Howaythetoon

I think Munich made most of the footballing world aware of who Manchester United are and helped make them famous in many respects but wealth wise, I don't think it has mattered a lot, the Premiership, Sky and global market factors have created Man Utd's wealth - that and obvious good management on and off the pitch. Remember when we won promotion, we were not too far behind them in terms of wealth so that just goes to show you how much of their wealth has transformed since the turn of the 90s and indeed for most clubs - long after Munich. Their wealth in the 80s came via floating on the SE for example and I'd say they were no more wealthier than most leading up to that whole era, despite being a more recognised name due to Munich both in Britain and throughout the world. Remember also back then, there were no foreign markets to sell shirts, no iconic Beckhams to front campaigns and during the European ban, no visist to foreign soil and no bumper TV deals. It is also a myth that Man Utd's vast wealth comes from an army of Asians or other foreign fans, it doesn't, it comes from being mega successful at home - i.e. TV money domestic and global, corporate sponsorship and a 76,000 capacity - all built relatively recently on the back of Sky, and the popularity of the Premiership worldwide. To cite Munich as the reason or the big factor behind Man Utd's global brand is plain daft, most of the people who came to know of Man Utd via the disaster are either dead now or very old and I doubt many are even aware of their past in that sense. The media do make a big deal of Man Utd and have done for years, but then they are very news worthy and the same can be said for any successful club. Just look at Chelsea, look at us under KK, we were the talk of football home and abroad and suddenly more established clubs like Villa, Spurs and Everton were being ignored. Also, if the Man Utd love in off the back of Munich gave them an advantage, how come it took them years to win the League again and to do anything in Europe? They got no advantage because of Munich, sympathy and more fame yes, but a fat lot of good it did them.

My right shoulder has been acting up of late, sore and aches and pains, can't remember landing on it or lifting anything to cause any damage, I'm wondering if its the way I lie when asleep or the cold weather as I sleep with the window open. Either way it hurts and me being a fanny, I don't like going to the doctors so I'm hoping it just fixes itself like a lot of strains and aches seem to do.

Two Great Whites target a surfer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gpVXdn0FO4 Air Jaws: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVxEbmt57mE Bull Shark attacks Shark scientist:

Some might, if you've ever seen that footage where they were towing a seal-shaped dummy off the back of a boat in South African waters you would know Great Whites don't use that approach. They do investigate (mouth objects) actually, and most attacks are a result of that, they are just having a grope really but because their hands have big fuck off teeth attached to them, they cut Human skin to ribbons and many who do get investigated think the Shark tried to eat them which couldn't be further from the truth. Tow anything in that stretch of SA water you mention though and you'll most likely get a Shark following it, they've even been known to go for boats in that stretch of water (Shark alley, Dyer island). Those waters are thought to be feeding and breeding waters so the Shark's senses are overloaded and it's a case of anything goes. They soon learn that the decoys are nothing however. There are three theories why they attack: Investigation (most common and mostly non fatal) - this is most likely what the Abalone diver in this thread encountered. Mistaken identity True predation Many are ruling out mistaken identity now though because this Shark just doesn't make mistakes, but no-one quite knows why they breach with a Human in their mouth, decapitating the person, without finishing it off for example, which happens a lot in fatal previously put down to mistaken identity attacks. True predation events go without saying and only a handful ever survive to tell the tale, usually they are saved by helpers, although one Shark after eating one bloke, turned on the rescuer and had a go at him, this was in 10ft of water. Has anyone seen the Chille video? A marine biologist expeditions anchors off the coast of Chille in open waters and some of the crew jump in for a swim in the warm blue seas, one women got isolated from the pack and next thing she knows a 15ft Shark is chomping on her leg at a relaxed pace, trying to drown her to finish her off without wasting too much energy, all caught on camera, although very bouncy you can clearly see the Shark's head wrapped around the women's leg, anyway after a tug of war between Shark and rescuers the women was saved minus one leg and deep lacerations. It was thought the Shark was so hungry (hadn't fed for months) that this was a pure opportunity attack and the woemn was lucky the Shark didn't seem to have the energy or fight to eat her, otherwise she would have been killed pretty quickly despite rescue attempts. Anyway, nice to the Sun making out as if the Shark was huge: I'll stop boring you all now PS I feel truly at home on here now, having had a Shark thread

