GOWLING OUT

[Quakers2009]

we’ve tried to replace Taylor twice in a month, he probably wouldn’t be too happy to read that and it might not be true.

Aye he just signed Robson and told Taylor he wasn’t needed on match days, not even for the warm up, just for the craic.

It was in the York rag that we were in for Whiteley.

Darlo_CR is also usually spot-on with his posts and seems to be ITK. If I was a betting man, I'd say we were in for Whiteley until Scarborough came in and York agreed to rip-up his contract.

Obviously, I cannot verify this was the case, which subsequently means it didn't happen.

All in the Darlogramps (DF97) pile-on!

[Darlofan97]

This is like Groundhog Day. So although the list is a privately circulated you claim to have been informed of who's on it?

Yes. I am not sure why this is such a difficult concept?

Tell me you haven’t read any of my posts, without telling me you haven’t actually read my posts.

The irony! Have you read your posts?

I never said you said anything about having access to a private document, but you clearly stated above you were given access to information which was privately circulated which would suggest someone had access to it or had seen it and had shared the details with you, I also never said you that you said anyone from the club had leaked it either.

However it raises the possibility that someone who is possibily linked to the club did so, you've said the person you recieved this information from is not connected to the club, so if it was shared privately how did they find out about it?

PS: I note that the goalposts have moved again and it is now not classified!

You are literally being deliberately obtuse:

However it raises the possibility that someone who is possibily linked to the club did so, you've said the person you recieved this information from is not connected to the club, so if it was shared privately how did they find out about it?

Players are offered to clubs every day, up & down the country. These clubs contain dozens of staff members & volunteers that talk to one & other.

This really isn't the data leak you are implying. It's talk on a circuit of coaches/scouts within the NE/Yorkshire, yet you want to imply I've possibly seen a confidential document, or there is a leak inside the club. That is not the case.

Oh, and I said it is not classified as that is a term the FBI use. People are making out I have leaked top secret nuclear codes.

They are National League North players being offered to other clubs. That.Is.It.

Next time, I won't post what I have been told from very reputable people, as clearly, I have to deliver a thesis on how I know this information.

[theoriginalfatcat]

97, why didn't you say ages ago that you had a friend/contact who is a scout/coach?

Instead, for ages you choose to play silly buggers just for your personal amusement.

Mind you, there still could be numerous reasons why your info is bigged up/exaggerated/out of date or simply wrong.

[Darlofan97]

97, why didn't you say ages ago that you had a friend/contact who is a scout/coach?

Instead, for ages you choose to play silly buggers just for your personal amusement.

Mind you, there still could be numerous reasons why your info is bigged up/exaggerated/out of date or simply wrong.

Personal amusement?

Apologies. I didn’t realise how much you had to be held to account on this Board.

Sigh.

[CrazyDarlo]

we’ve tried to replace Taylor twice in a month, he probably wouldn’t be too happy to read that and it might not be true.

Aye he just signed Robson and told Taylor he wasn’t needed on match days, not even for the warm up, just for the craic.

Emphasis on the word “twice”. He only brought Robson in and chose not to extend his loan. Whether he tried to bring in another goalkeeper is all speculation.

[Quakers2009]

we’ve tried to replace Taylor twice in a month, he probably wouldn’t be too happy to read that and it might not be true.

Aye he just signed Robson and told Taylor he wasn’t needed on match days, not even for the warm up, just for the craic.

Emphasis on the word “twice”. He only brought Robson in and chose not to extend his loan. Whether he tried to bring in another goalkeeper is all speculation.

How do you know this?

[CrazyDarlo]

we’ve tried to replace Taylor twice in a month, he probably wouldn’t be too happy to read that and it might not be true.

Aye he just signed Robson and told Taylor he wasn’t needed on match days, not even for the warm up, just for the craic.

Emphasis on the word “twice”. He only brought Robson in and not extended his loan. Whether he tried to bring in another goalkeeper is all speculation.

How do you know this?

Edited, poor choice of words

[theoriginalfatcat]

97, why didn't you say ages ago that you had a friend/contact who is a scout/coach?

Instead, for ages you choose to play silly buggers just for your personal amusement.

Mind you, there still could be numerous reasons why your info is bigged up/exaggerated/out of date or simply wrong.

Personal amusement?

Apologies. I didn’t realise how much you had to be held to account on this Board.

Sigh.

WUM. You could have easily said how you came on to this info right of the start, instead of having multiple posters attempt to wheedle it out of you bit by bit - and yes, for your own personal amusement.

[Quakers2009]

we’ve tried to replace Taylor twice in a month, he probably wouldn’t be too happy to read that and it might not be true.

Aye he just signed Robson and told Taylor he wasn’t needed on match days, not even for the warm up, just for the craic.

Emphasis on the word “twice”. He only brought Robson in and not extended his loan. Whether he tried to bring in another goalkeeper is all speculation.

How do you know this?

Edited, poor choice of words

So you don't, then.

The irony.

[Quakers2009]

TOFC, the link has been disclosed and you still say - "there still could be numerous reasons why your info is bigged up/exaggerated/out of date or simply wrong".

DF97 said 'this is what I have been told, you don't have to believe me', and you then reply "you're not an official club spokesman" and accuse him of being a wind-up merchant.

You doubted that he had inside information in the first place, and then you doubted the information itself after he disclosed the link - and then you got personal.

Utterly pointless.

[theoriginalfatcat]

Nope. Not the way I see it.

The link was disclosed after pages of deflection. If 97 had said right at the start "I've got a friend who is a scout who told me blah blah blah" we could have then made up our minds without all this fuss. That's why I called him a WUM. Because he likes the attention, he's like someone in a school playground saying "I know something you don't know"

Secondly, and as a separate point, I think it's still quite fair to doubt this info - it's not official.

Thirdly, 97 has an anti Gowling agenda. He never writes anything positive, all his posts are anti Gowling, even when we announced a new goal keeping coach he was straight in having a dig.

[BM1883]

If you googled the definition of ‘rattled’ you’d see theoriginalfatcat. Complete head loss.

Adamant on calling out 97 as a ‘WUM’, yet rather than not rising to it, if that’s how you feel, here you are.

If 97 chooses to post information he has been passed, in a forum, that’s entirely his choice. He’s not asking you all to believe him or validate it. It’s merely an opinion as it cannot be established as fact by everyone else. That’s as far as it goes.

You make a personal judgement whether you deem it as fact or fiction and move on.

Why get wound up over it? Strange behaviour.

[theoriginalfatcat]

BM - you’ve completely missed the point I was making! I made it twice as well.

[Quakers2009]

The link was disclosed after pages of deflection. If 97 had said right at the start "I've got a friend who is a scout who told me blah blah blah" we could have then made up our minds without all this fuss. That's why I called him a WUM. Because he likes the attention, he's like someone in a school playground saying "I know something you don't know"

That is, of course, your perception, and I hasten to add that you have thrown random unprovoked digs at DF97 recently - some personal.

Secondly, and as a separate point, I think it's still quite fair to doubt this info - it's not official.

It would never be official, though, would it? The club have not released anything. You're free to doubt the information, but why whine about wanting the source?

Thirdly, 97 has an anti Gowling agenda. He never writes anything positive, all his posts are anti Gowling, even when we announced a new goal keeping coach he was straight in having a dig.

On Saturday:

"Outstanding to a man.

Fair play to Gowling. I thought he was too stubborn to revert from his 3/5 at the back.

Good to see Taylor & Hedley restored too.

[Lawman3]

Now I like a good argument as much as the next man, but this isn't one of them.