Bubbles bursting...complete domination

Who said that then?

That was covered in "(complete history)" was it not?

So we are back to full tenures then

Out of interest, taking your business analogy, would you compare one companies 4 week profit against another's 18 months profit?

Initially I made the points that :
1/imo Mr Monk would not be a success in the medium to longer term and there were parallels with the travails of Tim Sherwood. I gave several reasons for this view and suggested that within a year he will be gone.roathie you are now embroiled in a futile attempt to prove whether he is or is not a successful manager after only a handful of games. He is neither good nor bad yet - its too early to judge!

im not at all stating anything regarding his calibre of manager. Im simply giving some stats. Although again to suggest he will fail because you think sherwood will is bizarre as i told you at the time.

2/You are in a relegation fight but I felt that would probably be OK.
Mr Monk now agrees and says you are in a relegation fight Planet Swans nearly all say you are in a dogfight and now the full back Ben Davies says it. But Roathie you appear to be only one who knows the truth that you are in no trouble and are playing completely dominant football!!

it is usually the case, and i am usually proved right. Ive been associated with the club longer than Ben Davies has been alive and Garry Monk has been player and manager put together. My opinion always comes first and gets proven right time and time again.


In the meantime I can hear a faint "pop" "pop" "pop" "pop" sound. What can it be? ?
Oh of course its the sound of Swansea bubbles bursting...... I wonder if in the next few weeks there will be big rumours about disunity and arguements among the players?.

you can but dream i guess

Who said that then?

That was covered in "(complete history)" was it not?

So we are back to full tenures then

Out of interest, taking your business analogy, would you compare one companies 4 week profit against another's 18 months profit?

Either will do as long as they are relevant. Two managers complete history is fine and so is scenarios of obvious comparison such as half of the same season each.

Businesses - if the two businesses were only 4 weeks and 18 months old respectively then yes as its all i have to go on.

Who said that then?

That was covered in "(complete history)" was it not?

So we are back to full tenures then

Out of interest, taking your business analogy, would you compare one companies 4 week profit against another's 18 months profit?

Either will do as long as they are relevant. Two managers complete history is fine and so is scenarios of obvious comparison such as half of the same season each.

Businesses - if the two businesses were only 4 weeks and 18 months old respectively then yes as its all i have to go on.

Shame you didn't say that in the first place when you were adamant it was all about full tenures. Even then Monk hasn't had half a season yet, he's had 5 PL games v Laudrups 24. So is it too early for any meaningful comparison?

As for business, it may be all you have to go on but just how meaningful would it be? One business could be a day old and that's all you have to go on, but it would unlikely be indicative of how the year would pan out. 4 weeks would be better of course but still very early to make any serious comparisons with more established businesses.

Just because it's all you have doesn't make it enough

Who said that then?

That was covered in "(complete history)" was it not?

So we are back to full tenures then

Out of interest, taking your business analogy, would you compare one companies 4 week profit against another's 18 months profit?

Either will do as long as they are relevant. Two managers complete history is fine and so is scenarios of obvious comparison such as half of the same season each.

Businesses - if the two businesses were only 4 weeks and 18 months old respectively then yes as its all i have to go on.

Shame you didn't say that in the first place when you were adamant it was all about full tenures. Even then Monk hasn't had half a season yet, he's had 5 PL games v Laudrups 24. So is it too early for any meaningful comparison?

That was in context to you wanting to take 4 games from 2 different seasons. I replied that things need to be whole. A whole season works too.

As for business, it may be all you have to go on but just how meaningful would it be? One business could be a day old and that's all you have to go on, but it would unlikely be indicative of how the year would pan out. 4 weeks would be better of course but still very early to make any serious comparisons with more established businesses.

comparisons can be made at any stage, the more relevant you can make them the more accurate they will be. 4 weeks is 4 weeks, if you had more we would compare more.

Just because it's all you have doesn't make it enough

of course its enough, it just wont be as telling as a longer period. What you can say however is "for this 4 weeks my profit has been enough, if sustained, to turn over X amount"

Who said that then?

That was covered in "(complete history)" was it not?

So we are back to full tenures then

Out of interest, taking your business analogy, would you compare one companies 4 week profit against another's 18 months profit?

