Fat Sam Defends the Indefensible

[peasepud 59]

is that what DSNR means ? Thought you were pissed actually

 

It does now, I just made it up

 

must have done, can't think for bugger what else it could mean

 

At the end of the day in the schoolyard it couldnt be beaten so you just have to add DSNR to the end of your posts and argument over ie....

 

Fifth best team in the league ever DSNR

 

and nobody can argue back, its the nae returnies that does it, theres no comeback from that

[kciM 0]

Shepherd did all this on his own ? You mean the majority shareholders said to him "just go ahead and make all the major decisions Freddie lad, put our fortune at stake and we'll see you on the golf course later."

 

Wey aye. Of course.

 

Your comment that I've highlighted shows what little you know - never mind understand - because it was Dogless Hall who came out in the press and said that. Which sort of backs up my first sentence.

 

Don't let the obvious truth change your opinion though

 

Sorry mate, but you seem to be just another person who when you are told about the position the club was in prior to the Halls and Shepherd taking over, falls on deaf ears.

 

Leazes.

 

If I was Sir John and went to the local press to try and take some of the pressure off you (Freddie Shepherd) for making the decision to sack Bobby Robson and it wasn't true, would you leave it at that or defend yourself ?

Edited December 2, 2007 by kciM

[LeazesMag 0]

Shepherd did all this on his own ? You mean the majority shareholders said to him "just go ahead and make all the major decisions Freddie lad, put our fortune at stake and we'll see you on the golf course later."

 

Wey aye. Of course.

 

Your comment that I've highlighted shows what little you know - never mind understand - because it was Dogless Hall who came out in the press and said that. Which sort of backs up my first sentence.

 

Don't let the obvious truth change your opinion though

 

Sorry mate, but you seem to be just another person who when you are told about the position the club was in prior to the Halls and Shepherd taking over, falls on deaf ears.

 

Leazes.

 

If I was Sir John and went to the local press to try and take some of the pressure off you (Freddie Shepherd) for making the decision to sack Bobby Robson and it wasn't true, would you leave it at that or defend yourself ?

 

If I was Sir John Hall, and sitting on a mega million pound company and was the major shareholder, the last thing I would do is allow someone else to make the major decisions all on his own. Unless you think Sir John is stupid.

 

What they say in public is another matter entirely.

 

This has been discussed in detail in the past. Our best era is when Keegan was manager, then Bobby Robson. Other managers have had great track records elsewhere but not had time or been suitable for us, or messed up for various reasons, or being shite. Much as it may pain you, if you have a personal grievance against Shepherd and Hall Jnr, the fact is that it was those 2 and Fletcher who chose the best manager we have had, not Sir John, who didn't want him. Yet somehow in the eyes of some people, he takes the credit for appointing him. Very odd.

 

During the time of ALL these managers since 1992, the major shareholders have been the same. The major shareholders in football clubs don't normally allow other people to mess around with their investment, unless they are idiots. Do you think Sir John Hall is an idiot ?

 

I'm not denying they have made mistakes, but the simple truth is whatever their mistakes, they have been the only half decent directors we have had at this club for 50 years. And, so far, Ashley and Mort have shown very little sign of understanding how to match the Champs League qualifications and couple of Cup Finals. Although I sincerely and obviously hope they catch on, and quickly.

 

I realise this doesn't sit well among those who put PR before results, but I'm afraid results is all I personally care about. And results are the best PR in football anyway.

Edited December 3, 2007 by LeazesMag

[Ketsbaia 0]

Not even a page in and it's an argument about the old board

It's not much of an argument is it ?

 

Who could possibly argue against the fact that shepherd had a £38 million surplus when he became chairman yet left almost £100 million debt and had spent all of the money from Northern Rock and Adidas prior to the takeover ? Shit, it should be said that £44 million was spent on ground re-development.

 

Who could argue against the fact that Shepherd sacked Bobby Robson and replaced him with Souness because he thought Robson was going to take us down and Souness would take us to another level ?

