-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Huddlestone
- Thread starter par
- Start date
clevelandspur
Pascal Chimbonda
Still that is making a pretty big assumption it could have been about anything really
BrainOfLevy
Michael Carrick
It definitely should have been, I'm not denying that.
I just think it was strange to make that tweet, then probably receive loads of mentions from football fans saying '@TomHuddlestone 6, hope that wasn't about AVB!!!' while he then continues tweeting about Channel 4's comedy night, so he knows full well how people are going to read into it. He then deletes it, and then some time after that decides to say that not everything he tweets is about football.
What I think happened was that he made the tweet, probably feeling a bit frustrated that AVB told him he wouldn't be straight back into the team, that he needed to get fitter, and was probably quite satisfied that a load of Spurs fans were on 'his side' of the argument. His agent/Levy/AVB/fellow players probably had a word with him, told him what exactly was happening, and forced him into deleting it and then finally denying it was anything to do with football a couple of days later. From reading his timeline around that time I detected a bit of a snide tone, he'd reply to people saying he was fit, but knowing he wasn't going to be playing. The implication being that it gets people on his side again. How could AVB leave him out etc etc.
I just don't see why he didn't deny it the same night, considering he was still using Twitter and received loads of worried tweets from Spurs fans. I don't see also why, if it was nothing to do with football, the need to delete it is there. Once he's clarified, surely we can then believe him if it really was nothing else.
clevelandspur
Pascal Chimbonda
Fair point. I hope its nothing to do with that time will tell I guess
parklane1
Tony Galvin
It probably has nothing to do with what he said on teletext, AVB has probably had a look at Hudd and accepted that he is a overated player who he no longer needs at the club.
Send him out on loan and hope that some club will like what they see and offer to buy him, i have said for weeks that i doubt he will be here at the end of the season.
Send him out on loan and hope that some club will like what they see and offer to buy him, i have said for weeks that i doubt he will be here at the end of the season.
If anything it's the other way. Hudd is told to go out on loan and gets a bit miffed.
You cannot alter time-based events - the facts are there to be seen
There is a point at which series of random 'coincident' become a sequence of events which are easily placed on a rather basic timeline producing what is rather obvious. Only if you are looking for it though
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
And therein lies the rub.
You are looking for issues, funnily enough you then find them...
parklane1
Tony Galvin
He is not good enough for a top team, nearly 200 games for Spurs and we keep banging on about his potential. AVB has seen him and realized he will not suit his team plan.
I look for explanations - and ones which are built on consequential series of events which were factual reality
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
It is conjecture, no matter how much you want to dress it up, and nothing more.
It proves nothing but your vivid imagination.
It proves nothing but your vivid imagination.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
And as Ive said - you can see anything you want if you stare really hard and have a vivd imagination.
You are filling in the gaps, that is not proof.
You are filling in the gaps, that is not proof.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
It is also quite amusing as that is what you railed against people doing RE VDV earlier.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
Classic 2+2=5 is taking a string of events and fabricating the motive/context/story behind them.
Exhibit A = Arcspace contribution to the last few pages in this thread.
Exhibit A = Arcspace contribution to the last few pages in this thread.
nayimfromthehalfwayline
Andy Thompson
What happened was Huddlestone made some tweets. There is (and never has been) any denying it.
What is laughable is your using a little timeline to try and infer context and reason behind them, to try and attribute them to issues between player and management - when there is absolutely no proof for it whatsoever.
Its that sort of crap the papers get slagged for on here all the time, we dont need it from fans as well.
What is laughable is your using a little timeline to try and infer context and reason behind them, to try and attribute them to issues between player and management - when there is absolutely no proof for it whatsoever.
Its that sort of crap the papers get slagged for on here all the time, we dont need it from fans as well.
Calm down
I never suggested an issue between player and manager - that s the bit YOU made up. The scenario here suggests the reaction from one player to a specific event - nothing more or less - ie his personal view not a coup d'etait
No one here is suggesting (as far as I can see) he got sent on loan because of the tweets
I never suggested an issue between player and manager - that s the bit YOU made up. The scenario here suggests the reaction from one player to a specific event - nothing more or less - ie his personal view not a coup d'etait
No one here is suggesting (as far as I can see) he got sent on loan because of the tweets
Last edited:
Spursalot
Jimmy McCormick
Actually that's what i assumed you were stating. As after the quotes about avb sending him on loan, you stated: