Prepare yourself for the laugh of the century
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Why keep coming on here then? Why keep posting?
The way I see it is this:-
1) If your objective is to troll by telling everyone how superior you are as a fan that's a bit twatish isn't it?
2) If your intention is to get everyone to hate you as the board villian so that you get some attention well, that's a bit sad and twatish isn't it?
3) If you think the 1882 movement is silly and you come onto a board full of people who follow it expecting them to change their minds based on trolling, well, that's a bit twattish isn't it?
4) If you think internet discussion is stupid, but keep engaging in it, well, that's a bit twatish isn't it?
5) If you get no enjoyment out of this board then coming here would be a bit twatish wouldn't it?
6) If you want to convince people that AVB is shit but are failing so obviously, but then just keep on and on, then it's a bit twatish isn't it?
7) If you hate internet talk, and require everyone to meet you in the pub at a match in order to get your views on the club, but still come online to tell them that, well that's a bit twatish isn't it?
8) If you think that loads of people give a shit about Billy the Biscuit and his mates than that's a bit twatish isn't it?
9) If you are the uber fan you claim to be and aren't busy spending your time with the other uber fans, instead wasting time on the lesser people, then that's a bit sad and twatish isn't it?
So, it seems, one way or another, there may just be an element of twat about you.
Just a theory of course.
Couldn't yOu nail your bollocks to it instead?
an anagram of Carlito Brigante is 'Bargainer Tic Lot' which leads me to think it is Harry Redknapp
We need stability and that doesnt come from judging a manager after two months. He has'nt had a fully fit squad, and while I accept that doesnt excuse some of AVBs ludicrous decision's, I would really like to see what he would do with everyone available.
If he starts playing Livermore over Parker, and keeps Vertonghen LB over BAE then Id be me more concerned.
It is truely baffling some of the decisions he is making, particulary in home games, but its way too soon for this. He needs to be given two or three seasons, before we should start talking about his position.
The guy is not going to relegate us, and this is a transitional season. As much as people slate Pool fans, they are making us look like utter, utter cunts at the moment.
They are in the same situation, but worse, as they have spent heavily on shit players, and have been in transition/sliding backwards for 3/4yrs. Yeah they wanted Woy out, but I didnt hear any boos at Anfield to this day, and they even gave him a warm ovation when he returned with WBA.
Its groundhog day supporting this club.
If its not the fans demanding a manager's head, it's Levy, or Sugar. Repeat process - Win nothing.
11 managers since 1991. Before that, the last 11 managers took us back to 1938.
Piss take.
If he starts playing Livermore over Parker, and keeps Vertonghen LB over BAE then Id be me more concerned.
It is truely baffling some of the decisions he is making, particulary in home games, but its way too soon for this. He needs to be given two or three seasons, before we should start talking about his position.
The guy is not going to relegate us, and this is a transitional season. As much as people slate Pool fans, they are making us look like utter, utter cunts at the moment.
They are in the same situation, but worse, as they have spent heavily on shit players, and have been in transition/sliding backwards for 3/4yrs. Yeah they wanted Woy out, but I didnt hear any boos at Anfield to this day, and they even gave him a warm ovation when he returned with WBA.
Its groundhog day supporting this club.
If its not the fans demanding a manager's head, it's Levy, or Sugar. Repeat process - Win nothing.
11 managers since 1991. Before that, the last 11 managers took us back to 1938.
Piss take.
Oh do fuck off with this trolling shit. I bet if you were here six months ago you'd be posting the same shit about Harry.
Could you stop giving it the "I'm a better fan than you" attitude. It's fucking annoying. We all love Tottenham Hotspur FC and it's not a contest as to who was there first. My dad was a Spurs supporter before I was born, doesn't mean I love the club any less than him, just because I've not been alive for as long as he has.
And why do you suddenly show up on the forum again after a shit performance? You really like being miserable don't you?
