when the thread goes off topic.
I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
If you think they are supposed to be hilarious then there's no helping you. The basic premise is just to garner a chuckle, grin, the merest hint of a smile, a guffaw or even a groan.
So what got you up so crabby today?
So start a fucking pun thread then, you can guffaw yourself 24/7 without filling this one up with shit.
There is no news about the takeover. Despite 1100+ pages we still really know fuck all. The club that most of love is going to shit and this could be an existential threat.
Personally I don't come on this thread with any real expectation of info. It's filled with bad puns, irrelevant comment and speculation. I take it for what it is and enjoy it.
If the Mods allow off topic comments and you don't like it then there's an obvious answer...
I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
If you think they are supposed to be hilarious then there's no helping you. The basic premise is just to garner a chuckle, grin, the merest hint of a smile, a guffaw or even a groan.
So what got you up so crabby today?
So start a fucking pun thread then, you can guffaw yourself 24/7 without filling this one up with shit.
There is no news about the takeover. Despite 1100+ pages we still really know fuck all. The club that most of love is going to shit and this could be an existential threat.
Personally I don't come on this thread with any real expectation of info. It's filled with bad puns, irrelevant comment and speculation. I take it for what it is and enjoy it.
If the Mods allow off topic comments and you don't like it then there's an obvious answer...
And there are some seriously funny people on CL. Funny haha I mean. It’s part of its charm.
Yes a lot of the pun stuff is rubbish but sometimes it leads to some real LOL posts. The humour and quick wittedness some show is commendable. @SID had a rant, fair enough, but some of the responses to that were funnier than the puns
I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
Yep your right this is really is not the plaice for the fish puns
I wonder whether all you pun specialists try them out on your other halves first before you submit them just to check how hilarious they are. Of course for anyone wanting to catch up on probably the most important period of our clubs history since the homecoming, they're not funny at all and you come across as a bunch of wankers.
Yep your right this is really is not the plaice for the fish puns
What a load bollocks. You have a guy who has a direct line to someone who is part of the takeover that has been going on for over three plus months and has now switched his focus to talking about fish. Unbelievable
What a load bollocks. You have a guy who has a direct line to someone who is part of the takeover that has been going on for over three plus months and has now switched his focus to talking about fish. Unbelievable
Pollocks
Your right, we should stop this Carp-ing around an shoal some sense into proceedings.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
Be it on your head.
If they turn out to be terrible owners you can quite rightly say you warned us.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
A well argued and balanced argument, but no fish puns though
I would caution that 5 year plans aren't necessarily a sign of ambition, as
a) it depends on what the plan actually covers, a plan that sees us as a mid table Championship team after 5 years would be an improvement on our current state, but hardly very inspiring b) are the plans realistic, and proportional to the level of funding they are investing? It's easy to talk big, but in a world where there are some very rich owners splashing the cash to get in the PL, relying on Aussie sports know how and scouting as a secret weapon won't cut it.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
A well argued and balanced argument, but no fish puns though
I would caution that 5 year plans aren't necessarily a sign of ambition, as
a) it depends on what the plan actually covers, a plan that sees us as a mid table Championship team after 5 years would be an improvement on our current state, but hardly very inspiring b) are the plans realistic, and proportional to the level of funding they are investing? It's easy to talk big, but in a world where there are some very rich owners splashing the cash to get in the PL, relying on Aussie sports know how and scouting as a secret weapon won't cut it.
A plan to be a mid-table Championship club is, from an outsider perspective, simply a plan to lose a very large amount of money. So whatever their credibility, I doubt if that’s the plan.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
Has anybody else ever noticed that although there are loads of bands with fish related names, none of them are very good?
I liked Noah and the Whale and thought they were good
Sorry to be a pedant but a whale isn’t a fish.
Also, I thought you were finished on Charlton Life? You saw the fish bands and were reeled back in?
