Cardiff City Forum



A forum for all things Cardiff City

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:01 pm

Green Arrow wrote:
Mario Polotelli wrote:
TRose69 wrote:
Mario Polotelli wrote:Yes everyone makes typos but not everyone tries to palm off getting a whole paragraph wrong, and a change of argument as a "Typo" ffs.

As I said, some f*cking typo :laughing5:

No inferiority complex here Bryan, your arguments are nearly always flawed and you are too arrogant to see it. :thumbup:


Well I'm gonna leave this one for the time being, being so young and all it's past my bedtime

You are too funny - I suggest you have a look at this test... To me it seems you fit ever catagory :lol:

http://www.qatarliving.com/qatar-living ... se-7-signs

Catergory even :laughing6:


Category. :laughing5:

Categoría

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Wed Jan 29, 2014 11:06 pm

Mario Polotelli wrote:
TRose69 wrote:
Mario Polotelli wrote:Yes everyone makes typos but not everyone tries to palm off getting a whole paragraph wrong, and a change of argument as a "Typo" ffs.

As I said, some f*cking typo :laughing5:

No inferiority complex here Bryan, your arguments are nearly always flawed and you are too arrogant to see it. :thumbup:


Well I'm gonna leave this one for the time being, being so young and all it's past my bedtime

You are too funny - I suggest you have a look at this test... To me it seems you fit ever catagory :lol:

http://www.qatarliving.com/qatar-living ... se-7-signs

Catergory even :laughing6:


:thumbup:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:02 am

Another thread ruined by the usual suspects I see

Barry if you had a black cat mine would be blacker chuckles

Multiple account Barnett and possibly even roathie

No wonder people don't post on here anymore

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:03 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:Another thread ruined by the usual suspects I see

Barry if you had a black cat mine would be blacker chuckles

Multiple account Barnett and possibly even roathie

No wonder people don't post on here anymore


What, for posting an opinion? Don't be so ridiculous. :lol:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:05 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:x


This is my only account and I've been on one account since my JBCCFC1927 account. If you want me to go back to using multiples at the same time then just say the magic words and I will. However, don't start moaning then if I do okay. You cried for ages so I stuck to one. I would still be on my other had my email not been accessed by someone else and I've stuck to this one. If I've got something to say I'm more than happy to say it on this one.

Everyone knows your a multi of a known user anyway so cut the crap.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:08 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:Another thread ruined by the usual suspects I see

Barry if you had a black cat mine would be blacker chuckles

Multiple account Barnett and possibly even roathie

No wonder people don't post on here anymore


You are correct about Barnett, wrong about the rest. Barnett would be a decent lad if he stuck to one account,but he can't because he's a crap wind upmerchant who has to keep reinventing himself.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:09 am

Mario Polotelli wrote:Ive seen various comments about how we were difficult to beat under Malky, how he would have kept us up, how he had never dropped into the bottom 3.etc.etc.etc

Well I have done some in depth investigation on our season under Malky and here are my findings which I think dispell some of these comments.

Ok, lets take a look at Cardiff in the PL under Malky statistics shall we:

Games
Played: 18
Won: 4
Drew: 5
Lost: 9
Points: 17
Goals scored - 13
Goals conceded - 18

Defecit
Of the 9 games lost we lost by
1 goal - x 1
2 goals - x 4
3 goals - x 4

Goals Conceded
In the 18 games we conceded 27 goals. Split as followed:
5 clean sheets
1 goal x 3 games
2 goals x 6 games
3 goals x 3 games
4 goals x 1 games

Goals scored
In the 18 games we scored just 13 goals. Split as follows:
9 blanks
1 goal x 6 games
2 goals x 2 games
3 goals x 1 game

So on average we were conceding 1.55 goals per game under Malky and in 10 of the 18 games we conceded 2 or more goals.

On average we scored 0.72 goals per game, drawing a blank 9 times, and only scoring 2+ in 3 of the 18 games.

