keegan to come back

[Howaythelads 0]

Leazes, the following statements are factual and therefore indisputable.

 

- Freddy Shepherd willing appointed Graeme Souness

 

- Freddy Shepherd has continually supported Graeme Souness 100%

 

- Freddy Shepherd fully supported Souness over the Craig Bellamy saga, including selling him and even went so far as to sa he'll never play for this club again so long as I'm in charge.

 

What's your view on those three points and how do you feel about Shepherd's involvement/views on them?

 

(And please don't sidetrack this one by asking different questions in return).

66048[/snapback]

 

Totally irrelevant questions, tbh. What are you getting at? What are you trying to prove here?

 

I think it's important for a Chairman to back a manager 100%. I think that's been made clear to almost everybody.

 

I'm pissed off that FS appointed the most incompetent manager the club has had in my lifetime. I'm pissed off that he backed him when Souness put his ego before the club by getting rid of our best player, but the fact is, FS is doing his job by backing the manager. End of. This means he's a good Chairman, not a bad one. It also means that Souness is a shit manager, shame it took some people too long to realise it.

66065[/snapback]

 

Might be irrelevant to you - they're not to me, hence why I've asked them

 

What I'm trying to get at, is that Freddy Shepherd is entirely responsible for Graeme Souness being here, he's the only man who can actually bring the Souness era to an end yet he chooses not to do so. He's also the man who ultimately could have ensured CB stayed at SJP if he felt like it.

 

Now it seems that LM (and yourself for that matter) seems to think the sun shines out of his fat arse, so what I'm trying to determine is how you can think that when he is ultimately responsible for the one man who boils your piss day in, day out....

 

And since when was the chairman's only repsonsibility to provide money?

66067[/snapback]

 

Sun shines out of his arse? That's nonsense, Craig. That should have obvious by the post earlier in this thread, where I put down my thoughts about FS's limited ability when selecting managers. Your comment shows selective reading, mate. You should stop the attempted point scoring, any debate would then be more interesting, don't you agree?

 

Irrelevant might be the wrong word I was looking for, so sorry about that. I said irrelevant because of the way you phrased your questions, can't think of the right word to use but here's why I said it. It's obvious you aren't really interested in the answers. You're trying to worm some kind of statement out of somebody to spin in order to suit some point you're trying to make. You don't need to try to worm that statement out of anybody. We all know FS appoints the managers and most would think he hasn't done a good job at it. Mind you, as has been said and also selectively skipped over, most of that is hindsight except for Souness, who some knew from the start was incompetent.

 

What you're saying would be "relevant" ( for want of that better word ) if you simply stated what you thought of FS and then asked a related question.

[Craig 6302]

Sun shines out of his arse?  That's nonsense, Craig. That should have obvious by the post earlier in this thread, where I put down my thoughts about FS's limited ability when selecting managers. Your comment shows selective reading, mate. You should stop the attempted point scoring, any debate would then be more interesting, don't you agree?

66071[/snapback]

 

In fairness, the question wasn't aimed at you, hence why I've not referenced your earlier points (which I have read). Still at least you've managed to keep your keyboard occupied!

[LeazesMag 0]

Leazes, the following statements are factual and therefore indisputable.

 

- Freddy Shepherd willing appointed Graeme Souness

 

- Freddy Shepherd has continually supported Graeme Souness 100%

 

- Freddy Shepherd fully supported Souness over the Craig Bellamy saga, including selling him and even went so far as to sa he'll never play for this club again so long as I'm in charge.

 

What's your view on those three points and how do you feel about Shepherd's involvement/views on them?

 

(And please don't sidetrack this one by asking different questions in return).

66048[/snapback]

 

As people continually side step mine ....

 

I said it earlier. Shepherd is a top chairman, he's made a mistake with Souness but that doesn't change the fact that he's a top chairman.

 

He has appointed his manager and backed him. I don't agree with his actions, but he is doing what a chairman should do, back him or sack him, that makes him a good boss.

 

Those of you who critcise him for appointing managers who you would have done yourself are pretty fickle and have short memories. He has done what he thought was right for the club. See my earlier points about other clubs and other managers, it is totally relevant because you can only say Shepherd is crap by pointing at dozens, or more, that are better than him. But you can't.

