Jump to content

Sportsound Watch


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Red_Dwarf_Posse said:

 


What was said?

 

Stewart was asking if Wishart's union would represent and advise all players, or just those who were paid-up members - Wishart said it was a strange question, and avoided answering - Stewart asked it three times, and Wishart giggled - something like that.

Pair of bell-ends. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Red_Dwarf_Posse said:

 


What was said?

 

He was asking Wishart what the position was in terms of non-PFA members,  if they'd be helping everyone or just their members, and then if they'd be accepting new members. Quite straight forward stuff but Wishart got quite worked up by him asking it and avoided answering, which led to Stewart asking it a twice more, which seemed to get Wishart's back up for some reason, as if it was completely out of order to be asking a reasonable question.  When he asked it the third time Wishart started laughing too, which Stewart then had a go at him for.  Wishart eventually mumbled through an answer but in the end came out of it looking a bit daft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stewart was asking if Wishart's union would represent and advise all players, or just those who were paid-up members - Wishart said it was a strange question, and avoided answering - Stewart asked it three times, and Wishart giggled - something like that.
Pair of bell-ends. 


I don’t really see how Stewart gets one over on Wishart there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can’t understand why anyone could reasonably criticise Stewart for his question to Wishart . And both Richard Gordon and Neil McCann pretty much said that as well.

Can’t understand either why Wishart couldn't just give a straight answer. Which , in my opinion,  should’ve been to say that he’s paid to look out for and give advice to members of the Players Union.

Edited by A96
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Savage Henry said:

 


I don’t really see how Stewart gets one over on Wishart there.

 

I don't think I said he did.

However, Wiishart could have avoided the stand-off by answering Stewart's query, rather than dismissing it by saying it was a 'strange question'.

Under the current exceptional circumstances, surely it would have been good for Wishart to say that the union would be happy to advise all players, even if they weren't members.

I'd rather have a pint with Stewart than Wishart, but only if he was buying - the pubs are shut now, though. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Grangemouth Bairn said:

John Hartson, imo, is the thickest footballer/x-footballer I have ever heard.

He is a complete imbecile.

Hard to argue with that after the wee bit of the show I heard today. I think he said that for Celtic not to win the league they’d have to lose 5 of their remaining 8 games.  Which is complete and utter pish.  If they lost both games against the Hvns and , for instance ,either lost 2 or drew 3 of the other 6 , the Hvns could overtake them by winning all of their games.

What was maybe worse though was that neither David Currie nor Tom English picked him up on that comment.

And apart from anything else Hartson deserves ridicule for being unable to pronounce “huge” or “future” properly.  Unless “hooodge” and  “foootcha” are actually right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should Sevco do the honourable thing and allow the invincibles to win the league title?

 

 

 

It isn’t sevco’s choice.

 

The dumbest element of hartsons opinion is the notion that this is an issue for rangers and Celtic to settle between themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, A96 said:

Hard to argue with that after the wee bit of the show I heard today. I think he said that for Celtic not to win the league they’d have to lose 5 of their remaining 8 games.  Which is complete and utter pish.  If they lost both games against the Hvns and , for instance ,either lost 2 or drew 3 of the other 6 , the Hvns could overtake them by winning all of their games.

What was maybe worse though was that neither David Currie nor Tom English picked him up on that comment.

And apart from anything else Hartson deserves ridicule for being unable to pronounce “huge” or “future” properly.  Unless “hooodge” and  “foootcha” are actually right.

An Aberdonian dishing out a lecture in elocution :1eye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

 

It isn’t sevco’s choice.

 

The dumbest element of hartsons opinion is the notion that this is an issue for rangers and Celtic to settle between themselves.

Exactly this. So John Hartson is basically saying that Rangers conceding the title to Celtic means that Rangers also get to decide  that Hearts are relegated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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