Busting some myths….

[Steve Watts]

8 minutes ago, Olé said:

Wait so NP is responsible for him playing at RWB but not responsible for the system and setup that gave him the season of his life and made him top scorer in the first place?

And Andy King is "holding down" a CB position (which started literally only 4 games ago when both Atkinson and then Klose were unfit). What exactly did you want NP to do?

Regarding us all nodding along in agreement to NP, I seem to recall the Churchill dog quite clearly spent the entire time shaking his head, so you might want to look in a mirror.

No no no no don't like this manager wan't another one........ No no no no don't like that manager wan't another one........ No no no no don't like this manager wan't another one.

 

In fairness he could have switched the system away from 3 at the back to a more conventional 4-4-2/4-3-3/4-5-1 with Tanner, Vyner, Pring and Dasilva at the back.  King could have been played as an anchor man to protect the defence a little.  Ideal? Nope, far from it. However, it will at least have had round pegs in round holes.  There were options.

[Philly The Kid]

3 hours ago, Olé said:

I actually don't think the club themselves are pushing the "got no money" narrative unless I've missed something.

The club aren't pushing anything at the moment.
We've got an owner who's silence is deafening, a chairman  who only seems to pop up when there's good news and a CEO who's leaving (although the replacement seems an astute appointment. I wonder how much RG had to do with that one).

The team should definitely be doing better though the injuries we've had have been to key players we simply don't have the depth to replace.
The argument about players being better than other players who are/aren't playing is a complicated one. Attitudes, commitment and effort both in games and training plays a part. Pearson says players showing all of those qualities will get the nod over those who aren't, so I can only assume the likes of Bentley and others who people say are better than their current replacements aren't giving enough in training.
 

[phantom]

50 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Pearson is the division's fourth longest serving manager and has a top 10 wage budget.

It would be interesting reading if someone could provide these details, and not just money spent by the club by what actually is on the playing budget

[Bar BS3]

30 minutes ago, Olé said:

Wait so NP is responsible for him playing at RWB but not responsible for the system and setup that gave him the season of his life and made him top scorer in the first place?

And Andy King is "holding down" a CB position (which started literally only 4 games ago when both Atkinson and then Klose were unfit). What exactly did you want NP to do?

Regarding us all nodding along in agreement to NP, I seem to recall the Churchill dog quite clearly spent the entire time shaking his head, so you might want to look in a mirror.

No no no no don't like this manager wan't another one........ No no no no don't like that manager wan't another one........ No no no no don't like this manager wan't another one.

The ones in the backs of cars nod their heads, I think. 

I'm never usually one to call for a change of managers. 

NP feels like he's just taking the piss now. 

We get worse rather than better & if you think that getting AW's most productive season out of him and then playing him at RWB is a positive example of his management, then I really don't know what else to say to you..!

[IAmNick]

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

Pearson is the division's fourth longest serving manager and has a top 10 wage budget. I'm afraid my sympathies for the "difficulties" of the job in hand are wearing thin. As i pointed out on Boxing Day, there are plenty of managers in the division in worse financial positions than us who are doing better. Managers with smaller wage budgets and have been in charge for less than a year. 

More generally, if we're comparing with the LJ era. I'd suggest the division was stronger back then. That season we finished 7th, we missed out on 6th in an end of season defeat to Lampard's overspending Derby County, and Bielsa's Leeds were also in the play offs (and lost).

Obviously less money about these last few years and the quality of the division is lower as a result. 

What Gould said was:

"Now we are bringing the salary levels down, we don't have lots of cash we can throw at things. If you looked at what we did last summer, we were targeting the very best players who were out of contract that year.

We think that is quite a sweet spot for us because we would always be looking to be in the top 10 in terms of salaries that we can pay in the Championship. Therefore for the best players coming out of contract in the Championship or League One we are very, very attractive."

Bolded bit mine - that's very different from saying we have a top 10 wage budget. He's saying we're looking to be able to be in the top 10 of salaries we can pay. That's not the same thing. To me that reads as, for the right players we can offer them a competitive salary with other clubs they might be interested in - but not that we'll have a squad on 15, 20, 30k+ like other teams... and us more recently.

