Summer business [POLL]

[Happyhammer93]

I voted for "could be better, could be worse."

Was pleased to see the spine of our team stay. But would have prefered a more experinced buy at the top level than Diamanti - who does look like a very good dead ball specialist - but only has a good record in a second divison.

[Trap1]

Trap
How many people post in that thread? You and Ashbanki have 1000 posts between in that thread alone.

I don't recall seeing many threads at all about it on In the brown stuff. How many people geuinely post in that for sale thread?

I'm not sure how many people have posted in the thread although I'm sure you will give me the statistical breakdown.

I give you the names of three biggest West Ham fan sites and you give me ITBS (no disrespect to the folks there).

Maybe we should have a second poll with the question...

'Are you concerned about who owns West Ham'?

I'd start a thread but my poll request one was hijacked by people.

[Horace]

Maybe we should have a second poll with the question...

'Are you concerned about who owns West Ham'?

Ooh, a poll with a loaded question... I wonder if it might just provide some ammunition for your futile campaign?

[mickfbrown]

Ooh, a poll with a loaded question... I wonder if it might just provide some ammunition for your futile campaign?

Don't diss "operation ice crush", phase 1 was to remove BG and he has managed that !

[Chuck D]

West Ham are never going to be good enough for you Chuck are they, really, taking it all into consideration and everything ?

Why would a statement of unquestionable fact lead you to that conclusion?

[Chuck D]

What difference does it make what teams they represent? Is Ilunga any worse for being Congolese? Would you prefer Bentley to Behrami? After all, England are better than Switzerland.

George Weah was the best player in the world for a while, and played for Liberia!!

Interesting post Bob, and certainly Weah was a good player.

Are you comparing Behrami and Ilunga to him?

If we had the whole Maltese squad on our books, we'd be full of internationals. We'd also get relegated from League 2. Which is why Carnage's original comment about us being "full of internationals" means nothing.

You could pick up the next best twenty brazillians outside their national squad, and they'd be better than the best twenty San Marino players. So international players means nothing.

And I think that in our current position, a winger who scores, and creates goals might be a better option than a versatile player who runs round breaking up attacks.

[carnage]

Chick

It's not "meaningless". We sold, according to you, our best player in January, and he was
Welsh, and they are a poor side, for sure.

[Chuck D]

Chick

It's not "meaningless". We sold, according to you, our best player in January, and he was
Welsh, and they are a poor side, for sure.

How do those two correlate?

Wales have had Ryan Giggs, one of the best players in world football (over the last 15 years) playing for them.

They've also have Lewin Nyatanga. One would (still) walk into our team, the other no one would be bothered about.

In the 80's they had Neville Southall, one of the best keepers in the world, playing with the likes of Jeremy Charles. One I would have been delighted to sign, the other was ****.

Which is why just being an international for a lesser nation means nothing. Being a good international is entirely different, for sure.

[saludo de carlitos]

Going by this poll it seems most people are content with our business.

[Chuck D]

Going by this poll it seems most people are content with our business.

And more people are disappointed than are pleased?

And twelve times more people think it was a farce than are delighted?

[bubbles1966]

Going by this poll it seems most people are content with our business.

:shock:

If you keep hold of just one player that you rate its always possible that things could be worse - option 3.

Option 3 is very possibly an inferior outcome to option 4 :lol:

[westlondonhammer]

:shock:

If you keep hold of just one player that you rate its always possible that things could be worse - option 3.

Option 3 is very possibly an inferior outcome to option 4 :lol:

No need to look shocked, SDC is correct

Option 3 is the midpoint... its represents anyone content, ok, not overly pleased and not overly displeased... anyone with a negative perception would have voted option 4 or 5. If you ask UtJ how the poll was designed than I am sure that he will explain to you that that was how it was meant and I am sure 95% of people participating in the poll would have answered it based on that reading of the scales

So with 61% either content or happy SDC is correct in his reading of the poll

[bristolhammerfc]

Would you be ok with paying every week to be "contented". Surely most people pay to be "happy".

Imagine going to the Cinema and being asked on your way out. If you answered "yeah it could have been worse", would you honestly tell me that would enthuse you to go and watch a film by the same director again?

The point is why should our transfer dealings just leave people "not bothered". Twenty five thousand people have paid good money to be more than just contented.

[beckton]

No need to look shocked, SDC is correct

No he isn't, you just happen to agree with his opinion and his interpretation on the voting.

Could be worse, could be better is a sign of resignation more than contentment.

My interpretation is those happy or content with our tranfer dealings should have voted in the reasonably pleased or delighted section.

If people have voted in that section as sign of their contentment we may have a hanging chads situation where some people may have miscast their votes!


In the name of fairness and democracy I demand a recount! :lol:

[davids cross]

I'm pretty unhappy with the result myself.

The percentages only add up to 98% when everybody knows a good KUMB poll adds up to 99%....... :lol:

[dapablo]

Would you be ok with paying every week to be "contented". Surely most people pay to be "happy".

Imagine going to the Cinema and being asked on your way out. If you answered "yeah it could have been worse", would you honestly tell me that would enthuse you to go and watch a film by the same director again?

The point is why should our transfer dealings just leave people "not bothered". Twenty five thousand people have paid good money to be more than just contented.

Exactly the point.

The answer go and support someone else's film, easy.

[Trap1]

Exactly the point.

The answer go and support someone else's film, easy.

Why should he or anyone else?

[derek zoolander]

I voted for could have been better could have been worse.

Because that pretty much exactly sums up our summer transfer dealings.

[joyful]

[quote]Twenty five thousand people have paid good money to be more than just contented.[/quote]

Actually, last time I noticed, football was a game with a winner or a loser or sometimes neither.

That means some weeks I hope to be happy, some weeks I expect to be miserable and some weeks I expect to think "what if".

If you want to be happy all (or even most) of the time, you would buy a season ticket at somewhere other than west ham.

[dapablo]

Why should he or anyone else?

As I'm sure you may of heard elsewhere upon other matters, it's all about choice, if you think you've made a poor one then sort it out stop complaining to everyone else what a fool you've been. It really only takes a little bit of sense to realise that better players play for the better teams if that is what you crave then go and watch them, whats so difficult, it is far easier in anybodys stretch of the imagination to go somewhere else rather than turn West Ham into top team.

The club I support ain't good enough, oh we are sorry.