The Jacks are NOT whiter than white

It cracks me up. Tan interferes and the jacks slate him to high heaven. Huw interferes and he's some sort of Demi-God.

We don't slate Tan we love him. Even sing his name!

Huw interferes? Or the board of swansea city sack a manager who's team is under performing?

Tan interferes? Or the board of Cardiff city sack a manager who's team is underperforming?

No idea, but as far as I'm concerned our BOARD made the right decison. The vast majority of swans fans agree with that decision by the BOARD. Did Tan sack an under performing manager or were you performing to par?

It cracks me up. Tan interferes and the jacks slate him to high heaven. Huw interferes and he's some sort of Demi-God.

We don't slate Tan we love him. Even sing his name!

Huw interferes? Or the board of swansea city sack a manager who's team is under performing?

Tan interferes? Or the board of Cardiff city sack a manager who's team is underperforming?

No idea, but as far as I'm concerned our BOARD made the right decison. The vast majority of swans fans agree with that decision by the BOARD. Did Tan sack an under performing manager or were you performing to par?

After spending £50m IMO we were underachieving.

Laudrup didn't want Bony, possibly Swansea's best player this season, no wonder he got sacked the moron

Apparently the majority of board members wanted laudrup out and huw was favouring him to stay , but that's the good thing about Swansea , one man does not run the club

its the hand that fate gave you, not some master plan, had there been a very wealthy man around at the time you wouldnt have this set up now......its the opposite with us, the messs the club was in was too much for a Swansea type consortium, so we gwt Tan..........

Apparently the majority of board members wanted laudrup out and huw was favouring him to stay , but that's the good thing about Swansea , one man does not run the club

its the hand that fate gave you, not some master plan, had there been a very wealthy man around at the time you wouldnt have this set up now......its the opposite with us, the messs the club was in was too much for a Swansea type consortium, so we gwt Tan..........

Thats because you carried on spending when you were in a perilous position - we didnt.

Apparently the majority of board members wanted laudrup out and huw was favouring him to stay , but that's the good thing about Swansea , one man does not run the club

its the hand that fate gave you, not some master plan, had there been a very wealthy man around at the time you wouldnt have this set up now......its the opposite with us, the messs the club was in was too much for a Swansea type consortium, so we gwt Tan..........

Thats because you carried on spending when you were in a perilous position - we didnt.

really?

Swansea have a history of overspending.......i will add ..obviously not the last few years........but how did this board come about?...why was the club sold for a pound?.............the Toshack years? well documented poor dealings and wages that didnt match income.......its easy to throw stones.........but not the best idea when standing in a glass house

I agree most of them need a good rub down with a sand brick.

really?

Swansea have a history of overspending.......i will add ..obviously not the last few years........but how did this board come about?...why was the club sold for a pound?.............the Toshack years? well documented poor dealings and wages that didnt match income.......its easy to throw stones.........but not the best idea when standing in a glass house

I dont think the club ever got itself into £130m of debt or whatever it is you are in.

Im not pretending we have a superb record. However for the last 11 years we have cut our cloth accordingly and been the model of professional well run clubs. You have had so many chances to learn lessons, clear up your act and failed each time. Your demand for instant success is insatiable and it gets matched with suitable chairmen who plunge you further into debt.

Tan relented on nthe rebrand and the projected £100m loans and you all went bananas and begged him to make the U-turn - to which he did.

really?

Swansea have a history of overspending.......i will add ..obviously not the last few years........but how did this board come about?...why was the club sold for a pound?.............the Toshack years? well documented poor dealings and wages that didnt match income.......its easy to throw stones.........but not the best idea when standing in a glass house

I dont think the club ever got itself into £130m of debt or whatever it is you are in.

Im not pretending we have a superb record. However for the last 11 years we have cut our cloth accordingly and been the model of professional well run clubs. You have had so many chances to learn lessons, clear up your act and failed each time. Your demand for instant success is insatiable and it gets matched with suitable chairmen who plunge you further into debt.

Tan relented on nthe rebrand and the projected £100m loans and you all went bananas and begged him to make the U-turn - to which he did.

the Toshack years??????......lets be honest about this, three european cup winners in a fourth division team makes sense?

in reality if the club had even doubled the cl;oth it cut youd never have gone up one division let alone 3........spend spend spend...........and the of course 11,000 in the top flight..........football has moved on..the figures have multiplied over and over .. but for a none sense rise to the top you own the model for that too...........

Anyone can go into admin and start with a clean slate.

At least we paid our debts in full.

Anyone can go into admin and start with a clean slate.

At least we paid our debts in full.

Not quite true. We paid Hammam off with an agreed deal, not the full amount owed. Not too dissimilar to Swansea method in all honesty.

Rumour coming out from Swansea that Michu is refusing to play in protest of Laudrup's treatment?
Just watched Monk's interview on SSN about Michu's injury, did you notice how much bigger his nose was at end of interview?