 

In Souness case though, HE, as a manager is judged on results, and I for one would never have let him anywhere near SJP. Shepherds mistake, but at least I and others were astute enough to say this from the start rather than blindly back him, if others had felt like we did we just might have got rid of the useless idiot earlier.

 

Also Craig, you remember McKeag etc, or you seem to do, you are aware just how shit a chairman can really be, so why don't you at least appreciate the fact Shepherd has tried to give his managers all the financial clout he can ?

Edited December 9, 2005 by LeazesMag

[Guest alex]

The way I see it Shepherd is pretty much totally to blame for the current situation. Last summer he undermined Robson's position by announcing his contract wouldn't be renewed at the end of the season. He then sacked Robson on the eve of the transfer window closing meaning the new manager was unable to bring in any new players (showing his trademark lack of planning/foresight). He then appoints his 5th/6th/7th choice of manager, i.e. Souness, again suggesting he hadn't even sounded out potential replacements. He then gives this 'shite' manager enormous financial backing and now, if we are to believe the rumours, he is on the verge of sacking him, putting us right back to square one and meaning any new manager will have little or no funds.

[Craig 6302]

The way I see it Shepherd is pretty much totally to blame for the current situation.

66082[/snapback]

 

 

 

Leazes, you haven't commented on Shepherd's total support for Souness in the exit of Craig Bellamy from the club. What's your view on that?

[LeazesMag 0]

The way I see it Shepherd is pretty much totally to blame for the current situation. Last summer he undermined Robson's position by announcing his contract wouldn't be renewed at the end of the season. He then sacked Robson on the eve of the transfer window closing meaning the new manager was unable to bring in any new players (showing his trademark lack of planning/foresight). He then appoints his 5th/6th/7th choice of manager, i.e. Souness, again suggesting he hadn't even sounded out potential replacements. He then gives this 'shite' manager enormous financial backing and now, if we are to believe the rumours, he is on the verge of sacking him, putting us right back to square one and meaning any new manager will have little or no funds.

66082[/snapback]

 

It goes without saying that I totally agree that Shepherd is making another mistake by not getting rid of fuckwit, and he needs to get the next appointment right or he himself will be under severe pressure, and rightly so.

 

One thing is for certain though, he will back him, more than everyone bar 2 or 3 clubs, what more can you ask of him ?

 

If Shepherd goes and we end up with a Doug Ellis/Bob Murray moneyhoarder type of chairman, we;ll have a lot more to moan about than this.

[Craig 6302]

Also Craig, you remember McKeag etc, or you seem to do, you are aware just how shit a chairman can really be, so why don't you at least appreciate the fact Shepherd has tried to give his managers all the financial clout he can ?

66081[/snapback]

 

As I have stated elsewhere, sticking your hand in your pocket doesn't automatically make you a good chairman.

 

From a financial point of view, Shepherd is a top-class chairman. He provides funds yet ensures that the club maintains a decent financial state.

 

From a footballing point of view (i.e. resource management) I think he's absolutely hopeless!

[LeazesMag 0]

The way I see it Shepherd is pretty much totally to blame for the current situation.

66082[/snapback]

 

 

 

Leazes, you haven't commented on Shepherd's total support for Souness in the exit of Craig Bellamy from the club. What's your view on that?

66083[/snapback]

 

It's the same answer Craig, he as a boss has backed his manager, I thought that was clear. However it isn't what I would have done.

 

You do see my point about previous chairman, and the point about Ellis types don't you ?

[Guest alex]

The way I see it Shepherd is pretty much totally to blame for the current situation. Last summer he undermined Robson's position by announcing his contract wouldn't be renewed at the end of the season. He then sacked Robson on the eve of the transfer window closing meaning the new manager was unable to bring in any new players (showing his trademark lack of planning/foresight). He then appoints his 5th/6th/7th choice of manager, i.e. Souness, again suggesting he hadn't even sounded out potential replacements. He then gives this 'shite' manager enormous financial backing and now, if we are to believe the rumours, he is on the verge of sacking him, putting us right back to square one and meaning any new manager will have little or no funds.