BTW I don't think there has been any attacks (from Great White's anyway) on divers from patrolling Sharks, i.e. the Shark noticing the diver and going over for a bite so you can understand why the experts say what they do about being able to see one. Believe it or not they are very cautious and very conscious of their own safety first and foremost, I've seen endless footage where the freediver has sent a large GW swimming away in a panic just by moving their hands or going towards it, like a timid puppy. Much maligned and misunderstood. Because of it's size, teeth and the Jaws films many people think they just eat whatever is in sight, whether it be a human or otherwise when really, if that were the case, thousands would be taken every month as they patrol near all the popular surf areas of the world and there are countless reports from surfers and bathers of seeing one not too far out. They just aren't interested in the main, why eat us when they can eat the rich blubber of a seal - there are plenty of those and they aren't as alien to them as we are. That said, I wouldn't like to take me chances.

How do we know that like? And isn't it common sense anyway? "hey, there's a shark with it's mouth open below me, think I'll stay on the boat today". They say if you can see a car coming, you usually don't get run over What I mean is if you are a diver and you come across a Shark patrolling the area or can see it in your vision field, that's a good sign, when you can't, that's the time to panic. They are unlikely to come up to you and attack you or eat you if you can see it, as they hunt via stealth and prefer to stalk their prey. Basically if you're in the water and see a Shark, don't be too alarmed (easy said than done I bet) and that if it disappears, don't think the coast is clear, like that poor Abalone diver.

A sign that the team don't get in and behind defences or cause sides problems within the penalty box.

Aye they are Plankton eaters, as are Whale Sharks but they are huge, and I mean huge and have no teeth. They are held in captivity like so it might have been baby ones of those.

That Cascarino bloke boils my piss, him and a few Toon talking heads. As a rule though I try not to let the media influence me, much less rile me.

Aye, you'd think he'd know better though.

This. I don't even think there is a big issue between the two, they have both claimed post their SJP spat that they admired one another greatly as people and as players, I think Shearer being a pundit that night of the 5-1 drubbing was just a coincidence and in now way the cause of Keane's rant. As a manager he's doing a good job and it will be interesting to see just what type of manager both he and Shearer develop into. If I had to bet on one though, I'd say Shearer will be the better manager due to his ability to think straight in the heat of the battle, something Keane has always struggled with. But I think both will be a big success one day if I'm being honest, as they have that type of quality as characters to inspire others. One day the two could cross swords as manager of NUFC and Sunderland respectively, let battle commence then.

Own the 95-96 home and away top, and the blue away one the season after, have the season before last's somewhere although all tatty now. Didn't buy the new one. Can't beat the 95-96 home and away ones for me, best shirts we've ever brought out.

These? Direct cousin of the White Shark and known to attack humans, if provoked but harmless enough. They were almost wiped out to extinction after Jaws as many mistook them for the White Shark. I'm not a big fan of captivity but they saved that particular species.

The scariest TRUE Shark story I've read about is how one Abalone Diver when gathering Abalone on the sea floor encountered a big 18ft GW, it just swam by him and didn't take any notice, anyway he soon left the water and got back on his boat, a while later thinking the coast is clear he sat on the edge of his boat back to the water ready to jump in, he fell into the oncoming Shark's open jaw and was savagely mauled to death. The Shark had stalked him and was waiting for him. A very rare true predation event. They say if you can see the Shark you're OK, most who get attacked never see anything before the strike and often don't even get to see what is attacking them full stop, they just feel it (all that blood). Anyway that particular story was scary because the Shark had targeted the bloke to feed on and he unwittingly caught it stalking him on the sea floor, and there have been a few cases where the diver has "dropped" into the jaws of a Shark as soon as he/she entered the water or pushed off from the boat. Can you imagine the horror? You don't stand a chance. Anyway, doesn't seem like this was a predation act, more of an investagative bite, there is no way a 10ft GW would try and take out a prey item that size, despite being more than capable of eating him. They usually hunt smaller prey. He's very lucky, had that been a larger one he'd have died regardless as it would have taken his head off. These attacks are increasing like, first of the new year I think for this species.

We need experience so go and by another youngster - typical Toon. Has anyone evenb seen much of this Davies?