Anyone who thinks they are a better fan than anyone else is an absolute fucking idiot, and a complete cunt of a human being. What makes some one supporting spurs in Los Angeles opinion less valid than someone in Chiswick? Some of these fans spend THOUSANDS to fly over here and make the incredible effort to see a Spurs game. I haven't been to the lane since Martin Jol was in charge. Doesn't make me any less of a fan. It is arrogant and offensive to believe you are better than some one else.
If someone gets up at 4am in the morning to watch a game and pours hundreds of pounds of their own money into the club revenue by way of shirts and merchandise you're damn right that I consider them supporters.
It is about how you feel, how you behave and what you do for the club, not whether or not you happen to me lucky enough to be living within the M25, have no wife or kids and have loads of money in the bank.
:avblol:CheekyCockney said:
It isn't so much about AVB having the right stuff, but more a touch of realism abut who who are and who we can get. AVB may not be doing the business, but he has, at present, an arguably weaker squad than Harry, not just because of the loss of Rafa and Ratcunt, but also a growing injury list.Yet, he's still had us in foruth last week, and in fifth now only on goal difference. That's a damn sight better than either of your examples in Gross or Ramos (the latter of which had an arguably stronger squad in his first season).
The likes of you, who claim to be the Billy Big Bollocks of WHL who have been going since 1882 and have seen every false dawn of all time, still, it seems, don't grasp that Levy (or whoever else) isn't going to be able to bring in a younger Sir Alex or ship in Sheikh Mansoor's oil billions with a couple months over the summer. We get what we can afford. If you're such a fucking footballing genius with all the answers who couldn't stand Harry either, maybe you can tell us who the Messiah is going to be?
Pretty sure my officiation to the club is more historic than yours and will easily out live you by a few hundred years pal.
Keep on booing.
A good article from Rory Smith in the Times:
Andre Villas-Boas damned before he has even started
Times Sport
November 05 2012 12:11PM
Rory Smith
Tottenham Hotspur are fifth in the Barclays Premier League. They have taken 17 points from their opening ten fixtures – hardly a startling return, but in such an open division, probably not far off what should have been expected – level with Everton in the fourth and final Champions League spot and two points ahead of Woolwich, their visceral rivals, a team cast either as potential title challengers of rare and precocious ability or an unmitigated shambles bound for relegation, depending on their latest result.
Tottenham’s latest result, a defeat at home to Wigan, was desperately disappointing. You can tell it was a shock because the outcome ensured the game was promoted to the coveted second slot on Match of the Day. John “Motty” Motson was probably exaggerating when he described it as “one of the most surprising results of the season,” given that it happened two years ago, too, but still, losing to Roberto Martinez’s side probably came as a bit of a blow to Andre Villas-Boas.
That’s the Andre Villas-Boas who has been booed off at home by his new club’s fans at least three times in his short tenure at White Hart Lane. The Andre Villas-Boas who the “jury is out on”, according to Gary Lineker, the Match of the Day anchor and cringe-inducing hump-advertiser. The Andre Villas-Boas who, remember, has taken his side to their first victory at Old Trafford in 28 years, to fifth in the Premier League, ahead of Woolwich, and in contention for a Champions League spot.
Lineker was not so quick to suggest that 12 of Martin O’Neill’s peers were still undecided about the Northern Irishman’s reign at Sunderland, which has seen him guide his side to 16th in the Premier League and, more impressively still, one win in 17 games.
Nor was he especially enthusiastic to harangue Tony Pulis, Stoke’s bespectacled moral arbiter, for a run which has seen the division’s greatest aesthetes win just one of their last 16. They sit just a place above Sunderland, on goal difference, four points clear of the relegation quagmire only by virtue of the fact that Reading, QPR and Southampton are all really quite bad at football.
Maybe that is because Villas-Boas is at a club where expectations are substantially higher than at either the Stadium of Light or the Britannia. He is also in a job he came to in relatively unusual circumstances, succeeding a manager who had guided Spurs to fourth in the Premier League last season and who still enjoyed the support of a majority of the fans. Fourth wasn’t good enough to save Harry Redknapp; there is no reason fifth should be deemed sufficient for his successor.
