| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Roberto_Carlow 
Liam Brady
Joined: 05 Jan 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 1378
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:06pm |
 jamo1 wrote:
I wonder if United didn't get annihilated by Liverpool yesterday in what was/is a very embarrassing result and actually won the game would there be any talk like the last few pages on here about the United owners?
|
The talk about owners on here, as it always is, was started by non united fans. The result yesterday was nothing to do with the owners, no one has said it is.
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
E2016
Liam Brady
Joined: 13 Jan 2016
Location: Cork
Status: Offline
Points: 1731
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:08pm |
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. 
|
|
Borussia
Roy Keane
Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 10676
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:11pm |
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. |
I'll refer you to my opening line "Hard to accurately describe all of it" and will also refer you to the book I reference.
|
|
Het-field
Roy Keane
By Appointment to His Majesty The King
Joined: 08 Mar 2016
Status: Online
Points: 10526
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:13pm |
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Again, what I will say to you is go and read what has been written and documented on this. That book I mentioned is a good place to start. |
I'm happy to read it, but I also read into it, and the machinations are complex enough to believe that commercial realities were the first things that guided the decision. I respect any club that listens to its fans, and credit to Liverpool for doing so from the point of view of ticket prices etc. That is also laudable. But I just dont buy the idea that commercial realities and reasonings were not almost entirely responsible for the takeover at Liverpool, especially given the fire consequences predicted. |
Let me know if you still feel the same after reading it. |
Sure. But I've taken a lot from public sources here, and it will be difficult for me to change my mind. Especially, given legal actions taken afterwards, Gillett and Hicks weren't going to go quietly, based on their valuation of the club, no matter how the fans felt about them.
|
|
E2016
Liam Brady
Joined: 13 Jan 2016
Location: Cork
Status: Offline
Points: 1731
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:14pm |
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. |
I'll refer you to my opening line "Hard to accurately describe all of it" and will also refer you to the book I reference. |
What I can be sure of is that Liverpool never got a game cancelled by protesting.
So you acting like Liverpool are the experts at removing difficult owners when the situations are so totally different, and when United have provably gone above and beyond the efforts that Liverpool did - its condescending horsesh*t.
|
|
Borussia
Roy Keane
Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 10676
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:24pm |
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. |
I'll refer you to my opening line "Hard to accurately describe all of it" and will also refer you to the book I reference. |
What I can be sure of is that Liverpool never got a game cancelled by protesting.
So you acting like Liverpool are the experts at removing difficult owners when the situations are so totally different, and when United have provably gone above and beyond the efforts that Liverpool did - its condescending horsesh*t. |
Sorry, what? I've said absolutely nothing of the sort. Go back and read my posts. Somebody commented that fan protests, outside of the super league, have achieved nothing - I challenged that and mentioned specifically I was going to reference Liverpool because, being a fan, I've more knowledge on that. I'm making a general non club specific point - Apologies if that doesn't fit in with the tribalism you are looking for.
|
|
E2016
Liam Brady
Joined: 13 Jan 2016
Location: Cork
Status: Offline
Points: 1731
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:36pm |
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. |
I'll refer you to my opening line "Hard to accurately describe all of it" and will also refer you to the book I reference. |
What I can be sure of is that Liverpool never got a game cancelled by protesting.
So you acting like Liverpool are the experts at removing difficult owners when the situations are so totally different, and when United have provably gone above and beyond the efforts that Liverpool did - its condescending horsesh*t. |
Sorry, what? I've said absolutely nothing of the sort. Go back and read my posts. Somebody commented that fan protests, outside of the super league, have achieved nothing - I challenged that and mentioned specifically I was going to reference Liverpool because, being a fan, I've more knowledge on that. I'm making a general non club specific point - Apologies if that doesn't fit in with the tribalism you are looking for. |
No, somebody commented that utimately it is factors beyond the protests which lead to these decisions being made.
You challenged that and pointed out stuff like Liverpool fans sending a few emails like true inspirational heroes, and the seemingly gigantic effect that had on Hicks and Gillette. I'm sure they were completely bamboozled by it all.
Previously in the thread, you seemed oblivious to the extent that United fans have protested. Which is provably more than anything Liverpool fans ever did, thereby reinforcing the idea that protesting is not the silver bullet you claim it is.
I'm sure Liverpool fans love giving themselves high fives and like to delude themselves into thinking that they got rid of Hicks and Gilette, and therefore now are the experts on removing owners. The reality is that none of these owners give a toss about the protests or the fans, every fan is replaceable and very little that the fans do matter to the decisions these people make.
|
|
Borussia
Roy Keane
Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 10676
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:38pm |
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. |
I'll refer you to my opening line "Hard to accurately describe all of it" and will also refer you to the book I reference. |
What I can be sure of is that Liverpool never got a game cancelled by protesting.