Also some side notes we conceded in the 1st half in 10 of the 18 games, and were also 2 or 3 goals down before half time in several of the games, 2 in particular Malkys last 2 games in charge.

Ive looked at where we accumulated the points and was alarmed to see that after match day 6, Fulham away, arguably our best PL performance under Malky, the stats are somehwat shocking.

Here are the stats post Fulham:


Games
Played: 12
Won: 2
Drew: 3
Lost: 7
Points: 9
Goals scored - 7
Goals conceded - 21

Defecit
Of the 7 games lost we lost by
2 goals - x 3
3 goals - x 4


Goals Conceded
In the 12 games we conceded 21 goals. Split as followed:
4 clean sheets
2 goals x 4 games
3 goals x 3 games
4 goals x 1 games

Goals scored
In the 12 games we scored just 7 goals. Split as follows:
6 blanks
1 goal x 5 games
2 goals x 1 games


So on average, post Fulham we were conceding 1.75 goals per games, and in 8 of the 12 games we conceded 2 or more goals.

On average we scored 0.58 goals per game, drawing a blank 6 times, and only scoring 2+ in 1 of the 12 games.

So as you can see we are getting progressively worse, and if you take the last 6 games of his reign, 6 being a usual marker for "form" it makes for worse reading than the post Fulham 12 game stats.

In a game wherby you have to score more than the opposition to win, or at least score as many to get a point, then the statistics do not read well.

So to conclude, we had a good start to life in the PL. Up to and including Fulham I am sure we would all agree 8 points (2 wins, 2 draws, 2 losses) from 6 games (18 points available), scoring 6, conceding 7, we were aquitting ourselves well, especially having faced home games against City, Spurs and Everton.

However, after this point, we then only take another 9 points in the next 12 games (36 points available). Scoring just 7 and conceding 21.

So whilst we may have not dropped into the bottom 3 under Malky we were in freefall, had dropped to 17th and with Arsenal, City and Man U away in January only the staunchest of Malky fans, or a complete retard, could deny dropping into the relegation zone was inevitable, and given we could not score under Malky, that in my opinion is where we were staying.

Also, to those who will inevitabely say we faced a number of the top teams at home pre Xmas, we also faced 7 of the bottom half teams away from home and only managed 6 points out of 21, and a measley 3 goals. A poor return I am sure you will agree.

We drew 5 blanks v West Ham, Norwich, Villa, Stoke and Palace. Not only that we barely created a chance in any of those games. Unforgiveable if we are truly honest.

All of this and only now I am mentioning the piss poor signings and the huge budget wasted on sub standard players. 3 of which now look to be out of the club already.

Ladies and gentleman of the jury. I rest my case.

Mario you forgot the most important stat of all, Malky's league position before Tan's cack handed tinkering :o

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:15 am

Green Arrow wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:x


This is my only account and I've been on one account since my JBCCFC1927 account. If you want me to go back to using multiples at the same time then just say the magic words and I will. However, don't start moaning then if I do okay. You cried for ages so I stuck to one. I would still be on my other had my email not been accessed by someone else and I've stuck to this one. If I've got something to say I'm more than happy to say it on this one.

Everyone knows your a multi of a known user anyway so cut the crap.


I'm a multiple I've only got this account
There's lots of sad people on here and at least 3/4 or commenting as multiple accounts in one thread it's extremely sad
And I've never cried at you using multiple accounts so no idea where u get that from Barnett

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:16 am

Blue_Always wrote:You are correct about Barnett, wrong about the rest. Barnett would be a decent lad if he stuck to one account,but he can't because he's a crap wind upmerchant who has to keep reinventing himself.