But that argument is flawed. Spurs, Sunderland and Stoke all want to achieve to different levels, but the basic aim is the same: to improve. To be better than they were last season, and the season before that. To be going somewhere. That is why Spurs got rid of Redknapp and brought in Villas-Boas. Because they wanted to have a target, a point. Redknapp had failed to make the leap: Spurs were, under the 64-year-old, contenders to qualify for the Champions League, but he seemed unable to turn them into title challengers. And so Daniel Levy, the chairman, decided it was better to twist than to stick.
Both Pulis and O’Neill are failing by the same yardstick, albeit at a reduced level. The former deserves credit for bringing Stoke up, and maintaining them among the elite, but it has been four years now. He would be unique in world football if an achievement from the previous decade bought him unlimited grace.
Stoke are in an intriguing quandary: under Pulis, they are likely to bully and to bulldoze their way to enough points to remain in the top flight in perpetuity. Is that enough? Or should they really be looking to move on to the next level, to become a side capable of flirting with Europe with reasonable frequency? Should Peter Coates not ask Pulis to provide proof he is not simply a good enough manager to keep a team in the Premier League, but of sufficient quality to try and provide a degree of entertainment, too?
The general consensus seems to be no: Stoke should be happy to be where they are, and what they are, forever. Pulis does not have to face a jury. Pulis is not even on trial. As with O’Neill, defeats are not attributed to managerial failings, but to errors from individual players or, if he can get away with it, referees.
Look at Sunderland: O’Neill’s dictum that his side’s problems are related to his creative players being, well, not very creative is swallowed whole. Is it not the manager’s responsibility to craft a side to get the best out of Stephane Sessegnon and Adam Johnson and James McClean? Is it not his job to allow them to flourish?
And yet that question is never asked. O’Neill, like Pulis, has been deemed “a good manager.” He is a known quantity. We know he can do it again, because he has done it before. Villas-Boas has never done it before – whatever happened abroad doesn’t count, because the Premier League is so unique and beautiful and special – and so it is assumed he will never do it.
That is why it feels as though the Portuguese has been damned before he has even started. It is why it feels as though every defeat is treated as a harbinger, as proof, and every victory an exception. It is why pressure falls on his shoulders so easily but barely touches some of his counterparts. It is why O’Neill and Pulis remain feted even as they fail. Because everyone’s roles in the immortal soap opera that is the Premier League are pre-determined. Because the narrative is set, and the facts must not be allowed to get in the way.
Andre Villas-Boas has taken a team to the cusp of the Champions League. Andre Villas-Boas is doing what he should be. But that is not success, because he is Andre Villas-Boas, and Andre Villas-Boas fails.
Andre Villas-Boas damned before he has even started
Times Sport
November 05 2012 12:11PM
Rory Smith
Tottenham Hotspur are fifth in the Barclays Premier League. They have taken 17 points from their opening ten fixtures – hardly a startling return, but in such an open division, probably not far off what should have been expected – level with Everton in the fourth and final Champions League spot and two points ahead of Woolwich, their visceral rivals, a team cast either as potential title challengers of rare and precocious ability or an unmitigated shambles bound for relegation, depending on their latest result.
Tottenham’s latest result, a defeat at home to Wigan, was desperately disappointing. You can tell it was a shock because the outcome ensured the game was promoted to the coveted second slot on Match of the Day. John “Motty” Motson was probably exaggerating when he described it as “one of the most surprising results of the season,” given that it happened two years ago, too, but still, losing to Roberto Martinez’s side probably came as a bit of a blow to Andre Villas-Boas.
That’s the Andre Villas-Boas who has been booed off at home by his new club’s fans at least three times in his short tenure at White Hart Lane. The Andre Villas-Boas who the “jury is out on”, according to Gary Lineker, the Match of the Day anchor and cringe-inducing hump-advertiser. The Andre Villas-Boas who, remember, has taken his side to their first victory at Old Trafford in 28 years, to fifth in the Premier League, ahead of Woolwich, and in contention for a Champions League spot.