Either will do as long as they are relevant. Two managers complete history is fine and so is scenarios of obvious comparison such as half of the same season each.

Businesses - if the two businesses were only 4 weeks and 18 months old respectively then yes as its all i have to go on.

Shame you didn't say that in the first place when you were adamant it was all about full tenures. Even then Monk hasn't had half a season yet, he's had 5 PL games v Laudrups 24. So is it too early for any meaningful comparison?

That was in context to you wanting to take 4 games from 2 different seasons. I replied that things need to be whole. A whole season works too.

As for business, it may be all you have to go on but just how meaningful would it be? One business could be a day old and that's all you have to go on, but it would unlikely be indicative of how the year would pan out. 4 weeks would be better of course but still very early to make any serious comparisons with more established businesses.

comparisons can be made at any stage, the more relevant you can make them the more accurate they will be. 4 weeks is 4 weeks, if you had more we would compare more.

Just because it's all you have doesn't make it enough

of course its enough, it just wont be as telling as a longer period. What you can say however is "for this 4 weeks my profit has been enough, if sustained, to turn over X amount"

"If sustained" - that's a huge "if" in the context of football with all it's uncertainties, hence why 4 or even 5 games is far too few games to compare against another managers 62 with any meaningful conclusion. I fail to see how this can be disputed.

"If you had more we would compare more" and "it just won't be as telling as a longer period" - therefore why not use Laudrups full 62 game tenure to compare against monk? When monk had a better points:games ratio you were happy to use Laudrups full tenure, yet now decide to use laudrup this season only?

You say a " a whole season works too" - monk has had 5 games, lazt time I checked that wasn't a whole season, a half or even a quarter. So you're not even comparing like with like this season.

You're full of contradictions.

"If sustained" - that's a huge "if" in the context of football with all it's uncertainties, hence why 4 or even 5 games is far too few games to compare against another managers 62 with any meaningful conclusion. I fail to see how this can be disputed.

everything is an "if" when talking about the future. However what the fact is - is that currently he has the same points per game ratio as Laudrup did with this squad, and he is our most successful ever manager.

"If you had more we would compare more" and "it just won't be as telling as a longer period" - therefore why not use Laudrups full 62 game tenure to compare against monk? When monk had a better points:games ratio you were happy to use Laudrups full tenure, yet now decide to use laudrup this season only?

where have I said you cant do that then? You are now joining polo and chuckles in inventing a position I havent even come close to having.

You say a " a whole season works too" - monk has had 5 games, lazt time I checked that wasn't a whole season, a half or even a quarter. So you're not even comparing like with like this season.

30 games have gone in this season and we have the WHOLE of that to look back on. We are not selecting certain parts - which is of course what I said we cant do.

You're full of contradictions.

there is not one contradiction in there what so ever.

As usual you have either misunderstood or completely made up what I said, in this case it seems it is a combination of both

"If sustained" - that's a huge "if" in the context of football with all it's uncertainties, hence why 4 or even 5 games is far too few games to compare against another managers 62 with any meaningful conclusion. I fail to see how this can be disputed.

everything is an "if" when talking about the future. However what the fact is - is that currently he has the same points per game ratio as Laudrup did with this squad, and he is our most successful ever manager.

"If you had more we would compare more" and "it just won't be as telling as a longer period" - therefore why not use Laudrups full 62 game tenure to compare against monk? When monk had a better points:games ratio you were happy to use Laudrups full tenure, yet now decide to use laudrup this season only?

where have I said you cant do that then? You are now joining polo and chuckles in inventing a position I havent even come close to having.

You say a " a whole season works too" - monk has had 5 games, lazt time I checked that wasn't a whole season, a half or even a quarter. So you're not even comparing like with like this season.

30 games have gone in this season and we have the WHOLE of that to look back on. We are not selecting certain parts - which is of course what I said we cant do.

You're full of contradictions.

there is not one contradiction in there what so ever.

As usual you have either misunderstood or completely made up what I said, in this case it seems it is a combination of both

So you now think the only worthy comparison is laudrup this season? Or do you think it's more meaningful to use Laudrups full tenure including last season when he delivered your most success season?

