Renton

The bit in bold - I think that is one of the main problems with our board - they don't plan but stumble from one mistake to another. Why wasn't the replacement of Robson planned for, like Liverpool did that summer? Please, please, stop defending this practice of giving a manager a few games at the start of the season then sacking him without a planned replacement - that's how we ended up with Souness. I also though the appointment of Gullit would have been avoided with minimal research into the man's character - I was almost as gutted when we employed him as we were when we got Souness. If the rest of the fans were for him, well, more fool them, and it perfectly illustrates why the fans should not "elect" the manager. But once again, we have Shepherd proclaiming Roeder is the fans' choice. Jesus wept - not this particular fan he isn't.

Daglish wasn't given enough time to be successful though, wouldn't you agree? He was sacked far too early and, therefore, wasn't given the necessary backing imo. EDIT: Totally agree with SLP's and Zico's sentiments too. 136665[/snapback] I'm astounded. Dalglish was given too long. The man was a total disaster and it became very clearly that he was not going to achieve anything positive at the club. He managed to dismantle an excellent team that needed strengthening leaving us playing negative football even in a Cup Final. 138194[/snapback] The ridiculous thing was Bridget that he was sacked only 2 games into the season, after spending a lot on signings. Personally, I think a manager with his pedigree certainly deserved an extra year though (something I was never willing to give Souness because he was a proven failure). How could he possibly have been given less long anyway? There are all sorts of reasons why that team was dismantled btw, not all of them under Dalglish's control. Plus there were some serious mitigating circumstances why things went pear-shaped in 97-98, not least the loss of Shearer at his peak (compounded by the forced selling of Ferdinand, and Thomasson, who could have been superb, not settling in in time). That's not to say his time here went well, but the timing of his sacking and his replacement by a fuckwit were insane, only to be repeated 5 years later...... 138240[/snapback] Dogleash is summed up in one statement. He sold Pedro fucking wanker. The only reason he won the league with Rovers was Shearer, fact! (I recently heard Robbie Slater interviewed (starting 11 CM in that team) and they were his word.) 138263[/snapback] Beardsley was 36 or 37 ! Shearer was the main catalyst in Blackburns team, Ray Harford was supposedly a main one as well. Maybe if he had came here with him things would have been different. They had other good players at Blackburn though. Selling Ferdinand was a major boob, like Bellamy now, but I think Tomasson could and should have been kept. I think if he had played alongside Sir Les or Shearer he would have came on better here than he did, rather than play alongside Arsprilla who was no help to a young lad settling into a new club, country etc as he continuted to just amble around doing his own thing when he felt like it, and for some reason is idolised and called a crowd pleaser. He was nothing but a waste of space. Dalglish's mistake was not being able to get rid of him instead of Sir Les, or choosing to keep him instead of Sir Les. The chanting of "attack attack attack" is forever a memory that makes me curl up with complete frustration and sorrow. But the sacking of Dalglish 2 games into the season is a no brainer. Nobody at the time said we should sack him in the summer, even after the Cup Final. It was only when the season started it became obvious that despite the signings he had made, nothing was going to change. The board were right. If only they hadn't done the same with Souness. They were right to sack Gullit too. But they got Bobby Robson. I've said this before. You can't say the timing of Dalglish was wrong and the timing of Gullit was right. The timing is not important, the replacement is what matters. This is proven again by the fact that people said we should give Souness longer and not sack him last September, whereas if Roeder had taken over in September or October, what sort of season would we have had ? 138304[/snapback] Don't agree Leazes. You have to judge each case on its merits. How can you say it was obvious nothing was going to change after two games? A narrow defeat away to Chelsea and a draw at home to a recently promoted side who turned out to be rather good? Sorry, you can't defend the timing of that, just like you couldn't with Bobby. But what's worse, is that in both cases we sacked managers with proven pedigree and replaced them with fuckwits. The sacking of Gullit and Souness were entirely different matters, and both of them clearly got too long! I agree with a lot of what you say, but really, you are completely blinkered in your persistent defense of the board and Shepherd in particular. It's obvious in your mind he can do virtually no wrong. Well I suggest if this really was the case with our resources we might be doing just a bit better than we are now and may have actually won something by now. We never will while Shepherd is here, I'd bet you my house on that.

