LeazesMag

aye, fair point.

no Rob, it's what you say rather than shoot the fuckers first, and give them an opportunity to hurt innocent members of the public. ho hum.....regarding the thread starter, you think our police are like those in Brazil do you

the REAL Swindon Mag ?

Roxette, Listen to your Heart. Brilliant Fantastically shaggable bird too

No of course I didn't know one way or the other whether they were good appointments or poor appointments. As usual, I hoped that they would do the business and I then gave both men time to prove themselves. Now you answer me this - what does that have to do with what we're talking about? I didn't answer it because it was utterly irrelevant. 65967[/snapback] oh, right you answered this. Or didn't. Nowt like sitting on the fence. Just as well Shepherd isn't as decisive as you And it's totally relevant, it proves that you only exercise hindsight when making criticisms or giving praise if appropriate ..... anyone can do that 65975[/snapback] Where have I exercised hindsight? Jesus Christ, you asked whether I'm now saying that they're bad appointments and jumping on some bandwagon. I point out that 'No, I'm not saying they were bad appointments or jumping on a bandwagon', so you accuse me of exercising hindsight with regards to something else (fuck knows what!). And this from the man who KNEW, not thought, KNEW the very first time he saw Shola play that he would never be good enough. Guilty of applying a bit of hindsight yourself there, are you? 65981[/snapback] What I'm saying its a bit rich of people criticising Shepherd for appointing managers that they themselves would have done at the time, I thought that was fairly obvious. Can't see your point about Ameobi at all, what sort of hindsight ? He wasn't good enough from day 1 and I've always said that .....

you and Gemmil on the brink of another u-turn perhaps ....... I presume you are going to join the bandwagon who say he's stupid for appointing Dalglish and Gullit when you agreed with him at the time ..... 65889[/snapback] Is there such a bandwagon or is this another one that only exists in your head? Like the people that said Shola was the next Shearer. 65890[/snapback] Did you ? I made my usual first, correct impression after one game of Shola Ameobi..... 65893[/snapback] Did I think Shola was the next Shearer? No I didn't. Don't know anyone who did. You should become a scout. 65906[/snapback] You, and others, were on the old toontastic/newcastle online more than me, and you know a lot of people thought this. Anyway, as I asked, did you think Shepherd had made a cock up at the time, when he appointed Dalglish or Gullit, or not ? Or were you pleased ? Because if you were, you are out of order criticising Shepherd. yes or no. 65973[/snapback] When Shepherd appointed Dalglish I didn't just think it was a good choice, I thought it was the perfect choice. But I didn't know one way or the other what was going to happen. When he appointed Gullit I was just pleased that there was a bit of a lift to the place but again I didn't know what the appointment held in store. Both didn't work out, but I still wouldn't necessarily say either were bad appointments, they just both performed poorly in their time here. For me to say they were bad appointments I'd have to have thought they were flawed from the start, and I didn't. Now can you please show me where I've criticised Shepherd. I think for the most part he's a decent chairman - he's guilty of shortsightedness and he doesn't seem to have a long-term strategy in place for the club, but I'd take him over a lot of others simply from the point of view of the way he backs his managers with cash. I just hope when he comes to replace Souness he really puts some thought into it. 65977[/snapback] Fair enough, my point is simply that people slag Shepherd off for making decisions that they themselves would have made. He's certainly been naive in his thought process when appointing managers, they have all been a "reaction" type of appointment, but they have all had successful track records, so no one can accuse him of lacking ambition for the club, yet they do. The older ones among us will tell you what it's like supporting the club with zero ambition. Also, it isn't just Shepherd who chooses the manager, it's a board decision. And yes, whoever they get next will be backed just the same as the others. It's the biggest decision for them, because following the Keegan years, we have steadily declined ever since, apart from the blip in the middle when Bobby Robson got us into the Champions League. And yes, it is because we appointed managers who weren't right for Newcastle [with hindsight] although it is possible that with more time one of them may have done better.