Anyone can go into admin and start with a clean slate.

At least we paid our debts in full.

Not quite true. We paid Hammam off with an agreed deal, not the full amount owed. Not too dissimilar to Swansea method in all honesty.

Totally different. Hammans debt was dodgy to say the least!!

the Toshack years??????......lets be honest about this, three european cup winners in a fourth division team makes sense?

in reality if the club had even doubled the cl;oth it cut youd never have gone up one division let alone 3........spend spend spend...........and the of course 11,000 in the top flight..........football has moved on..the figures have multiplied over and over .. but for a none sense rise to the top you own the model for that too...........

You are talking 30 odd years ago man.

Football has moved on as you say. We are talking about the here and now. Sanctions have been put into place to curb this, clubs have gone bust and penalties brought in for those that fail to comply. If lessons are to be learned they were then.

As a result we are well run. You in the other hand seem to go from bad to worse. That £50m splurge on players was ridiculous, as is the extension probably. You arent in a position to be able to do this, and this is why you are taken advantage of, time and time again.

If some billionaire foreigner came in wanting to buy us we would chase him back to where he came from. The minute your chairman starts writing cheques the club cant afford is the minute you do everything you can to oust him..... Yet instead you ask for more.

Anyone can go into admin and start with a clean slate.

At least we paid our debts in full.

Not quite true. We paid Hammam off with an agreed deal, not the full amount owed. Not too dissimilar to Swansea method in all honesty.

Totally different. Hammans debt was dodgy to say the least!!

Not different at all. You claimed we paid our debts in full, which isn't true. Neither club fully serviced their full debts & came to agreements with creditors for its payment.

the Toshack years??????......lets be honest about this, three european cup winners in a fourth division team makes sense?

in reality if the club had even doubled the cl;oth it cut youd never have gone up one division let alone 3........spend spend spend...........and the of course 11,000 in the top flight..........football has moved on..the figures have multiplied over and over .. but for a none sense rise to the top you own the model for that too...........

You are talking 30 odd years ago man.

Football has moved on as you say. We are talking about the here and now. Sanctions have been put into place to curb this, clubs have gone bust and penalties brought in for those that fail to comply. If lessons are to be learned they were then.

As a result we are well run. You in the other hand seem to go from bad to worse. That £50m splurge on players was ridiculous, as is the extension probably. You arent in a position to be able to do this, and this is why you are taken advantage of, time and time again.

If some billionaire foreigner came in wanting to buy us we would chase him back to where he came from. The minute your chairman starts writing cheques the club cant afford is the minute you do everything you can to oust him..... Yet instead you ask for more.

it is different in the amounts..........but as i said reckless never the less.....and i know that you THINK youd chase a nillionaire away, but of course its not your choice............should Mr Morgan and co decide to sell and move to Las Vagas..you and your fans are not in the loop

the Toshack years??????......lets be honest about this, three european cup winners in a fourth division team makes sense?

in reality if the club had even doubled the cl;oth it cut youd never have gone up one division let alone 3........spend spend spend...........and the of course 11,000 in the top flight..........football has moved on..the figures have multiplied over and over .. but for a none sense rise to the top you own the model for that too...........

You are talking 30 odd years ago man.

Football has moved on as you say. We are talking about the here and now. Sanctions have been put into place to curb this, clubs have gone bust and penalties brought in for those that fail to comply. If lessons are to be learned they were then.

As a result we are well run. You in the other hand seem to go from bad to worse. That £50m splurge on players was ridiculous, as is the extension probably. You arent in a position to be able to do this, and this is why you are taken advantage of, time and time again.

If some billionaire foreigner came in wanting to buy us we would chase him back to where he came from. The minute your chairman starts writing cheques the club cant afford is the minute you do everything you can to oust him..... Yet instead you ask for more.

have to say..............your clubs rise up the divisions under Toshack....i knew at the time { before sky TV } you were spending far more than the cl;ub could hope to sustain............i was so envious of this overspend.....and to this day believe had we done it it would have worked.........anyway............how much harm did it do Swansea as a club?..i believe you only fill the Liberty now on the back of teenagers back in the eighties getting the bug .. the crowds you now get are unprecidented at Swansea tbh.............who is to say that in 20 or 40 years time we will not benefit as you have done........nothing is forever especially in football...........the billionaire might be around the next corner no matter how many chicos you have with bricks to chase him off

Anyone can go into admin and start with a clean slate.

At least we paid our debts in full.

Not quite true. We paid Hammam off with an agreed deal, not the full amount owed. Not too dissimilar to Swansea method in all honesty.

Totally different. Hammans debt was dodgy to say the least!!

Not different at all. You claimed we paid our debts in full, which isn't true. Neither club fully serviced their full debts & came to agreements with creditors for its payment.

Thats how business works Chuckles dear.