Daglish wasn't given enough time to be successful though, wouldn't you agree? He was sacked far too early and, therefore, wasn't given the necessary backing imo. EDIT: Totally agree with SLP's and Zico's sentiments too. 136665[/snapback] I'm astounded. Dalglish was given too long. The man was a total disaster and it became very clearly that he was not going to achieve anything positive at the club. He managed to dismantle an excellent team that needed strengthening leaving us playing negative football even in a Cup Final. 138194[/snapback] The ridiculous thing was Bridget that he was sacked only 2 games into the season, after spending a lot on signings. Personally, I think a manager with his pedigree certainly deserved an extra year though (something I was never willing to give Souness because he was a proven failure). How could he possibly have been given less long anyway? There are all sorts of reasons why that team was dismantled btw, not all of them under Dalglish's control. Plus there were some serious mitigating circumstances why things went pear-shaped in 97-98, not least the loss of Shearer at his peak (compounded by the forced selling of Ferdinand, and Thomasson, who could have been superb, not settling in in time). That's not to say his time here went well, but the timing of his sacking and his replacement by a fuckwit were insane, only to be repeated 5 years later...... 138240[/snapback] Dogleash is summed up in one statement. He sold Pedro fucking wanker. The only reason he won the league with Rovers was Shearer, fact! (I recently heard Robbie Slater interviewed (starting 11 CM in that team) and they were his word.) 138263[/snapback] Sorry, that's idiotic. It's ridiculous to judge a manager on one issue only. Dalglish could spot a good player - he was the one that signed Beardsley when at Liverpool, was he not? Plus, when he left us second time round, how old was he? 36 or 37? And people say Shearer is past it! What did Beardsley do afterwards? Fuck all. He was released at the right time. As for belittling his achievement at Blackburn, well, that's idiotic too. One man does not make a team, he assembled the best team in the premiership for a small town in Lancashire who a few years previously were languishing in the lower division. Fait enough, he had money, but that is still a massive achievement. Why don't you hit me with another cliche like it was Dalglish and not Souness that destroyed Liverpool while you're at it?

Daglish wasn't given enough time to be successful though, wouldn't you agree? He was sacked far too early and, therefore, wasn't given the necessary backing imo. EDIT: Totally agree with SLP's and Zico's sentiments too. 136665[/snapback] I'm astounded. Dalglish was given too long. The man was a total disaster and it became very clearly that he was not going to achieve anything positive at the club. He managed to dismantle an excellent team that needed strengthening leaving us playing negative football even in a Cup Final. 138194[/snapback] The ridiculous thing was Bridget that he was sacked only 2 games into the season, after spending a lot on signings. Personally, I think a manager with his pedigree certainly deserved an extra year though (something I was never willing to give Souness because he was a proven failure). How could he possibly have been given less long anyway? There are all sorts of reasons why that team was dismantled btw, not all of them under Dalglish's control. Plus there were some serious mitigating circumstances why things went pear-shaped in 97-98, not least the loss of Shearer at his peak (compounded by the forced selling of Ferdinand, and Thomasson, who could have been superb, not settling in in time). That's not to say his time here went well, but the timing of his sacking and his replacement by a fuckwit were insane, only to be repeated 5 years later......

The season when he got West Ham to 7th, didn't they have a really bad start, with fans calling for him to be sacked but then he turned it round to finish in 7th place? I'm pretty sure he did. 137963[/snapback] I hope that's wrong G/T. We don't want facts about success getting in the way of Renton's pessimism 137972[/snapback] If you want facts, look at his record in simple terms of games played, won, lost and drawn. Tell me if you think it's a reasonable record overall. I suspect he has the worst record of any Newcastle manager in decades, including Souness. Of course that is too simplistic, but there are grounds for concern. I remain to be convinced, I hope I he proves my pessimism wrong.

Well that's a theory that will never be tested.