66082[/snapback]

 

It goes without saying that I totally agree that Shepherd is making another mistake by not getting rid of fuckwit, and he needs to get the next appointment right or he himself will be under severe pressure, and rightly so.

 

One thing is for certain though, he will back him, more than everyone bar 2 or 3 clubs, what more can you ask of him ?

 

If Shepherd goes and we end up with a Doug Ellis/Bob Murray moneyhoarder type of chairman, we;ll have a lot more to moan about than this.

66084[/snapback]

I'm not saying Shepherd is a bad chairman per se, he has always given his managers financial support and he's far better than anyone from the pre-Sir John Hall days. I just thinks he lacks foresight and has, consequently, made some bad decisions.

[sweetleftpeg 0]

I've always said that whilst Shepherd and the board may be willing to splash cash, they seem to work from some sort of short term quick fix strategy rather than looking at the bigger picture. I never agreed with some of the stuff John Hall had the club involved in, but he put us in the position we were in by thinking outside the box and into the future. Since he's gone the board have made a succession of bad decisions imo which from where I'm sitting looks like there isn't a long term plan.

 

The Robson affair is a perfect example. Should and could have been handled so much better. Robson should have been offered an ambassadorial position within the club, go around and use his profile to boost the club and region, meet potential investors etc. He might not have wanted that, but it would have been better to at least offer him it. I agree that he had done all he could and it was time to look to a younger man, but the board obviously thought one would fall into our lap and everyone would be benging down our door to take the job. Piss poor, and the sooner this British manager obsession ends the better.

[ChocChip 0]

That's odd, i always thought that Shepherd authorised the spending of the available income that the club had itself generated, i wasn't in the least bit aware he was spending his own money all this time. Surely if the club has created enough income for transfers any reasonable chairman would allow it to be spent so rather than stealing it for their own gain, doesn't seem like an act of altruism to me.

 

So, imo, Shepherd's most important role is in the recruiting of a managerial and coaching continuance that would push this club towards footballing excellence. In this regard he has proved himself a total c**t and all those who are blind to this fact have been taken in by the most basic of propaganda. Sheep!

[Craig 6302]

I've always said that whilst Shepherd and the board may be willing to splash cash, they seem to work from some sort of short term quick fix strategy rather than looking at the bigger picture. I never agreed with some of the stuff John Hall had the club involved in, but he put us in the position we were in by thinking outside the box and into the future. Since he's gone the board have made a succession of bad decisions imo which from where I'm sitting looks like there isn't a long term plan.

 

The Robson affair is a perfect example. Should and could have been handled so much better. Robson should have been offered an ambassadorial position within the club, go around and use his profile to boost the club and region, meet potential investors etc. He might not have wanted that, but it would have been better to at least offer him it. I agree that he had done all he could and it was time to look to a younger man, but the board obviously thought one would fall into our lap and everyone would be benging down our door to take the job. Piss poor, and the sooner this British manager obsession ends the better.

66095[/snapback]

 

Totally agree...

 

IMO the fortunes of the club have gone in reverse as a direct result of the decisions made by the board, of whom Freddy Shepherd sits in the chair.

[luckypierre 0]

If a chairmans job was to release the clubs OWN funds to the manager then yes he's done a great job but surely theres more to it than that. The buck for bad decision after bad decision has to stop somewhere Leazes. He say he ahs the clubs interest at heart but how is paying an extortionate amount of rent for property his brother owns in the clubs interest? He's the one who authorised the ridiculous contracts for Dyer.

 

Your support of him is a strange one. On the whole I respect your views on football, you know what you're talking about for the most part but theres an element of double standards when it comes to Shepherd. Just because he's not as bad as previous chairmen does not make him a good chairman. In the same way that Souness isnt the worst manager we've had it doesnt hide the fact he's a poor manager. Under his stewardship the club hasnt moved forward one bit, in the same way you lay it (rightfully) on Souness doorstep, we've went backwards. He's a smug, odius bastard whose in this for one thing and thats to line his own pocket. Freddie Shepherd has done very very well out of Newcastle United, its a shame that stament cant be swicthed round

 

Theres no guarantee another chairman would be better, theres no guarantee the manager will be either. It does not make them immune to criticism.

