Craig

I still remember Bournemouth in 1992..... 76553[/snapback] Brighton 3rd Round. Cant remember when. 1985/6? We must be able to do either of thos two tho, shirley?! 76556[/snapback] 1983 - Trelford fucking Mills - don't remind me! 76564[/snapback] 1983???????? You're having a tin bath??!! I'm never usually that far off in my year estimates!! Jesus wept, still remember it-first memory of us in the FA Cup. 76571[/snapback] I think we played them again in 1985/86 (and lost again)... But 1983 is the one which boils my fucking piss!

I still remember Bournemouth in 1992..... 76553[/snapback] Brighton 3rd Round. Cant remember when. 1985/6? We must be able to do either of thos two tho, shirley?! 76556[/snapback] 1983 - Trelford fucking Mills - don't remind me!

Some cracking optimism on N-O I might add... I still remember Bournemouth in 1992.....

Stoke City/Tamworth v Barnsley/Walsall Cheltenham Town/Chester City v Newcastle United Coventry v Nuneaton Borough/Middlesbrough West Brom/Reading v Torquay/Birmingham Portsmouth v Liverpool Leicester v Southampton Bolton v Arsenal Aston Villa v Port Vale Brentford v Sunderland Manchester City v Wigan/Leeds Millwall/Everton v Chelsea Preston v Crystal Palace West Ham v Blackburn Colchester v Derby Charlton v Leyton Orient Wolves v Burton/Manchester United

For me only one was completely predictable, with one being likely (Gullit). I do think though that Shepherd seems to have very little knowledge about the game of football (although he is OK on the financial side), and his PR gaffs are the stuff of legends. I was reading in the back of the program how Shepherd likes to help small teams like Mansfield out - right, if you say so Freddie. 76446[/snapback] Predictable or not, he's appointed 4 managers with only SBR being any good. If Souness bought four players and 3 were shit, quite rightly, he'd be getting stick. I've got time for Shepherd as he backs his managers but to suggest that he's only made one mistake, i.e. appoint Souness, is a bit wide of the mark. 76452[/snapback] Even more worryingly, of the ones he has appointed, all of them have won trophies at other clubs and have a successful track record in management. Until they get here. Not saying thats proof conclusive that that's Fat Fred's fault, but I think it's indicative. Personally I think the reason for our underachievement since Shepherd (who it has to be conceded has made (our) cash available to managers) is to do with lack of professionalism. The lack of professionalism at the club starts at the very top with the chairman and permeates down from there. 76472[/snapback] But Souness's track record in management is very poor overall, and anyone who had done any background research into Gullit would have known he was a grade A twat. I think the problems have resulted because of the poor choice in managers. Personally I think Dalglish wasn't given long enough (panic sacked by Shepherd, admittedly), and Robson did have some success (without winning anything), but was ultimately too long in the tooth. Just because Shepherd is a constant in this, does not make him a cause. I have heard the same argument being used against Shearer - which imo is bullshit! 76480[/snapback] It might be oversimplifying things somewhat, but I would characterise pre-Shepherd failure as the result of under-investment and post Shepherd failure as the result of a lack of professionalism. The Hall/Keegan era I discount from that tiemline as I think it was so exceptional and our failure to land the big one then was due to a lack of experience/naivety etc etc. The fans (rightfully) moan about the players attitudes/off field behaviour, but why are we surprised when we see the man at the very top of the pile setting the example he does. When he's not in brothels he's slagging the fans. When he's not coming out with outlandish/disrespectful idiotic PR soundbites he's undermining the manager and buying players himself.....it's just a farce tbh. I watched Liverpool the other night in the FA Cup-one of the best ties I've seen, a brilliant advert for football and a credit to both teams involved. Amazing stuff yet a part of me was gutted because I knew you never see that from our lot. Basically I believe that comeback (and the one in Istanbul last May) all owed to the attitude of the players and the respect/reverence they have for that club. It's not like they have better/more fans or are paid any more than our lot, they just KNOW the standards that apply and that certain performances are unacceptable. I think it's in the fabric of that club-the same applies to Man Ure and Arse. It certainly isnt in ours and as long as the likes of FF are at the apex I cant honestly see why we should expect that to change. 76489[/snapback] I think many nails have been hit right on the head with that post - pretty much sums up how things are. Course two people will argue differently....

