Toonpack

Keegan's first stint or second ?? There's just a tad of a difference between the two.

That's the sad (criminal) thing about it, he should have had one first IMO

Aye, but Harvey was synonymous with the team for years, he's the only one who should have a statue IMO (which is what I meant above, he should have had one ahead of SBR and Milburn even)

You know what I meant, not real time view from somewhere up a height. While I'm on, I'd have trainers on the pitch for "injuries" without stopping the game (unless a stretcher is needed) give penalties/free kicks for pushing and shoving at corners and stop the watch for throw-ins (which nearest player to the ball would have to take) and free kicks and I'd have any player swearing at the ref booked/sent off.

Joe Harvey is the only one (to repeat myself) won stuff as a manager and player/captain

It's not about their eyes it's about using the technology, and it really is quite simple, draw the line thingy across the pitch, as they do, on a telly. TV Official looks at it, offside yes/no, goal yes/no, simple (and in a natural break in play) Marginal one's benefit to the attacker, the clear dropped bollock's one's would be cleared up correctly. All goals could easily be reviewed. You're not allowed to punch the ball into the net or to control the ball with your hand on the way to lashing it into the net, that's pretty black and white, that happens more than dodgy goal-line stuff tbh.

So goals counting/or not legally/illegaly doesn't matter. If the game doesn't care about that "the nature of the game" needs changing completely IMO.

Distilling your argument down, you're talking about an illegal goal being "wrong" and if it happened once a month it's once a month too much. Geez it happens more than that NOW, there's more than one illegal goal given, or a legal goal chalked off, because of a bad decision, that is a much bigger problem than anything else IMO. For every marginal one, there are many many more "clear as day" one way or the other. The "easy" way to help, outside of my radical notion to fix it, reduce the error levels anyway, is have someone who has the perspective make the offside/onsode call and that ain't the linesman at pitch level.

No more than they do now you simply play on, offside's a stupid rule (certainly the way it is now) all that matters is the goals. Who gets wound up ever for more than a few seconds because they conceded a corner that wasn't, nee fucker, I've never had a "we were robbed" discussion over a corner before, plenty about goals given/not given though.

They wouldn't man, nee point, if he did park offside and they scored it'd be ruled out, absolutely no point. IF the twat's parked way offside defenders would just ignore the fucker, why try to tackle him for said free kick/throw in/corner. Even forgetting my "forget offside theory" all goals should be reviewed (but that only helps disallow illegal goals, doesn't really help reinstating incorrectly not given goals - player breaks through but is wrongly pulled back etc, unless you let the play progress).

It's not like, how many times would your naysayer scenario actually happen in comparison to the number of wrong offside/onside decisions that are made in every game (which falsely effect the flow and result of the game, every time there's a wrongly given/ruled off goal the result of the game is affected). Is what you portrayed actually any worse than a goal being wrongly given/dissallowed which happens all the time already or an attack wrongly halted even. I would add Newcastle player crossing for a headed goal is a novel concept mind.

If you think about it, the ONLY time offside/onside is truly important is if it leads to a goal/disallowed goal, there's around 8 offside decisions per game which have a canny habit of being incorrect, obviously there's no stat for the offside not being called. But then again it only matters if a goal results one way or the other, get rid of those 8 breaks in the game let the game flow and just review the goals for legality. The problem with technology is always stated as "it'll break up the game" there's shitloads of things break up the game already (dubious offside, the sniper in the crowd, getting the wall set, throw-ins that take forever). IF you are going to use technology use it for what is truly important, and that's simply the goals IMO. Would be done during the natural break in play, no disruption, but right result for what's really the only important decision, was it a goal or not. You'd still have plenty of contention to "discuss" from the general play, but you'd not have your team getting robbed so much (e.g. us against Metalist)

Nah, first case it's a penalty, second case goal kicks/corners not subject to review ONLY goals. Offside is never called, it'd just be applied if it effected a goal.

I agree but the latter causing an issue is WAY more frequent (than over the line) as it was when the coffee was black. Easy fix, never stop the game for offside but review every goal for legality (exc pens), reviews would only happen in an already quite natural break in play. Offside/onside is only important if someone scores and there'd be less stoppages overall in the full game.

Joe Harvey is the only one

Daft thing is the "over the line" happens rarely, wrong offside/onside goals on the other hand .................

Keeping off the managerial merry go round is no bad thing in the longer term. You should try N-O good number there STILL want him binned or at least shifted in the summer.

Aye but the trend is the other way. Whether they did it or not would be more apt. No-one, least of all me, doubts Ashley is a cunt, but the shit he gets for everything is beyond ridiculous.

The club losing it's soul is just the fans up close and personal "hit" from football losing it's soul.

The profit allows you to put it on the field consistently and ongoing, putting it on the field from other sources just won't work, especially in todays financial climate if you don't have a Sheik or an Oligarch (or you are Man U). Shepherd once broke even, doesn't matter where the money comes from, and despite putting it "on the field" (and into pockets) the highs were few and far between and getting lower each passing one. There was no future in it. Despite the higher commercial revenues we didn't have a pot to piss in, now we do and we could buy a new bigger pot if we wanted with no concerns. Chez nailed it above.

No-one knows, but I think you can make an educated guess based upon the evidence (and of course add in the banking crash) Didn't need to be Ashley but it needed to be someone with VERY deep pockets.

Between 98 and 06 we made profits totalling £12.1 Mill and losses totalling £39.5 Mill. BUT once you look at the real bottom line and add on the dividends and share purchases (when the club bought shares back from SJH) we made a total profit of £200K and total losses of £62 Mill in the same period. We made one "real" profit (in 2004 of £200K) from 98 onwards we made losses (multi million losses) which were, year on year, under £20 Mill virtually in direct proportion to the increase in TV monies we received over the period (plus the champs league windfall).

Check the trend since KK's first coming and then overlay that with the money running out and I strongly disagree mid table mediocrity was the worst we could expect, it was more likely the best !!

...................... and we were making considerable losses year on year (with no-one but the banks to rely on, to bail us out and despite £10 Mill a year more commercial revenue etc), the league position trend was steadily downwards. We were stiffed. To even try and argue the "now" state of the club versus "then" is the same or worse, is preposterous.