| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic 15:58 - Oct 7 with 11862 views | UTS1885 |
Those responsible in the boardroom for bringing back the deranged idiot Matt Le Tissier clearly failed to see all the woeful, disgraceful garbage he has been promoting and pumping out since 2020. He showed no responsibility towards our club and was rightly removed in shame from his position as a club ambassador. He has become a total laughing stock in football and is ridiculed for his obnoxious, arrogant comments in the national media.
Not in my name, Dragan, it must be said — or in the names of many other fans who saw what he was saying and have morals. Le Tissier is nothing more than a shameless embarrassment, and he brought that on himself.
To the 600 Sotonians that died from covid disease for this prat to say it was a scam and recently 'nonsense' RIP
No debate or replies from me as its done and dusted and there for everyone to see. [Post edited 9 Oct 17:20]
|  | | |  |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 14:53 - Oct 9 with 5242 views | saint901 |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 05:05 - Oct 9 by Jellybaby |
You seem to be accusing Le Tiss of “thought crime” and that if he ventures too far outside the Overton window then he should be discarded.
You are basically saying the same thing as the obsessively deranged UTS/Poirot, but in a more measured way - iron fist in a velvet glove one might say.
I find your intolerant views slightly troubling 901. |
Troubling?
I'm saying that he has probably earned the right to represent the club but that it's a two way contract.
One way is the club rewarding his for his efforts. The other is that he does nothing overt to damage the club.
His behaviour is up to him. If he thinks he behaves in a manner which will no breach the terms of engagement, fine. If in the minds of others he breaches the terms then there are consequences.
Thankfully for him - and you Mr Jellybaby - I'm not the arbiter here and have no influence. |  | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 15:47 - Oct 9 with 5186 views | Jellybaby |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 14:53 - Oct 9 by saint901 |
Troubling?
I'm saying that he has probably earned the right to represent the club but that it's a two way contract.
One way is the club rewarding his for his efforts. The other is that he does nothing overt to damage the club.
His behaviour is up to him. If he thinks he behaves in a manner which will no breach the terms of engagement, fine. If in the minds of others he breaches the terms then there are consequences.
Thankfully for him - and you Mr Jellybaby - I'm not the arbiter here and have no influence. |
Yes troubling 901. I see you as the over officious clerk signing off the prison sentences in the dissenters gulag for daring to challenge the party line.
Le Tiss will run his life by his own conscience not be kowtowed by any employer or even worse passing popular opinion.
Most on here can now appreciate these qualities and are able to agree to disagree if necessary. Those that talk about “consequences” for thought crime and wrong speak have no idea where this leads or if they do, don’t care. | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 16:29 - Oct 9 with 5145 views | Butty101 |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 15:47 - Oct 9 by Jellybaby |
Yes troubling 901. I see you as the over officious clerk signing off the prison sentences in the dissenters gulag for daring to challenge the party line.
Le Tiss will run his life by his own conscience not be kowtowed by any employer or even worse passing popular opinion.
Most on here can now appreciate these qualities and are able to agree to disagree if necessary. Those that talk about “consequences” for thought crime and wrong speak have no idea where this leads or if they do, don’t care. |
I see you as a David Icke type nut job. |  |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 17:39 - Oct 9 with 5107 views | Jellybaby |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 16:29 - Oct 9 by Butty101 |
I see you as a David Icke type nut job. |
I see you as someone who resorts to insults when someone says something you don't agree with. | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 18:31 - Oct 9 with 5072 views | Butty101 |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 17:39 - Oct 9 by Jellybaby |
I see you as someone who resorts to insults when someone says something you don't agree with. |
Much like you insulted 901 yes? | |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 01:55 - Oct 10 with 4908 views | Jellybaby |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 18:31 - Oct 9 by Butty101 |
Much like you insulted 901 yes? |
But Butty that wasn’t an insult to 901, that was a prediction! We are like a couple of old boxers slogging it out, I don’t think he needs your support - he’s a worthy opponent.
