|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 14, 2009 22:42:17 GMT
Scroll down to the bottom, which is an approrpriate location for it to be.... Pete to QPR Report: " I will also seek advice on you keep transfering my responses onto your site, without a link and you simply copy and pasting my reply..."Posted on Pete's WATBR Blog - I bring it to you unedited (Now waiting for Pete's response to my posted comment to this blog post.) Pete's Blog - Questions That I Missed Been accused of not answering these Q&A on another board, must have missed them, but here goes. Won't satisfy the people that asked them but, here are my answers. i'm sure I answered them but here goes. 1. Why did you not demand this of the board before? I have at every opportunity 2. If you are true to what you're now saying why blame Sousa for us not making the playoffs? he tried to invent a style of football that never existed or was not suitable for the championship 3. Who do you think is to blame for not getting strikers in? The board, not enough money to get top strikers, but SOusa did have Blackstock and Helgusson and tinkerd too much 4. Who do you think is really to blame for us not making the playoffs? Without doubt Paulo Sousa 5. If we don't get 2 quality strikers in and we are only mid table after 20 games will you be campaigning for the replacement of the new manager? Not, if he sticks by his prinicapals and plays the same team 6. Considering you say "If you want to go up within the 4 year plan. Spend big on two quality strikers and don't try and get up us on the cheap. It won't work as proved this season" Why would you not start a campaign against the board on this matter, instead of a campaign against Sousa? Sousa lost it in my view, by getting us only 4 points out of 27, at a time when were within touching distance. he did not know his best 11 7. Do you think if Sousa was given 2 quality strikers he could have got us to the playoffs? He would have continued to play 1 or tinker 8. Do you think your comment now contradicts what you have been saying the past couple of months? Absolutely not, this squad is good enough for play off spot, an extra two strikers should get us into the top 2 www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=177
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on Apr 15, 2009 7:40:20 GMT
Posted on Pete's WATBR Blog - I bring it to you unedited (Now waiting for Pete's response to my posted comment to this blog post.) Pete's Blog - Questions That I Missed Been accused of not answering these Q&A on another board, must have missed them, but here goes. Won't satisfy the people that asked them but, here are my answers. i'm sure I answered them but here goes. 1. Why did you not demand this of the board before? I have at every opportunity 2. If you are true to what you're now saying why blame Sousa for us not making the playoffs? he tried to invent a style of football that never existed or was not suitable for the championship 3. Who do you think is to blame for not getting strikers in? The board, not enough money to get top strikers, but SOusa did have Blackstock and Helgusson and tinkerd too much 4. Who do you think is really to blame for us not making the playoffs? Without doubt Paulo Sousa 5. If we don't get 2 quality strikers in and we are only mid table after 20 games will you be campaigning for the replacement of the new manager? Not, if he sticks by his prinicapals and plays the same team 6. Considering you say "If you want to go up within the 4 year plan. Spend big on two quality strikers and don't try and get up us on the cheap. It won't work as proved this season" Why would you not start a campaign against the board on this matter, instead of a campaign against Sousa? Sousa lost it in my view, by getting us only 4 points out of 27, at a time when were within touching distance. he did not know his best 11 7. Do you think if Sousa was given 2 quality strikers he could have got us to the playoffs? He would have continued to play 1 or tinker 8. Do you think your comment now contradicts what you have been saying the past couple of months? Absolutely not, this squad is good enough for play off spot, an extra two strikers should get us into the top 2 www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=177You know with 30 minutes effort I could find a QBP post that, contradicts everyone of those. He builds his arguments on sand because he uses the expedient over principle, he denigrates by applying a moral standard to Sousa that he has never applied to others. By the way Pete this is the team Ainsworth started against Burnley: Cerny, Delaney, Leigertwood, Routledge, Vine, Gorkss, Ramage, Connolly, Di Carmine, Ephraim, Taarabt and this the team that started against Wednesday: Cerny, Stewart, Mahon, Routledge, Gorkss, Ramage, Connolly, Cook, López, Helguson, Taarabt. That's three changes and shifting Connolly from CB to LB was that tinkering or inspired judgement. Sousa started his first 8 games with two strikers so I think clearly preferred it initially. Now answer the Portuguese Leftback question ?