 

No, it's hardly an argument, more like Desperate Housewives than anything.

 

 

Shepherd did all this on his own ? You mean the majority shareholders said to him "just go ahead and make all the major decisions Freddie lad, put our fortune at stake and we'll see you on the golf course later."

Wey aye. Of course.

 

Your comment that I've highlighted shows what little you know - never mind understand - because it was Dogless Hall who came out in the press and said that. Which sort of backs up my first sentence.

 

Don't let the obvious truth change your opinion though

 

Sorry mate, but you seem to be just another person who when you are told about the position the club was in prior to the Halls and Shepherd taking over, falls on deaf ears.

 

The people on the board, the ones who made the decisions were all Fat Fred's mates. 'Course they said that. Anyway, didn't Shepherd stamp his feet and act like a bairn because SJH wasn't taking enough interest in the club?

 

Leazes, you're a fucking fantastic poster when you want to be, just let go of the past. Fat Fred has fucked off and there is nothing you can do to change people's minds about him.

[kciM 0]

If I was Sir John Hall, and sitting on a mega million pound company and was the major shareholder, the last thing I would do is allow someone else to make the major decisions all on his own. Unless you think Sir John is stupid.

 

What they say in public is another matter entirely.

 

This has been discussed in detail in the past. Our best era is when Keegan was manager, then Bobby Robson. Other managers have had great track records elsewhere but not had time or been suitable for us, or messed up for various reasons, or being shite. Much as it may pain you, if you have a personal grievance against Shepherd and Hall Jnr, the fact is that it was those 2 and Fletcher who chose the best manager we have had, not Sir John, who didn't want him. Yet somehow in the eyes of some people, he takes the credit for appointing him. Very odd.

 

During the time of ALL these managers since 1992, the major shareholders have been the same. The major shareholders in football clubs don't normally allow other people to mess around with their investment, unless they are idiots. Do you think Sir John Hall is an idiot ?

 

I'm not denying they have made mistakes, but the simple truth is whatever their mistakes, they have been the only half decent directors we have had at this club for 50 years. And, so far, Ashley and Mort have shown very little sign of understanding how to match the Champs League qualifications and couple of Cup Finals. Although I sincerely and obviously hope they catch on, and quickly.

 

I realise this doesn't sit well among those who put PR before results, but I'm afraid results is all I personally care about. And results are the best PR in football anyway.

 

 

If I was Freddie Shepherd and Sir John Hall was trying to make it look like I was responsible for sacking a manager who was respected throughout the game then I'd have made sure my side was known, wouldn't you ?

 

http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcast...-name_page.html

 

Sir John stressed that as he was no longer on the Newcastle United board they were his personal views, and that he was fully behind Freddy Shepherd.

 

 

He says: "It was a very difficult decision to make. I would guess that the board thought this particular season Newcastle would finish fourth and get into the Champions League. But we had a poor start to the season.

 

 

"The problems in the dressing room seemed to continue through into the season and I can understand Freddy Shepherd, the chairman's decision.

 

 

"It was the right decision, to my mind, and I'm standing by him.

[LeazesMag 0]

Not even a page in and it's an argument about the old board

It's not much of an argument is it ?

 

Who could possibly argue against the fact that shepherd had a £38 million surplus when he became chairman yet left almost £100 million debt and had spent all of the money from Northern Rock and Adidas prior to the takeover ? Shit, it should be said that £44 million was spent on ground re-development.

 

Who could argue against the fact that Shepherd sacked Bobby Robson and replaced him with Souness because he thought Robson was going to take us down and Souness would take us to another level ?

 

No, it's hardly an argument, more like Desperate Housewives than anything.

 

 

Shepherd did all this on his own ? You mean the majority shareholders said to him "just go ahead and make all the major decisions Freddie lad, put our fortune at stake and we'll see you on the golf course later."

Wey aye. Of course.

 

Your comment that I've highlighted shows what little you know - never mind understand - because it was Dogless Hall who came out in the press and said that. Which sort of backs up my first sentence.

