Plymouth 19:45 Gillingham Tuesday 23/10/18

Strangely enough it’s not all about you, it’s a good format, in years to come I’m sure the mascot will look on it quite fondly and realise how fortunate he was building his memory at such a young age.

I would have kept the  mascot in for many reasons. The same old stuff I would not have.. there's only so many sprinklers a man can take. To repeat what I have always said, the format is good, just cut it down to a quarter of the size and think about the viewer, or lose your audience.
You're right it's not all about me, never thought it was.....nor is it all about you, gaffer, find another vehicle for your own petty crap, or does honestly criticising videos count as coin throwing these days in your puritan Aviva world.

Tut tut beeman how very touchy you are, I’m afraid it does appear all about you as you litter your little essay with “I” this and “I” that.
You are indeed entitled to your opinion and so am I and as much as you would like me to sod off elsewhere to air my petty crap, it amuses me to read some of your straw munching, left wing complete crap.
You have a nice night now.

Graiser wrote:

Tut tut beeman how very touchy you are, I’m afraid it does appear all about you as you litter your little essay with “I” this and “I” that.
You are indeed entitled to your opinion and so am I and as much as you  would like me to sod off elsewhere to air my petty crap, it amuses me to read some of your straw munching, left wing complete crap.
You have a nice night now.

Yes, that bit gives away your  motivation .. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzlol

I seem to remember the left/right thing coming up from you before.... with Rickler chiming in too. the web is full of it under the table. Keep up the good fight if you think life is that easy to solve lol

beesrus wrote:

I seem to remember the left/right thing coming up from you before.... with Rickler chiming in too. the web is full of it under the table. Keep up the good fight if you think life is that easy to solve  lol

Why am I not surprised you didn't use SFD or Tringy etc, after all, they never stop talking about politics, but no...  You drag me in from nowhere, and I bet you will be hard pressed to find a handful of 'political' quotes from me. Talk about obsessed.  

...and you of course never mention politics at all do you?


Tell you what though...  You certainly have given me the best laugh of the week.

This quote regarding the Gills match is priceless...

beesrus wrote:

I can't be there tonight, but I will be booing bRent and Adams in spirit.

As if you are ever at Home Park...

I quite chuckled at that one too at the time, given my ongoing brent boycott. Clearly, I'll have to use the sarcasm emotowhatever a little more often so you can keep up, or maybe the Roger Moore raised eyebrow, that would probably do the trick. I'm guessing you're an old fashioned red nose and big floppy shoes man, but I could be wrong.

beesrus wrote:

I quite chuckled at that one too at the time, given my ongoing brent boycott. Clearly, I'll have to use the sarcasm emotowhatever a little more often so you can keep up, or maybe the Roger Moore raised eyebrow, that would probably do the trick. I'm guessing you're an old fashioned red nose and big floppy shoes man, but I could be wrong.

95% boycotts don’t really count, Beez.

Oh I think you'll find they do Czarky. Above all, they have to be maintainable over the long run ... know yerself. Countries call them sanctions.
At least I apologise for my very infrequent visits to the Brentihad and don't try to hide them, while others bray about their annual sojourns to the motherland. Funny old bunch, humans.
100% stuff is something else. like not eating animals, teetotal, or being hetero rather than bi. No 95% permissable there  
Right must get out in the sun.

Graiser wrote:

Strangely enough it’s not all about you, it’s a good format, in years to come I’m sure the mascot will look on it quite fondly and realise how fortunate he was building  his memory at such a young age.

Who is it all about Gaffer?

Hugh Watt wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Strangely enough it’s not all about you, it’s a good format, in years to come I’m sure the mascot will look on it quite fondly and realise how fortunate he was building  his memory at such a young age.

Who is it all about Gaffer?

Surely it’s not a “Who” but a “What’s it all about” and most probably anybody with a modicum of intelligence could work it out don’t you think

beesrus wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Tut tut beeman how very touchy you are, I’m afraid it does appear all about you as you litter your little essay with “I” this and “I” that.
You are indeed entitled to your opinion and so am I and as much as you  would like me to sod off elsewhere to air my petty crap, it amuses me to read some of your straw munching, left wing complete crap.
You have a nice night now.

Yes, that bit gives away your  motivation .. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzlol

I seem to remember the left/right thing coming up from you before.... with Rickler chiming in too. the web is full of it under the table. Keep up the good fight if you think life is that easy to solve  lol

Anything but keeping to the point, but Me, I’ve no political motivation whatsoever, I’ve done with Labour in all forms.

Czarcasm wrote:

95% boycotts don’t really count, Beez.

More like 85 - 90%. Hardly a boycott at all really.... 'Restricted' at best...

beesrus wrote:

Oh I think you'll find they do Czarky. Above all, they have to be maintainable over the long run ... know yerself. Countries call them sanctions.

Once again... You just refuse to accept reality. You are not "boycotting" Argyle no matter what you say, because you still go whenever the mood takes you. In your case... A sanction is not a boycott.

When is a boycott not a boycott? When Beezy is involved....

Graiser wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Strangely enough it’s not all about you, it’s a good format, in years to come I’m sure the mascot will look on it quite fondly and realise how fortunate he was building  his memory at such a young age.

Who is it all about Gaffer?

Surely it’s not a “Who” but a “What’s it all about” and most probably anybody with a modicum of intelligence could work it out don’t you think

You said “it’s not all about you”, if not then who?

As to what’s it all about, anyone with a modicum of intelligence will know that the answer is 42