Toonpack

There are murmurings elsewhere that there's a Polis dimension to the shuffle. Standing is illegal and can effect safety certification blah blah. Easier to control dispersed persistent standers than a big group. Although based on comments on various forums it appears that the "group" is pretty much all being located in another group, or proximity at least.

If you're the Jan I'm thinking of, you lie on the sofa watching TV, eating chocolates and drinking wine all day.

Download and scan with Super Anti-spyware and Hitman Pro. I run MSE, Avast and those two plus do occassional scan with Malwarebytes (I've only ever had one problem and that was a webpage hijacker, Malware/Avast etc didn't find it, the two I mention above sorted the bassa though). Considering going all in and pay for "Kaspersky" though I think. ref MSE and Avast, isn't it bad to have two anti-virus elements ? I used to use Avast and Spyware doctor, but was told to bin spyware doctor because the AV could clash with Avast, so now I'm using Avast, Windows Firewall, running malwarebytes once a week, and using a program called Win Patrol which scans for things attempting to change or access types of files. Sort of interested in MSE is why I ask ? I run them both on a XP machine, no conflict at all that I've come across, both will scan when I want them to etc. (my Win7 netbook waasn't so happy) Edit - I would add, I didn't set out to run this config of AV, just happened when I was adding/working through new weapons to throw at the hijacker. Regarding MSE, I got my one and only "incident" shortly after moving one of my machines (running XP) to MSE from Zone Alarm, (which was very good, but awfully CPU intensive). Only considering Kaspersky because the Infrastructrue "egghead" (and he really is an egghead) recommended it. The techy lads who work with MS software all the time wouldn't touch a microsoft AV with a bargepole :-)

Download and scan with Super Anti-spyware and Hitman Pro. I run MSE, Avast and those two plus do occassional scan with Malwarebytes (I've only ever had one problem and that was a webpage hijacker, Malware/Avast etc didn't find it, the two I mention above sorted the bassa though). Considering going all in and pay for "Kaspersky" though I think.

I must have missed his first 3 years at £60K a week, whilst he was proving himself. He's been good for ONE season.

Brinkmanship rules. Willie and Dekka, what a combination.

Unless the offer has been withdrawn. McKay used the word "indicated" not "stated", that's not difinitive one way or the other. It's a manouver that's all. I was thinking that perhaps they've got a replacement lined up. Barton will get more money / a better signing on fee at his next club if he sees out his contract. Just a possibility like. McKay is dodgy as fuck so I wouldn't trust what he says by any means. However, as soon as there were rumblings about the length of the contract being an issue I worried Barton wouldn't sign a new contract and would be away so it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case too. FWIW lee_ryder Lee Ryder #nufc Barton WAS offered a new contract today and in January and turned them both down, both pretty lucrative too Totally agree on the McKay sentiment Doubt he'll get near £60K a week elsewhere given his "liability" risk, we certainly haven't had full value for money from him, over his contract, one decent season.

Unless the offer has been withdrawn. McKay used the word "indicated" not "stated", that's not difinitive one way or the other. It's a manouver that's all.

McKay is the master of flim flam, he's trying to bully the club. Club are likely trying the same approach they succesfully used with Taylor and Stretford when they went into bully mode.

I just dont believe that sentence. Had he said we cant agree etc etc....But I cant believe the club have called Willy in to say we are not renewing. Could be read as 'the offer already on the table is the final offer' though. Yep, McKay at his best. Let's wait and see eh?

Not sure why people laugh at this site (Im pretty new to it), but in fairness, all they do is seem to trawl the net for all the Newcastle news from the papers etc and bang it up on their site very early in the day. Its possibly the fastest collection of all the days Newcastle news in one place Ive come across This is far better/quicker.

McGregor, Rangers keeper, possibly. The Tims up here aren't hugely impressed with FF btw.

I would think he did it deliberately as it pisses off the Scots (and wannabe Scots, like yourself) You credit him with WAY too much savvy, his ignorance knows no bounds.

Wrong I'm afraid, primary aim of the rules is, thou shalt not racketh up debt or maketh consistent losses and thou shalt liveth within your means. Not exactly our former regime's strong suit. In order to help the transition for clubs, owners are allowed, within the rules, to subsidise clubs to the tune of circa £40Mill a year (maximum) for the next three years, then it drops to about £20 Mill for a couple of years (not sure of exact figure/time off the top of my head) the idea being that in time (7 -10 years) it drops to zero. Sadly, subsidy from personal money (even if they could have afforded it) wasn't a strong suit of previous regime either. I think that money over and above that mentioned above can still be "pumped in" but only if it is capitalised.