So you acting like Liverpool are the experts at removing difficult owners when the situations are so totally different, and when United have provably gone above and beyond the efforts that Liverpool did - its condescending horsesh*t. |
Sorry, what? I've said absolutely nothing of the sort. Go back and read my posts. Somebody commented that fan protests, outside of the super league, have achieved nothing - I challenged that and mentioned specifically I was going to reference Liverpool because, being a fan, I've more knowledge on that. I'm making a general non club specific point - Apologies if that doesn't fit in with the tribalism you are looking for. |
No, somebody commented that utimately it is factors beyond the protests which lead to these decisions being made.
You challenged that and pointed out stuff like Liverpool fans sending a few emails like true inspirational heroes, and the seemingly gigantic effect that had on Hicks and Gillette. I'm sure they were completely bamboozled by it all.
Previously in the thread, you seemed oblivious to the extent that United fans have protested. Which is provably more than anything Liverpool fans ever did, thereby reinforcing the idea that protesting is not the silver bullet you claim it is.
I'm sure Liverpool fans love giving themselves high fives and like to delude themselves into thinking that they got rid of Hicks and Gilette, and therefore now are the experts on removing owners. The reality is that none of these owners give a toss about the protests or the fans, every fan is replaceable and very little that the fans do matter to the decisions these people make. |
Ha ha ha - You are just making sh*t up now and seem incapable of having a discussion here without trying to score some of points over a perceived enemy or something. I'm on the side of any fans who are protesting against unfit owners - Owners should be custodians, clubs should be community assets -but you crack on with your point scoring.
Edited by Borussia - 06 Mar 2023 at 3:40pm
|
|
Ibaraki
500 Club la la la
Joined: 19 Jun 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 570
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:45pm |
I'm sure the RBS have some sort of email filters ffs
|
|
BrendanD88
Jack Charlton
99% of my posts are emojis
Joined: 29 Mar 2013
Location: Co Down
Status: Offline
Points: 9981
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:45pm |
jamo1 wrote:
I wonder if United didn't get annihilated by Liverpool yesterday in what was/is a very embarrassing result and actually won the game would there be any talk like the last few pages on here about the United owners?
|
The talk is coming from non United supporters on here.
|
|
BrendanD88
Jack Charlton
99% of my posts are emojis
Joined: 29 Mar 2013
Location: Co Down
Status: Offline
Points: 9981
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:48pm |
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Territorial wrote:
And the whole of the MU support can protest all they like, but it won't make a damned bit of difference to what the Glazers do - the money will decide.
|
Agreed. When you look at many takeovers (and that includes Liverpool's), the commercial reasonings behind them will trump any fan protest, as the reasoning for the transition. |
I don't subscribe to this - It works in theory but if, for example, the Qatari lad turns out to be the person willing to pay the most and United fans, en masse, where to turn up on matchday and protest against him (which I don't think would happen) then I dare say he might have second thoughts. |
United fans have been singing about literally murdering Joel Glazer and previously his dad, by cutting him up, for a very, very long time now. No second thoughts up until recently they saw how much Chelsea went for. |
If songs was the extent of it then I don't blame them for taking no notice - Proper protest is what I was referring to. |
United fans got a game called off thanks to their protests, maybe they should send a few strongly worded emails like the Liverpool fans.
|
|
E2016
Liam Brady
Joined: 13 Jan 2016
Location: Cork
Status: Offline
Points: 1731
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:48pm |
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
E2016 wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
Het-field wrote:
Borussia wrote:
I can think of 4 or 5 instances at Liverpool alone - I only mention Liverpool as I can talk of those but bound to be more. |
Apart from the ESL, what else for Liverpool? |
- The previous owners - The ticket price increase walk out - The furlough of staff - The attempt to try and trademark "Liverpool" |
Like any takeover the previous owners were ultimately led by commercial realities as opposed to fan dissatisfaction/protest. I'd also argue (even with the apology) the furloughing reversal was a massive PR faux-pas, and the negative media coverage led the decision.
Agree on the ticket price reversal though. |
This isn't actually true - Hard to accurately describe all of if but, for example, Liverpool fans in NY spotted Hicks and Gillett heading for a meeting with a financial institution in order to try and refinance their debt. Within hours the financial institution was bombarded with emails etc saying it would be a bad idea to do this. I think it was RBS ultimately who pulled the plug on Hicks and Gillett (Might have the wrong financial institution). The reason this was done was that thousands of people contacted RBS and told them they'd take their business elsewhere if they continued to prop them up. The book "An Epic Swindle" by Brian Reade gives a very good and detailed account of all that happened to get Hicks and Gillett out.
And it's fair to point out that this isn't a direct comparison to the United situation as the Glazers aren't i the same financial situation was Hicks and Gillett were. |
A few emails. Heroic stuff. |
I'll refer you to my opening line "Hard to accurately describe all of it" and will also refer you to the book I reference. |
What I can be sure of is that Liverpool never got a game cancelled by protesting.