I also think there has been a lot of variance in our salary structure, as Pearson has talked about too. Players on 20k+ not playing, others on 2k playing every game. That's not good or healthy for the environment in the club imo. I think if you looked at our median or mean wage of our starting 11 there's no way it'd be top 10 in the division.

There are teams with worse financial positions doing better. Until recently there were some with much better positions doing worse. That's football as you well know!

I think Pearson should be doing slightly better with what he has available currently. I don't think it's a good or fair comparison with LJ's term though.

Edited December 28, 2022 by IAmNick

[Harry]

3 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Nice try, Harry.

Last season we finished 17th. 

This season we hoped to do a bit better.

We still can - 18th at the minute but only half way through the season. 

Yes the football's less than scintillating and we continue to fritter away points but keep the faith! I don't mean that to sound glib - it's effing frustrating, is what it is.

You're right, LJ did have us 1 point off the playoffs when Covid struck in March 20 but we all know what happens then don't we - before May we hit a losing streak and blow it.

Funny how you didn't use stats from the season before:

In April 2019 we beat West Brom 3-2 at home. We're 5th, 6 games left to play, 5 points clear of 7th place with a game in hand. Play offs here we come!

We hit a losing streak and  finished 8th.

And of the 7 starting players against WBA in April 2019 who are no longer here, I'd have every single one of them in today's team/squad. Plus Pisano and Kelly, who came on as subs. So - imho - the tools currently at Pearson's disposal are inferior by some way. 

That finish to 2018-19 was peak Johnson - get into a great position, then fail to deliver. 

Is that what you're pining for? 

Merry xmas! 

Hi mate. 
To be honest, I’m not pining for LJ in any way. I agreed with the timing of his dismissal and I wouldn’t want him back. 
I’m just trying to make a comparison between the current manager and our last manager (discounting the quite ridiculous decision to put Holden in charge inbetween). 

I’d also like to make it clear that I am not actively calling for Pearson to be dismissed at this point. 
I actually don’t believe upheaval is what we need right now. But he’s making it more and more difficult to get behind him. 
What we need right now is a manager to adopt a siege mentality and use all of his tools to the best of their abilities. I don’t think he is doing that. And he needs to do that, pronto, else we will find ourselves playing rovers again next season. 

Edited December 28, 2022 by Harry

[Henry]

@Harry are you still working for the club?

[Simon79]

8 hours ago, Engvall’s Splinter said:

I’m astounded you feel Dasilva and Williams are top players in their respective positions. 
 

Just because it’s been speculated that Scott has been linked with Prem clubs doesn’t confirm he has - and if he has that could be more for future than now. 
 

The squad is bottom half at best. 
 

Pearson needs to revisit the system though. 

I think DaSilva would hold his own in a top team in this division. With regards Williams, I said he is a top half Championship midfielder, not a top midfielder. I think a number of clubs in the top 12 that would be potentially be interested in him. What do you mean, bottom half at best? That’s quite a wide spectrum. In my original post, I think we’re capable of 10th-12th, so if you’re thinking 13th-15th, we are not that far apart. Or if you mean 18th-20th, we obviously are. Pearson himself mentioned the Play Offs at the start of the season & he doesn’t strike me as a bluffer! COYR 

[firstdivision]

16 hours ago, Harry said:

Well, I say busting myths. Maybe I’m more trying to stir the pot. But here goes anyway….

At the start of the covid break, March 2020, we had Lee Johnson in charge. 37 games had been played. We were 7th. 1 point off the playoffs. Since the turn of the year, we’d won 5, drawn 2 and lost 5. 
 

In those 12 games of the calendar year to date, the following players were regulars :

Bentley, Kalas, Baker, Dasilva, Massengo, Weimann, Wells. 
 

7 players who have all been part of Pearson’s squads in the 22 months he’s been here. 
 

We keep hearing about the massive job Pearson has had to do. We hear that he’s had to get rid off bad eggs, overpaid primadonnas and not have any funds to bring his own players in. 
 

7 of the team that had us in 7th place after 37 games have been at his disposal. Sadly Bakers time was cut short, but he was available for Pearson for a fair while during his tenure. 
 

Players who have left the club under Pearson are :

Szmodics, Elliason, Morrell, J Smith, Bailey Wright, Matty Taylor, Korey Smith, Rory Holden, Adelakun, Diedhiou, Baldwin, Opi Edwards, Gilmartin, Hunt, Lansbury, Hinds, Mariappa, Paterson, Rowe, Walsh, Watkins, Wallocott, Nagy, Nurse, Palmer, O’Dowda, Janneh, Bakinson, Britton, Cundy. 
 