Edited December 9, 2005 by luckypierre

[Renton 17767]

If a chairmans job was to release the clubs OWN funds to the manager then yes he's done a great job but surely theres more to it than that. The buck for bad decision after bad decision has to stop somewhere Leazes. He say he ahs the clubs interest at heart but how is paying an extortionate amount of rent for property his brother owns in the clubs interest? He's the one who authorised the ridiculous contracts for Dyer.

 

Your support of him is a strange one. On the whole I respect your views on football, you know what you're talking about for the most part but theres an element of double standards when it comes to Shepherd. Just because he's not as bad as previous chairmen does not make him a good chairman. In the same way that Souness isnt the worst manager we've had it doesnt hide the fact he's a poor manager. Under his stewardship the club hasnt moved forward one bit, in the same way you lay it (rightfully) on Souness doorstep, we've went backwards. He's a smug, odius bastard whose in this for one thing and thats to line his own pocket. Freddie Shepherd has done very very well out of Newcastle United, its a shame that stament cant be swicthed round

 

Theres no guarantee another chairman would be better, theres no guarantee the manager will be either. It does not make them immune to criticism.

66117[/snapback]

 

Top post, my thoughts entirely. Also add to that Shepherd's appalling PR and you basically have a shit chairman. We deserve better.

[Renton 17767]

I've always said that whilst Shepherd and the board may be willing to splash cash, they seem to work from some sort of short term quick fix strategy rather than looking at the bigger picture. I never agreed with some of the stuff John Hall had the club involved in, but he put us in the position we were in by thinking outside the box and into the future. Since he's gone the board have made a succession of bad decisions imo which from where I'm sitting looks like there isn't a long term plan.

 

The Robson affair is a perfect example. Should and could have been handled so much better. Robson should have been offered an ambassadorial position within the club, go around and use his profile to boost the club and region, meet potential investors etc. He might not have wanted that, but it would have been better to at least offer him it. I agree that he had done all he could and it was time to look to a younger man, but the board obviously thought one would fall into our lap and everyone would be benging down our door to take the job. Piss poor, and the sooner this British manager obsession ends the better.

66095[/snapback]

 

Robson could have been offered a job as chief scout, a role he had with Barcelona after he stepped down as manager and one which he claims led to one of the best years of his life.

[LeazesMag 0]

I've always said that whilst Shepherd and the board may be willing to splash cash, they seem to work from some sort of short term quick fix strategy rather than looking at the bigger picture. I never agreed with some of the stuff John Hall had the club involved in, but he put us in the position we were in by thinking outside the box and into the future. Since he's gone the board have made a succession of bad decisions imo which from where I'm sitting looks like there isn't a long term plan.

 

The Robson affair is a perfect example. Should and could have been handled so much better. Robson should have been offered an ambassadorial position within the club, go around and use his profile to boost the club and region, meet potential investors etc. He might not have wanted that, but it would have been better to at least offer him it. I agree that he had done all he could and it was time to look to a younger man, but the board obviously thought one would fall into our lap and everyone would be benging down our door to take the job. Piss poor, and the sooner this British manager obsession ends the better.

66095[/snapback]

 

spot on about Bobby Robson mate

[LeazesMag 0]

That's odd, i always thought that Shepherd authorised the spending of the available income that the club had itself generated, i wasn't in the least bit aware he was spending his own money all this time. Surely if the club has created enough income for transfers any reasonable chairman would allow it to be spent so rather than stealing it for their own gain, doesn't seem like an act of altruism to me.

 

who says it's his own money ?

 

See the point about other clubs being run nowhere near as well as ours, transfer wise.

 

So, imo, Shepherd's most important role is in the recruiting of a managerial and coaching continuance that would push this club towards footballing excellence. In this regard he has proved himself a total c**t and all those who are blind to this fact have been taken in by the most basic of propaganda. Sheep!

66102[/snapback]

 

yes and no. It is his job, it's also his job to look after the finance of the club.

 

The only manager he has appointed who the masses were against, at the time, is Souness. The vast majority were happy with Dalglish and Gullit. The only propaganda being peddled so far as I can see is by those who simply change their mind rather than admit they got it just as wrong as Shepherd.

 

You can't say he is a c**t for appointing a manager that you were happy with him for appointing.

