[SOLD] Luis Suarez

The bed-wetters had a terrible day last Saturday, so some have jumped on this as an opportunity

 

A medieval sailing ship. Slow and a bit unwieldy, but capable of carrying reasonable amounts of cargo.

 

Ah. Based on this list https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/COG I'd assumed "Clusters of Orthologous Groups". Your explanation makes much more sense.

 

Simply put - because some people don't think we got a "big chunk of cash" for him.

 

I deduce COG can mean many things, however a bed wetter is a bed wetter

 

But might additionally be a head wobbler.

 

...and we have Glenn Murray and Jerome Sinclair trying to fire us to safety on the final day.

No more beds left to wet. Clapping ringing in everyone’s ears, COG 4 EVA being flown on banners from planes upon high...

 

A cog is a type of ship that first appeared in the 10th century, and was widely used from around the 12th century on. Cogs were clinker-built, generally of oak. These vessels were fitted with a single mast and a square-rigged single sail. One might say that a COG is just another name for HMS Piss the League.

 

I thought "COG" was "CrankyOldGit", @miserableoldgit 's brother.

 

Really?

Remind me...who was the 40+ million rated attacker we had in our squad when they took over? My memory is hazy.

 

Remind me......did The Red Helmet rack up £120m worth of debt? Think before you post.

 

That's absolutely hilarious coming from the guy who has stated multiple times that we should just "not sell players" in a climate where have zero income from gate receipts, despite having expenses to meet.

 

You're confusing me with someone else or just lying. Never once said we should not be selling players.

 

Ok then.

 

I have no idea either , I’ll be honest I’m not even sure if COGs are bed wetter of happy clappers

Here is a list of options

https://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/COG

I am going to assume from here on that COG stands for “Covenant of the Goddess” which I assume is some kind of Satanic worshipers group that is infiltrating WFC forum

 

This ****er has gone now so lets not waste any more forum time and space on the guy, lets close this thread now.

Anyone agree?

 

It doesn’t really work like that. The pozzos have taken loans leveraged against assets that they own. Baz didn’t have a pot to **** in so couldn’t have leveraged said loans.

 

thinks are just getting interesting! can’t wait to see the next battle in the bedwetter vs COG ongoing war!

 

Do as I say, not as I do, eh

 

agree , don’t know why he thinks he is too good for Watford , never seen him play, couldn’t give a toss, based on Ivic’s comments good riddance

 

You should check out the COG subsection of the forum.

There's some really interesting stuff about the birth of the almighty Omicron Carnassus IV and his relentless ascent into the supreme leader as we all know him today. I must say, I can't wait for him to save me and the other COGs from eternal damnation.

EDIT: just found out that this subsection is accessible by invite only. Sorry fellow COGs, I've said to much. Please don't kick me out.

 

is c*ck on glue one of the options?

 

it was never really about Suarez.

 

Exactly....where have I said we shouldn't be selling players?

 

he literally quoted it

 

If Gray is not a 'finisher' then what is he?

 

But he didn't. Any fool can lift something out of context. Where have I ever said Watford should not sell players? You don't sell for poor prices, and he knew that being talked about, but lifted a phrase out of context....which is a usual forum manipulation.

I've never once said Watford shouldn't be selling players. Of course we have to sell, but not for low prices.

 

But you think all our sales have been too low so if you were in charge we would not have sold anyone. QED

 

Spotted somewhere in Spain......these masked crooks who kidnapped a Watford player.

 

Why?

So you think the owner got the best possible deal anyone on the planet could have got? I think the evidence is plentiful, that our club does not sell for an optimum price. They are actually very poor at selling players. Our fans are a bit slow at picking that up. They are hypnotised into thinking "it's another Gino masterstroke". It's amazing reading what a brilliant deal this has been.

 

It's obvious now what's happened with Suarez.

From that picture alone you can see his head had been turned. Quite literally 180˚ in fact.

 

Let's be honest, Gino could serve up a tray of homemade s**t sandwiches and a lot of our fans would still scoff them down and shake his hand for the privilege.

I'm past caring that he's gone from a football perspective, but it's an absolutely abysmal deal that we've got for him. Genuinely laughed out loud when I saw "fee that could reach £10m".

The best negotiator in world football sure does like to bend over and get pumped time and time again.

 

Moot point - but it says is expected to be worth more than £10m.

I admit though, I suspect they are putting a rather large amount of faith in the sell-on clause to bail them out of this being a cheap deal.

 

you said:

“Where have I ever said Watford should not sell players? You don't sell for poor prices,”

You seem to agree we need to sell players but at the same time think the prices for Doucoure, Estupinian and Suarez are too low which indicates you consider they should not have been sold. Therefore if you were in charge you would not have made any meaningful sales at this stage. On one hand you are saying we need to sell but on the other hand that we should not have made any sales as the prices offered.

Irrespective of whether we got the best possible deal (I agree we did not) the issue is do we need to sell or not in order to raise money? If we had not sold Doucoure, Estupinan or Suarez because we thought the offers too low where would we raise the money from?

Appreciate we may not agree on this one.