Of all of those gone, 30 listed, not a single one has gone to a higher ranked division and not a single one has been a success anywhere since. 
Of that list, you could probably get an argument for Paterson as being a decent player here, Diedhiou was generally pretty useless but for the odd goal and had cult status, Korey had a good career here but was on the wane, and Eliasson had a “good cross on him” but little else. 
Of all the others, there probably aren’t many fans who could put up a good argument for why they should have stayed at City and in most cases the majority of the fanbase were happy to see them go. 
 

So, let’s disregard all the financial arguments. Johnson had money and Pearson hasn’t. Yes, I get it. 
But the squad that Johnson ended with here in March 2020 contained 7 of the same squad Pearson has had at his disposal and 30 other players which no one really wanted here anyway and were not bothered when they left. 

Pearson has managed to replace those 30 unwanted players with Semenyo (a sought after talent), Scott (a much sought after talent), Conway (a potentially sought after talent, Atkinson (a £1.6m centre back), James & King (2 of his own studs who’ve won a premier league), Naismith (the player of the season at a team which got to the playoffs), Klose (a man with recent prem experience and promotion from this league).

So, the question is, Johnson got that bunch of players, most of which no fans really wanted and who have done nothing of note since leaving City, to 7th in the league, whilst Pearson has had 7 of the regulars from that Johnson team plus his own additions of generational talents and premier league players. So how did Johnson manage to get what could be easily argued as a worse team man for man into 7th place and nearly into the playoffs, whilst Pearson hasn’t managed to string any kind of form together over a 22 month stretch with arguably a better squad? 
 

I really feel that we are over-egging the impact the financial situation is having on Pearson’s job. Yes, the financial situation is very real and he hasn’t had a great deal to play with, but the squad now is arguably better man for man than the one Johnson had. Should Pearson be getting much more out of this squad than a record of 24-19-41, a 28.5% win rate, when Johnson was getting a 46% win rate from a worse bunch of players who needed to all be removed from the club!
 

Personally, I think the bloke is getting away with murder. 

You do realise there is far too much common sense and logic in this post. 

[Sleepy1968]

2 minutes ago, Simon79 said:

I think DaSilva would hold his own in a top team in this division. With regards Williams, I said he is a top half Championship midfielder, not a top midfielder. I think a number of clubs in the top 12 that would be potentially be interested in him.

 

Hmm.

Dasliva is above average at defending. He can play in a back four, but will put you a player down when defending set pieces. Going forward he is generally poor, always wanting to check back with the ball rather than run with it. His crossing ability is weak (par for this team), and badly placed floaters are the norm. Why he's been playing as a left wing back, God only knows.

Williams has had a few good games, and he tries to support the attack which is always a plus, but overall I've been underwhelmed by him - maybe that is coloured by the hype surrounding his signing.

I don't think either would be consider more than squad players at a top 10 Championship club. Both would be decent signings at L1.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, phantom said:

It would be interesting reading if someone could provide these details, and not just money spent by the club by what actually is on the playing budget

 I’ve not seen any clubs issue accounts which break down the overall wage bill for players v non-players.  Norwich and Plymouth are very transparent and even they don’t do it.

I once asked Kieran Maguire (price of football pod) how he worked it out in his various articles.  He basically said he had a formula based on number of players vs employees and some magic and it usually fell somewhere around the 65-75% of salary costs attributed to playing squad.

Here are the wages from the accounts of every club who was in the championship in 2021, a wage bill created by Holden, although mostly inherited from Johnson, but Holden despite only signing one player for a fee, still increased the wage budget.  That is not me trying to be mischievous, just a fact, that the £30.252m at the end of 2021 was only added to by Pearson in acquiring Danny Simpson on what was alleged to be a tiny salary.

So in 2021 - Holden’s season, we had the 9th biggest wage budget…assumes Derby wasn’t higher, it may e been???

The previous season - Johnson’s season it £27.357m so would’ve been around top 10 too.

We will have to wait for 2022 - Pearson’s season.

 

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

You do realise there is far too much common sense and logic in this post. 