List my current other accounts then smart arse. I only use this account and I'm quite happy to call you an arsehole on this one. Ive got no need for another.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:18 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:Another thread ruined by the usual suspects I see

Barry if you had a black cat mine would be blacker chuckles

Multiple account Barnett and possibly even roathie

No wonder people don't post on here anymore


What, for posting an opinion? Don't be so ridiculous. :lol:


You post an opinion yes chuckles but then you split hairs constantly over wording of posts by other users correcting what they have said it's pathetic

You don't allow another opinion that doesn't fit in with yours and you always want the last say on everything this thread is completely typical of that

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:19 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:I'm a multiple I've only got this account
There's lots of sad people on here and at least 3/4 or commenting as multiple accounts in one thread it's extremely sad
And I've never cried at you using multiple accounts so no idea where u get that from Barnett


My apologies smakerz. I thought you were on about me. Roathie was on here yesterday on about 8 accounts and he's been doing it for a while and often talks to himself to create debate to bring others in then he goes at them. The bloke is absolutely insane. I can be confrontational and opinionated and up for a laugh but I only use one account. If I wanted to use more I could and have this forum in ruins but i just want to talk football.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:21 am

Green Arrow wrote:
Blue_Always wrote:You are correct about Barnett, wrong about the rest. Barnett would be a decent lad if he stuck to one account,but he can't because he's a crap wind upmerchant who has to keep reinventing himself.


List my current other accounts then smart arse. I only use this account and I'm quite happy to call you an arsehole on this one. Ive got no need for another.


Barnett, You won't change until your acknowledge your behaviour. I'll be here for you .......watching.....waiting.....praying for your recovery.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:23 am

Blue_Always wrote:
Barnett, You won't change until your acknowledge your behaviour. I'll be here for you .......watching.....waiting.....praying for your recovery.


Another obvious Roathie multi this. :sleepy2:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:23 am

Green Arrow wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:I'm a multiple I've only got this account
There's lots of sad people on here and at least 3/4 or commenting as multiple accounts in one thread it's extremely sad
And I've never cried at you using multiple accounts so no idea where u get that from Barnett


My apologies smakerz. I thought you were on about me. Roathie was on here yesterday on about 8 accounts and he's been doing it for a while and often talks to himself to create debate to bring others in then he goes at them. The bloke is absolutely insane. I can be confrontational and opinionated and up for a laugh but I only use one account. If I wanted to use more I could and have this forum in ruins but i just want to talk football.


Barnett when you talk properly your a good poster and actually sometimes I enjoy reading your posts keep on that trend and no one has a problem

Roathie is a wind up without doubt and I only speak with him in gamblers den where by he is very useful and knows his stuff, in his defence people now go onto gamblers den to try and discredit him which is pathetic as he's causing no harm in there

Chuckles less I say about him the better don't want him squealing and taking up the mods time now do we

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:26 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:
You post an opinion yes chuckles but then you split hairs constantly over wording of posts by other users correcting what they have said it's pathetic

You don't allow another opinion that doesn't fit in with yours and you always want the last say on everything this thread is completely typical of that


& then people debate it with me, so I debate back - that's the point of discussion.

I don't allow other opinions, yet I've done this in this exact thread. :lol: I will always challenge opinion if I disagree with it.

:roll:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:28 am

In terms of this actual thread polo some insightful statistics there thanks

Ive no doubt we'd be relegated if malky had stayed and te argument we weren't in bottom 3 is pretty poor as form speaks for itself and we'd be exactly where we are now if he had stayed

Only real question is will we now stay up under ole

Hopefully we pick up points on what is a pivotal month for our season time to do the talking on the pitch now

If we can get 7/9 in February we are in with a fighting chance anything less and we are in real trouble with Newcastle away in Chelsea home last two games we need too be safe by then IMO as I wouldn't fancy our chances with those two left needing points to stay up

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:32 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:
You post an opinion yes chuckles but then you split hairs constantly over wording of posts by other users correcting what they have said it's pathetic

You don't allow another opinion that doesn't fit in with yours and you always want the last say on everything this thread is completely typical of that


& then people debate it with me, so I debate back - that's the point of discussion.