Anyway, I remember now what your beef is in this from another thread and I am sorry for your situation friend. | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 06:41 - Oct 10 with 4028 views | Butty101 |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 01:55 - Oct 10 by Jellybaby |
But Butty that wasn’t an insult to 901, that was a prediction! We are like a couple of old boxers slogging it out, I don’t think he needs your support - he’s a worthy opponent.
Anyway, I remember now what your beef is in this from another thread and I am sorry for your situation friend. |
You have a better memory than me | |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 09:11 - Oct 10 with 3676 views | saint901 |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 15:47 - Oct 9 by Jellybaby |
Yes troubling 901. I see you as the over officious clerk signing off the prison sentences in the dissenters gulag for daring to challenge the party line.
Le Tiss will run his life by his own conscience not be kowtowed by any employer or even worse passing popular opinion.
Most on here can now appreciate these qualities and are able to agree to disagree if necessary. Those that talk about “consequences” for thought crime and wrong speak have no idea where this leads or if they do, don’t care. |
Good morning Mr Jellybaby.
I think your assessment of me is almost the complete opposite of reality although I can see why it suits you to think that way.
My view is that people are responsible for themselves and their own actions. If by those actions they place themselves outside an agreed contract or the law, then that is their choice. By straying from agreed terms, they are necessarily liable for the consequences.
If Le Tiss wishes to enter a contract with its terms and conditions the it's not unreasonable to expect him and the other party to abide by its terms. If he or the other party decides hat they cannot keep the terms, then leave the contract.
He can make whatever personal choice he likes so long as he is prepared for the consequence.
There are presently no consequences for thought crime because there is no definition or practical way to recognise what that is. Perhaps the closest is when we see wild and outrageous and usually ill informed "internet sleuths" present theories about actual crimes or incidents. I'd point to the recent Lucy Letby conviction and the disappearance of Nicola Bulley.
Sadly, it seems that those who think that those situations (and others) are evidence of "deeper" misfeasance are perfectly prepared to spin untenable theories and unevidenced lies in order to collect clicks. Even more tragic are those whose lives are so empty or who are so easily led by the thoughts of others, that they find this sort of thing worth clicking.
There are many issues about the political administrations of the past 50 years that I disagree with. I am very far from being a passive acceptor of every dictat issued. (May surprise you Mr J that I'm seen by some "in authority" as a disruptor who causes them inconvenience and on a couple of occasions have shown that the interpretation of law offered was incorrect.)
I do however think that people are responsible for themselves and if they have views. actions which are seen as unwanted by others, then so be it. Express your views but don't expect those who have a different agenda to support you.
As for "opponent", I'm not sure that is a word I would use.
A bit like the claimed existence of a deity I find many of Mr J's theories and claims impossible to evidence without proof. And a bit like the claimed existence of a deity, ultimately all those questions end with "you have to have faith". Might be a flaw in my character but I prefer proof to faith and without the first, I cannot get to the second. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 14:48 - Oct 10 with 3602 views | Jellybaby |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 09:11 - Oct 10 by saint901 |
Good morning Mr Jellybaby.
I think your assessment of me is almost the complete opposite of reality although I can see why it suits you to think that way.
My view is that people are responsible for themselves and their own actions. If by those actions they place themselves outside an agreed contract or the law, then that is their choice. By straying from agreed terms, they are necessarily liable for the consequences.
If Le Tiss wishes to enter a contract with its terms and conditions the it's not unreasonable to expect him and the other party to abide by its terms. If he or the other party decides hat they cannot keep the terms, then leave the contract.
He can make whatever personal choice he likes so long as he is prepared for the consequence.
There are presently no consequences for thought crime because there is no definition or practical way to recognise what that is. Perhaps the closest is when we see wild and outrageous and usually ill informed "internet sleuths" present theories about actual crimes or incidents. I'd point to the recent Lucy Letby conviction and the disappearance of Nicola Bulley.
Sadly, it seems that those who think that those situations (and others) are evidence of "deeper" misfeasance are perfectly prepared to spin untenable theories and unevidenced lies in order to collect clicks. Even more tragic are those whose lives are so empty or who are so easily led by the thoughts of others, that they find this sort of thing worth clicking.