 

Don't let the obvious truth change your opinion though

 

Sorry mate, but you seem to be just another person who when you are told about the position the club was in prior to the Halls and Shepherd taking over, falls on deaf ears.

 

The people on the board, the ones who made the decisions were all Fat Fred's mates. 'Course they said that. Anyway, didn't Shepherd stamp his feet and act like a bairn because SJH wasn't taking enough interest in the club?

 

Leazes, you're a fucking fantastic poster when you want to be, just let go of the past. Fat Fred has fucked off and there is nothing you can do to change people's minds about him.

 

thanks for the compliment mate

 

However, I'm not really looking back. I'm looking forward. The fact that so many people were unable to understand that qualifying for europe, playing in the CL etc etc was what a club does when they have a good board rather than a shite board always mystified me.

 

I hope Ashley and Mort do better. Of course I do.

 

I hoped that they would, but I'm having serious doubts, I really am. And the simple fact is, he can buy a pint of John Smiths for everybody on Tyneside, but if the team doesn't match the league positions and european qualifications of the previous majority shareholders, then there is no way in the world that I would ever consider him to be better.

Edited December 4, 2007 by LeazesMag

[peasepud 59]

I hoped that they would, but I'm having serious doubts, I really am. And the simple fact is, he can buy a pint of John Smiths for everybody on Tyneside, but if the team doesn't match the league positions and european qualifications of the previous majority shareholders, then there is no way in the world that I would ever consider him to be better.

 

And you base these serious doubts on what? 6 months in the job? another manager who looks like failing? (a manager appointed by who?) a lack of silverware? the fact hes taken a club which in the words of our new chairman was "very close to 'folding like a pack of cards'" and paid off half the debt from his own pocket?

 

You sir, are basing your views on the fact hes splashed a bit cash when hes been out and about, the type of thing that you yourself have said you couldnt care about when everyone else talked about fat man slagging us off, shagging whores (on our money) and generally taking the piss out of you, me and everyone else who wears the clubs colours.

 

 

I will have no hesitation in holding my hands up and saying it was a failure....when it actually happens but so far Ive seen nothing to hint at Mort being 200% better chairman than that fat bastard.

[ewerk 26192]

I hope Ashley and Mort do better. Of course I do.

 

I hoped that they would, but I'm having serious doubts, I really am. And the simple fact is, he can buy a pint of John Smiths for everybody on Tyneside, but if the team doesn't match the league positions and european qualifications of the previous majority shareholders, then there is no way in the world that I would ever consider him to be better.

 

a. What have Mort and Ashley done / not done that you disagree with?

 

b. Would Shepherd have done it differently?

[Guest alex]

Mort and Ashley didn't even pick the current manager ffs.

[Park Life 70]

We do have a rather rickety inj prone squad as well. Everyones carrying on as if we have 20 good players ready to give it all week in week out...We haven't.

[LeazesMag 0]

I hoped that they would, but I'm having serious doubts, I really am. And the simple fact is, he can buy a pint of John Smiths for everybody on Tyneside, but if the team doesn't match the league positions and european qualifications of the previous majority shareholders, then there is no way in the world that I would ever consider him to be better.

 

And you base these serious doubts on what? 6 months in the job? another manager who looks like failing? (a manager appointed by who?) a lack of silverware? the fact hes taken a club which in the words of our new chairman was "very close to 'folding like a pack of cards'" and paid off half the debt from his own pocket?

 

You sir, are basing your views on the fact hes splashed a bit cash when hes been out and about, the type of thing that you yourself have said you couldnt care about when everyone else talked about fat man slagging us off, shagging whores (on our money) and generally taking the piss out of you, me and everyone else who wears the clubs colours.

 

 

I will have no hesitation in holding my hands up and saying it was a failure....when it actually happens but so far Ive seen nothing to hint at Mort being 200% better chairman than that fat bastard.

 

I'm not saying anything PP, other than that so far I've made no judgement whatsoever because I've seen nothing to indicate anything whatsoever !!!!