<<<< round of applause >>>> And I think he is bang on supporting his new manager. What would people be saying if he didn't ? 137730[/snapback] Jesus wept! Did either of you two actually watch SSN when Shepherd came out with his embarassing tirade? Did anyone? It was completely uncalled for and once again made us look unprofessional, to put it mildly. Leazes, you claim that virtually everyone but yourself is "blind" to Shepherd. I sugggest it is you that need the glasses. If this situation had arisen in any other club no way would you have supported Shepherd's stance and rants over this. We can argue the merits of the license and whether Roeder should have been made an exception or not 'til the cows come home (personally I think not), but the fact is Shepherd had already succeeded in getting his cheap option in, which makes his rant, live on TV, all the more unnecessary and ridiculous. 137807[/snapback] I am aware that he makes mistakes, everyone does. But overall he runs the club very well and does a lot more good things for the club than bad, I don't consider the odd daft thing said in the press as anything more than unncessary, any more than I consider Craig Bellamy wrong for calling Souness on the TV. Unneccessary but forgotten if you are winning. I don't blame him in the slightest for getting angry at defending a man who nearly died. I think it is absolutely atrocious for Roeders union not to help him, after what happened to him. I would do exactly the same as Fred, in fact I would use the opportunity to tell the world I think Barnwell is a shithead of the highest order for not defending a member of his own union. I would be quite prepared to defend my new manager publicy until Barnwell and his cronies admit their complete lack of understanding and humanity. And the comment by spongebob - I agree completely. I think Newcastle supporters who themselves cannot support their chairman in this matter is a bad craic, this is our manager, our chairman and our club that is being crapped on here -by another Geordie as well..... but especially think those who use it to continue their "damned whatever he does" view are a complete embarrassment, far more so than Shepherd has ever been. 137879[/snapback] I can only assume you didn't see it then. And why is it acceptable to criticize the manager (as you did), but not the chairman (as you always refuse to)? And wtf has being a geordie got to do with it? If this was a one off LM, then fair enough. But he does it time and time again, I am really fucking sick of it now. It is beyond a joke.

Yeah, but it's always Shola though isn't it? Like SLP says, let's see the video of Shearer doing arse all except take penalties for the last two years. 137882[/snapback] Righto.

Still top scorer in those seasons though. 137878[/snapback] Whoop-de-whoo 137880[/snapback] Well, if you're going to change your strikers, better starting with the worst first I would have thought, meaning he would likely have still had a role, unless we had got rid of all the other strikers at the same time. Anyway, don't forget that the deterioration of Shearer and virtually all our other players coincided with Bobby losing the plot (imo) and Souness.

Still top scorer in those seasons though.

I thought the ref got the Lehman decision spot on. Didn't really pay much attention to the game after that, but I did hear that the Arsenal free kick from which they scored was dodgy. Anyway, at the end of the day, they were beaten fairly and squarely by the better side. I'm sick of this incessant moaning about refs. Perhaps if it's so easy, Papa Lazarou can get a job doing it.

Fact is, we need to buy at least two top class strikers this season, to keep Ameobi and Chopra away from the first team. Can't see it happening though, so get used to the old donkey.

What exactly did he say? 137813[/snapback] Apparently he scored two goals in an England practice match. The bit I heard was along the lines of: "People are surprised I'm fully fit but they shouldn't be my foot has been ok for a long time now." I didn't hear him mention two months. I was surprised he was fit like. 137814[/snapback] At least he's going to be fine for England then. Confirms my opinion of him tbh.

What exactly did he say?

<<<< round of applause >>>> And I think he is bang on supporting his new manager. What would people be saying if he didn't ? 137730[/snapback] Jesus wept! Did either of you two actually watch SSN when Shepherd came out with his embarassing tirade? Did anyone? It was completely uncalled for and once again made us look unprofessional, to put it mildly. Leazes, you claim that virtually everyone but yourself is "blind" to Shepherd. I sugggest it is you that need the glasses. If this situation had arisen in any other club no way would you have supported Shepherd's stance and rants over this. We can argue the merits of the license and whether Roeder should have been made an exception or not 'til the cows come home (personally I think not), but the fact is Shepherd had already succeeded in getting his cheap option in, which makes his rant, live on TV, all the more unnecessary and ridiculous.