Scotch is a drink

Heard he'd been tipping his load into some Austrian bint, Ruby Shtruck she's called.

The repayments are not in question, the mortgage is paid off. If however there were outstanding amounts then YES it would be 100% at Halls/Shepherds door for their crass mismanagement and raping of the club.

Can you repeat the answers to my questions first (if you've answered them) as I can't be bothered to trawl through ten days inane ramblings of a mad man then have to ask Rob W to borrow his enigma machine to decipher them. You're off your nut mate, this thread has confirmed it but at least its kept your wanking material in one place. I've answered what you asked. I knew you wouldn't reply. Your fucking mad, fuck off back to skunkers. What do you think of your man [not] finishing in the top 10 even once in 4 years [your own quote] against hopeless Fred doing it 4 times in 6 years ? You've been made to look a tit by your own comments. The replies are bumped to the previous page as you've taken so long to come back and respond. Where did you get the info that the stadium repayments can't be met ? Who's fault is that, if revenues have gone down [are you going to games and supporting your man by the way, or are you another hypocrite who has stopped] in the 4 years since he bought the club ? You're all consuming hatred is just sad, arsehole. Bet you don't reply. Again. He didn't man, you've missread and leap off on one of your voyages to the wrong end of the stick

There is nothing to suggest this is true. The way they have spun the 'debt' story at times amounts to lies but he has met the payments, never been a suggestion he couldnt. In fact the final payments are due in the next couple of years, arent they? There is no question of Ashley not being able to meet the repayments, not even relevant as far as I can see. The full amount was settled when he bought the club, the stadium loan had the "change of ownership clause" (circa £40Mill). Under the original loan we were paying £4.5Mill/year interest on the original sum with full settlement due 2016, I believe.

PR? Ashley couldn't even spell it As to the Bonus, are we sure that its not some dodgy reporting by the media and by beating West Brom we end up higher in the table, equating to the extra 500k pay out? It's evidently £800K a place. Love how even something "good" is spun as pure evil

Half Mill Bonus for club staff, with a catch Expect the players to have to run a guantlet of cleaners and their mops if they loose, it'd make canny viewing though and it'd wouldn't be without merit from a motivational point of view.

Not keeping Enrique shows primarily, players and their agents are in control and as such you shouldn't let players get down to the last year of their contract.

Footballer in last year of contract holds all the cards, one chance in 100 he stays IMO Why can we not compete with those 2 clubs? Top 4 obvs as they'll have CL money but Spurs and Dippers? Have'nt we just picked up £35m? Lowering of expectations etc........................ Erm, because within the game, they are perceived as bigger than us. (righlty or wrongly, but its a fact).

Pardew in the Völkischer Beobachter, erm I mean Daily Mail Footballer in last year of contract holds all the cards, one chance in 100 he stays IMO

I've said on numerous occasions that the appointment of Allardyce was an admittance a change of direction was needed [same as after Gullit and Dalglish]. The point is, the new owner, "hasn't done better" has he ? There is NO excuse for NUFC becoming a selling club again, selling our best players above the managers head and not backing him with the cash, and settling for competing at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn. I would like an oil Sheikh or a Russian mega billionaire just like anybody else, but the new owner has not done better, and these people ALL said that anybody would do better. They wanted someone who would stop buying trophy players, stay out of the limelight, stop renting warehouses, taking small change dividends etc, but thought the ambition was automatic . My point was ALWAYS that the ambition was NOT automatic, so the next owner was not guaranteed to be better at all. And since he took over, we have been relegated, we set our sights lower, the profle and appeal of the club has gone down and accordingly revenues against our competitors, our best players look elsewhere to fulfill career ambitions. If THAT is better, and not a decline, what would they call a decline ? NJS is actually endorsing the fact that we shouldn't have spent more than 12.7m quid on transfers in over a decade, and shouldn't have expanded the stadium - or if he agrees with it, seems to think we should have done it without taking out a loan ? Does he think we should have saved the money up first ? It's mind boggling, and blind hatred gone mad. Maybe they HAD taken us as far as they could, but no way in the world would we have been relegated and settled for competing at the levels we do now. My point is that - during their time - they reached levels which may not be matched for decades, yes. As I've also said, comparing it to the era now, is like saying Jackie Milburn wouldn't be as good as current players because he played with a heavier ball and heavier boots. You can only compete with the situation and competitors at the time. The new owner is not "better", despite the assertions that "anybody" would be. No he didn't ,and now you are stating it as fact.