Thats how business works Chuckles dear.

Haven't claimed otherwise. To claim that Cardiff City paid their debts in full though, is incorrect.

Thats how business works Chuckles dear.

Haven't claimed otherwise. To claim that Cardiff City paid their debts in full though, is incorrect.

Sam agreed the settlement, didnt have too, huge difference, he could have taken this to court but chose to accept an offer
those paid 5p in the pound had no choice..take it or leave it.........no taking it to court

Sam agreed the settlement, didnt have too, huge difference, he could have taken this to court but chose to accept an offer
those paid 5p in the pound had no choice..take it or leave it.........no taking it to court

I know, we still didn't pay off our debts fully though.

To have a go at Swansea Coty for not paying their debts in full, when Cardiff didn't either, stinks of double standards.

Sam agreed the settlement, didnt have too, huge difference, he could have taken this to court but chose to accept an offer
those paid 5p in the pound had no choice..take it or leave it.........no taking it to court

I know, we still didn't pay off our debts fully though.

To have a go at Swansea Coty for not paying their debts in full, when Cardiff didn't either, stinks of double standards.

A huge difference in the two situations Chuckles dear but I know that wont stop you trying to be correct and if you get owned you vanish for a week or two, coward.

Sam agreed the settlement, didnt have too, huge difference, he could have taken this to court but chose to accept an offer
those paid 5p in the pound had no choice..take it or leave it.........no taking it to court

I know, we still didn't pay off our debts fully though.

To have a go at Swansea Coty for not paying their debts in full, when Cardiff didn't either, stinks of double standards.

two men sit down and negotiate......both leave happy.........that is paid in full........in any walk of life.

f**k Laudrup.He was taking us down quicker than the Costa Concordia and had lost interest and didn't see what was happening. It's the first time we've sacked a manager in years and years and his tenure was up because of awful results.He might have been Michael laudrup but not even he is bigger than Swansea City so had to go..It could have been dealt with better but who gives a shit.It'll all be forgotten this time next week.

Sam agreed the settlement, didnt have too, huge difference, he could have taken this to court but chose to accept an offer
those paid 5p in the pound had no choice..take it or leave it.........no taking it to court

I know, we still didn't pay off our debts fully though.

To have a go at Swansea Coty for not paying their debts in full, when Cardiff didn't either, stinks of double standards.

i havent haad a go at Swansea...........and wouldnt wish what happened to them on anyone..........but to suggest that we dont pay debts in full when Sam is obviously happy is bonkers.........Sam could have told him/us to f**k off i want more........those people Swansea owed had no such avenue............JCB time.......keep digging that hole

i havent haad a go at Swansea...........and wouldnt wish what happened to them on anyone..........but to suggest that we dont pay debts in full when Sam is obviously happy is bonkers.........Sam could have told him/us to f**k off i want more........those people Swansea owed had no such avenue............JCB time.......keep digging that hole

You didn't, no. But someone did in this thread.

To suggest that we serviced the total of our debts, when we didn't is also bonkers.

Thats how business works Chuckles dear.

Haven't claimed otherwise. To claim that Cardiff City paid their debts in full though, is incorrect.

As for debts being paid in full of course they have. As far as l am aware Langston loan notes have been settled.Remember Sam said he was not Langston. My take is that ccfc have paid off all liability as claimed in full otherwise it would state balance owed. They may have been discounted by agreement however they are paid in full and final settlement that is clear.
As for Swansea the debts from the Struel years
We're huge at the time. The bottom line was there was to much for any one to save them. they even lost the lease of the vetch. However the main point and fact is that they have failed to fulfill liabilities on 2 Separate occasions unlike CCFC. Believe me you do not enter administration owing just coppers.
As for statement by Roathie in Jenkins he trusts again believe me Jenkins and the word trust are not two words that marry. It is an experience one must sample to understand.

i havent haad a go at Swansea...........and wouldnt wish what happened to them on anyone..........but to suggest that we dont pay debts in full when Sam is obviously happy is bonkers.........Sam could have told him/us to f**k off i want more........those people Swansea owed had no such avenue............JCB time.......keep digging that hole

You didn't, no. But someone did in this thread.

To suggest that we serviced the total of our debts, when we didn't is also bonkers.

i bought my wife something for v day...id told the lady i wished to spend a hunfred quid,what i had in my hand was 115, she said i can do it for a 100............i dont owe them 15 quid, both parties happy..the price of something..is what is agreed on......sam was happy { tbh tried it on }.........in this case was he really owed what he said?..or is it debatable?
there was no debate when Swansea hit the rocks......you quite simply were getting nowhere near what you were owed

f**k Laudrup.He was taking us down quicker than the Costa Concordia

fairplay

Too right, they send a you're fired email, and don't even allow the poor bugger to go back and say goodbye after all he did for them, still I suppose they need to stay up as they have bonuses to earn