Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:11 am  

G1 wrote:

I don't recall that happening at all.

I was always aware of the nature of the Harris "deal".

You confusing me with someone else?

Rubbish that. You were giving me it big style at the time that there was no agreement in place. Hence why I reminded you of it when it was revealed in the court case. It was from that time where you started your little crush on me. You were not alone, I will give you that, that were a few posters chipping in who no longer post on here.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:17 am  

ThePrinter wrote:

Yeah but he's doubling up as a chauffeur remember.

I wonder if Westerman suffers a broken leg or serious knee injury, could we get Clark on loan for a few months until Westerman is able to drive again?

I can recommend Steve Renouf's wife as an excellent cleaner.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:19 am  

Superted wrote:

Plenty by all accounts.... Enough space to sign a 'marquee' player but not use the official marquee slot...

Just seems odd that we would have so much available at this point.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:41 am  

Rumours are what make the board interesting - there are very few on here who post maliciously.

RL is a very small community and rumours will always be an important part of promoting interest in the sport.

Leeds are a very inclusive club and that is part of its charm - the fact club officials are prepared to be reasonably open is to applauded and they should not be castigated for this approach.

The club want to sell season tickets and the club want to be seen to doing all it can to improve the product on offer - talking to customers about the vision for the future is all part of that.

There are things I would like the management to do differently but on the whole no fan could complain about the effort and effectiveness of GH and his team.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:47 am  

Gotcha wrote:

Rubbish that. You were giving me it big style at the time that there was no agreement in place. Hence why I reminded you of it when it was revealed in the court case. It was from that time where you started your little crush on me. You were not alone, I will give you that, that were a few posters chipping in who no longer post on here.

You're just continuing to make stuff up.

None of that happened.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:48 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Rumours are what make the board interesting - there are very few on here who post maliciously.

RL is a very small community and rumours will always be an important part of promoting interest in the sport.

Leeds are a very inclusive club and that is part of its charm - the fact club officials are prepared to be reasonably open is to applauded and they should not be castigated for this approach.

The club want to sell season tickets and the club want to be seen to doing all it can to improve the product on offer - talking to customers about the vision for the future is all part of that.

There are things I would like the management to do differently but on the whole no fan could complain about the effort and effectiveness of GH and his team.

Great post!

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 11:59 am  

G1 wrote:

You're just continuing to make stuff up.

None of that happened.

Yeah, your very lucky the posts don't go back that far. Doesn't mean your not telling a complete lie though. I mean we are going back 12 years here. It totally happened, and as said where your crush started on me.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:03 pm  

Looks like we can file Westerman with Morley, Ellis etc as in Leeds wanted them but not prepared to pay more than another club, certainly not a bad thing imo.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:12 pm  

Gotcha wrote:

Yeah, your very lucky the posts don't go back that far..

I'm lucky?

You're lucky the Phil Daly thread isn't around because there's concrete proof that you tell lies for any recent posters who don't remember that hilarity.

Doesn't mean your not telling a complete lie though

Like when you lied about your critique of Jimmy Keinhorst, before Seth dug up the thread and showed you up?

I mean we are going back 12 years here

...and as we know, you sometimes make mistakes about who it was you were talking to the night before so I will say again, perhaps you have mistaken me for another poster or you are, yet again, just making stuff up.

Look, by all means post rumours. They're good and they're the lifeblood of the board like Sal says.

But if you try and give those rumours, and by extension yourself, added credibility by claiming you're "in the know" then you are making your credibility part of the discussion rather than just the rumour.

And as well all know, when it comes to credibility, you have none. Phil Daly told me. At least I think it was him.

Re: Joe Westerman : Tue Oct 20, 2015 12:52 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

Rumours are what make the board interesting - there are very few on here who post maliciously.

RL is a very small community and rumours will always be an important part of promoting interest in the sport.

Leeds are a very inclusive club and that is part of its charm - the fact club officials are prepared to be reasonably open is to applauded and they should not be castigated for this approach.

The club want to sell season tickets and the club want to be seen to doing all it can to improve the product on offer - talking to customers about the vision for the future is all part of that.

There are things I would like the management to do differently but on the whole no fan could complain about the effort and effectiveness of GH and his team.

True. But whilst some rumours are believable, some aren't. When one poster in this instance used such rumours to criticise posters and fans for praising the way the club treats players and basically say it's a lie then it's going to come under the microscope. Especially when people make valid counter points to why they don't believe the rumour and usually the rumour spreader snaps back along the lines of "but it is true, because I said so"