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 7:50:42 GMT
See my league table/stats post. We haven't been a top six team for almost the entire season. What other manager is judged so quickly - especially when he's not given the "tools" that he requests. Definitely a very "flexible" approach to debate/discussing! And even on the latest Blackstock statement on the Nott F. www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8025&page=2(Of course before QPR posted a statement from the Agent, Pete did too which Pete interpreted (all facts to the contrary based just on this reported interview) that the Agent had told Pete "Sousa knew)
|
|
|
Post by superckat on Apr 15, 2009 10:57:53 GMT
Eusebio. Once again I totally agree with you. To be fair to Pete he did answer the questions. I never realised when I asked them it would have been picked up by anyone outside of WATRB. I didn't agree with his response. But this is where I started getting bored with the whole thing because I could have spent all day picking holes in his arguments. At times it is just too easy. Here is another example why it's just too easy. Without even trying please see below:
On Reports blog Question 5 and his answer.
5. If we don't get 2 quality strikers in and we are only mid table after 20 games will you be campaigning for the replacement of the new manager? Not, if he sticks by his prinicapals and plays the same team
His original answer to my question 5
5. If we don't get 2 quality strikers in and we are only mid table after 20 games will you be campaigning for the replacement of the new manager? After 25 games I will, for me its not about managers, its about the club gloing up
180 degrees turn I wonder which one of these is his opinion?
|
|
|
Post by moriarty on Apr 15, 2009 11:06:16 GMT
"After 25 games I will, for me its not about managers, its about the club gloing up"
It's a good job Manchester United didn't have that attitude when they appointed Sir Alex..........
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 11:07:48 GMT
Or QPR when they appointed Stock, Jago, Venables, etc!
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 12:26:39 GMT
I'm not sure the point of Pete having his own WATRB blog with comments section (in which I below) below, if he's not going to respond to comments on his own blog! On the other hand, he's been busy preparing, so maybe it will be coming! QPR REPORT's Response to WATRB's Pete's Blog postTry: Questions that you haven't answered As I said: No one deserves to be threatened or abused. But you're too glib in your post and ignore some of the central questions that need to be answered. The only reason for not answering them would be that you have done something that you shouldnt have. Pete: You (and Scott) finally responded and said the club contacted you about the post. That raises other interesting questions - including the process by which the club got in touch with the original poster. And what role WATRB played re that. The central one which I have asked and which have others have asked - but which you have consistently refused to respond to: What is the source/and under what circumstances were you provided the information ? When THE post was made re Sousa's desire for a Portugese defender, WHY did you respond (with that internal information - "[T]he Portugal defender was wanted for £300,000 for which Sousa would have got a cut." This is the central question, that many, many people have asked - and will continue to ask. So how suddenly did you come into this information? What was the process: Did you contact the club and tell them about that there was this poster saying what Sousa ostensibly said: And you needed some facts to refute the claims? Or to put Sousa in a bad light? If not: What exactly was this process? And when are you going to respond to the real issues instead of creating straw arguments to respond to and adopting the martyr complex? If Managers are going to be ousted for revealing confidential information...Should other club officials be treated any differently? www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=177#comments
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 12:42:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Apr 15, 2009 13:23:23 GMT
And when are you going to respond to the real issues instead of creating straw arguments to respond to and adopting the martyr complex? Absolutely spot on.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 14:06:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 14:51:16 GMT
And Scott's Response to my blog post Mike, give up. Honestly, and I'm your biggest backer, it's getting a tad tiresome. Understand the situation with regards to legal action. You wont get any outcome till that has an outcome. And that may take months and months www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=181And I responded (not a quote) - All Pete had to do was say, he couldn't comment regarding his comment on the Portugese players and otehr matters, due to legal constraints.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Apr 15, 2009 15:33:46 GMT
And Scott's Response to my blog post Mike, give up. Honestly, and I'm your biggest backer, it's getting a tad tiresome. Understand the situation with regards to legal action. You wont get any outcome till that has an outcome. And that may take months and months www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=181And I responded (not a quote) - All Pete had to do was say, he couldn't comment regarding his comment on the Portugese players and otehr matters, due to legal constraints. Daft response, what legal action and agianst whom? Nothing is subjudacy as there is n action in place. Good grief.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 15:38:26 GMT
Well I guess the implication is that there is some sort of legal...and could involve Pete. Of course it would have been more tolerable if there had been just some semblance of humility, regret, explantion for why not in a position to respond or just a simple not able to talk about the whole the matter. . Rather than the opposite. And selective talking about that matter. And then throwing up a "can't/wont talk any further about it).
