Right, first off, I'm going to congratulate both the team and Steve Kean on today's result. A clean sheet has been well over due and maybe now we can look forward to a few more as we look to avoid the drop.
On topic now though. Over the past few months, there have been numerous clubs with active protests against their respective clubs for a variety of different reasons, but the only club I've seen get slated for it have been Rovers fans. Why?
Wolves fans protested today, and apparently even had a go at one of their own players. Villa fans protested against McLeish. Liverpool fans want Dalglish gone despite their first silverware since 2006. Arsenal fans wanted Wenger out until their recent purple patch and even the prawn sandwich brigade have given old red-nose a few choice words this season.
What's the difference?
What is the difference?
posted on 10/3/12
i just think the nature of the protest was more personal than any other case. not sayin that justifies it, but it makes it stand out more
posted on 11/3/12
More personal? Hardly. Here it is again with fans of other teams being ridiculously uninformed about the situation.
posted on 11/3/12
Wanting the manager to leave the club is by definition personal, but how is that different in the other examples mentioned?
posted on 11/3/12
This says it all about Wolves fans
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2113189/Jamie-OHara-attacked-Wolves-fans-outside-Molineux.html
posted on 11/3/12
A bit rash to paint all Wolves fans with the same brush because of one incident like that. It could well have been a Rovers fan doing the same thing to Steve Kean for example, and I would not like to pooled into the idiot category because of someone else's foolishness.
posted on 11/3/12
It couldn't dusty, Kean has HAD to employ Hong Kong Fuey to protect him!