So now the whole of a season breaking into 24 v 5 games is meaningful?

Making stuff up? I've quoted you directly
It's difficult to understand you when you change your mind every 2 minutes

So you now think the only worthy comparison is laudrup this season?

again... So where have i said that then?

Or do you think it's more meaningful to use Laudrups full tenure including last season when he delivered your most success season?

you are telling me that I can only pick one?

So now the whole of a season breaking into 24 v 5 games is meaningful?

if thats all we have to go on then it is as meaningful as it can be. Isnt this obvious?

Making stuff up? I've quoted you directly

absolutely, you keep changing my quotes and context and applying them to a broader discussion. Not on my watch Carps

It's difficult to understand you when you change your mind every 2 minutes

yet ironically I havent changed it once

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

So you now think the only worthy comparison is laudrup this season?

again... So where have i said that then?

Or do you think it's more meaningful to use Laudrups full tenure including last season when he delivered your most success season?

you are telling me that I can only pick one?

So now the whole of a season breaking into 24 v 5 games is meaningful?

if thats all we have to go on then it is as meaningful as it can be. Isnt this obvious?

Making stuff up? I've quoted you directly

absolutely, you keep changing my quotes and context and applying them to a broader discussion. Not on my watch Carps

It's difficult to understand you when you change your mind every 2 minutes

yet ironically I havent changed it once

I was asking you questions, hence the question marks at the end of the sentences. Care to answer?

No irony in sight. You stated you had to use a managers full tenure to compare against another, but now compare using only Laudrups record this season. That's a change of mind. And where have I changed your quotes?


So what method is the most meaningful in your opinion? It's not a difficult question

:D

You spelt wanker wrong

I was asking you questions, hence the question marks at the end of the sentences. Care to answer?

two things make a question, wording and ending. You ended with a question mark but your wording was very much a statement. If it is a reiteration statement then thats fine, however the statements you were making were things I had never typed.... Ever.

No irony in sight. You stated you had to use a managers full tenure to compare against another, but now compare using only Laudrups record this season. That's a change of mind. And where have I changed your quotes?

that was in a conversation regarding you wanting to take 4 games from this season and 4 games from this season. I didnt realise the suggestion if comparison for better accuracy was going to be the only one I was allowed to do for ever. If you made that clear I would have made a list for you.

So what method is the most meaningful in your opinion? It's not a difficult question

no idea. How can we tell how meaningful something is until time tells us so? I can use my common sense to say selecting 4 games from two different seasons wont be the most meaningful thiugh

:D

You spelt wanker wrong

Ah well, then I guess I will have to stick with what it actually says then carps

Roaths quotes pre the WBA defeat:

"The most accurate thing we can go on is judging their complete tenure and not just parts of them, as parts of them can be manipulated. Im going on every game they have ever managed Swansea in the Prem"

"We are comparing Monks whole Swansea league career with the other two's whole league career - there is no small piece in sight"

"The points to game ratio is available after every game it is up to you when you start to agree, but what you have no choice in agreeing to is that if we judge all 3 Swansea Premier League managers careers then Monk has the highest points per game ratio" (pre WBA of course )

"You can compare anything to anything, the more whole the comparison the more accurate it becomes"

Then quotes after the defeat - change of agenda?

"He has a similar record to what Laudrup did this season though who is arguably our most successful ever manager"

"This season he has the same points to game ratio as our most successful ever manager achieved with ths squad"

"As for this season to compare every single match Monk managed this season and every single match Laudrup managed this season is also a fair comparison"

" Two managers complete history is fine and so is scenarios of obvious comparison such as half of the same season each" (not that monk has been manager for half a season yet )

And then back to:
"comparisons can be made at any stage, the more relevant you can make them the more accurate they will be. 4 weeks is 4 weeks, if you had more we would compare more" (so like a managers full tenure then and not just this season )

And then:
"30 games have gone in this season and we have the WHOLE of that to look back on. We are not selecting certain parts - which is of course what I said we cant do" (yet selecting only parts of Laudrups tenure is ok )

My favourite:
"Like I said you cant have your cake and eat it. If you didnt wish to discuss it with a dismissive tone prior to the WBA match the you must expect the same treatment after it. Not cake and eating on my watch carps"

Carpe Diem gorging on roathie cake for days despite being told it wouldn't happen

Jesus Christ carps

Each one of those quotes is spot on and stand by every single one of them you dont seem to know what your argument is, all quite amusing.