What did you think of @Oléresponse and others?

[NcnsBcfc]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

 I’ve not seen any clubs issue accounts which break down the overall wage bill for players v non-players.  Norwich and Plymouth are very transparent and even they don’t do it.

I once asked Kieran Maguire (price of football pod) how he worked it out in his various articles.  He basically said he had a formula based on number of players vs employees and some magic and it usually fell somewhere around the 65-75% of salary costs attributed to playing squad.

Here are the wages from the accounts of every club who was in the championship in 2021, a wage bill created by Holden, although mostly inherited from Johnson, but Holden despite only signing one player for a fee, still increased the wage budget.  That is not me trying to be mischievous, just a fact, that the £30.252m at the end of 2021 was only added to by Pearson in acquiring Danny Simpson on what was alleged to be a tiny salary.

So in 2021 - Holden’s season, we had the 9th biggest wage budget…assumes Derby wasn’t higher, it may e been???

The previous season - Johnson’s season it £27.357m so would’ve been around top 10 too.

We will have to wait for 2022 - Pearson’s season.

 

Is it not the case that we as a club have to pay out loyalty bonuses, when players leave at the end of their contracts? Or that a thing of old?

I also remember that sometimes say a 4 year contract had incremental rises over the course of the contract on a yearly basis. So the final year of the contract would often be it's most expensive to the club.

Both of these might explain why the overall wages amount went up, and the number of players contracted didn't.

Just a thought anyhow.....

[Kid in the Riot]

1 hour ago, IAmNick said:

What Gould said was:

"Now we are bringing the salary levels down, we don't have lots of cash we can throw at things. If you looked at what we did last summer, we were targeting the very best players who were out of contract that year.

We think that is quite a sweet spot for us because we would always be looking to be in the top 10 in terms of salaries that we can pay in the Championship. Therefore for the best players coming out of contract in the Championship or League One we are very, very attractive."

Bolded bit mine - that's very different from saying we have a top 10 wage budget. He's saying we're looking to be able to be in the top 10 of salaries we can pay. That's not the same thing. To me that reads as, for the right players we can offer them a competitive salary with other clubs they might be interested in - but not that we'll have a squad on 15, 20, 30k+ like other teams... and us more recently.

I also think there has been a lot of variance in our salary structure, as Pearson has talked about too. Players on 20k+ not playing, others on 2k playing every game. That's not good or healthy for the environment in the club imo. I think if you looked at our median or mean wage of our starting 11 there's no way it'd be top 10 in the division.

There are teams with worse financial positions doing better. Until recently there were some with much better positions doing worse. That's football as you well know!

I think Pearson should be doing slightly better with what he has available currently. I don't think it's a good or fair comparison with LJ's term though.

I'm not basing my top 10 wage budget comment on what Gould said. I'm basing it on evidence, as below. Our wage budget was £33m in 2020/21, putting us into the top 10, and we'll be there again this financial year (season 2021/2022) as most other clubs in the division also cut their cloth accordingly. 

As for using "median/mean wage of starting 11". Starting to sound like a bit of a desperate argument. It's up to Pearson how he utilises his squad. Yes, hes been unlucky with the likes of Kalas and Baker but equally it's been his choice to freeze out the likes of Massengo and Bentley. 

[LondonBristolian]

1 hour ago, Steve Watts said:

In fairness he could have switched the system away from 3 at the back to a more conventional 4-4-2/4-3-3/4-5-1 with Tanner, Vyner, Pring and Dasilva at the back.  King could have been played as an anchor man to protect the defence a little.  Ideal? Nope, far from it. However, it will at least have had round pegs in round holes.  There were options.

I think that's my biggest criticism of Pearson. He's got a system that he thinks works with our best XI - which is fair enough - but he is too reluctant to switch things when we just don't have the right players available to fit it.

Obviously there's swings and roundabouts here. There is a lot to be said for having a consistent style of play and consistency in formation. But I also think Pearson could be better at making tweaks when players central to making that formation work simply aren't available. 

[Harry]

1 hour ago, Henry said:

@Harry are you still working for the club?

I’ve never worked for the club. 

If you’re referring to the passion I have for scouting and am I still in touch with the club in this regard, yes.  Nothing has changed in that regard. But it’s not ‘work’. I don’t get paid for it. 

