Isegrim

I don't believe you. Especially the bit about you having a lass.

Things have changed for me over the weekend as well. Last weekend of July is still a bad date, but it now looks like my girlfriend and I will be in (south) England for a couple of weeks in late July/August. Depending on the date of our sailing trip I probably could get a free weekend or convince her of a couple of days in the north. So maybe if we can put back the date for a week or two (don't know when the season is starting) I might be able to turn up. I can't make any commitments though.

They'll start sending scouts to maternity clinics next.

He actually looked decent in the first couple of matches but was then struggling with the physical nature of English football. If he can adapt to it, he can still be a decent squad player. I wouldn't mind if we can get sell him for decent money though.

Did we?

You're harbouring doubts about more or less everything though.

Is Kuijt really a good example? I think he is grossly underrated by loads of people who reduce him to his goal scoring record, which is obviously not the best. Of course he scored loads of goals in Holland, but this was never the most important part of the game. He is a workhorse with quite good understanding of the game. In a supporting role he does quite well to get the best out of team mates imho. That's the diference to players like Kezman (or Huntelaar) who are foremost goal scorers and who indeed are liabilites when they don't score.

No chance. Aren't Man United apparently sniffing around? It's about jumping the queue then, isn't. Not that I think that Huntelaar is really the player needed, butsing the example of van der Vaart again, loads of big European teams were "sniffing around" when he was at Ajax. They got caught by total surprise when Hamburg lured him by showing him their intention and ambition.

I'm a big fan of N'Zogbia and would like us to hang on to him as I still think he is an exceptional talent. But Barton and Geremi are better suited to the current formation with their defensive and positional abilities. N'Zogbia has been best used wide left so far. I reckon he could do a very good job behind the strikers without many defensive duties, but failed to impress most times he played there. That's why Owen is the best option we do have for it at the moment. Edit: Or in short words: As alex already said.

I agree. His is/was the perfect player to step in when you need him without the team suffering from a gap in quality between first and second 'keeper. He might now even be considered as first keeper. But promoting him even another level it's probably far too much (even though considering the very poor quality of other English 'keepers).

Diego did cost Bremen 5m Euro, van der Vaart did cost Hamburg 5.5m Euro. You don't have to be lavish, you just have to be clever. Totally agree. But we have to also be aware that top marquee players attract other big players. So ambition must be worn on the sleeve. **I'm not interested in discussing the past before the usual suspects pipe up. Totally agree about "ambition". The factor "attraction" is a reason why I wouldn't as easily get rid of Owen as others probably would do as long as he is able to actually play decent as well. But there are players who maybe have a decent name, but whose career has stalled or they are unhappy for one or another reason who are probably easier to attract. It's just a case of doing your homework (that's the job for the wise men now). At the current moment of time Newcastle are not able to lure happy players from big clubs anyway, regardless of the money they were offering.

Diego did cost Bremen 5m Euro, van der Vaart did cost Hamburg 5.5m Euro. You don't have to be lavish, you just have to be clever.

Done deal yesterday. am a day behind The photo in an earlier post was a bit of a subtle hint...

Smehagain tbh.

Of course the results this season are disappointing. But the fact that the new board isn't getting slated for it (yet) by the majority is giving them still the benefit of the doubt. And to be honest, while they haven't probably done everything right I can't see to many things they have actually done wrong. Most notably I haven't seen any indications that actually did not back the manager. To expect them doing miracles overnight would have been too much. In the end the club was spiralling downwards for a couple of years since Bobby Robson's departure. But this doesn't mean expectations will not increase in the future, starting this summer. They took over a new club and had to get used to it. They also started to restructure it financially and organisationally to fulfil their ambitions. Running a club is more than just throwing money at the manager (which is important though). Of course the club is in a better state than 15 years ago. Nobody will deny this. Therefore Ashley's benchmark will not be 1992 but 2008 (or 2004) which will be a much bigger task. As I said only a fool would expect this to be achieved in the first season. The criticism will rightfully come if the club won't show "ambition" in the future and remain in no man's land of the table (or worse). But after the takeover the new board does deserve a bit of trust imho, just as the old board did get for quite a long time until things started to go the wrong direction.

Imagine what Barton would have done to the bloke outside of McDonald's if he hadn't known how to back away...

That's Newcastle Australia then.

