Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:42 pm
Barry Chuckle wrote:Realised that you've been a massive hypocrite again?!![]()
You don't like assumptions, but then made one yourself when it suited your agenda.
Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:43 pm
Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:45 pm
Barry Chuckle wrote:But you ASSUMED that it would be a different man in the job & that he would be suitably experienced... Have you got a club statement to prove that? Or were you just making a massive assumption, something that you condemned the other day, when it didn't suit your agenda...
Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:48 pm
JONNY012697 wrote:
stop going round in circles Barry answer my questions
you're the one ignoring things.do you admit that you have made an assumption, something you criticised others for the other day?
![]()
how do you know it will be the same guy what are you assuming?
I'm assuming, yes. But then, I'm not the one who had a go at others for assuming am I? You did that, then assumed he will be replaced with a more suitable person.![]()
your attempt to scare people is boring
![]()
Sun Oct 13, 2013 2:50 pm
Barry Chuckle wrote:JONNY012697 wrote:
stop going round in circles Barry answer my questions
you're the one ignoring things.do you admit that you have made an assumption, something you criticised others for the other day?
![]()
how do you know it will be the same guy what are you assuming?
I'm assuming, yes. But then, I'm not the one who had a go at others for assuming am I? You did that, then assumed he will be replaced with a more suitable person.![]()
your attempt to scare people is boring
![]()
Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:05 pm
)
Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:34 pm
JONNY012697 wrote:Occasional Violins wrote:JONNY012697 wrote:we all know he was good at the job thats why he got it in the first place
Does that go for the current incumbent?
no but again I havent mentioned him dont see your point really.
Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:57 pm
Occasional Violins wrote:JONNY012697 wrote:Occasional Violins wrote:JONNY012697 wrote:we all know he was good at the job thats why he got it in the first place
Does that go for the current incumbent?
no but again I havent mentioned him dont see your point really.
The fact that he wouldn't be the current incumbent unless he was good at the job according to your original statement.![]()
Mon Oct 14, 2013 8:54 am