Jump to content

Kevin Keegan Resigns as manager


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I cant even join with in any banter at the mo. My best mate (non Toon fan) called today:

 

Mate: "Just heard about KK resigning"

McGroin: "Aye"

Mate: "Do you want comiserations or cynical, mean jokes?"

McGroin: "Can you leave the jokes for a week. Im nearly crying here"

 

He got the point and luckily joined in the with Ashley-slagging.

 

I've had so many PISSY-WANK texts over the past 3 days...just not in the mood.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And once again, I just know over the next week Im going to have "THAT" conversation with people who know fuck all about football but want to seem interested.

Edited by JawD
Link to post
Share on other sites

Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

Link to post
Share on other sites

A scouse mate tried to start some "banter" and I had to cut him down quick sharp. I understood he was just having a laugh and I understood that he doesn't appreciate the depth of affection we have for Keegan, but allthe same he can keep his ever so witty scouse shit to himself.

 

Stevie'll be proud, I managed to get bin-dipping, corpse-robbing, dole-wallowing, "cunt" and all the other stereotypes into one 150 character text.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A scouse mate tried to start some "banter" and I had to cut him down quick sharp. I understood he was just having a laugh and I understood that he doesn't appreciate the depth of affection we have for Keegan, but allthe same he can keep his ever so witty scouse shit to himself.

 

Stevie'll be proud, I managed to get bin-dipping, corpse-robbing, dole-wallowing, "cunt" and all the other stereotypes into one 150 character text.

Good work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

When he told them to take care of the club while he was gone I don't think he intended them to force the manager out. This has come from the very top, make no mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

When he told them to take care of the club while he was gone I don't think he intended them to force the manager out. This has come from the very top, make no mistake.

 

 

That letter didnt come from ashley.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It may not have been ashleys name on it but you can be damn sure he knew what Lambastard was doing

 

i doubt he gets so much swing that he can take it upon himself to issue ultimatums to the manager that will result in him leaving and every fan going mental

 

Ashley no matter how far removed he likes to think he is, Ok's and rubber stamps shit like that

like the owner of any company would do

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

When he told them to take care of the club while he was gone I don't think he intended them to force the manager out. This has come from the very top, make no mistake.

 

 

That letter didnt come from ashley.

 

Given the gravitas of the situation I'm sure it went for his approval before being given to Keegan. Mike Ashley is a man who I imagine doesn't like to be backed into a corner and won't have taken kindly to Keegan's demands. I'm nearly sure that he was give Llabia his instructions from afar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

After the news settled in on Tuesday I started to think with my head a bit more than my heart. Tried to take the owners/middle management view...

 

Of the two, Ashley is the one with the (apparent) long term commitment to the club, should he really bow to Keegans every whim on player recruitment when he'll be gone in 2 years guaranteed? Ashley can only assume that Keegan is looking for a short term fix and will leave the club with a squad of expensive old men who he can get no value back from.

 

And after being gutted all over again tonight I can still see that line of thought. They can't comprehend Keegan's connection with the club. Our recent history is the likes of Allardyce and Souness bringing in their expensive flops which have had to be replaced season after season as the manager walks off with a payout. A long term vision minimises that risk.

 

I can't comprehend them not keeping it as a mutual agreement approach though. Why did it work well for 3 months of the window only to fall apart so miserably on the very last day? They had to have taken the piss, big style.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

After the news settled in on Tuesday I started to think with my head a bit more than my heart. Tried to take the owners/middle management view...

 

Of the two, Ashley is the one with the (apparent) long term commitment to the club, should he really bow to Keegans every whim on player recruitment when he'll be gone in 2 years guaranteed? Ashley can only assume that Keegan is looking for a short term fix and will leave the club with a squad of expensive old men who he can get no value back from.

 

And after being gutted all over again tonight I can still see that line of thought. They can't comprehend Keegan's connection with the club. Our recent history is the likes of Allardyce and Souness bringing in their expensive flops which have had to be replaced season after season as the manager walks off with a payout. A long term vision minimises that risk.