I don't allow other opinions, yet I've done this in this exact thread. :lol: I will always challenge opinion if I disagree with it.

:roll:

He's right though.

You don't disagree with opinions because you don't take anything in unless its what you think. Your right an everybody else is wrong.

You twist things people say. You try putting people down an acting as if they are stupid and cry if anything bad is said to you.

An on some occasions you just pluck things out on thin air.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:34 am

Bluebird86 wrote:He's right though.

You don't disagree with opinions because you don't take anything in unless its what you think. Your right an everybody else is wrong.

You twist things people say. You try putting people down an acting as if they are stupid and cry if anything bad is said to you.

An on some occasions you just pluck things out on thin air.


No he isn't. :thumbup: stop making things up. :lol:

If I disagree with something, I will challenge it, if I agree, I will agree. Simple enough & normally how debates/discussion forums work. :thumbup:
Last edited by Barry Chuckle on Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:35 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:
You post an opinion yes chuckles but then you split hairs constantly over wording of posts by other users correcting what they have said it's pathetic

You don't allow another opinion that doesn't fit in with yours and you always want the last say on everything this thread is completely typical of that


& then people debate it with me, so I debate back - that's the point of discussion.

I don't allow other opinions, yet I've done this in this exact thread. :lol: I will always challenge opinion if I disagree with it.

:roll:[/quote

There's difference between debating and just posting the same thing consistently

If your in a debate you see others points of view and if in disagreement give a counter argument but with you you just put down another's view because yours is all that counts in your own little world and it would seriously debt your pride if you had to agree with someone on an issue immediately without having to dispute their original post

If you did that then your existence would be pointless hence why even if deep down you no someone is right you will just disagree with them to have a differing opinion

It makes you different from a sheep who follows I'll give you that but it's also an extremely annoying trait to have

I'm certain you'll never agree with anyone's opening post entirely because you'll have no meaning in life if you can't argue with opinions

You should go into politics fit right in with the rest of the pillocks in office

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:37 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:
There's difference between debating and just posting the same thing consistently

If your in a debate you see others points of view and if in disagreement give a counter argument but with you you just put down another's view because yours is all that counts in your own little world and it would seriously debt your pride if you had to agree with someone on an issue immediately without having to dispute their original post

If you did that then your existence would be pointless hence why even if deep down you no someone is right you will just disagree with them to have a differing opinion

It makes you different from a sheep who follows I'll give you that but it's also an extremely annoying trait to have

I'm certain you'll never agree with anyone's opening post entirely because you'll have no meaning in life if you can't argue with opinions

You should go into politics fit right in with the rest of the pillocks in office


This is all complete and utter nonsense. :laughing6: don't ever give up the day job, you'll make a rubbish psychologist.

If I agree, I will say so, if I disagree, I will debate. There's been plenty of threDs where I've agreed with the point, you really are talking rubbish. :thumbup:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:39 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:
There's difference between debating and just posting the same thing consistently

If your in a debate you see others points of view and if in disagreement give a counter argument but with you you just put down another's view because yours is all that counts in your own little world and it would seriously debt your pride if you had to agree with someone on an issue immediately without having to dispute their original post

If you did that then your existence would be pointless hence why even if deep down you no someone is right you will just disagree with them to have a differing opinion

It makes you different from a sheep who follows I'll give you that but it's also an extremely annoying trait to have

I'm certain you'll never agree with anyone's opening post entirely because you'll have no meaning in life if you can't argue with opinions

You should go into politics fit right in with the rest of the pillocks in office


This is all complete and utter nonsense. :laughing6: don't ever give up the day job, you'll make a rubbish psychologist.

If I agree, I will say so, if I disagree, I will debate. There's been plenty of threDs where I've agreed with the point, you really are talking rubbish. :thumbup:


Bet you can't even count them on 1 hand Barry

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:40 am

One minute ago, you said I never do it, now you say it's less than 5.. Already changing your mind I see? :laughing6:

You're wrong, simple as that. :thumbup:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:41 am

Green Arrow wrote:
Blue_Always wrote:
Barnett, You won't change until your acknowledge your behaviour. I'll be here for you .......watching.....waiting.....praying for your recovery.


