Leazes, you talk a lot of sense in some of your posts, but utter cobblers in others. Robson was NOT a planned appointment. We already had a manager at the time, Gullit. He was sacked and the search for a new manager began. Despite being the obvious choice (and I mean obvious to literally everyone), it took Shepherd several days to contact Robson, and according to Robson in his book, he very nearly cocked it up by offering him such a derisory salary to do the job. Complete incompetence.
It's true that Robson was probably the first choice after Keegan left, but again, how could that be planned? Keegan had quit unexpectedly, there was absolutely no planning involved. So, if you look back in recent history, this is the story.
Keegan - a planned and inspired choice by John Hall, not shepherd.
Dalglish - not planned, but a popular choice who didn't work.
Gullit - not planned, mixed reception, but madness imo considering what had happened to him at Chelsea and his known hatred of our number 9 (before he even took the job).
Robson - NOT PLANNED. Fortunately available at the third time of asking, although Shepherd unbelievably almost cocks up the appointment.
Souness - not planned, Shepherd makes a serious mistake under pressure from Hall jnr (aka shithead), and ends up with 5th choice manager. Unbelievable that he was in the top 1000 candidates really.
Roeder - not planned, Shepherd selects him after a good term as caretaker, claiming yet again he is the fans' choice. Meanwhile, the rest of the football world are pissing themselves laughing at us.
Can you spot a pattern here? Lurching from one disater to the next, almost without respite. When other clubs realise their manager is not working, they PLAN ahead, scouring the world for a good replacement, BEFORE they sack the incumbent. Not us though, which is why we are in the mess we are. Whose fault is this - the boards, of course.
I'll also take issue with one other thing you said in your post. The Newcastle team that Dalglish inherited required a hell of a lot more than "tweaking" to win the league. As a first team it was good, but nowhere near the match of ManU who were coming to their peak. But the squad was poor, and we had scrapped the reserves and all but abolished the youth team. This was compounded by the fact many of the first team players were over the hill (Beardsley being a prime example). I'm sure one of the reasons Keegan left was because he knew the game was up. The task that Dalglish and subsequent managers inherited was a very hard one, not least because it coincided with having an incompetent fool as our chairman.
138774[/snapback]
i would slightly disagree with that.
Keegan: as you say, inspired.
Dalgleish: Proven manager who dismantled team and played negative football.
Guillt: Appointed to bring back sexy football from keegan days. poor man management soured his term
Robson: Proven manager, great man manager and sexy football. more of a father figure than disciplinarian.
Souness: Appointed to restore discipline but done at the expense of man management, tactics, sexy football etc etc
Roeder: ?