 

And - he ISN'T the one who makes these final decisions anyway, beccause he ISN'T the majority shareholder, the chairman of such a company only carries out the decision of the board as a whole.

Edited December 9, 2005 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

If a chairmans job was to release the clubs OWN funds to the manager then yes he's done a great job but surely theres more to it than that. The buck for bad decision after bad decision has to stop somewhere Leazes. He say he ahs the clubs interest at heart but how is paying an extortionate amount of rent for property his brother owns in the clubs interest? He's the one who authorised the ridiculous contracts for Dyer.

 

What decisions ? Are you on about Dalglish and Gullit ? If so, did you agree with them at the time. It would be canny if someone would answer this, as everyone seems to be giving the impression they knew at the time they were crap choices. I mean, I think they were the wrong choice too, now, but at the time I didn't think Dalglish was anyway, so how can I criticise the board/Shepherd when I agreed with them ?

 

Your support of him is a strange one. On the whole I respect your views on football, you know what you're talking about for the most part but theres an element of double standards when it comes to Shepherd. Just because he's not as bad as previous chairmen does not make him a good chairman.

 

I agree, but my point always has been, while he isn't the best, he is still better than most, and if you ask fans of other clubs a hell of a lot of them would swap their chairman for ours

 

In the same way that Souness isnt the worst manager we've had it doesnt hide the fact he's a poor manager. Under his stewardship the club hasnt moved forward one bit, in the same way you lay it (rightfully) on Souness doorstep, we've went backwards. He's a smug, odius bastard whose in this for one thing and thats to line his own pocket. Freddie Shepherd has done very very well out of Newcastle United, its a shame that stament cant be swicthed round

 

Theres no guarantee another chairman would be better, theres no guarantee the manager will be either. It does not make them immune to criticism.

66117[/snapback]

 

Souness could be the worst we've had. Even the others who have been shit, may have done better than Souness with the money he's had. Arguably of course !

 

I wouldn't be against Shepherd being replaced, but we could very easily end up with worse.

 

On the other hand, we could hardly do worse than Souness.

[Howaythelads 0]

Also Craig, you remember McKeag etc, or you seem to do, you are aware just how shit a chairman can really be, so why don't you at least appreciate the fact Shepherd has tried to give his managers all the financial clout he can ?

66081[/snapback]

 

As I have stated elsewhere, sticking your hand in your pocket doesn't automatically make you a good chairman.

 

From a financial point of view, Shepherd is a top-class chairman. He provides funds yet ensures that the club maintains a decent financial state.

 

From a footballing point of view (i.e. resource management) I think he's absolutely hopeless!

66085[/snapback]

 

Which is what I said earlier on. So what are you arguing about or is it just something you feel you have to do?

[Craig 6302]

No-one's debating the fact that from a financial perspective, Shepherd is one of the best there is, it's the forward planning from a footballing point of view that most people think he's inept at.

 

The constant references to 'masses only against the decision to appoint one of his managers' is irrelevant tbh. We're not actually criticising him for that singular action, we're criticising him for sacking the previous manager just as the transfer window was shutting when we were desperately in need of attracting players and doing so seemingly on a whim with no long term plan for his replacement.

 

Shepherd should have been planning Robson's replacement 6 months before he sacked him and he should have sacked him at the start of the summer. We have Graeme Souness as manager as a direct result of the fact that he didn't properly plan.

 

Forget the finances, he needs to take a good look at how Kenyon (not Abramovich) got Mourinho for Chelsea or how Rick Parry (not David Moores) got Benitez for Liverpool.

 

Newcastle United would greatly benefit from a Chief Executive IMO. I don't think it's any coincidence that the top 4 clubs have that sort of management infrastructure:

 

Arsenal

Chairman: Peter Hill-Wood

Chief Executive: David Dein

 

Chelsea

Chairman: Bruce Buck

Chief Executive: Rick Parry

 

Liverpool

Chairman: David Moores

Chief Executive: Rick Parry

 

Manchester United

Chairman: One of the Glazer sons

Chief Executive: David Gill

 

It's time we appointed someone to look after the football perspective and leave Freddy to concentrate on the figures tbh. But he likes to meddle far too much for that to happen!