Another obvious Roathie multi this. :sleepy2:


It's taken months but here it is......Barnett now spitefully calling me roathie just because I've said he's a crap wind-up. :lol:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:44 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:One minute ago, you said I never do it, now you say it's less than 5.. Already changing your mind I see? :laughing6:

You're wrong, simple as that. :thumbup:


Read again Barry I said im sure you'll never agree with an opening post ENTIRELY

Again twisting words to suit your agenda and to also keep this argument going cos you must have the final say on every issue

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:46 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:
Read again Barry I said im sure you'll never agree with an opening post ENTIRELY

Again twisting words to suit your agenda and to also keep this argument going cos you must have the final say on every issue


haven't twisted any words :lol: , you're the one who said these things & you're wrong about that too! :roll:

I'm replying to you to counter your incorrect accusations. Are you seriously suggesting that nobody can reply to you after you make a point? :crazy:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:46 am

Blue_Always wrote:
Green Arrow wrote:
Blue_Always wrote:
Barnett, You won't change until your acknowledge your behaviour. I'll be here for you .......watching.....waiting.....praying for your recovery.


Another obvious Roathie multi this. :sleepy2:


It's taken months but here it is......Barnett now spitefully calling me roathie just because I've said he's a crap wind-up. :lol:


:sleepy2:

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:53 am

Barry Chuckle wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:
Read again Barry I said im sure you'll never agree with an opening post ENTIRELY

Again twisting words to suit your agenda and to also keep this argument going cos you must have the final say on every issue


haven't twisted any words :lol: , you're the one who said these things & you're wrong about that too! :roll:

I'm replying to you to counter your incorrect accusations. Are you seriously suggesting that nobody can reply to you after you make a point? :crazy:


Of course not Barry

You said I changed my mind I didn't you said if now changed it from zero to 5 which I hadn't hence the last post re stating my original comments

It appears you don't like me pointing out what I said because you were wrong now your trying to cover your wrong

Can't make it up

No more on the matter from me must stop letting you wind me up with your pendantic bullshit

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:55 am

Well you had, because you went from saying that I never did it, to you betting that I only could count the number of times on one hand (which is 5, unless you're from Swansea :lol: )

You are simply wrong.

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:05 am

smakerzthebluebird wrote:
Barry Chuckle wrote:
smakerzthebluebird wrote:
You post an opinion yes chuckles but then you split hairs constantly over wording of posts by other users correcting what they have said it's pathetic

You don't allow another opinion that doesn't fit in with yours and you always want the last say on everything this thread is completely typical of that


& then people debate it with me, so I debate back - that's the point of discussion.

I don't allow other opinions, yet I've done this in this exact thread. :lol: I will always challenge opinion if I disagree with it.

:roll:[/quote

There's difference between debating and just posting the same thing consistently

If your in a debate you see others points of view and if in disagreement give a counter argument but with you you just put down another's view because yours is all that counts in your own little world and it would seriously debt your pride if you had to agree with someone on an issue immediately without having to dispute their original post

If you did that then your existence would be pointless hence why even if deep down you no someone is right you will just disagree with them to have a differing opinion

It makes you different from a sheep who follows I'll give you that but it's also an extremely annoying trait to have

I'm certain you'll never agree with anyone's opening post entirely because you'll have no meaning in life if you can't argue with opinions read this again by here chuckles then apologise it says never agree entirely that means you will agree to some extent but not fully

You should go into politics fit right in with the rest of the pillocks in office

Re: WHY MALKY HAD TO GO

Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:07 am

I've read it already thanks & I understood it the first time. I've already explained that you are wrong, as there are many times where I have COMPLETELY agreed with a thread.

If you had read my post correctly the first time, maybe you would have understood it. :thumbup: