Happy Face 29 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 3629 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. He's quitting before he even starts now - prepare for MattM4 to start seething about what a cunt he is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. He's quitting before he even starts now - prepare for MattM4 to start seething about what a cunt he is Quitting before he starts!! Quittertastic!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakehips 0 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. He's quitting before he even starts now - prepare for MattM4 to start seething about what a cunt he is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM4 0 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. He's quitting before he even starts now - prepare for MattM4 to start seething about what a cunt he is yes hilarious isnt it. Wish i could see the funny side of anything to do with Keegan. Not to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6321 Posted June 24, 2009 Author Share Posted June 24, 2009 My take on the whole KK situation is that one of his most endearing characteristics has always been his own integrity and the way he stood up for what he believed in. Had it not been for that, he wouldn't have walked out after the Swindon game encouraging SJH to start spending. He wouldn't have dropped Clarkie and Cole for the League Cup game at Wimbledon following indescretions by both only for them both to come back a few days later (against Wimbledon) and be hungry enough to destroy them. He wouldn't have taken Beresford off after 20 minutes against Villa for calling him a cunt and replacing him with Elliott who ultimately played better. He wouldn't have sold Andy Cole (eventually replacing him with Ferdinand who nearly won us the league). They were the positive outcomes to this area of his character. Of course on the flip-side there was the 'losing it on Sky' incident and his resignation last September. What is paramount though is that we weren't relegated because Keegan quit. We were 3 games into a 38 game season. We were relegated because we were poorly managed above the team manager. There's no debate in that scenario. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13895 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Yep. Ashley relegated us. West Ham were in the same position as us in the same time in the season, they appointed Zola as permenant manager and we stuck with Houghton and then employed Kinnear as ''interim'' manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My take on the whole KK situation is that one of his most endearing characteristics has always been his own integrity and the way he stood up for what he believed in. Had it not been for that, he wouldn't have walked out after the Swindon game encouraging SJH to start spending. He wouldn't have dropped Clarkie and Cole for the League Cup game at Wimbledon following indescretions by both only for them both to come back a few days later (against Wimbledon) and be hungry enough to destroy them. He wouldn't have taken Beresford off after 20 minutes against Villa for calling him a cunt and replacing him with Elliott who ultimately played better. He wouldn't have sold Andy Cole (eventually replacing him with Ferdinand who nearly won us the league). They were the positive outcomes to this area of his character. Of course on the flip-side there was the 'losing it on Sky' incident and his resignation last September. What is paramount though is that we weren't relegated because Keegan quit. We were 3 games into a 38 game season. We were relegated because we were poorly managed above the team manager. There's no debate in that scenario. Well said Craig. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. He's quitting before he even starts now - prepare for MattM4 to start seething about what a cunt he is yes hilarious isnt it. Wish i could see the funny side of anything to do with Keegan. Not to be. Go and stick some pins in your Shola doll you miserable wanker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6321 Posted June 24, 2009 Author Share Posted June 24, 2009 Having sad all that...he's not going to Southampton though. LeTiss has gone on record saying that he has discussed the managerial position with KK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spongebob toonpants 3629 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My take on the whole KK situation is that one of his most endearing characteristics has always been his own integrity and the way he stood up for what he believed in. Had it not been for that, he wouldn't have walked out after the Swindon game encouraging SJH to start spending. He wouldn't have dropped Clarkie and Cole for the League Cup game at Wimbledon following indescretions by both only for them both to come back a few days later (against Wimbledon) and be hungry enough to destroy them. He wouldn't have taken Beresford off after 20 minutes against Villa for calling him a cunt and replacing him with Elliott who ultimately played better. He wouldn't have sold Andy Cole (eventually replacing him with Ferdinand who nearly won us the league). They were the positive outcomes to this area of his character. Of course on the flip-side there was the 'losing it on Sky' incident and his resignation last September. What is paramount though is that we weren't relegated because Keegan quit. We were 3 games into a 38 game season. We were relegated because we were poorly managed above the team manager. There's no debate in that scenario. And lets not forget he walked out but would have walked back in again if Wise had gone. It amazes me that even after all that has gone on since he left, the obscene way the club has been treated, the absolute farce of this season and the inability of Ashley/LLambias/Wise to make any decision that wasn't a disaster that any sentient person with any feeling for the club can still think Keegan could have stayed and worked under those conditions. Hell probably pitch up at Southampton, get them into the top half of the Prem, leave after 4 years and be accused of quitting at the first sign of trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I'm also interested why people blame Ashley more than LLambias? Keegan knew before he took the job that a Director of Football would be appointed, it was LLambias job to make sure the system worked. If I were Ashley (in September) I'd have sacked LLambias for calling Keegan's bluff on walking, and sacked Keegan for walking without calling him first. Which