Peter Lawwell's lies

people forget that we expected to not get through to the group stages at the end of last season. Cuz we knew this team wasn't good enough and we'd have to sell off a big asset in order to compensate.

we just really hoped we were wrong.

same thing happened to Lennon and the Europa league actually gave our players some good European experience which then led to us getting into the last 16.

lets hope the board back Ronny some more than jst another striker. We need another defended if VVD * off. I don't want Ambrose near our defence again.

 

did he really say we have to sell our best players because rangers went bust ,two matches against the huns = selling wanyama ,hooper wilson ,he must have forgot to mention the crazy sums of money brough in from playing in europe

 

Good interview and believeable as well.

 

"we will re-invest every penny into the club" so if the playing staff isn't seeing any of this money where is it all going?

 

Ahhhh all getting reeled in by the lawell fishing rod catch yourselfs a break fs!

 

Brain dead mugs in this thread, so fickle it's beyond a joke.

 

Very genuine interview. He speaks from knowledge and experience and not from a que.

 

That's why these executive types are trained in PR.

I've said on the lies thread my views. A lot of what he says does make sense, but I still feel he failed to answer why no-one of note with a fully-functioning torso (or pair of hairclippers) was brought in before the qualifiers. We've been crying out for a number 9, we failed prior to Maribor; we need an anchorman, not so much as a cheap arsewipe reporting "exclusives".

His answer seemed to be that Deila didn't want anyone, but given he's said on many occasions that the squad isn't good enough and that the squad needs strengthened; and he seems to wax lyrical about wingers, I don't believe a word of it. He was almost pinning the blame on Deila for this one which would be fine if we were talking tactics and team performance but not when we're talking about getting much-needed transfers over the line.

 

he said he wants to get in at least one other player i.e specovic and hopefully more

 

It's not the loss in revenue from the four games against them. The product of Scottish football is a lot less valuable. A club like Celtic relies heavily on gates and attendances are a lot lower.

 

He's a snake. "we could have bought the loan signings" Well why didn't you? Just shows you have no confidence in the players you are bringing in.

 

Pumped out of Europe in an embarrassing fashion, best players sold, team filled with dross, club legends like Lenny and Larsson knocking back the club they love, a 3rd or 4th choice who knows manager.

Aww it's pyoor awrite big Peter gave a mad pyoor genuine interview, here big man here's ma season ticket money and extra fur the taps and the weans taps.

 

If you could point to where he's misleading us and evidence it, that'd be a lot more helpful.

 

Maybe if we had tried that before we would not be stuck with so much dross now ?

 

Or we could bring in a player that we know will be good. I know it's a risk with any player if they will settle etc but we bring in nobodys who sit on they bench for their old team.

 

He has not replaced the quality of player he bleats on about. Wafflle from Lawwell.

 

Good interview the financial facts speak for themselves - Running costs circa £65 million income is down. We have done really well as a club when you consider the absolute mess if Scottish football, forget that you hate PL for one moment and take a rational look at the financial outgoings and incomings and tell me how anyone could do better without sending us down he road of the dead club.

 

The dead club went bust from decades of over spending and cheating, a PLC like us spending an extra £5 million or whatever for a season or two is not going to put us anywhere near like deadco ffs.

 

Usual statements for Lawwell which are open to interpretation. A fine politician in the making, he doesn't lie but is playing hide and seek with the truth( in my opinion).

The prime example is the statement he makes " We will back the manager, like we have done with every other manager". It's a vague statement. He can argue his point about backing the manager by naming signings etc but it's not the same as just handing the money over. The scenario and situations are different, signing guys on loan when a permanent addition was required.

Throughout the interview there are many more instances of vague statements which can be argued either way.

 

the football facts speak for themselves too ,when he talked about all the quality players we have did he not realize he already sold them all apart from commons who he wont give a new contract to ,had another listen to his attempted brainwashing and yes he said the overall revenue because of the huns demise,which is bullshit as the numbers have been falling steadily since he decided to downsize year after year