Andy Carroll....Local Hero! O̶r̶ ̶J̶u̶d̶a̶s̶?

[LeazesMag 0]

Glad someone knows the technicalities.

 

According to LM if we finished 10th two years in a row but unlikely as it seems the 9 teams above us were competely different between the 2 years then we would be the best club in the country as no other team had bettered our average. I'd argue our average position was 10th.

Perhaps I'm missing something here but if you took a mean average, wouldn't ours be 5th best?

 

If you have the 5th best average position and said position that equates to the 5th best is actually 9.4th year on year in real finishing position, to finish 10th or above year on year is all that's required to match it.

 

Of course given the games changed and top 4 are a lock-in, near as damn it, finishing with an average real position of 9.4th may no longer be enough to finish 5th best average of the averages. But surely finishing with an actual average league position of 9.4th (or above) in real terms would equal (or surpass it if above 9.4th) the previous record of 5th best average when the real number was 9.4th.

 

Easy really, hope I've cleared that one up

 

Bottom line, 9.4th is the benchmark the other stat is bollocks.

You can try and make it sound more complicated than it actually is but the 9.4th place figure is what was used to calculate 5th best over that period. Like I said, I don't think that's a definitive measure of success but it shouldn't be discounted as a method of measuring it either. Any more than jizzing over potentially turning a profit at some stage is something to get overly excited about.

 

It's an odd method to calculate success in my mind, and doesn't really reflect the fact that for the majority of our time under Hall and Shepherd we were in the bottom half of the table (I think this is correct). The fact that most other clubs have done worse than us is not really a measure of success either, and in any case, considering the money we generated and spent you'd still have to say we were punching below our weight. Had the Halls hung around another year and we would almost certainly be sixth on that liost as well with the appointment of Allerdyce for us and O'Neill for Villa as well.

 

Under the previous board we had some great times but we couldn't sustain them, which was also due to decisions made by the board (Keegan leaving, Robson be sacked, and a succession of disatrous mangerial appointments and as well as the timings of those appointments). Bottom line is we won fuck all. I completely accept that things are even shitter now under Ashley but to continually brag about us being '5th best' is a lot more embarassing to me than singing chants about Andy Carroll. Just my opinion like.

 

This is obviously more aimed at Leazes but I need a mediator.

 

Nobody is saying its "success", it's a perspective. Nobody wouldn't say the club didn't make great progress during this period and only an idiot could say such a transformation could not have occurred without decisions being made and actions taken which were not with the long term future of the club in mind [see NJS and you have agreed with him]

 

The fact that only 4 clubs did better than we did under the Halls and Shepherd is relative to the fact that replacing them with better mean't someone had to come along and break up ManU, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool, at the time. This was the criteria I used when I explained on numerous occasions to the "anyone but Fred" brigade that finding better would be extremely difficult, and they in fact also based on all this "relative success" have not in fact been replaced by someone "better", as I said, its a shame that there are STILL some people that can't grasp this, and are so stupid they have to actually ask what was behind such progress, which of course could never have happened without making big decisions with the future of the club both on and off the field in mind [again, see NJS and you who agree with him].

 

The position now is that there are very much more than 4 clubs who have done better than us and achieved a higher average league position than 5th best since Mike Ashley bought the club. The question is why, and those who insist we are better off or indeed even suggest that we might yet become better off, what gives them grounds for saying this.

 

It's completely ridiculous, and staggering that they can think this, in my opinion, and in time I am 100% that this will prove to be the case that he will not get anywhere near it.

 

Edit. By the way, the top 4 are not "locked in" in any shape or form, football in England has never been like this. We ourselves were locked into the top 2 for a couple of years when we were the only possible candidates to beat ManU to the title [despite what the anti-Halls and Shepherd brigade say, this is true and even 2 years is a damn sight better than none so don't decry it]

 

So if they don't think we should give it a shot and position ourselves appropriately to attempt to displace them, and all it takes is a good/bad managerial appointment [with backing], more fool them, if they under-sell the club.

Edited May 9, 2011 by LeazesMag

[Toonpack 6803]

Nobody is saying its "success", it's a perspective. Nobody wouldn't say the club didn't make great progress during this period and only an idiot could say such a transformation could not have occurred without decisions being made and actions taken which were not with the long term future of the club in mind [see NJS and you have agreed with him]

 

The fact that only 4 clubs did better than we did under the Halls and Shepherd is relative to the fact that replacing them with better mean't someone had to come along and break up ManU, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool, at the time. This was the criteria I used when I explained on numerous occasions to the "anyone but Fred" brigade that finding better would be extremely difficult, and they in fact also based on all this "relative success" have not in fact been replaced by someone "better", as I said, its a shame that there are STILL some people that can't grasp this, and are so stupid they have to actually ask what was behind such progress, which of course could never have happened without making big decisions with the future of the club both on and off the field in mind [again, see NJS and you who agree with him].