No of course I didn't know one way or the other whether they were good appointments or poor appointments. As usual, I hoped that they would do the business and I then gave both men time to prove themselves. Now you answer me this - what does that have to do with what we're talking about? I didn't answer it because it was utterly irrelevant. 65967[/snapback] oh, right you answered this. Or didn't. Nowt like sitting on the fence. Just as well Shepherd isn't as decisive as you And it's totally relevant, it proves that you only exercise hindsight when making criticisms or giving praise if appropriate ..... anyone can do that

you and Gemmil on the brink of another u-turn perhaps ....... I presume you are going to join the bandwagon who say he's stupid for appointing Dalglish and Gullit when you agreed with him at the time ..... 65889[/snapback] Is there such a bandwagon or is this another one that only exists in your head? Like the people that said Shola was the next Shearer. 65890[/snapback] Did you ? I made my usual first, correct impression after one game of Shola Ameobi..... 65893[/snapback] Did I think Shola was the next Shearer? No I didn't. Don't know anyone who did. You should become a scout. 65906[/snapback] You, and others, were on the old toontastic/newcastle online more than me, and you know a lot of people thought this. Anyway, as I asked, did you think Shepherd had made a cock up at the time, when he appointed Dalglish or Gullit, or not ? Or were you pleased ? Because if you were, you are out of order criticising Shepherd. yes or no.

Of course. He has fully supported all his managers with total financial backing. Why, don't you ? Before you and anyone else rattles off the names of Gullit and Dalglish, don't bother unless you said at the time they would be crap ....... because if you do think he was stupid for appointing them, then you must be as stupid as you think he is ..... And name me as many chairman as you can who have backed their managers as much as Shepherd has ? 65888[/snapback] As I've said, if you back the chairman then you must by defnition believe he will be successful and so back his actions......which include appointing Souness, not sacking Souness, still not sacking Souness, not even sacking Souness when it's clear he won't be successful, authorising the sale of valuable club players who could make a difference on the pitch. Don't tell me he can't overule the manager, didn't SBR try to offload Shearer to Liverpool? Who's still here though? 65916[/snapback] The difference being that you can't sack Shepherd, and no one appoints him. Another difference being an acceptance that everyone makes mistakes sometimes, and this is a disastrous one. Also a realisation that over the 8 years of his time as chairman we have competed for top quality players, and played in europe quite a lot .... not really enough, but a damn sight better than the people who run the club from the 1950s' until 1992, and most other premiership chairman. There is one just 12 miles down the road, to ram the point home. No one castigated Shepherd for appointing Dalglish and Gullit at the time, so you cannot say now with hindsight they were poor appointments, because that is all it is, hindsight. The only thing wrong with Shepherd is the stupid things he says, which makes us look daft and him look even dafter. Shepherd is without a doubt one of the better chairman in the premiership, if you really don't think so you should think about how badly some of the other "big" clubs are run, and backed by their chairmen. Why don't you go on the rivals sites, or other clubs forums, and ask them what they think of how Shepherd backs his managers. I would bet you the vast majority will say they wish their chairman did the same. Look back to September, when an awful lot of people were slagging off Shepherd to spend his "own?" money, then we bought Owen and Luque ? Short memories, but pretty much par for the course. And, no fucker wants him to call time on Souness more than I do, because I despise the shitbag

What was your first impression after one game of Amdy Faye just out of interest? 65897[/snapback] first game at home to Coventry, played quite well, but first game against premiership opposition, was that he was nothing other than a squad player at best, at this level. Which would have been the next home game against Charlton, probably, as he played against Man City and I didn't go to that away game. So considering the 2 teams involved, he is a decent 1st division player at best. My first impression even against Coventry was that he was far too negative and basic a player to be a decent premiership player, never mind the standard we should set at Newcastle, we dominated the game and made it easy for him to support his team mates, finding space etc, a good thing to do, but no one tested him very much. Strange how I answer people's questions with straight answers, yet so many people don't answer mine [not you SLP, just an observation ]

you and Gemmil on the brink of another u-turn perhaps ....... I presume you are going to join the bandwagon who say he's stupid for appointing Dalglish and Gullit when you agreed with him at the time ..... 65889[/snapback] Is there such a bandwagon or is this another one that only exists in your head? Like the people that said Shola was the next Shearer. 65890[/snapback] Did you ? I made my usual first, correct impression after one game of Shola Ameobi.....

There's a surprise, now wait until tomorrow for Souness to say that Owen won't make the game either (but that he will be back for the next one, whenever that is). 65867[/snapback] Souness looking for new "door openers with pace" soon, unless he gets Santas sack Fucking clown of the first degree

you and Gemmil on the brink of another u-turn perhaps ....... I presume you are going to join the bandwagon who say he's stupid for appointing Dalglish and Gullit when you agreed with him at the time .....

