FFS. why take off our most attacking player?
Hucks who hasn't done much would have been much better. But oh no, it's mcveigh who goes off. he has been part of every attacking move.
Posted By: PaulMcVeighGirl on January 31st 2006 at 21:25:15
Message Thread
- FFS. why take off our most attacking player? (NCFC) - PaulMcVeighGirl, Jan 31, 21:25:15
- You're still biased though (n/m) (NCFC) - Fierce Panda, Jan 31, 21:26:35
- no i'm not. i normally like hucks to stay on, but he hasn't done much. (n/m) (NCFC) - PaulMcVeighGirl, Jan 31, 21:27:20
- But surely in that case... (NCFC) - Squirrel, Jan 31, 21:28:50
- roffle (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim Nasium, Jan 31, 21:37:42
- But surely in that case... (NCFC) - Squirrel, Jan 31, 21:28:50
- no i'm not. i normally like hucks to stay on, but he hasn't done much. (n/m) (NCFC) - PaulMcVeighGirl, Jan 31, 21:27:20
- You're still biased though (n/m) (NCFC) - Fierce Panda, Jan 31, 21:26:35
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.