 

The position now is that there are very much more than 4 clubs who have done better than us and achieved a higher average league position than 5th best since Mike Ashley bought the club. The question is why, and those who insist we are better off or indeed even suggest that we might yet become better off, what gives them grounds for saying this.

 

It's completely ridiculous, and staggering that they can think this, in my opinion, and in time I am 100% that this will prove to be the case that he will not get anywhere near it.

 

Edit. By the way, the top 4 are not "locked in" in any shape or form, football in England has never been like this. We ourselves were locked into the top 2 for a couple of years when we were the only possible candidates to beat ManU to the title [despite what the anti-Halls and Shepherd brigade say, this is true and even 2 years is a damn sight better than none so don't decry it]

 

So if they don't think we should give it a shot and position ourselves appropriately to attempt to displace them, and all it takes is a good/bad managerial appointment [with backing], more fool them, if they under-sell the club.

 

The thing is Leazes the "golden period" ended in 97, we had a brief hiatus under SBR and we didn't back him when we needed to (the Bowyer summer), because we couldn't afford it, we fucked off SBR and then unbelieveably mortgaged the future and threw buckets of cash at Souness, cash we didn't have.

 

Will we get anywhwere near the nineties positon again, I very much doubt it, not without some form of bizare miracle. BUT ownership change or not, we wouldn't have got near it again either under any continuance of the previous regime. In fact we'd be a hell of a lot worse off than we are now IMO, but we can't discuss that area, we promised

[Renton 17719]

I agree with that post Leazes. We need ambition, backing, and an inspirational magerial appointment to move forward, none of which we will get under Ashley.

 

The old board always had ambition, but in my opinion they weren't in the position to offer adequate financial backing in the post-Abrohmovic era. I think their magerial appointmetns were also poor, especially towards the end of their time. Keegan turned out to be inspirational, Robson was obvious, and the rest were shown to poor with hindsight (Dalglish) and foresight (Gullit, Souness, Roeder, and Allerdyce). Add to this the greed they showed (inflated salaries and dividends) and the embarassment they caused and I don't have such a rosey viewpoint on them as you do.

 

Now look, I know you don't agree with my viewpoint, so don't try and respond, because its all been said literally hundreds of times before. Some times people just have to agree to disagree, and most importantly, move on.

[McFaul 35]

I agree with that post Leazes. We need ambition, backing, and an inspirational magerial appointment to move forward, none of which we will get under Ashley.

 

The old board always had ambition, but in my opinion they weren't in the position to offer adequate financial backing in the post-Abrohmovic era. I think their magerial appointmetns were also poor, especially towards the end of their time. Keegan turned out to be inspirational, Robson was obvious, and the rest were shown to poor with hindsight (Dalglish) and foresight (Gullit, Souness, Roeder, and Allerdyce). Add to this the greed they showed (inflated salaries and dividends) and the embarassment they caused and I don't have such a rosey viewpoint on them as you do.

 

Now look, I know you don't agree with my viewpoint, so don't try and respond, because its all been said literally hundreds of times before. Some times people just have to agree to disagree, and most importantly, move on.

Thank god. I seen someone had posted on this thread, and thought he'd scored. Just put 25 quid on Fulham.

[Toonpack 6803]

I agree with that post Leazes. We need ambition, backing, and an inspirational magerial appointment to move forward, none of which we will get under Ashley.

 

The old board always had ambition, but in my opinion they weren't in the position to offer adequate financial backing in the post-Abrohmovic era. I think their magerial appointmetns were also poor, especially towards the end of their time. Keegan turned out to be inspirational, Robson was obvious, and the rest were shown to poor with hindsight (Dalglish) and foresight (Gullit, Souness, Roeder, and Allerdyce). Add to this the greed they showed (inflated salaries and dividends) and the embarassment they caused and I don't have such a rosey viewpoint on them as you do.

 

Now look, I know you don't agree with my viewpoint, so don't try and respond, because its all been said literally hundreds of times before. Some times people just have to agree to disagree, and most importantly, move on.