oddly leaves Wise employed, as he only submitted his opinions on Keegan's transfers - LLambias is the man that had to appease the situation and ensure a happy medium was agreed. My 'guess' is Keegan submitted a list of old/experienced players that would leave no sell on value in a few years, these got rejected for being a waste of money putting his nose out of joint. I reckon this was compounded by the Milner transfer, which LLambias probably bartered a deal with Keegan and then never delivered. He showed his inability to line deals up by letting Given to to Man City then failing to sign Michael Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig 6321 Posted June 24, 2009 Author Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I think you'll find his legal case against the club prevents him from doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I think you'll find his legal case against the club prevents him from doing so. Doesn't this prove he cares more about the money than the club?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 9103 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I think you'll find his legal case against the club prevents him from doing so. Doesn't this prove he cares more about the money than the club?? No. It proves that he wants to win the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I'm also interested why people blame Ashley more than LLambias? Keegan knew before he took the job that a Director of Football would be appointed, it was LLambias job to make sure the system worked. If I were Ashley (in September) I'd have sacked LLambias for calling Keegan's bluff on walking, and sacked Keegan for walking without calling him first. Which oddly leaves Wise employed, as he only submitted his opinions on Keegan's transfers - LLambias is the man that had to appease the situation and ensure a happy medium was agreed. My 'guess' is Keegan submitted a list of old/experienced players that would leave no sell on value in a few years, these got rejected for being a waste of money putting his nose out of joint. I reckon this was compounded by the Milner transfer, which LLambias probably bartered a deal with Keegan and then never delivered. He showed his inability to line deals up by letting Given to to Man City then failing to sign Michael Johnson. Surely you've answered your own question there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I think you'll find his legal case against the club prevents him from doing so. Doesn't this prove he cares more about the money than the club?? Bit like saying signing up at the end of May proves you're a mackem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I think you'll find his legal case against the club prevents him from doing so. Doesn't this prove he cares more about the money than the club?? No. It proves that he wants to win the case. You actually think this will go to court, lol. Not a chance. If it's not dropped, it'll be settled out of court with an NDA. Money is the only motive. Surely you've answered your own question there. Not really, I said I'd sack Keegan for walking. Pretty sure this wouldn't apease most. Ashley's actions were to sell the club, which royally back fired. +I take it insults are your way of saying I'm right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 My issue with Keegan is not that he walks out, but that he does it without publicly stating his reasons. Which regardless of your stand point divides the fans and causes unrest. I think you'll find his legal case against the club prevents him from doing so. Doesn't this prove he cares more about the money than the club?? No. It proves that he wants to win the case. You actually think this will go to court, lol. Not a chance. If it's not dropped, it'll be settled out of court with an NDA. Money is the only motive. Surely you've answered your own question there. Not really, I said I'd sack Keegan for walking. Pretty sure this wouldn't apease most. Ashley's actions were to sell the club, which royally back fired. You wondered why people blamed Ashley more. There's two options as I see it, either (as you outline) Llambias is acting largely with autonomy and incompetent yet Ashley sticks with him (so the latter is ultimately to blame for not getting rid/appointing someone better in the first place etc.) or Llambias is just the monkey and doing what the organ grinder tells him (which also makes Ashley more responsible). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Interesting, ashley gets the blame by proxy. His company his mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 70 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Interesting, ashley gets the blame by proxy. His company his mess. How is he poxy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Interesting, ashley gets the blame by proxy. His company his mess. I explained why I thought he was more to blame, i.e. making a bad appointment then sticking with that bad appointment when said appointment displayed incompetence. A case of ultimate responsibility if you like. I made that fairly clear. At no stage did I suggest Llambias was blameless before you try and stick that one on me. You'll have to explain the 'blame by proxy' comment (I know what the phrase 'by proxy' means by the way ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florencita 0 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 NO,NO,NO,NO, & NO!! Keegan should go NOWHERE near southampton ffs!! He will Manage NEWCASTLE next season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil 6 Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Sorry i was summarising what you'd said and mulling it over... By 'blame by proxy' I meant as Ashley hired the guy who's doing a cr*p job, so he's doing a cr*p job (by sticking with him). So ultimately your saying it's his responsibility to ensure the club is run correctly anything else is neglect. hmmm.... never really thought of it that way. I can see the argument for this thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 24, 2009 Share Posted June 24, 2009 Sorry i was summarising what you'd said and mulling it over... By 'blame by proxy' I meant as Ashley hired the guy who's doing a cr*p job, so he's doing a cr*p job (by sticking with him). So ultimately your saying it's his responsibility to ensure the club is run correctly anything else is neglect. hmmm.... never really thought of it that way. I can see the argument for this thinking. It's hardly revolutionary thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now