[Craig 6302]

Also Craig, you remember McKeag etc, or you seem to do, you are aware just how shit a chairman can really be, so why don't you at least appreciate the fact Shepherd has tried to give his managers all the financial clout he can ?

66081[/snapback]

 

As I have stated elsewhere, sticking your hand in your pocket doesn't automatically make you a good chairman.

 

From a financial point of view, Shepherd is a top-class chairman. He provides funds yet ensures that the club maintains a decent financial state.

 

From a footballing point of view (i.e. resource management) I think he's absolutely hopeless!

66085[/snapback]

 

Which is what I said earlier on. So what are you arguing about or is it just something you feel you have to do?

66221[/snapback]

 

HTL, why do you jump into the middle of a discussion I'm having with someone else and think I'm responding to points you've made?

 

Or is it something you feel you have to do?

[Howaythelads 0]

That's odd, i always thought that Shepherd authorised the spending of the available income that the club had itself generated, i wasn't in the least bit aware he was spending his own money all this time. Surely if the club has created enough income for transfers any reasonable chairman would allow it to be spent so rather than stealing it for their own gain, doesn't seem like an act of altruism to me.

 

So, imo, Shepherd's most important role is in the recruiting of a managerial and coaching continuance that would push this club towards footballing excellence. In this regard he has proved himself a total c**t and all those who are blind to this fact have been taken in by the most basic of propaganda. Sheep!

66102[/snapback]

 

 

Please point me toward any post from anybody anywhere at anytime who reckons that FS has good football knowledge. We all know he's made mistakes appointing managers, so you won't find any, of course. This means that these sheep you mention are a figment of your imagination. Either that or you're just an outright liar trying to stir shit, like.

 

How is FS a c**t for appointing managers who, in hindsight, proved to be the wrong choices? I'm not the only one asking this and it's a sensible question that appears to have many of you stumped.

 

If you were around when KK left, did you or did you not believe Dalglish was a good choice by FS?

 

That simple question goes to...

 

Craig

Renton

Choco

Gemmill

LP

SLP

[Guest alex]

I must admit I was quite pleased when we got Daglish, I thought he would sort out the defence and leave the rest pretty much alone. I was pleased when we got Gullit too.

[LeazesMag 0]

Also Craig, you remember McKeag etc, or you seem to do, you are aware just how shit a chairman can really be, so why don't you at least appreciate the fact Shepherd has tried to give his managers all the financial clout he can ?

66081[/snapback]

 

As I have stated elsewhere, sticking your hand in your pocket doesn't automatically make you a good chairman.

 

From a financial point of view, Shepherd is a top-class chairman. He provides funds yet ensures that the club maintains a decent financial state.

 

From a footballing point of view (i.e. resource management) I think he's absolutely hopeless!

66085[/snapback]

 

Which is what I said earlier on. So what are you arguing about or is it just something you feel you have to do?

66221[/snapback]

 

HTL, why do you jump into the middle of a discussion I'm having with someone else and think I'm responding to points you've made?

 

Or is it something you feel you have to do?

66236[/snapback]

 

Well, I've got to go back to work, but it seems to me that quite a lot of others are as well.....

 

No one is disputing Shepherds lack of football knowledge, but it still seems to me that people just use hindsight to knock Shepherd, when they would have made the same mistakes in appointing his managers, and a couple of straight answers wouldn't go amiss here

[Howaythelads 0]

Also Craig, you remember McKeag etc, or you seem to do, you are aware just how shit a chairman can really be, so why don't you at least appreciate the fact Shepherd has tried to give his managers all the financial clout he can ?

66081[/snapback]

 

As I have stated elsewhere, sticking your hand in your pocket doesn't automatically make you a good chairman.

 

From a financial point of view, Shepherd is a top-class chairman. He provides funds yet ensures that the club maintains a decent financial state.

 

From a footballing point of view (i.e. resource management) I think he's absolutely hopeless!

66085[/snapback]

 

Which is what I said earlier on. So what are you arguing about or is it just something you feel you have to do?

66221[/snapback]

 

HTL, why do you jump into the middle of a discussion I'm having with someone else and think I'm responding to points you've made?

 

Or is it something you feel you have to do?

66236[/snapback]