Lineker was not so quick to suggest that 12 of Martin O’Neill’s peers were still undecided about the Northern Irishman’s reign at Sunderland, which has seen him guide his side to 16th in the Premier League and, more impressively still, one win in 17 games.
Nor was he especially enthusiastic to harangue Tony Pulis, Stoke’s bespectacled moral arbiter, for a run which has seen the division’s greatest aesthetes win just one of their last 16. They sit just a place above Sunderland, on goal difference, four points clear of the relegation quagmire only by virtue of the fact that Reading, QPR and Southampton are all really quite bad at football.
Maybe that is because Villas-Boas is at a club where expectations are substantially higher than at either the Stadium of Light or the Britannia. He is also in a job he came to in relatively unusual circumstances, succeeding a manager who had guided Spurs to fourth in the Premier League last season and who still enjoyed the support of a majority of the fans. Fourth wasn’t good enough to save Harry Redknapp; there is no reason fifth should be deemed sufficient for his successor.
But that argument is flawed. Spurs, Sunderland and Stoke all want to achieve to different levels, but the basic aim is the same: to improve. To be better than they were last season, and the season before that. To be going somewhere. That is why Spurs got rid of Redknapp and brought in Villas-Boas. Because they wanted to have a target, a point. Redknapp had failed to make the leap: Spurs were, under the 64-year-old, contenders to qualify for the Champions League, but he seemed unable to turn them into title challengers. And so Daniel Levy, the chairman, decided it was better to twist than to stick.
Both Pulis and O’Neill are failing by the same yardstick, albeit at a reduced level. The former deserves credit for bringing Stoke up, and maintaining them among the elite, but it has been four years now. He would be unique in world football if an achievement from the previous decade bought him unlimited grace.
Stoke are in an intriguing quandary: under Pulis, they are likely to bully and to bulldoze their way to enough points to remain in the top flight in perpetuity. Is that enough? Or should they really be looking to move on to the next level, to become a side capable of flirting with Europe with reasonable frequency? Should Peter Coates not ask Pulis to provide proof he is not simply a good enough manager to keep a team in the Premier League, but of sufficient quality to try and provide a degree of entertainment, too?
The general consensus seems to be no: Stoke should be happy to be where they are, and what they are, forever. Pulis does not have to face a jury. Pulis is not even on trial. As with O’Neill, defeats are not attributed to managerial failings, but to errors from individual players or, if he can get away with it, referees.
Look at Sunderland: O’Neill’s dictum that his side’s problems are related to his creative players being, well, not very creative is swallowed whole. Is it not the manager’s responsibility to craft a side to get the best out of Stephane Sessegnon and Adam Johnson and James McClean? Is it not his job to allow them to flourish?
And yet that question is never asked. O’Neill, like Pulis, has been deemed “a good manager.” He is a known quantity. We know he can do it again, because he has done it before. Villas-Boas has never done it before – whatever happened abroad doesn’t count, because the Premier League is so unique and beautiful and special – and so it is assumed he will never do it.
That is why it feels as though the Portuguese has been damned before he has even started. It is why it feels as though every defeat is treated as a harbinger, as proof, and every victory an exception. It is why pressure falls on his shoulders so easily but barely touches some of his counterparts. It is why O’Neill and Pulis remain feted even as they fail. Because everyone’s roles in the immortal soap opera that is the Premier League are pre-determined. Because the narrative is set, and the facts must not be allowed to get in the way.
Andre Villas-Boas has taken a team to the cusp of the Champions League. Andre Villas-Boas is doing what he should be. But that is not success, because he is Andre Villas-Boas, and Andre Villas-Boas fails.
Tottenham Hotspur 3rd.
So by your logic with over half the season gone we must be in pretty damn good shape.