Thank god. I seen someone had posted on this thread, and thought he'd scored. Just put 25 quid on Fulham.

 

He didn't even travel (SSN) crocked (again) evidently

Edited May 9, 2011 by Toonpack

[NJS 3972]

I agree with that post Leazes. We need ambition, backing, and an inspirational magerial appointment to move forward, none of which we will get under Ashley.

 

The old board always had ambition, but in my opinion they weren't in the position to offer adequate financial backing in the post-Abrohmovic era. I think their magerial appointmetns were also poor, especially towards the end of their time. Keegan turned out to be inspirational, Robson was obvious, and the rest were shown to poor with hindsight (Dalglish) and foresight (Gullit, Souness, Roeder, and Allerdyce). Add to this the greed they showed (inflated salaries and dividends) and the embarassment they caused and I don't have such a rosey viewpoint on them as you do.

 

Now look, I know you don't agree with my viewpoint, so don't try and respond, because its all been said literally hundreds of times before. Some times people just have to agree to disagree, and most importantly, move on.

 

Agree as well.

[McFaul 35]

I agree with that post Leazes. We need ambition, backing, and an inspirational magerial appointment to move forward, none of which we will get under Ashley.

 

The old board always had ambition, but in my opinion they weren't in the position to offer adequate financial backing in the post-Abrohmovic era. I think their magerial appointmetns were also poor, especially towards the end of their time. Keegan turned out to be inspirational, Robson was obvious, and the rest were shown to poor with hindsight (Dalglish) and foresight (Gullit, Souness, Roeder, and Allerdyce). Add to this the greed they showed (inflated salaries and dividends) and the embarassment they caused and I don't have such a rosey viewpoint on them as you do.

 

Now look, I know you don't agree with my viewpoint, so don't try and respond, because its all been said literally hundreds of times before. Some times people just have to agree to disagree, and most importantly, move on.

Thank god. I seen someone had posted on this thread, and thought he'd scored. Just put 25 quid on Fulham.

 

He didn't even travel (SSN) crocked (again) evidently

fuck me. It's 3-0 to Liverpool after 17 minutes oh my god.

[Toonpack 6803]

I agree with that post Leazes. We need ambition, backing, and an inspirational magerial appointment to move forward, none of which we will get under Ashley.

 

The old board always had ambition, but in my opinion they weren't in the position to offer adequate financial backing in the post-Abrohmovic era. I think their magerial appointmetns were also poor, especially towards the end of their time. Keegan turned out to be inspirational, Robson was obvious, and the rest were shown to poor with hindsight (Dalglish) and foresight (Gullit, Souness, Roeder, and Allerdyce). Add to this the greed they showed (inflated salaries and dividends) and the embarassment they caused and I don't have such a rosey viewpoint on them as you do.

 

Now look, I know you don't agree with my viewpoint, so don't try and respond, because its all been said literally hundreds of times before. Some times people just have to agree to disagree, and most importantly, move on.

Thank god. I seen someone had posted on this thread, and thought he'd scored. Just put 25 quid on Fulham.

 

He didn't even travel (SSN) crocked (again) evidently

fuck me. It's 3-0 to Liverpool after 17 minutes oh my god.

 

 

Hopefully they give Dogleash the job and he reverts to being the manager we know he can be

[LeazesMag 0]

Nobody is saying its "success", it's a perspective. Nobody wouldn't say the club didn't make great progress during this period and only an idiot could say such a transformation could not have occurred without decisions being made and actions taken which were not with the long term future of the club in mind [see NJS and you have agreed with him]

 

The fact that only 4 clubs did better than we did under the Halls and Shepherd is relative to the fact that replacing them with better mean't someone had to come along and break up ManU, Chelsea, Arsenal and Liverpool, at the time. This was the criteria I used when I explained on numerous occasions to the "anyone but Fred" brigade that finding better would be extremely difficult, and they in fact also based on all this "relative success" have not in fact been replaced by someone "better", as I said, its a shame that there are STILL some people that can't grasp this, and are so stupid they have to actually ask what was behind such progress, which of course could never have happened without making big decisions with the future of the club both on and off the field in mind [again, see NJS and you who agree with him].

 

The position now is that there are very much more than 4 clubs who have done better than us and achieved a higher average league position than 5th best since Mike Ashley bought the club. The question is why, and those who insist we are better off or indeed even suggest that we might yet become better off, what gives them grounds for saying this.

 

It's completely ridiculous, and staggering that they can think this, in my opinion, and in time I am 100% that this will prove to be the case that he will not get anywhere near it.