There are many issues about the political administrations of the past 50 years that I disagree with. I am very far from being a passive acceptor of every dictat issued. (May surprise you Mr J that I'm seen by some "in authority" as a disruptor who causes them inconvenience and on a couple of occasions have shown that the interpretation of law offered was incorrect.)
I do however think that people are responsible for themselves and if they have views. actions which are seen as unwanted by others, then so be it. Express your views but don't expect those who have a different agenda to support you.
As for "opponent", I'm not sure that is a word I would use.
A bit like the claimed existence of a deity I find many of Mr J's theories and claims impossible to evidence without proof. And a bit like the claimed existence of a deity, ultimately all those questions end with "you have to have faith". Might be a flaw in my character but I prefer proof to faith and without the first, I cannot get to the second. |
I admit 901. I did not have you down as a disruptor - excited to hear your examples. I do remember you are anti Royal Family but appear not to carry your dislike of Elites in to other areas.
There are consequences to thought crime in that you will get de-platformed, shadow banned, de-monetised, defunded and sacked. Le Tiss was sacked by Sky for wrong think,while Jamie Carragher can spit at a young girl and keep his job???
If your employer attaches political conditions to your contract then I would see that as unacceptable and against “western values”, whatever they are these days.
If you are such a dissident why do you always highlight the unevidenced lies on the internet rather than the unevidenced lies within government? Is one a softer target than the other?
As for “evidence”, I would challenge you on this. A belief in a deity for example as you have used is in my opinion way more logical than no deity. The Big Bang theory and evolution are logically ludicrous - when do we ever see order come from chaos in nature, a far more rational belief with the overwhelming support of peoples throughout history is to believe in a creator, to me this is blatantly obvious and you have all the proof you need all around us.
Similarly to think there is not corruption and conspiracy in high places is naive, to think there is not a pyramidical system(S) as there is in every other organisation is also naive - just follow the money, it always seems to end up with Black Rock and Vanguard et al. Why do we have the forever wars? Do you know a normal person hot for war?
You can spend your time debunking conspiracy theories, but you would be better off challenging the actions of our overlords and seeing if they are subjugating and immiserating ordinary people who just want to get on with their lives?
Please supply me evidence that there is no God and also that there is no corruption in governments and also that agendas are not handed to governments to implement and also that wrongthink won’t get you penalised and that wars are not money making rackets . That’s just for starters. | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 15:36 - Oct 10 with 3577 views | City_boy |
Wow, this is getting a bit deep. I am off to the football forum ! [Post edited 10 Oct 15:38]
| | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 16:10 - Oct 10 with 3568 views | saint901 |
Wow, that's a lot Mr J!
I used to be part of the establishment and I have spent a good deal of my professional career battling the same establishment. I would therefore be so bold as to suggest that I have a slightly better than average understanding of how some of it works. Because of that I would find it very hard to believe that a small (or even a large) cabal of people could be manipulating the system for the advantage of the "elite".
So could such a system (UK or Western world) create and hold secret the fact that they're doing what they do for the benefit of the relatively few? I think not. I think it impossible for that big a secret to be held for so long by so many.
Do I think some individual or group sat behind a keyboard with no restrictions or oversight could think up and make available lies and nonsense? Yes, why not? They answer only to themselves (unless of course they also are being manipulated by the elite).
You are correct that I'm not a supporter of our or any other monarchy or system based on a monarchy. I think the days in which only the very wealthy could afford to be educated and therefore were better able to govern than the mass of uneducated, are long gone and with them the need for that system. I think that hereditary peerages and other aristocracy based processes should also be abolished and with them the House of Lords.
I'd keep a second chamber of law makers but give them real power and purpose and make sure that they had the range of skills required.
Do I "hate" the elite? Well, I'm not sure who the elite are. I have met some extremely wealthy people (worked for some of them) and in the main they are charming and amiable but driven by what I consider to be an ill founded view that he who has most money is more important than everybody else. Look at Musk. He thinks because he has money he is above not just the law but basic human rights.
I have met (and worked for) politicians; titled people; celebrities; famous faces and some notorious faces. With one or two notable exceptions, they are also charming and polite but are also driven by power; ancestry; a craving for fame; internal lusts. In their way, these people are just as sad and needy as the very wealthy, just requiring a different drug.