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Apr 15, 2009 15:43:59 GMT
If there is any action it's civil so no subjudacy. If there is.
He doesn't like your questions, he can't answer them so he's hiding from them.
Situation normal.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 15:45:22 GMT
[It's clearly infectuous: " I will also seek advice on you keep transfering my responses onto your site, without a link and you simply copy and pasting my reply." PETE's RESPONSE TO ME Don't know how many times, you've asked the same question. I had two different lawyers ring me last week. I cannot make any comments for legal reasons on pre-Sousa in regards to any "sensitive information" that was posted or not posted on this site. At no time did I ring them You fall into the same category of the formal poster who believes he was helping the previous manager. You are not. This will definitely be my last post on your blog to this site regarding this issue. I will also seek advice on you keep transfering my responses onto your site, without a link and you simply copy and pasting my reply.www.wearetherangersboys.com/forum/blog.php?b=181#comments
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Apr 15, 2009 15:55:47 GMT
From reading his posts it looks like the drummer boy has lost the plot. I think he needs to seek help not advice.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 16:01:20 GMT
Have to say, no joking, that I'm pretty offended by that comment
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Apr 15, 2009 16:13:12 GMT
Don't be offended.
A misunderstanding of what constitutes the law is evident.
Among other things as zed points out.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 15, 2009 16:22:26 GMT
See the other thread as Pete explodes!
|
|
bigade
Gerry Francis
Posts: 93
|
Post by bigade on Apr 15, 2009 17:08:34 GMT
personally i have no problem with copy and pasting without links,its all too official for me .why cant we all share information without the one-upmanship of ooohhhh it was on my site first,who cares.
|
|
|
Post by moriarty on Apr 15, 2009 17:54:33 GMT
personally i have no problem with copy and pasting without links,its all too official for me .why cant we all share information without the one-upmanship of ooohhhh it was on my site first,who cares. It seems to me that all that has to done is name clients of Base Soccer, and you will indeed be the first.
|
|
bigade
Gerry Francis
Posts: 93
|
Post by bigade on Apr 15, 2009 17:56:57 GMT
true ;D
|
|
Sabas
Dave Sexton
Posts: 2,349
|
Post by Sabas on Apr 16, 2009 6:36:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by weavie on Apr 16, 2009 8:25:53 GMT
well my own thoughts on the issue is that pete is not politically motivated he wears his heart on his sleeve he is the king of spontanouity he may well contradict himself because hes not a deep meaning full type of guy hes a kind man who would give away his last penny i would like qpr to bring him into there directorship perhaps doing ali russells job i would be sad if pete wsas subjested to a violent attack from a fan because fundimentally he was right about the football being dire i watched that watford home game mike and i can tell you in fifty years it was the worst experience ive had it was worse than the vauxhall game ......along with the 1985 milk cup final it was terrible THESE MESSAGE BOARDS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE A PLEASURE THING SO LETS ...ENJOY.......mike say after me one hundred times I LOVE Q BLOCK PETE
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Apr 16, 2009 8:37:38 GMT
The chap on the left couldn't possibly be QBP singing the praises of Sousa, shirley? No, don't think so sabas.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 16, 2009 8:39:04 GMT
Weavie: "From my cold death teeth" And I'm not completely certain that I agree fully with your assessment! So I'm looking to you, to take a stand and say: Yes. Mike and Pete have differences. But enough, Pete, enough.
|
|
Sabas
Dave Sexton
Posts: 2,349
|
Post by Sabas on Apr 16, 2009 11:11:30 GMT
Weavie, nice to meet you... I'm fresh here, but it looks like the claim about "Portuguese defender" was a bit political. Or just plain reckless.
And the video... it is silly, isn't it? Nothing more.
Oh, and that you-haven't-been-to-a-match-in-years-yank thing is way off.
|
|
bigade
Gerry Francis
Posts: 93
|
Post by bigade on Apr 16, 2009 16:16:26 GMT
he is the king of spontanouity ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Apr 16, 2009 16:51:49 GMT
The five stages of accepting this new messageboard: 1) Denial: 2) Anger 3) Bargaining 4) Depression 5) Acceptance
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Apr 16, 2009 17:11:25 GMT
GPete coated off LFW and all it's members saying we were all a bunch of sycophants, oh the irony, and then sure enough up he pops like something that won't flush properly.
Personally I'd prefer it if he stayed on the Island.
|
|