Of course. He has fully supported all his managers with total financial backing. Why, don't you ? Before you and anyone else rattles off the names of Gullit and Dalglish, don't bother unless you said at the time they would be crap ....... because if you do think he was stupid for appointing them, then you must be as stupid as you think he is ..... And name me as many chairman as you can who have backed their managers as much as Shepherd has ?

As has been said many times before, I don't back Souness. I did say give him time because everyone needs time to prove themselves. He has proved that he's shite and therefore he must go. You'll say I've said "give him time" for too long. I think he needed to have the chance to build his own team over the summer and show what he can do with the players he brings in. He's had that chance now and blown it. But you're wrong to say that by definition I believe he will be successful - 'hope' is a much more accurate word. Back his actions? There's only a handful of actions he's done that I agree with: Sell Bellamy Sell Robert Buy Owen Buy Luque Buy Parker Buy Emre Buy Solano The rest, I don't back or agree with.. 65623[/snapback] look at the league table ..... and the accounts of the club [one for the accountants] 65628[/snapback] The accounts are in good shape - Freddy sees to that (and him, not Souness is at fault if they're not). As for the league position - don't see it in the actions I listed above therefore where's the argument? 65665[/snapback] They may be in good shape, but I doubt it, they certainly can't be in such good shape as before Souness came. For a worse league position. And - in spite of your statement that Shepherd runs the clubs accounts, that is true under normal circumstances, but this has also been said before, Souness is responsible for putting us in a position of underselling players by telling the whole of the football world he didn't want certain players, then also putting us in a position where everyone knew we were desperate to replace them and knew they could overcharge us. No one else is responsible for this. Only Souness. He also decided to buy the players we have bought. In my estimation, the players we have brought in could have been bought for at least 10-15m less if he had behaved sensibly and played his cards better, and players sold could also have raked in more cash. Incompetent management, all round, and you know it, it doesn't need an accountant to spell this out.

Well said Mags. Have a pint on their suffering LOL I prefer them where they are to going extinct/waving 2-1 flags/winning games at the top of division 2 [championship or whatever they call it now]

Before Souness came, there was also 88 out of 92 who would swap league positions ........

Staggeringly unbelievable that anyone thinks that a hopeless arse like Amdy Faye [and he's not the only one] is more worthy to have in a football team than Craig Bellamy. Absolutely amazing. Only a complete total fuckwit could come out with such absolute tripe. Or, should I say, a manager who has taken a team from Champions League players to the bottom half of the premiership and spent 50m quid in the process, in less than 18 months ......... This statement is backed up with results and performances

As has been said many times before, I don't back Souness. I did say give him time because everyone needs time to prove themselves. He has proved that he's shite and therefore he must go. You'll say I've said "give him time" for too long. I think he needed to have the chance to build his own team over the summer and show what he can do with the players he brings in. He's had that chance now and blown it. But you're wrong to say that by definition I believe he will be successful - 'hope' is a much more accurate word. Back his actions? There's only a handful of actions he's done that I agree with: Sell Bellamy Sell Robert Buy Owen Buy Luque Buy Parker Buy Emre Buy Solano The rest, I don't back or agree with.. 65623[/snapback] look at the league table ..... and the accounts of the club [one for the accountants]

Dunno. Are your grammar? 65610[/snapback] ? are you one of these daft buggers who thinks we should call "maths", "math" ? Other than that, I can't see your point. If you do, it's a bit rich coming from someone who says "dunno" ......... Neither "math" nor "dunno" is English, at least they aren't in my book ......... Waiting for Meenzer [and anyone else] to start giving English lessons .....

yes, you are right. They are intrinsically linked to the fortunes of Newcastle United since September 2004. I'm only surprised that, despite all the factual evidence that this club has gone through a disastrous period since, that people disagree. As I've said, if you back the manager, or say you will give him time, then you must by defnition believe he will be successful and so back his actions. If you don't believe he will be successful, why back his actions ??? It's as logical as pointing to the league table, and looking at the results.

from where I'm looking, only a blind man can disagree with the above facts. See above. Those things that define quality of football teams, are called points. The more you get, the better you are. More types of figures are things called money, if someone spends or invests a lot of money, they expect a better return for it.

canny point as usual One thing you can't dispute is We were better off before Souness made his changes at huge expense and BTW is your maths improving .....

happy divided societies eh

maybe