 

I can't comprehend them not keeping it as a mutual agreement approach though. Why did it work well for 3 months of the window only to fall apart so miserably on the very last day? They had to have taken the piss, big style.

 

One day someone will get to the bottom of it all and it'll all come clear as to what really happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

When he told them to take care of the club while he was gone I don't think he intended them to force the manager out. This has come from the very top, make no mistake.

 

 

That letter didnt come from ashley.

 

Given the gravitas of the situation I'm sure it went for his approval before being given to Keegan. Mike Ashley is a man who I imagine doesn't like to be backed into a corner and won't have taken kindly to Keegan's demands. I'm nearly sure that he was give Llabia his instructions from afar.

 

Maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

After the news settled in on Tuesday I started to think with my head a bit more than my heart. Tried to take the owners/middle management view...

 

Of the two, Ashley is the one with the (apparent) long term commitment to the club, should he really bow to Keegans every whim on player recruitment when he'll be gone in 2 years guaranteed? Ashley can only assume that Keegan is looking for a short term fix and will leave the club with a squad of expensive old men who he can get no value back from.

 

And after being gutted all over again tonight I can still see that line of thought. They can't comprehend Keegan's connection with the club. Our recent history is the likes of Allardyce and Souness bringing in their expensive flops which have had to be replaced season after season as the manager walks off with a payout. A long term vision minimises that risk.

 

I can't comprehend them not keeping it as a mutual agreement approach though. Why did it work well for 3 months of the window only to fall apart so miserably on the very last day? They had to have taken the piss, big style.

 

They led him a merry dance 'til the end of the transfer window, thinking that there was fuck all he could do about it afterwards and it has blown up in their faces.

 

Well that's one theory anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after staying up late on transfer window day with all the drama will he go wont he go has he gone etc etc

 

i can safely say sky news setanta and everything else can fuck off for tonight...

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't comprehend them not keeping it as a mutual agreement approach though. Why did it work well for 3 months of the window only to fall apart so miserably on the very last day? They had to have taken the piss, big style.

 

I get the impression that before Milner left, there was an idea that the squad was "good enough" - something I don't agree on though Keegan was still probably expecting a left back. Milner's sale prompted an increase in demand for a midfielder and I'd guess if Martins and Viduka wern't injured they wouldn't have gone after a striker.

 

Overall I think its the infamous "everyone has a price" for sales that has been the straw - how much shit would we have been in if Owen and Barton had left (numbers wise at least).

 

Having said that I know Kev's statement suggests its purchases that were the stumbling block so we may have to wait to find out who he didn't want.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Im still not convinced that ashley is to blame for this whole sorry mess.

 

clearly, while ashleys been away, hes left llambias (as chairman) and its directors in charge of the club.

 

and who are the directors again - wise, jiminez and vetere (and obviously 1 or 2 others).

 

After the news settled in on Tuesday I started to think with my head a bit more than my heart. Tried to take the owners/middle management view...

 

Of the two, Ashley is the one with the (apparent) long term commitment to the club, should he really bow to Keegans every whim on player recruitment when he'll be gone in 2 years guaranteed? Ashley can only assume that Keegan is looking for a short term fix and will leave the club with a squad of expensive old men who he can get no value back from.

 

And after being gutted all over again tonight I can still see that line of thought. They can't comprehend Keegan's connection with the club. Our recent history is the likes of Allardyce and Souness bringing in their expensive flops which have had to be replaced season after season as the manager walks off with a payout. A long term vision minimises that risk.

 

I can't comprehend them not keeping it as a mutual agreement approach though. Why did it work well for 3 months of the window only to fall apart so miserably on the very last day? They had to have taken the piss, big style.

 

One day someone will get to the bottom of it all and it'll all come clear as to what really happened.

 

Could equally well have been that Keegan thought, ah fuck it, I'm popular enough around these parts I'll start laying the law down big style, and it's others sticking to the plan of not having short term staff dictate the long term vision.

 

Am I just imagining Keegan said he would ONLY do the 3.5 years?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...