Can you show me, where I said I was finished with Charlton Life please
I think he means Seed
Thank you for that, I know I never said it
Oops a daisy! Apologies @Johnnysummers5- in my desperation to use a rubbish fish pun, I got my Johnny Summers name related Charlton Life users mixed up.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged. If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged. If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
Blimey. I don’t get the anger Red, calm down.
You’ve read an awful lot into some simple statements.
“Just tell us exactly what you have been told” !?
I have done, that’s the point.
And above I’ve answered a question someone asked, so I gave my opinion.
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance. If they actually buy the club of course.
So when I suggested the delay had nothing to do with Roland, ex Directors, or loans, why did you say that this was not true? You don’t seem to know what the hell is going on so how do you know my theory is wrong?
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
No one knows, they just think they do or word their comments carefully so as not to be challenged. If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
It is how I feel. Come the day there will be so many posts to say “I told you so” and all will conveniently forget the gaps.
We can all say I heard it will happen, but to date nobody has produced anything that would suggest that they are truly in the know. i.e. How much? For what? By when?, and finally, by whom?
Comments
It think it’s a case of mistaken identity. I think he’s referring to @Isawsummersplay
Personally I don't come on this thread with any real expectation of info. It's filled with bad puns, irrelevant comment and speculation. I take it for what it is and enjoy it.
If the Mods allow off topic comments and you don't like it then there's an obvious answer...
@SID had a rant, fair enough, but some of the responses to that were funnier than the puns
1. GM is a decent bloke, and he’s definitely not a crook.
2. They’re not in it in order to sell us down the river in some sort of land/property scam involving a move from The Valley.
3.At least two of the consortium have previous involvement in sport, and are sports fans.
4. I believe (and this is fingers crossed time) that they’ll offer medium to long term financial stability, because the consortium model should spread the risk, and bypasses the risk nof having a single owner who might lose interest or go bust.
5. They seem to have ambition, backed by a five year plan. Of course the proof will be in the pudding.
6. They are at least aware that Charlton fans have earned the right to be taken seriously.
Of course there are negatives too.
It’s possible that they’ve had problems replacing a wealthy backer as some have speculated, and it’s possible that they’ve made mistakes along the way with the paperwork (purely speculation because I have no knowledge of this). It’s possibe we’ll end up with two or three Aussie players, although they’ve denied that.
I understand people’s scepticism. As people have said, they’ve proved nothing yet. But I’m prepared to give them a chance.
If they actually buy the club of course.
I would caution that 5 year plans aren't necessarily a sign of ambition, as
a) it depends on what the plan actually covers, a plan that sees us as a mid table Championship team after 5 years would be an improvement on our current state, but hardly very inspiring
b) are the plans realistic, and proportional to the level of funding they are investing? It's easy to talk big, but in a world where there are some very rich owners splashing the cash to get in the PL, relying on Aussie sports know how and scouting as a secret weapon won't cut it.
I still find it unbelievable that all those in the know still don’t know the price of the club or who is buying us. Muir I know, but who else? Who were the two who failed the test for example? Who is the wealthy backer? If you don’t know this, how do you know what is in the 5 year plan or how valid it is? Or is this based on a beer you had with an Australian you know? Everything you say above is merely speculation. Nothing is a fact, but to be fair, you don’t claim it to be either.
If you know the names of consortium individuals name them. It can’t be secret or you would not have been told. Or are you in the dark as well?
The use of the word “possible” is wearing thin. Just tell us exactly what you have been told. You confuse the message by introducing speculation because the reader is not sure what you have been told and what is your interpretation of what has been said.
At this point in time, all I think I know is that you had a beer with someone and you think we will be taken over by an Australian consortium at some point.
So do I.
If you ask them direct questions, they tend to disappear for the rest of the day.
You’ve read an awful lot into some simple statements.
“Just tell us exactly what you have been told” !?
I have done, that’s the point.
And above I’ve answered a question someone asked, so I gave my opinion.
Stop ranting (please?)
We can all say I heard it will happen, but to date nobody has produced anything that would suggest that they are truly in the know. i.e. How much? For what? By when?, and finally, by whom?