 

Whereas a number of people have decided he's better because he's made good PR.

[sweetleftpeg 0]

A bit worrying really, he's admitted what we've all worked out in that his tactics are all about stopping the opposition playing, but with the tactics we've been playing I've yet to see any 'strengths' come out of it. In fact, we haven't even got the 'stop the opposition playing' bit right yet either. Alex makes a good point, maybe he's got the wrong players for it. Unfortuantely for him, he could be running out of time to get the right ones.

[Park Life 70]

A bit worrying really, he's admitted what we've all worked out in that his tactics are all about stopping the opposition playing, but with the tactics we've been playing I've yet to see any 'strengths' come out of it. In fact, we haven't even got the 'stop the opposition playing' bit right yet either. Alex makes a good point, maybe he's got the wrong players for it. Unfortuantely for him, he could be running out of time to get the right ones.

 

Need a different kind of midfield really. It really has no muscle or engine in it.

[Jusoda Kid 1]

A bit worrying really, he's admitted what we've all worked out in that his tactics are all about stopping the opposition playing, but with the tactics we've been playing I've yet to see any 'strengths' come out of it. In fact, we haven't even got the 'stop the opposition playing' bit right yet either. Alex makes a good point, maybe he's got the wrong players for it. Unfortuantely for him, he could be running out of time to get the right ones.

 

 

Have a guess who said this:

 

“Given the right game-plan, and 11 players taking that on to the field and having the belief that it will work, will bring them a good result.

[sammynb 2929]

A bit worrying really, he's admitted what we've all worked out in that his tactics are all about stopping the opposition playing, but with the tactics we've been playing I've yet to see any 'strengths' come out of it. In fact, we haven't even got the 'stop the opposition playing' bit right yet either. Alex makes a good point, maybe he's got the wrong players for it. Unfortuantely for him, he could be running out of time to get the right ones.

 

 

Have a guess who said this:

 

“Given the right game-plan, and 11 players taking that on to the field and having the belief that it will work, will bring them a good result.

Gemmill's favourite manager.

[LeazesMag 0]

Leazes - is it or is it not true that shepherd had us in dire straits financially prior to the takeover?

 

Remember the position the club were in when they took over though ? Are you also aware that very few clubs aren't in debt, and remember that the major part of our debt was due to the expansion of the stadium, which financial people say was very well financially structured ? Or do you think we should still be playing in a 36,000 ground ?

 

In 1992 the club were nearer going bust than they will ever be, and that was as a result of decades of selling our best players and having no ambition. So which would you prefer ?

 

What will you say if we run the club with balanced books and see all the top players going to the other top clubs ?

 

If thats what you want, then this season, and the quality of players we brought to the club in the summer, isn't a blip. Its about to become the norm. Personally, I don't want that.

 

HF...........see this ? How many people have bought into EXACTLY this scenario in the last 3 years ? [One which you, like myself, has argued massively against]

[Happy Face 29]

Leazes - is it or is it not true that shepherd had us in dire straits financially prior to the takeover?

 

Remember the position the club were in when they took over though ? Are you also aware that very few clubs aren't in debt, and remember that the major part of our debt was due to the expansion of the stadium, which financial people say was very well financially structured ? Or do you think we should still be playing in a 36,000 ground ?

 

In 1992 the club were nearer going bust than they will ever be, and that was as a result of decades of selling our best players and having no ambition. So which would you prefer ?

 

What will you say if we run the club with balanced books and see all the top players going to the other top clubs ?

 

If thats what you want, then this season, and the quality of players we brought to the club in the summer, isn't a blip. Its about to become the norm. Personally, I don't want that.

 

HF...........see this ? How many people have bought into EXACTLY this scenario in the last 3 years ? [One which you, like myself, has argued massively against]

 

So it was based on the Summer 2007 deals...when we brought in Barton, Enrique and Beye.

 

SELLING those players is the evidence things have gone dowenhill for me. Your standards are MUCH higher.