Big bang and evolution pointing to the existence of a creator? No - don't buy that. I think the fact that life fills every available space at every available opportunity, often in conditions that are extreme, is proof that we are a lovely accident.
Love the attempt to flip the creator argument around! I say I think that without proof I'm unwilling to accept the existence of a creator and you say that I need evidence of there being no creator in order to believe that. Genius and lifted from the conspiracy handbook.
Belief in a creator or faith in the existence of such an entity is a personal thing. I detest any religion which seeks to force upon the weak minded a code or process which is usually accompanied by a group of people in fancy dress. I understand that faith and religion and belief in a creator are entirely different, if connected, issues but some bloke in fancy dress threatening eternal damnation unless I think like the rest of his sheep/followers? Not for me.
But this thread is about one man who in a past life was a gifted player at our club and whether he is a suitable choice for ambassador. My view remains, that who he was then is not who he is now. For so long as he can retain that distinction and our club's reputation is not damaged by what I see as his lies on some issues, fine. If he cannot do that he should be distanced. His choice. | | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 17:47 - Oct 10 with 3515 views | saintmark1976 |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 16:10 - Oct 10 by saint901 |
Wow, that's a lot Mr J!
I used to be part of the establishment and I have spent a good deal of my professional career battling the same establishment. I would therefore be so bold as to suggest that I have a slightly better than average understanding of how some of it works. Because of that I would find it very hard to believe that a small (or even a large) cabal of people could be manipulating the system for the advantage of the "elite".
So could such a system (UK or Western world) create and hold secret the fact that they're doing what they do for the benefit of the relatively few? I think not. I think it impossible for that big a secret to be held for so long by so many.
Do I think some individual or group sat behind a keyboard with no restrictions or oversight could think up and make available lies and nonsense? Yes, why not? They answer only to themselves (unless of course they also are being manipulated by the elite).
You are correct that I'm not a supporter of our or any other monarchy or system based on a monarchy. I think the days in which only the very wealthy could afford to be educated and therefore were better able to govern than the mass of uneducated, are long gone and with them the need for that system. I think that hereditary peerages and other aristocracy based processes should also be abolished and with them the House of Lords.
I'd keep a second chamber of law makers but give them real power and purpose and make sure that they had the range of skills required.
Do I "hate" the elite? Well, I'm not sure who the elite are. I have met some extremely wealthy people (worked for some of them) and in the main they are charming and amiable but driven by what I consider to be an ill founded view that he who has most money is more important than everybody else. Look at Musk. He thinks because he has money he is above not just the law but basic human rights.
I have met (and worked for) politicians; titled people; celebrities; famous faces and some notorious faces. With one or two notable exceptions, they are also charming and polite but are also driven by power; ancestry; a craving for fame; internal lusts. In their way, these people are just as sad and needy as the very wealthy, just requiring a different drug.
Big bang and evolution pointing to the existence of a creator? No - don't buy that. I think the fact that life fills every available space at every available opportunity, often in conditions that are extreme, is proof that we are a lovely accident.
Love the attempt to flip the creator argument around! I say I think that without proof I'm unwilling to accept the existence of a creator and you say that I need evidence of there being no creator in order to believe that. Genius and lifted from the conspiracy handbook.
Belief in a creator or faith in the existence of such an entity is a personal thing. I detest any religion which seeks to force upon the weak minded a code or process which is usually accompanied by a group of people in fancy dress. I understand that faith and religion and belief in a creator are entirely different, if connected, issues but some bloke in fancy dress threatening eternal damnation unless I think like the rest of his sheep/followers? Not for me.
But this thread is about one man who in a past life was a gifted player at our club and whether he is a suitable choice for ambassador. My view remains, that who he was then is not who he is now. For so long as he can retain that distinction and our club's reputation is not damaged by what I see as his lies on some issues, fine. If he cannot do that he should be distanced. His choice. |
Wow, a football forum where Jelly and 901 are knocking spots off each other as to whether or not God exists.