So you acting like Liverpool are the experts at removing difficult owners when the situations are so totally different, and when United have provably gone above and beyond the efforts that Liverpool did - its condescending horsesh*t. |
Sorry, what? I've said absolutely nothing of the sort. Go back and read my posts. Somebody commented that fan protests, outside of the super league, have achieved nothing - I challenged that and mentioned specifically I was going to reference Liverpool because, being a fan, I've more knowledge on that. I'm making a general non club specific point - Apologies if that doesn't fit in with the tribalism you are looking for. |
No, somebody commented that utimately it is factors beyond the protests which lead to these decisions being made.
You challenged that and pointed out stuff like Liverpool fans sending a few emails like true inspirational heroes, and the seemingly gigantic effect that had on Hicks and Gillette. I'm sure they were completely bamboozled by it all.
Previously in the thread, you seemed oblivious to the extent that United fans have protested. Which is provably more than anything Liverpool fans ever did, thereby reinforcing the idea that protesting is not the silver bullet you claim it is.
I'm sure Liverpool fans love giving themselves high fives and like to delude themselves into thinking that they got rid of Hicks and Gilette, and therefore now are the experts on removing owners. The reality is that none of these owners give a toss about the protests or the fans, every fan is replaceable and very little that the fans do matter to the decisions these people make. |
Ha ha ha - You are just making sh*t up now and seem incapable of having a discussion here without trying to score some of points over a perceived enemy or something. I'm on the side of any fans who are protesting against unfit owners - Owners should be custodians, clubs should be community assets -but you crack on with your point scoring.
|
It's literally in the quoted thread.
The poster said that it was commercial realities that led the takeover as they do all takeovers. You said no no, Liverpool fans sent emails to financial institutions and told RBS that they would leave if they 'propped them up'. So Hicks and Gilette sold. You said it's all in a book, which simply has to be read, presumably so one can understand just how amazing the Liverpool fans were at removing poisonous owners.
Elsewhere in here, you've shown obliviousness to the extent of united fans protests, and acted like everything United fans have done is completely uncoordinated - intimating that if they had just been more coordinated like Liverpool fans were then the Glazers would be gone. Yeah, if only the United fans had sent more emails.
Acting like that email or RBS nonsense had any real impact on anything is just deluded self congratulatory rubbish. Give me a bloody break.
|
|
Borussia
Roy Keane
Joined: 14 Oct 2010
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 10676
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:48pm |
Ibaraki wrote:
I'm sure the RBS have some sort of email filters ffs |
Obviously didn't back in the day given they confirmed that correspondence had been received.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/mar/12/liverpool-royal-bank-of-scotland
|
|
Roberto_Carlow
Liam Brady
Joined: 05 Jan 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 1378
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 3:53pm |
|
I sent an angry email to kellogs when they got rid of Start. They didn't reinstate the product and sent me a £1 Kellogs voucher instead. I'm still undecided if I won or not.
|
|
counterlock
Davey Langan
Joined: 07 Feb 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 899
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 4:43pm |
Borussia wrote:
Ibaraki wrote:
I'm sure the RBS have some sort of email filters ffs |
Obviously didn't back in the day given they confirmed that correspondence had been received.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2010/mar/12/liverpool-royal-bank-of-scotland
|
It had nothing to do with the fact that Hicks had defaulted on a similar loan in the states and the only reason they were able to refinance a year earlier is because Gillet sold his NHL team |
|
Max Power
Jack Charlton
A.K.A. Mod Powers
Joined: 15 Sep 2008
Location: Poznan/Gdansk
Status: Offline
Points: 9967
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 06 Mar 2023 at 11:38pm |
Roberto_Carlow wrote:
I sent an angry email to kellogs when they got rid of Start. They didn't reinstate the product and sent me a £1 Kellogs voucher instead. I'm still undecided if I won or not. |
I’ve just read back the last 3 pages on this thread and this post is exactly how I’d sum up what I just read, well done sir
|
|
Co-Founder of The Paul McShane Fan Club, Portmarnock Branch
|
|
BigStrongMan
Robbie Keane
Just Modding Like
Joined: 22 May 2009
Location: Ireland
Status: Online
Points: 107623
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: 07 Mar 2023 at 9:55am |
ShamtheRam wrote:
Borussia wrote:
ShamtheRam wrote:
SeaSharp wrote:
Norwich scarf sales through the roof tonight |
This lazy crap.
United fans spent most of the first half singing about the Glazers and protest prior to EVERY home game but don't let that get in the way of repetitive unfunny joke. |
Was I at a different game yesterday??? |
I don't know. Give us some clues and we can all try work it out together. |
Did we ever get to the bottom of this equation?
|
|
PM me for all forum moderation queries.
|
|
Cabra Hoop
Roy Keane
Joined: 06 Feb 2012
Location: Royal County
Status: Offline
Points: 10819
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 09 Mar 2023 at 8:46pm |
|
Just switched on the Betis-Utd game to see Joaquin taking a free for the visitors.Couldnt possibly be could it, but yeh still going strong at the ripe old age of 41.Bravo Senor.
|
|
" BFC always gives me a laugh........ "
|
|
Tweet