But I don’t work for the club and it doesn’t mean I’m in a position where I am not allowed to still be critical as a fan. 

Edited December 28, 2022 by Harry

[M.D]

26 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

I think that's my biggest criticism of Pearson. He's got a system that he thinks works with our best XI - which is fair enough - but he is too reluctant to switch things when we just don't have the right players available to fit it.

Obviously there's swings and roundabouts here. There is a lot to be said for having a consistent style of play and consistency in formation. But I also think Pearson could be better at making tweaks when players central to making that formation work simply aren't available. 

This is my issue too, I'm not a fan of 3 at the back and wings backs but I can see his logic when he states that this is the ideal formation for the players we have at hand.

I accept this view as we don't have a dominant centre half or defensive midfielder to play with a back four at this level.

What I don't get is shoehorning players into the system and his stubborn attitude to changing the system and then just throwing a few attack minded players at the match when all is lost really.

I have changed my mind after a knee jerk reaction from me after Boxing Day and think he should stay but I'm concerned he won't change this.

[spudski]

Without sounding like a nause...and appreciating all the detail...the simple question is...should NP getting more out of the squad at his disposal at this very moment?

Do we really need to compare the past with the present? Circumstances and times etc change.

What happened in the past really has no significant impact on what NP has at his disposal right now and in this moment. 

Should he be getting more out of these players now...regardless. IMO yes.

 

[BigTone]

Theres a few myths on here that need bursting.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Is it not the case that we as a club have to pay out loyalty bonuses, when players leave at the end of their contracts? Or that a thing of old?

it still happens, but players contracts are expiring every year. 

I also remember that sometimes say a 4 year contract had incremental rises over the course of the contract on a yearly basis. So the final year of the contract would often be it's most expensive to the club.

That’s also true.

Both of these might explain why the overall wages amount went up, and the number of players contracted didn't.

I think it really is as simple as we paid our players more And more over time, rather than a back-end of contract distortion.

Just a thought anyhow.....

1 hour ago, Kid in the Riot said:

I'm not basing my top 10 wage budget comment on what Gould said. I'm basing it on evidence, as below. Our wage budget was £33m in 2020/21, putting us into the top 10, and we'll be there again this financial year (season 2021/2022) as most other clubs in the division also cut their cloth accordingly. 

As for using "median/mean wage of starting 11". Starting to sound like a bit of a desperate argument. It's up to Pearson how he utilises his squad. Yes, hes been unlucky with the likes of Kalas and Baker but equally it's been his choice to freeze out the likes of Massengo and Bentley. 

Just to make posters clear why Kid’s (Swiss Ramble’s) numbers differ from mine (I’m quoting £23.81m in 2022), is because I wanted to give City’s wage bill at football club level to get a better feel for “playing budget”.  In my table I’ve tried to do the same with other clubs where they use a holding company to report…in their case I’ve also taken the football club accounts.

Why would I take this approach?

Because I can’t square the following question to give a good (fairer?) level of comparison:

why did the average Championship club have 211 staff, yet Bristol City (Holdings) need 700?

So I went with football club wages, where BCFC have 201 staff.  Average staff numbers in the Champ are 211.  So I think it’s more accurate to look at City’s wages at that level.

In 2021 it still makes us top 10.

The test will be (as I’ve stated more than once!) when we see other clubs 2022 accounts.  We will see whether Nige’s 20% wage bill cut keeps us in the top 10.  I think it will slip us 2/3 places.  2023 accounts will likely see us move into the bottom half.  And that’s where I drive some of my expectation levels from.

I still can’t answer my question in italics above.  We are a cost behemoth imho.  Ashton Gate has to have staff to cover Rugby and Football as well as concerts, but I’d expect it to be more efficient than twice as many staff than PL Norwich (354).  It looks like Bristol Sport Ltd staff are 0, so must be totally paid for by Rugby, Football and Basketball.

Hope that makes sense.

[Davefevs]

40 minutes ago, spudski said:

Should he be getting more out of these players now...regardless. IMO yes.

Yes.  I think we are better than 18th…but I have us 13th-18th, I don’t want us to be right at the bottom (or worse) than my range.

[spudski]

8 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yes.  I think we are better than 18th…but I have us 13th-18th, I don’t want us to be right at the bottom (or worse) than my range.

