| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? 16:41 - May 17 with 1416 views | NthQldITFC | After studiously avoiding anything related to the Premier League for 19 of the last 20 seasons, I am paying attention for the last couple of games this year. I assume (but without any proper kernowledge) that Wet Spam are the 'worser' club, based mainly on their GD and their silly song. Do we this want them to stay up as more of a target for us next season? |  |
| |  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:07 - May 17 with 336 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:04 - May 17 by grow_our_own | 100% Churchmans. Every Shoreditch charlatan hipster is a WH fan. They move out to the shires after a few years and then start supporting someone else. I resent funding WH from my tax for that pitiful excuse of a football stadium/olympic legacy. WH is a club that's completely lost its soul and will spiral is my prediction/hope, whereas Spurs would bounce straight back up. [Post edited 17 May 18:07]
|
Their squad actually has some players that would and actually have previously wiped the floor with the champ. Shows how big a job our summer is. [Post edited 17 May 18:08]
|  |
|  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:08 - May 17 with 331 views | Churchman |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:04 - May 17 by grow_our_own | 100% Churchmans. Every Shoreditch charlatan hipster is a WH fan. They move out to the shires after a few years and then start supporting someone else. I resent funding WH from my tax for that pitiful excuse of a football stadium/olympic legacy. WH is a club that's completely lost its soul and will spiral is my prediction/hope, whereas Spurs would bounce straight back up. [Post edited 17 May 18:07]
|
Even when that scum had a soul it wasn’t a very nice one, as several run ins and near misses on the football violence front back in the day will testify. |  | |  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:13 - May 17 with 302 views | pointofblue |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 17:56 - May 17 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior | That Newcastle second goal was a bit of a frightening reminder of what we will be up against in a few months. |
Was a stunning goal. The substitution appears to have improved West Ham slightly, though they could hardly be worse! |  |
|  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:14 - May 17 with 296 views | Wacko |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 17:56 - May 17 by grow_our_own | Get in Toon! Prefer WH to go down. They could spiral downwards in their awful, hated, soon to be half-empty, white elephant stadium. Essex supporters will see the blue light. [Post edited 17 May 17:58]
|
Is that a good thing?? (the last bit..) |  |
|  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:26 - May 17 with 263 views | Illinoisblue |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 17:32 - May 17 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior | Hadn’t considered, can’t hurt, might mean more Sundays though. |
Every little helps. It already seems there are more Prem games on Sundays than Saturdays. Sundays at least better than Monday night games. |  |
|  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:56 - May 17 with 232 views | pointofblue | 3-0. Game over. West Ham's survival hopes over? |  |
|  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:59 - May 17 with 226 views | dirtyboy |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 18:56 - May 17 by pointofblue | 3-0. Game over. West Ham's survival hopes over? |
And no one in that team is be clamouring to buy. Maybe Tatay as I type lol |  | |  |
| Do we want Wet Spam or Spuds to stay up? on 19:00 - May 17 with 226 views | pointofblue | Wow. Did I post too soon? [Post edited 17 May 19:00]
|  |
|  |
| |