Bolton Wanderers Forum The-Wanderer.co.uk

Not changed then, i for one am glad he has gone

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... l?ITO=1490

Damn, somebody enjoys themselves!

Notice how he is singled out over other players?

I bet they all weren't back home and tucked up in bed by 9pm.

Oooh, footballers in Birthday celebration shocker. Not just footballers but Jonny Foreigners too. Send the buggers back.

he was a legend
and when i go sunderland away i will be chanting his name at some point !
disserpointed he went sunderland though

I hope he keeps it up!

Yeah, but it is unacceptable though isn't it?

Diouf is was and always will be a liability for a club.

You either live with it and put up with his lack of professionalism as Sam did.

Or get rid as Megson did.

BWFC_Insane wrote:Diouf is was and always will be a liability for a club.

You either live with it and put up with his lack of professionalism as Sam did.

Or get rid as Megson did.

MEGSON OUT !

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Yeah, but it is unacceptable though isn't it?

Why?

Lord Kangana wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Yeah, but it is unacceptable though isn't it?

Why?

As a bare minimum you expect players to be professionals and keep themselves in the best physical condition possible for games and training.

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:

Lord Kangana wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Yeah, but it is unacceptable though isn't it?

Why?

As a bare minimum you expect players to be professionals and keep themselves in the best physical condition possible for games and training.

I see, so you've already got him down as getting wrecked have you? Come on, PB. You of all people.

Bruce Rioja wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:

Lord Kangana wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Yeah, but it is unacceptable though isn't it?

Why?

As a bare minimum you expect players to be professionals and keep themselves in the best physical condition possible for games and training.

I see, so you've already got him down as getting wrecked have you? Come on, PB. You of all people.

No, I haven't.. but is that the only measure?

If players are out drinking champagne at night clubs two days before matches, then that's unacceptable, in my book. I don't see that the line is only crossed if the player gets 'wrecked', however that is measured.

At the very least it will probably be a breach of his contract potentially giving rise to a charge of misconduct.

Unacceptable, as I say. These things have moved on since the time you last played the game.

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:

Bruce Rioja wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:

Lord Kangana wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:Yeah, but it is unacceptable though isn't it?

Why?

As a bare minimum you expect players to be professionals and keep themselves in the best physical condition possible for games and training.

I see, so you've already got him down as getting wrecked have you? Come on, PB. You of all people.

No, I haven't.. but is that the only measure?

If players are out drinking champagne at night clubs two days before matches, then that's unacceptable, in my book. I don't see that the line is only crossed if the player gets 'wrecked', however that is measured.

At the very least it will probably be a breach of his contract potentially giving rise to a charge of misconduct.

Unacceptable, as I say. These things have moved on since the time you last played the game.

you expect him on roughly 40,000 a week and not to spend any on booze at the age of 25 ? is he....when hes still only young

potter1989bwfc wrote: you expect him on roughly 40,000 a week and not to spend any on booze at the age of 25 ? is he....when hes still only young

In the run-up to a game - yes. Did you not expect that of him when he played for us? As you say, he's got a lifetime of boozing ahead of him when he stops collecting money to be a professional athlete.

So Diouf drinking champagne was the reason Sunderland lost 5-0?

Course it was,not like they were 3-0 down by the time he came on or anything...

What a horrible article,even for the Daily Mail.

Why I shall come down there and fetch thee a clout.

Maybe it's more to do with my loathing of the sensationalist way in which the Daily Mail reports..... well... anything. Weren't they also the loudest when the Legal Aid system provided Diouf with an interpreter?

I simply cannot sit in judgement on anything reported bu the Daily Mail. If it transpires that he was on the lash within 48 hours of a game then yes, that's unacceptable, but all we actually know from that report is that he was on licenced premises. You'll regularly find me on licenced premises drinking water.

potter1989bwfc wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:

Bruce Rioja wrote:

mummywhycantieatcrayons wrote:

Lord Kangana wrote: Why?

As a bare minimum you expect players to be professionals and keep themselves in the best physical condition possible for games and training.

I see, so you've already got him down as getting wrecked have you? Come on, PB. You of all people.

No, I haven't.. but is that the only measure?

If players are out drinking champagne at night clubs two days before matches, then that's unacceptable, in my book. I don't see that the line is only crossed if the player gets 'wrecked', however that is measured.

At the very least it will probably be a breach of his contract potentially giving rise to a charge of misconduct.

Unacceptable, as I say. These things have moved on since the time you last played the game.

you expect him on roughly 40,000 a week and not to spend any on booze at the age of 25 ? is he....when hes still only young

Um on 40 grand a week I expect him to do whatever the hell he is told. For what he is paid complete and total professionalism should not even be in question.

cophilie wrote:So Diouf drinking champagne was the reason Sunderland lost 5-0?

Course it was,not like they were 3-0 down by the time he came on or anything...

Is that really the point?

What a horrible article,even for the Daily Mail.

Agree that it's not a great article, not least in their insistence on listing his career indiscretions at the bottom.

Bruce Rioja wrote:Why I shall come down there and fetch thee a clout.

Maybe it's more to do with my loathing of the sensationalist way in which the Daily Mail reports..... well... anything. Weren't they also the loudest when the Legal Aid system provided Diouf with an interpreter?

I simply cannot sit in judgement on anything reported bu the Daily Mail. If it transpires that he was on the lash within 48 hours of a game then yes, that's unacceptable, but all we actually know from that report is that he was on licenced premises. You'll regularly find me on licenced premises drinking water.

Sure, the veracity of the report is another issue entirely.

The emboldened bit of your post shows that we're in no disagreement.

Though I wouldn't mind running that last sentence of yours through a lie detector.

You'd lose, but only at lunchtime.