I see us as definitely mid table. As we know though, 3 points at the end of the season with GD can have a significant difference on position.

[Offside]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

Without sounding like a nause...and appreciating all the detail...the simple question is...should NP getting more out of the squad at his disposal at this very moment?

Do we really need to compare the past with the present? Circumstances and times etc change.

What happened in the past really has no significant impact on what NP has at his disposal right now and in this moment. 

Should he be getting more out of these players now...regardless. IMO yes.

 

I agree, he should definitely be getting more out of these players. I am under  no illusion that we should be near the top six, but we should be in a better position than we are currently. Some of the performances have been truly dire and we don’t seem to learn from them. We lose games so easily. 

[Bar BS3]

8 minutes ago, Offside said:

I agree, he should definitely be getting more out of these players. I am under  no illusion that we should be near the top six, but we should be in a better position than we are currently. Some of the performances have been truly dire and we don’t seem to learn from them. We lose games so easily. 

Absolutely agree that he should be getting better from the squad we have got. 

Also agree on your other point, that we are just too easy to beat. 

Surely, when going through a bad spell (if 22 months, bar a few weeks, classes as a "spell") then at least make us hard to beat, even if we can't win many. 

We just look clueless most of the time. 

Unorganised at the back. Lost & unimaginative in midfield and, as a result, don't look much threat in attack. 

We seem to rely on certain players producing something good in that moment, rather than it coming as a result of any plan, training or tactic. 

Yes, we've been a little unlucky in some games - but the flip side of that is that we've also won games when we've had luck on our side.

It really should be so much better after the amount of time that he's had here and there never seems to be any consistent progress in any area of our game. 

 

[firstdivision]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

What did you think of @Oléresponse and others?

Exhausting. 

[Merrick's Marvels]

11 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

Exhausting. 

Yeah, having an open mind is too  much like hard work, isn't it? 

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Just to make posters clear why Kid’s (Swiss Ramble’s) numbers differ from mine (I’m quoting £23.81m in 2022), is because I wanted to give City’s wage bill at football club level to get a better feel for “playing budget”.  In my table I’ve tried to do the same with other clubs where they use a holding company to report…in their case I’ve also taken the football club accounts.

Why would I take this approach?

Because I can’t square the following question to give a good (fairer?) level of comparison:

why did the average Championship club have 211 staff, yet Bristol City (Holdings) need 700?

So I went with football club wages, where BCFC have 201 staff.  Average staff numbers in the Champ are 211.  So I think it’s more accurate to look at City’s wages at that level.

In 2021 it still makes us top 10.

The test will be (as I’ve stated more than once!) when we see other clubs 2022 accounts.  We will see whether Nige’s 20% wage bill cut keeps us in the top 10.  I think it will slip us 2/3 places.  2023 accounts will likely see us move into the bottom half.  And that’s where I drive some of my expectation levels from.

I still can’t answer my question in italics above.  We are a cost behemoth imho.  Ashton Gate has to have staff to cover Rugby and Football as well as concerts, but I’d expect it to be more efficient than twice as many staff than PL Norwich (354).  It looks like Bristol Sport Ltd staff are 0, so must be totally paid for by Rugby, Football and Basketball.

Hope that makes sense.

I dunno, £30m in wages using the Holdings, amortisation, depreciation- cost of staging events doesn't come that cheap.. obviously Interest will contribute to the losses but would they be included in the Running costs?

Academy, Community and Women's Football will all be included even if not itemised separately.

For context, Derby in 2018 had a £29m income- talking the consolidator- but total running costs of £75m maybe. That is wages, amortisation, academy- the lot. That cost of staging events was reduced during the 2020-21 season especially but is back towards  normal levels now. Unsure it is that far outside.

Edited December 28, 2022 by Mr Popodopolous

[Harry]

1 hour ago, BigTone said:

Theres a few myths on here that need bursting.

What’s so funny Big Man. I thought you had me on ignore anyway??? 

[BigTone]

2 minutes ago, Harry said:

What’s so funny Big Man. I thought you had me on ignore anyway??? 

Who was referring to you ? You flatter yourself.

Edited December 28, 2022 by BigTone

[David Brent]

1 hour ago, firstdivision said:

Exhausting. 

There were some big words in there tbf