Of course thats a fair point, as a lot of people do confuse "big" with "successful". Liverpool however, were not bigger than us before Shankly went to Liverpool. They hadn't even won the FA Cup until 1965. We also would have outstripped their crowds if we had had the stadium we have now during the Keegan era. Unfortunately, Shankly went to Liverpool and not Newcastle. With a Keegan type era again, half the city would want to watch Newcastle, just like last time. We would easily outstrip almost everybody in the support stakes if we had genuine success, we wouldn't need half of North Wales to fill the stadium. 136015[/snapback] Hi people. First post to an interesting discussion. Regarding "big" vs "successful", I think most people regard them as synonymous when talking about football clubs. Perhaps "rich" is a better word than "big" in terms of this discussion. NUFC is certainly a rich club, as rich as LFC, but it's not as big nor as famous, certainly not outside England. Liverpool is practically a legendary club, and that has allowed us to attract people like Benitez. Benitez, in turn, can attract players like Alonso--who was wanted by Madrid--and together they can bring success to the club. I don't like the term "sleeping giant", either, but NUFC has enormous potential. The problem, as I see it, is your board. They can't seem to tell a decent manager from a bad one, and when they found a good one in Uncle Bobby, he was hamstrung by the fact that the board felt Shearer to be more important than him. Compare Fergie jettisonning Keane, Beckham and now RVN. Or Houllier selling Fowler. Not a peep out of the boards. But at NUFC, leaving Shearer on the bench was enough to spell the end for a manager. If you hired a promising manager like Jewell or Pardew and the board gave him proper support and let him get on with his job, you'd definitely see some trophies. I'd agree that LFC have a more winning mentality than NUFC, but I don't think it comes so much from the history of the club, but more from the management. I don't have the exact stats to hand, but by the time Houllier left, it had been something like 2 years since we had come from behind to win a game. Benitez has made us famous for it, because he has instilled that belief in the players that wasn't there before. Success starts with the board. We have been successful because our board has always tried to hire top managers and has given them time (often too much) and supported them well. Even Abramovich's money doesn't guarantee success--what has brought that is that he was smart enough to hire the very best people he could (Kenyon, Mourinho, Arnesen) and let them get on with the job. Until you get someone decent in at board level, I can't see things improving much for Newcastle. 137462[/snapback] Sadly a fair analysis, with the exception of the sacking of Robson, which you oversimplified at least. I have said for some time we should appoint a chief executive who can run the football side of the club, but it looks unlikely to happen any time soon. Shepherd is only part of the problem - the rest of our board is rife with nepotism and incompetence and people who couldn't give a shit about the club.

It was on the radio when I was at the sandwich shop. Apparently the car burst into flames.

It does seem a matter of pedantics/semantics concerning Barnwell, until you consider that Shepherd was making it sound like Wilkinson was the chairman of a body equivalent to UNISON last night, and kept banging on about how a "Union" man could act like that. 137419[/snapback] Admittedly, I didn't see Shepherd in action. Shame he can't resist making unnecessary comments to the media when anyone with a bit of class would keep their gob shut. As Barnwell alludes to a line could have been drawn under this whole thing. Especially seeing as the dispensation has been granted and Roeder has been appointed. 137423[/snapback] Exactly. Totally unnecessary and unprofessional. It sounded like a pissed rant, and Sky loved it. You'd think with a face like his and his past comment, Shepherd would avoid the limelight, but he just can't resist it.

It does seem a matter of pedantics/semantics concerning Barnwell, until you consider that Shepherd was making it sound like Wilkinson was the chairman of a body equivalent to UNISON last night, and kept banging on about how a "Union" man could act like that.

Childish as fuck tbh. He comes across almost as unprofessional as Freddy. 137402[/snapback] Yeah, but Freddy started it ner, ner. I assume you didn't see Shepherd last night then, being in Houston? He was a total embarassment, as usual.

He was on Sky last night, whinging about Wilkinson's comments (which in actual fact were quite correct imo). What a cockend and an embarassment to the club. I feel uneasy about the new season already, I have a horrible feeling of impending deja vu.

Same here, Roeder has shown even with all the injuries and taking over the mess fuckwit left that he can out do all the crap and average teams and challenge the ones just below the very best. We need to see how he does with new players, less injuries and a whole pre season + full competitive season. But i can't see us finishing below 6th at all. 137075[/snapback] We'll see. Two things I think you are forgetting is his ability to spot and attract good players (pretty low I suspect) and that when he hits a bad spell (which so far as short-term caretaker he has avoided) he seems to have little ability to pull the team round (ask fans of Watford or Gillingham or West Ham). I hate always being the voice of doom on these boards but this seems to be my lot unfortunately. I think we could finish almost anywhere outside the top 4 next year.

Agree with that. Shola is just about a premiership player, Chopra never will be.

Should be a Geordie-only shirt. Step forwards Ameobi or Chopra.