Almost makes the question of Russell Martin staying or going appear totally irrelevant, which compared to The Big Bang Theory v Creator Theory, I suppose it is.
Reminds me of the banner at Wembley in 1976 “ Jesus Saves but Channon knocks in the rebounds”. | |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 09:36 - Oct 11 with 3377 views | Jellybaby |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 16:10 - Oct 10 by saint901 |
Wow, that's a lot Mr J!
I used to be part of the establishment and I have spent a good deal of my professional career battling the same establishment. I would therefore be so bold as to suggest that I have a slightly better than average understanding of how some of it works. Because of that I would find it very hard to believe that a small (or even a large) cabal of people could be manipulating the system for the advantage of the "elite".
So could such a system (UK or Western world) create and hold secret the fact that they're doing what they do for the benefit of the relatively few? I think not. I think it impossible for that big a secret to be held for so long by so many.
Do I think some individual or group sat behind a keyboard with no restrictions or oversight could think up and make available lies and nonsense? Yes, why not? They answer only to themselves (unless of course they also are being manipulated by the elite).
You are correct that I'm not a supporter of our or any other monarchy or system based on a monarchy. I think the days in which only the very wealthy could afford to be educated and therefore were better able to govern than the mass of uneducated, are long gone and with them the need for that system. I think that hereditary peerages and other aristocracy based processes should also be abolished and with them the House of Lords.
I'd keep a second chamber of law makers but give them real power and purpose and make sure that they had the range of skills required.
Do I "hate" the elite? Well, I'm not sure who the elite are. I have met some extremely wealthy people (worked for some of them) and in the main they are charming and amiable but driven by what I consider to be an ill founded view that he who has most money is more important than everybody else. Look at Musk. He thinks because he has money he is above not just the law but basic human rights.
I have met (and worked for) politicians; titled people; celebrities; famous faces and some notorious faces. With one or two notable exceptions, they are also charming and polite but are also driven by power; ancestry; a craving for fame; internal lusts. In their way, these people are just as sad and needy as the very wealthy, just requiring a different drug.
Big bang and evolution pointing to the existence of a creator? No - don't buy that. I think the fact that life fills every available space at every available opportunity, often in conditions that are extreme, is proof that we are a lovely accident.
Love the attempt to flip the creator argument around! I say I think that without proof I'm unwilling to accept the existence of a creator and you say that I need evidence of there being no creator in order to believe that. Genius and lifted from the conspiracy handbook.
Belief in a creator or faith in the existence of such an entity is a personal thing. I detest any religion which seeks to force upon the weak minded a code or process which is usually accompanied by a group of people in fancy dress. I understand that faith and religion and belief in a creator are entirely different, if connected, issues but some bloke in fancy dress threatening eternal damnation unless I think like the rest of his sheep/followers? Not for me.
But this thread is about one man who in a past life was a gifted player at our club and whether he is a suitable choice for ambassador. My view remains, that who he was then is not who he is now. For so long as he can retain that distinction and our club's reputation is not damaged by what I see as his lies on some issues, fine. If he cannot do that he should be distanced. His choice. |
901, you accuse Le Tiss of being a liar, please provide proof for these allegations as that is much stronger than saying you disagree with him.
Your observations on the wealthy and celebs are interesting and I would agree, very few if any stars make it big without selling their souls to the devil as witnessed by P Diddy and Harvey Weinstein revelations and as stated by Bob Dylan and Justin Berber.
You misunderstood my point on big bang and evolution which I (along with the majority of people alive today for what that is worth) consider to be ludicrous, scientifically unsupported nonsense - a bit like saying a masterpiece from Monet or Mozart was a lovely accident - utter b*llocks.
You point out that some religion can be coercive and yet you miss the coercive nature of present day (secular) society orchestrated by our overlords, where for example if you don’t get an experimental vaccine, you are a bad person and are killing Granny.
Don’t forget, I am waiting with bated breath for an example of your dissident behaviour which I am hoping will amount to more than running through a field of corn! | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 10:24 - Oct 11 with 3329 views | saint901 |
No Mr J I have not accused Le Tiss of anything.