As ive said, the cake is intact - you have mistaken it for the humble pie you are chomping down on

The trophy stays put

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Jesus Christ carps

Each one of those quotes is spot on and stand by every single one of them you dont seem to know what your argument is, all quite amusing.

As ive said, the cake is intact - you have mistaken it for the humble pie you are chomping down on

Spot on? They contradict you idiot

You said I couldn't debate the point since I dismissed your nonsense before the WBA game. To do so I would be having my cake and eating it. You now rather pitifully declare yourself as the debate winner (clearly realising you've lost) which means we did indeed have a debate.

Seems I did indeed have my cake and eat it, in fact gorged on rocky roaths

Jesus Christ carps

Each one of those quotes is spot on and stand by every single one of them you dont seem to know what your argument is, all quite amusing.

As ive said, the cake is intact - you have mistaken it for the humble pie you are chomping down on

Spot on? They contradict you idiot

no they don't, they are from differing conversations with differing context. Imnnot sure how many times you need to be told.

I stand by every one because they are right quite simply

You said I couldn't debate the point since I dismissed your nonsense before the WBA game. To do so I would be having my cake and eating it. You now rather pitifully declare yourself as the debate winner (clearly realising you've lost) which means we did indeed have a debate.

so because im allowing you to debate and still prove that you dont have an argument, that suits you how? I won the debate because im right

Seems I did indeed have my cake and eat it, in fact gorged on rocky roaths

nope, as ive said it was a big slice of humble pie you thought looked like a cake, because although i allowed you to debate it - you still have no argument

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

No need for a menu, I've got all the rocky roath I can eat

No need for a menu, I've got all the rocky roath I can eat

Humble pie can sometimes look like Rocky Roath

No need for a menu, I've got all the rocky roath I can eat

Humble pie can sometimes look like Rocky Roath

Only if your sight is as bad as your hand writing

No need for a menu, I've got all the rocky roath I can eat

Humble pie can sometimes look like Rocky Roath

Only if your sight is as bad as your hand writing

Mouse writing actually. Last time i tried the other way I had marker pen all over my screen.

Mouse writing actually. Last time i tried the other way I had marker pen all over my screen.

So you tried then

Mouse writing actually. Last time i tried the other way I had marker pen all over my screen.

So you tried then

I had a go yes.

That cup looks like the fa cup,something neither you or your team has been in possesion of! Answer to my question,of what this sensational total dominance football,has got you in way of results lately?? You played "sensational" v palace # result! Same v west brom # result! Same v napoli # result! Says it all really eh? sensational total dominance football means feck all.result at end of play does! Welcome to the dogfight roath.

That cup looks like the fa cup,something neither you or your team has been in possesion of!

oh? Nice story

I thought it looked like it had its own identity personally, something that you guys..... Yeah

Answer to my question,of what this sensational total dominance football,has got you in way of results lately?? You played "sensational" v palace # result!

the team that beat you 2-0 you mean? It got us into a position where we were leading and ended up taking a point after a weak 2nd half

Same v west brom # result!

not true, we lost this game. Can you imagine? Losing a football match? My word

Same v napoli # result! Says it all really eh?

nope. We got a draw at home and a defeat away truly shocking, can you imagine the horror of losing away to Napoli

sensational total dominance football means feck all.result at end of play does! Welcome to the dogfight roath.

sensational total dominance puts is in a position where 2 wins from 9 games keeps us up. Great stuff

sensational total dominance puts is in a position where 2 wins from 9 games keeps us up. Great stuff
No guarantees Swansea will win two more league games this season. They have won just two of their last ten league matches, and those were against the bottom two sides. If they continue with their recent form, they could well be drawn right into the middle of the relegation fight. Three of their next four fixtures are away, with Norwich at home being a vital match. Fail to beat Norwich, and there's every chance of being in,or very close to the relegation places.