It is good that you feel sorry for him, but if you want to do right by him, then he has to be sacked (if that is the set consequence by the club)



Like Standee has said, you cannot help someone who does not want to be helped. Wanting to be helped is the 'first' step. All the time he is getting away without the consequence of his actions, then he is not going to want that help.



You have to set firm boundaries, and if they cross that boundary then (for their own good) you have to enforce the consequence for doing so. If you don't then you are letting them down.

Indeed simply because if the don't uphold their own rules they bring another set on problems to the door as if they then bin somebody else off over problems they could be classed as picking on the person they let go when Tansey wasn't.

From all the footage I've seen of Crane, he'd still walk into the team for me with the creativity he offered. My point is that it takes someone that good to consider such tolerance for. Johns was another from the stories you hear, got up to all sorts but still brilliant on the pitch. Tansey's 'just' good, not great.

Haven't you personally sponsored Ben Cockayne since his "transgression"? Wind your neck in.

I'd retract that libelous statement as soon as you can.



You obviously didn't know Mick Crane at all

guess he couldnt drink then ??

This thread is great





Earlier in the piece a poster said Tansey goes on the lash with Bailey ? he is 6 ft odd, was it him with Tansey in the box on Saturday ?





Tansey was not that sorry when he called Agar a prick at Donny





The players are well piissed off with him, not sure where all this talk of the players believing Tansey is the next messiah came from

Dont recal any posters saying that to be fair what was said is they all know how good a player he can be but brain farts too often, think thats how it went

I think the club has over reacted.

He's also mightily relieved that seraphic Willie is all innocence and is still on track to arrive shortly.

And if it was a 17 year old no mark you would have the same view yes?

Yes that was once not '3 times'

Slightly diffrent.