I have pointed out numerous times that he can believe what he likes and say what he likes - evidence heavy or evidence free - but if he is in a contractual relationship with another party, he needs to mindful of the T&C's of that contract or risk breaching it.
Speaking of evidence, you claim that the majority of people alive today think that Big Bang and Evolution are incorrect or didn't happen. Any proof that the "majority" (which I think would be circa 4bn+) do think that? | | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 10:58 - Oct 11 with 3296 views | Jellybaby |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 10:24 - Oct 11 by saint901 |
No Mr J I have not accused Le Tiss of anything.
I have pointed out numerous times that he can believe what he likes and say what he likes - evidence heavy or evidence free - but if he is in a contractual relationship with another party, he needs to mindful of the T&C's of that contract or risk breaching it.
Speaking of evidence, you claim that the majority of people alive today think that Big Bang and Evolution are incorrect or didn't happen. Any proof that the "majority" (which I think would be circa 4bn+) do think that? |
For so long as he can retain that distinction and our club's reputation is not damaged by what I see as his lies on some issues, fine.
Sounds like an accusation to me 901? | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 14:48 - Oct 11 with 3237 views | saint901 |
Please read it carefully.
It's by what I see as lies. Very personal, first person.
Fortunately for him, I'm not the arbiter here - that is the club and their lawyers - and clearly they see matters differently.
I suspect my views on say Covid will be at variance to others and much may come down to interpretation and viewpoint.
There are however some hard factual truths which I think are difficult to deny.
Did people catch Covid and die? Yes. Were we (the UK and world) ready to deal with it? No. Did vaccines mitigate the impact? Yes. Did vaccines in very few cases do harm? Yes. Do I think on balance vaccines were a better option than losing perhaps millions more people to Covid waiting for natural immunity? Yes.Do I think Coivd was a man made bio weapon that escaped? On balance I think I do, yes. What was the purpose of that bioweapon? Probably the same as the purpose for all weapons, to create an advantage for one side. | | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 15:48 - Oct 11 with 3216 views | City_boy |
Gents, time to move on. [Post edited 11 Oct 16:01]
| | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 17:05 - Oct 11 with 3161 views | Jellybaby |
Out of respect for City Boy’s polite plea, I will leave the argument there. Obviously don’t agree with your conclusions 901, but always a pleasure locking horns with you.
Oh just to answer your question - best estimate 68% of the world population believe in creation.
Enjoy your weekend - at least Saints won’t lose! | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 18:17 - Oct 11 with 3119 views | grumpy |
'Oh just to answer your question - best estimate 68% of the world population believe in creation'
That must have been a big survey.  |  | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 20:50 - Oct 13 with 874 views | Number_58 |
Probably the biggest cheer at the Legends game today was when Le Tiss came on as sub. He slotted home a penalty with familiar consumate ease and was still signing autographs half an hour after the game had finished. He may have a few mad ideas that people don't agree with, but he's very much still worshipped in these parts. |  | | |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 21:16 - Oct 13 with 852 views | cocklebreath |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 20:50 - Oct 13 by Number_58 |
Probably the biggest cheer at the Legends game today was when Le Tiss came on as sub. He slotted home a penalty with familiar consumate ease and was still signing autographs half an hour after the game had finished. He may have a few mad ideas that people don't agree with, but he's very much still worshipped in these parts. |
Great to hear |  |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 10:12 - Oct 14 with 740 views | 1885_SFC |
Happy birthday Matt Le Tiss - 56 today.
I don't care what you say, think or do. You'll always be a club legend in my eyes and the best player (in my eyes) to ever pull on a Saints shirt. I used to pay my money just to see you play over many, many years at The Dell.
Have a good day. |  |
| |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 10:16 - Oct 14 with 733 views | saintwizzler |
| So Sorry Dragan and Sport Republic on 10:12 - Oct 14 by 1885_SFC |
Happy birthday Matt Le Tiss - 56 today.
I don't care what you say, think or do. You'll always be a club legend in my eyes and the best player (in my eyes) to ever pull on a Saints shirt. I used to pay my money just to see you play over many, many years at The Dell.
Have a good day. |
Well said |  |
| We thought that we had the answers,
It was the questions we had wrong. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
