Jump to content
IGNORED

New Signing On The Way?


filtonred

Recommended Posts

hold on, that means that the story about him signing are wide of the mark, but you havent said hes not signing? Is it wide of the mark to suggest it will be within 24 hours, but the deal is still on? I reckon if the deal was a complete non starter you wouldnt be under any obligation to your source not to say so?!

I'm off now to try to sleep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Few mixed messages here.

Yessir says no signing - not been wrong before.

Others with very credible contacts say signing is imminent.

Tomorrow should be interesting/frustrating..

There has to be a striker on the way before Sat otherwise Enoch would not be going as that will only leave us with 2 strikers unless GJ fancies giving Vasko a run up front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, guys, I think I should probably apologise for the Net Centre story at this point and explain.

It was based on some usually very reliable information, but on this occasion it appears to have been wide of the mark.

It was a bit of a gamble running the story, as the info wasn't nailed on, but it was from a couple of usually reliable sources and, with the departure of Enoch and a few other bits of information, it all seemed to fit together, to the point where I felt it was almost certainly true. It certainly all stacked up and made sense, so I went with it.

On this occasion, it looks to have been incorrect. I certainly would never accuse yessir of misleading anyone, as he's always been completely honest in the past, so if he says it isn't happening, then I absolutely accept that as fact.

Apologies for the bum steer on this one. But, as I say, the info was from a generally very reliable source, so I took a chance on running it.

I've witheld stories in the past from the same source as they haven't been 100% and then regretted it when the story breaks later (Enoch to Leeds being one such example), so this time I went the other way but it didn't pay off.

As I say, apologies. It was posted in good faith, I just made a bad call on this one. Live and learn.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Garfunkle
Ok, guys, I think I should probably apologise for the Net Centre story at this point and explain.

It was based on some usually very reliable information, but on this occasion it appears to have been wide of the mark.

It was a bit of a gamble running the story, as the info wasn't nailed on, but it was from a couple of usually reliable sources and, with the departure of Enoch and a few other bits of information, it all seemed to fit together, to the point where I felt it was almost certainly true. It certainly all stacked up and made sense, so I went with it.

On this occasion, it looks to have been incorrect. I certainly would never accuse yessir of misleading anyone, as he's always been completely honest in the past, so if he says it isn't happening, then I absolutely accept that as fact.

Apologies for the bum steer on this one. But, as I say, the info was from a generally very reliable source, so I took a chance on running it.

I've witheld stories in the past from the same source as they haven't been 100% and then regretted it when the story breaks later (Enoch to Leeds being one such example), so this time I went the other way but it didn't pay off.

As I say, apologies. It was posted in good faith, I just made a bad call on this one. Live and learn.

Cheers.

you should be banned

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Garfunkle
That's a bit harsh isn't it?

Give Huw credit for apologising; it was just one of those things.

can we have a font/smiley that indicates sarcasm please?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...