No.

This

I could equally say you're talking crap regarding your opinion that football is just another form of entertainment HF, anyway this isn't going anywhere and I'm not wanting to get tied down in a debate about films vs football but you are right, I just don't see the point in discussing whether a film director is overrated or not because I don't think it matters to anyone or anything - but that's just me, you obviously see it differently so fair enough. I'll leave the thread now and leave you geeks to it. Geeks? At least I haven't set up a website and written vast tomes about my little hobby. Nerdlinger. Touché

It is a tired old cliche I agree, but the likes of Fowler ARE natural finishers compared to some strikers, like Martins for example who just isn't and never will be. The likes of Fowler don't even need to look and can finish all manner of strikes effortlessly in the blink of an eye, so I think the description is valid where he is concerned. I don't think it means anything though in the grande scheme of finding the back of the net because Shearer was never described as a natural finisher, yet as we all know, he was in a league of his own when it came to finishing. Anyway natural to me means effortless and you have to admit, Fowler in his pomp put them away in that fashion. Romario was the same. The Shearers worked harder for their goals. What complete bollocks, again. Oh, I seem to have a stalker, that's two threads now, care to debate the point or are you unable to? I agree, though, I do talk shite I thought a succinct summary would work better than a point by point analysis. Basically I think the whole idea of Martins, or any player of such a young age, never being able to become as good a finisher as Fowler is ridiculous. It may take him more practice but he COULD quite possibly become as accomplished. And don't flatter yourself, if I was going to stalk someone they would be far prettier than you. Well I like to write waffle, so if it's succinct points you're after I'm your wrong man <talkingshite>I like Martins and he will score goals, but I doubt he'll ever become as accomplished in the art of finishing as a Fowler because he isn't a natural finisher. But that doesn't mean he can't be just as prolific or score goals and it isn't an issue. It isn't as if I'm criticising him for not being a natural finisher, you don't have to be one to score goals. All I'm saying in reply to Ally's post is that for some strikers you can clearly define whether they are a natural finisher or not and for me, Fowler falls into the category where as Martins doesn't.</talkingshite> Fair enough, I just think the idea of being a 'natural finisher' is a load of crap. Would you say Rooney being a natural talent is a load of crap too? And do you reckon Ameobi has it in him or could be coached to finish like Robbie Fowler with lots of practice? With enough practice, yes. You'd be down the training ground a while mind. Good to know I'm not the only one who talks shite on here

Man U's money (historically) comes from a global market presence and awareness of them that comes as much from the publicity from the Munich air crash as much as anything. Yes they've done some sensible things like appoint Ferguson and stick with him, but Man U have often had a HUGE revenue advantage over their domestic rivals that wasn't really "earnt", at least not on the football pitch only. Maybe I phrased that badly - it's money they've earnt themselves, be it through footballing success, marketing or on account of their history. Whereas Chelsea were being managed disasterously, were about to go under and then some Russian crook came along and decided to spunk his wealth on them. I realise that other teams are guilty of the reasons I listed above (for example divers and cheats are by no means confined to Chelsea) but none are so objectionable in every field as the wankers from Stamford Bridge. Every success Man Utd has had has come off their own sweat, all that money comes from the club's brand, Chelsea on the other hand have bought success like Blackburn did. You can't take anything away from Man Utd's success over the years and they are the team (on and off the pitch) to emulate. They point the way to other clubs with large fanbases and a good brand, like our own club. There is no reason why we can't enjoy success without an Abramovic because the fanbase is there and the brand, if not worldwide. Chelsea before Abramovic were just another Spurs, very centralised fanbase, small stadium and kidding no-one. Before Harding they were another West Ham, in fact probably below them in terms of size and brand.

They are a very good side still but this Man Utd team outside of one or two individuals is nothing special and I'd say their position at the top says an awful lot about our league, Arsenal are a far better side, with better players and they play the better football. On their day you can't stop them, all their big guns had an off day today (except the magnificent Fabregas) but they can still turn it on and win a game in the blink of an eye. This Man Utd side isn't a patch on their previous greats and you feel for them to be so potent the vast majority of their big guns have to be on fire. Ronaldo, Scholes and and Vidic have carried them at times over the Xmas period. Its just a shame that Arsenal are a mile behind, if they were just a few points off, I'd fancy them to take the league. With the addition of one or two new players next season, they should be very very strong.