I hear Alan Oliver is running a story in tonights Chronicle, that it was Souness..... 76437[/snapback] Well that PROVES it wasn't Souness.................... Anal has never got anything right in his life - he has to buy the paper to see what day it is................ 76467[/snapback] "Although Oswald has long been held responsible, my feeling is that Graeme Souness had a role to play..." 76471[/snapback] Our Graeme? Never held a gun in his life...... Is that the Grassy Knoll behind him

They're the same person though aren't they? 76486[/snapback] So I'm led to believe...

I guess we've fuelled this thread up for a good 30+ pages once HTL & LM get reading..... The keyboards those two must get through......

What more can you expect from the Observer - shocking really...

Quite depressing really....

More likely to play than Craig Moore I guess.....

Old I know......but who cares?

You mean Kennedy didn't get shot?

What's the point, you'll only read what you want to read anyway....

Pretty shocking actually....

Doesn't she send hers to private school anyway? Can't stand the bitch tbh..

I saw the experiment on a website. If you want I can simply quote some text from the Rockefeller Report in 1975 that states the possibility that JFK could have been shot from behind and his head could still have reacted in the same way. No offence like mate, but I would accept the evidence of ballistics experts in a government enquiry suggesting this is possible over you saying it isn't. My hwole point was that the Zapruder film doesn't prove a second gunman on the Grassy Knoll (or anywhere else). I have no idea what you mean by passing through two bodies, what do you mean by that. Jimbo's right about keeping an open mind of course. 75830[/snapback] I've seen footage of the water-melon experiment as well (they've also done it with a mannequin). The placed a melon in front of a camera and then shot at it with the same make of rifle, from the same distance and the same angle that LHO was supposedly at. The reason was that people were saying the fatal head shot must have come from the front as a shot from behind would result in the head going forward. As Alex said, all this experiment proved is that it IS possible for a shot from the book depository to result in the movement that Kennedy's head experienced. 76018[/snapback] The only problem being that LHO could never have hit a stationary watermelon from that distance, never mind a bloke in a moving vehicle. 76083[/snapback] Lucky shot......he was aiming for the driver!

What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"? 76361[/snapback] This is something a manager would say should a club have a Chairman who is involved in team affairs when he shouldn't be. 76367[/snapback]

Certain people won't have a wrong word said about Shepherd - never said it was you.... 76362[/snapback] Struggling, I see. 76368[/snapback] Not at all - just can't be arsed re-iterating what I've already said more than once for the benefit of someone who obviously chooses to read selectively....

As I have said in many previous posts, I won't have an opinion of them either way until they've proved themselves one way or another after some time at the club... 76358[/snapback] so you want it both ways.....you really have no right to criticise mate if you only use hindsight, anyone can do that 76360[/snapback] You seem to think that my only problem with Shepherd is the appointment of Souness - wrong! That's your view... I've pointed out his other failings many times in recent weeks - not going there again!

Certain people won't have a wrong word said about Shepherd - never said it was you....

What's that supposed to mean? Just answer a question, it's pretty easy. Who identifies the players to bring to the club in order to build a team? 76120[/snapback] The scouts! OK, pedency apart, it's Souness, but then I've never disputed that! Answer this simple one then in return: Who has the final say-so by slapping his signature on the cheque and has the power to say "not on your life am I buying that piece of shit!"?

As I have said in many previous posts, I won't have an opinion of them either way until they've proved themselves one way or another after some time at the club...

Mourinho recently said that he would walk away from Chelsea if his family wasn't settled. He reckoned his kids came first, then his missus and then Chelsea. I'd suggest Shearer would be the same and if he did become manager, I wouldn't mind him being as successful as Jose has...