I don't think so. And he was happy to offer more than anyone else for Woodgate in January wasn't he? I don't see where people get the idea he's not stumping up what the manager asks for. To help their agendas perhaps? moi ? Give me one good reason why I should have an "agenda" johnny ? Other than wanting the club to punch their weight ........ ? What the point of having the 3rd biggest stadium/crowds in the country if we act 2nd rate ? BTW, Allardyce has probably signed a confidentiality clause to keep his gob shut, that is pretty common. He did make noises last summer about not being backed though, and Mort clearly said that the dealings we made [good weren't they ?] were "good business" and also said before Xmas that any players signed in January would be for the future. Its the comments from Mort that cause this sort of response from me, and others. Why make out the club was going to fold, and put bad spin on what they took over ? Its bollocks, he knows it is. And its been explained in financial terms. The club will not fold. If NUFC were ever going to fold they would have done so in 1991. The new owner should have done more research into the clubs accounts if he doesn't like what he finds, now. And believe me if he sells it on he won;t lose anything, he'll want 230m quid having paid off the clubs "mortgage". Good move, but dont' kid yourself he's gave it away and is writing it off, which is what some people appear to suggest. Do they believe this ? Surely not. Has Mort said the club was going to fold? Again, a genuine question, I know he said they were suprised to learn the real size of the debts after the sale had gone through, but that was because they had to rush through the coup d'etat while Shepherd was on his death bed. Yes he did. http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/26092007/4/t...brink-mort.html Regardless of Mort's spin, to blindly deny that a club can fold is a bit deluded imho.

Maybe the 'transfer policy' he has adopted in the two transfer windows is down to the £100 million of debt he's had to pay off to stop the club from folding because of your good mate Freddy This idea that a business like Newcastle (with a virtual monopoly and catchment area) along with massive gates regardless of performance had any chance of 'folding' I find spurious and the kind of 'spin' Mort has been putting out since he arrived. The millions pouring into the PL virtually secures all PL club businesses for a considerable period. Many top flight clubs carry proportionate to income high debt ratios. It's not really about profitability either as there aren't many PL clubs that habitually make a profit. That said I am of the opinion the debt did need looking at but I find the melodrama surrounding it unnecessary. Not actually England, but Dortmund who are in many aspects very comparable to Newcastle had one foot in the grave because of their overambition. Of course it is difficult for a club or a business of the size of Newcastle with it's income to fold, but it's not impossible. I got told that KPMG had serious reservations about the balance sheets in recent years and it wasn't that easy to make them look (sort of) healthy. In the end the fate is down to the creditors and their securisation. As I understand it the likes of Schechter had options to cash in after the take over which would have fundamentally affected the resources of the club, which they seemed to consider to make use of. This was avoided by Ashley paying off the debt from his personal assets. You may call Mort's comments a drama, but I don't think they were technically a lie. They certainly aren't worse than the attempts to blandish the increasingly worrying financial state of the club in the form of lalaing. Out of interest what kind of TV money do top tier German clubs get? Less, which isn't of much importance in this context. Getting more tosh doesn't mean you can't get bankrupt if your higher debts get out of your hand.

Maybe the 'transfer policy' he has adopted in the two transfer windows is down to the £100 million of debt he's had to pay off to stop the club from folding because of your good mate Freddy This idea that a business like Newcastle (with a virtual monopoly and catchment area) along with massive gates regardless of performance had any chance of 'folding' I find spurious and the kind of 'spin' Mort has been putting out since he arrived. The millions pouring into the PL virtually secures all PL club businesses for a considerable period. Many top flight clubs carry proportionate to income high debt ratios. It's not really about profitability either as there aren't many PL clubs that habitually make a profit. That said I am of the opinion the debt did need looking at but I find the melodrama surrounding it unnecessary. Not actually England, but Dortmund who are in many aspects very comparable to Newcastle had one foot in the grave because of their overambition. Of course it is difficult for a club or a business of the size of Newcastle with it's income to fold, but it's not impossible. I got told that KPMG had serious reservations about the balance sheets in recent years and it wasn't that easy to make them look (sort of) healthy. In the end the fate is down to the creditors and their securisation. As I understand it the likes of Schechter had options to cash in after the take over which would have fundamentally affected the resources of the club, which they seemed to consider to make use of. This was avoided by Ashley paying off the debt from his personal assets. You may call Mort's comments a drama, but I don't think they were technically a lie. They certainly aren't worse than the attempts to blandish the increasingly worrying financial state of the club in the form of lalaing.

The Hoff - I've been looking for freedom

They are all new to Capello tbh.

Nah, the club's gone to the dogs.

I thought we'd seen the end of groin strains? Bring back Fat Sam and his Sports science staff.