I could equally say you're talking crap regarding your opinion that football is just another form of entertainment HF, anyway this isn't going anywhere and I'm not wanting to get tied down in a debate about films vs football but you are right, I just don't see the point in discussing whether a film director is overrated or not because I don't think it matters to anyone or anything - but that's just me, you obviously see it differently so fair enough. I'll leave the thread now and leave you geeks to it.

It is a tired old cliche I agree, but the likes of Fowler ARE natural finishers compared to some strikers, like Martins for example who just isn't and never will be. The likes of Fowler don't even need to look and can finish all manner of strikes effortlessly in the blink of an eye, so I think the description is valid where he is concerned. I don't think it means anything though in the grande scheme of finding the back of the net because Shearer was never described as a natural finisher, yet as we all know, he was in a league of his own when it came to finishing. Anyway natural to me means effortless and you have to admit, Fowler in his pomp put them away in that fashion. Romario was the same. The Shearers worked harder for their goals. What complete bollocks, again. Oh, I seem to have a stalker, that's two threads now, care to debate the point or are you unable to? I agree, though, I do talk shite I thought a succinct summary would work better than a point by point analysis. Basically I think the whole idea of Martins, or any player of such a young age, never being able to become as good a finisher as Fowler is ridiculous. It may take him more practice but he COULD quite possibly become as accomplished. And don't flatter yourself, if I was going to stalk someone they would be far prettier than you. Well I like to write waffle, so if it's succinct points you're after I'm your wrong man <talkingshite>I like Martins and he will score goals, but I doubt he'll ever become as accomplished in the art of finishing as a Fowler because he isn't a natural finisher. But that doesn't mean he can't be just as prolific or score goals and it isn't an issue. It isn't as if I'm criticising him for not being a natural finisher, you don't have to be one to score goals. All I'm saying in reply to Ally's post is that for some strikers you can clearly define whether they are a natural finisher or not and for me, Fowler falls into the category where as Martins doesn't.</talkingshite> Fair enough, I just think the idea of being a 'natural finisher' is a load of crap. Would you say Rooney being a natural talent is a load of crap too? And do you reckon Ameobi has it in him or could be coached to finish like Robbie Fowler with lots of practice?

Rummenigge. They are all no Gerd Müller though. indeed if we're talking "finishers" I htink my list of all time greats would run:- Muller Clough Lineker Greaves at NUFC it would have to be Len White saw them all - but Gerd was sommat else men who seemed to be able to stay totally calm in the mad house of the penalty (or even goal) area and just pop up to bang the ball in interestingly non of them was very fast, or very tall - all about reading the game and keeping a clear head Bloke I knew who saw both Hughie and Wor Jackie (passed away now sadly) reckons White was the best of them all and one of my relatives reckons he was even better than Shearer. What about Law Rob and Ian Rush? they'd make it if the list was longer - I think Rush was more a Shearer type when I watched him; Law...... a very good play maker as well as a striker - he was at his best running at the defence - wheras fat Gert and Clough never ran anywhere - they just waited for the ball to come to them I knew a lot of people and family who watched Hughie, Jackie and Len W - I only saw Len White They always rated them in that order - White probably suffered because he wasn't at all demonstrative and a lot of his goals were clinical - Jacky's were breathtaking and Hughie was magic according to all accounts I'd put Shearer in alongside Wor Jackie - my mam did and she remembered us winning the league when she was a bairn Cheers for the post Rob, always interesting to hear about ex-players we only see in the odd black & white clip. That's not a dig at your age either Reading about Wor Jackie many reckon had he had the confidence of others, he'd have been an even better player and would have at least added a good number of goals to his already fantastic tallies, but he was very shy and not the most confident of players. He even smoked to calm his nerves! Some ex players suggested he didn't get too many caps for England not because of Norhern bias like the Toon record books would have you believe or old match reports, but because he was always questioning whether he was good enough to play amongst such "greats" and that the selectors of the time just couldn't be arsed with coaxing him out of his shell when equally good players were full of confidence and didn't need pepp talks. Edit: I'd have loved to have seen Len Shakleton in action, the clown prince of soccer.