Clipboard in charge. Lol On 13/02/2012, at 7:02 PM, "Jeremy Tonks" <to...@hotkey.net.au> wrote:
> Another sad watershed in my long Wolves hair shirt experience. I watched this > morning (and genuinely wished I hadn’t). It is the first time I have EVER > watched Wolves and wished I hadn’t. > > Frankly it was embarrassing. Hennessy was the stand out (and he had one > clanger). Johnston hopefully got an assist for one goal (he’s in my fantasy > team L). What is MM trying to do to Fletcher and Miljas? > > Nothing worked and we were woeful in the first half. Abysmal in the first > half. I hate to say it but we were actually better in the second and got > absolutely flogged. > > > > There is no midfield and our defense is pathetic. I don’t care if we had > Tevez and Ronaldo up front – they’d catch cold. > > > > I’m not for changing managers – but I soon will be L > > > > Matthew Leese makes very good sense in his lengthy email. > > > > > > From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf > Of Steven Millward > Sent: Monday, 13 February 2012 6:51 PM > To: nswolves@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Wolves v Baggies [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > > > I like watching the games on fast forward. I really don't know how anyone > can say we lack pace. > > I don't think the 'hair shirt' of watching the games in the middle of the > night has anything to do with it. > > Imagine fighting amongst yourselves at a football game. Embarassing isn't > it? I can't get worked up about it anymore. I know that Mick and Morgan > said that we would progress but we only bought Johnson so it was unrealistic > to think we'd improve much. > > > > On 13 February 2012 15:08, Marcus Chantry <chant...@iinet.net.au> wrote: > > I suppose that's quite easy to say when you don't bother staying up to watch > the games live. Watching the highlights or in 'fast forward' means you don't > suffer the same pain or get a full appreciation of our ineptitude. There were > many thousands of fans in the ground yesterday who felt the same level of > dissatisfaction, to the extent that many were fighting amongst themselves. > > > > After scraping through last season Mick and Morgan promised that there would > be no repeat of the great escape and that we would make progress this season. > They have clearly failed to deliver on that promise of progress so people > should be entitled to criticize. > > > > However, at the end of the day if we finish in 17th position, in line with > our wage bill, then we will have had a small victory in survival, even if > progress clearly hasn't been delivered on the pitch. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On 13/02/2012, at 1:59 PM, Steven Millward <millward....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear oh dear, it's a good job this generation wasn't being relied upon during > the war. We'd have surrendered as soon as Poland was invaded. We thrashed > them in the same fixture last year and they thrashed us this year. So what? > > > > It seems no one has any stomach for being perpetually at the bottom of the > Premier league or losing to local rivals. You all might as well go and > support one of the teams at the top of the division. Or perhaps the Harlem > Globe Trotters. They're having a great run at the moment > > > > > > > > > On 13 February 2012 08:10, Parkes Jim - Sydney-MHA <jpar...@munichre.com> > wrote: > > I am now fully committed to the cause of getting Mick out now. > > Really don’t give a sh*t who replaces him: couldn’t be any worse. > > Think of those poor sods back home who work with WBA fans. > > > > > > > > From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf > Of Morris, Lee SGT > Sent: Monday, 13 February 2012 8:03 AM > To: nswolves@googlegroups.com > Subject: RE: [NSWolves] Wolves v Baggies [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > > > UNCLASSIFIED > > A bit late. > > > > Funny thing is, QPR would have done the same to us with 11 men > > > > IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Department of Defence and > is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914. If you > have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender > and delete the email. > > From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf > Of Marcus Chantry > Sent: Monday, 13 February 2012 01:34 > To: nswolves@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Wolves v Baggies > > apparently it's kicking off outside the Steve Bull stand. some sort of > protest demanding Mick's head. > > > > On 13/02/2012, at 2:25 AM, Marcus Chantry wrote: > > > > I wish we could see Mick's post match interview. > > > > On 13/02/2012, at 2:22 AM, Jeremy Tonks wrote: > > > > Should have been 6 > > From: nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] On Behalf > Of Marcus Chantry > Sent: Monday, 13 February 2012 2:16 AM > To: nswolves@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Wolves v Baggies > > sorry, 5 at home. > > On 13/02/2012, at 2:13 AM, Marcus Chantry wrote: > > > > > so will Mick say that we played well and were unlucky to concede 4 at home? > > On 13/02/2012, at 1:15 AM, Paul Taylor wrote: > > > > > Anyone watching this tripe at the moment? No linkage at all from defence to > midfield, then a hoof up. Being shown up badly. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > > > > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > > > CAUTION: This message is intended only for the named addressee. It is > confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, any disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited and may be > unlawful. By opening any attachment, you agree that the Munich Re Group will > not be liable for any loss resulting from viruses or other defects. Any views > in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender > expressly and with authority states them to be the views of the Munich Re > Group. The Munich Re Group will not be liable for any action taken, or > omitted to be taken, in reliance upon the contents of this message. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out. -- Boo! Thick Mick Out.