 

Edit. By the way, the top 4 are not "locked in" in any shape or form, football in England has never been like this. We ourselves were locked into the top 2 for a couple of years when we were the only possible candidates to beat ManU to the title [despite what the anti-Halls and Shepherd brigade say, this is true and even 2 years is a damn sight better than none so don't decry it]

 

So if they don't think we should give it a shot and position ourselves appropriately to attempt to displace them, and all it takes is a good/bad managerial appointment [with backing], more fool them, if they under-sell the club.

 

The thing is Leazes the "golden period" ended in 97, we had a brief hiatus under SBR and we didn't back him when we needed to (the Bowyer summer), because we couldn't afford it, we fucked off SBR and then unbelieveably mortgaged the future and threw buckets of cash at Souness, cash we didn't have.

 

Will we get anywhwere near the nineties positon again, I very much doubt it, not without some form of bizare miracle. BUT ownership change or not, we wouldn't have got near it again either under any continuance of the previous regime. In fact we'd be a hell of a lot worse off than we are now IMO, but we can't discuss that area, we promised

 

it didn't end in 1997 at all. In 1998 we got to the FA Cup Final and again the following year with the basis of the team built by Keegan that had been 2nd best in the country. A few years after that, we qualified for the Champions League, got to the 2nd phase, and finished 4th, 3rd and 5th in the premiership. The first season with Bellamy and Robert in the team, we were top of the league near the end and were in 2nd place with 7 games to go until Craig Bellamy was injured against the mackems.

 

We also finished 7th only 12 months before Mike Ashley bought the club. We broke our transfer record for Michael Owen, who at the time was Englands nr 1 striker, and got to the quarter final of the UEFA Cup twice.

 

Nobody is denying that Souness was a bad appointment, however every club makes bad appointments, its a myth that nobody else makes bad appointments, this is the basis of me reminding people of the overall record of the Halls and Shepherd. You can't cherry pick and say they were "shit" by pulling 18 months out of 15 years.

 

We reached heights nobody else has reached at the club in half a century, THAT'S fact. And they all have the same club, the same potential support, they made more of the advantages than anybody else has done, by miles.

 

And there is NO guarantee, absolutely none, that anybody else will come in and do it again. Ever, or for a long time. There is NO way of knowing, ambition is a choice , the Halls and Shepherd chose to show it, and the younger generation and bandwagon jumpers grew to expect it, they were victims of their own higher standards the the raised expectations that they created. Which means they must have done a fuckin good job.

[ewerk 26227]

 

[Monkeys Fist 38665]

They’ve missed off the clincher in the deal- two free water features and some shrubs. 

 

[wykikitoon 16546]

[trooper 940]

7 minutes ago, ewerk said:

 

He's going to be on a pay as you play contract. Apparently he's a few weeks away from being fit, so Ashley's saving money straight away

[Monkeys Fist 38665]

Just now, trooper said:

He's going to be on a pay as you play contract. Apparently he's a few pints away from being fit, so Ashley's saving money straight away

FYP

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

It's been known all summer. Wonder why they've waited until today. It's like they're on a pr offensive 

[David Kelly 1117]

3 minutes ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

It's been known all summer. Wonder why they've waited until today. It's like they're on a pr offensive 

Same as always, keep the wages down as much as possible until the season is just about to start.  It makes no difference to them that bringing in players at the last minute who aren't yet match fit means it takes much longer for the team to get going.

Things like this are the real reasons Rafa has left rather not being given enough money to spend.  He was just sick of them fucking him about so he's took the opportunity to earn a shit load more.

[OTF 6134]

And the circus continues 

[Dr Gloom 19773]

Andy Carroll

[Tom 13830]

We’ve been a bit of a circus club for a while. I’m eventually finding the jokes funny. 

Welcome back big man  

[Ugly Mackems 133]

If he signs he'll score more than Rondons 10. No loss if it's pay as you play. 

[PaddockLad 14574]

On 09/05/2011 at 20:33, LeazesMag said:

 

it didn't end in 1997 at all. In 1998 we got to the FA Cup Final and again the following year with the basis of the team built by Keegan that had been 2nd best in the country. A few years after that, we qualified for the Champions League, got to the 2nd phase, and finished 4th, 3rd and 5th in the premiership. The first season with Bellamy and Robert in the team, we were top of the league near the end and were in 2nd place with 7 games to go until Craig Bellamy was injured against the mackems.

 

We also finished 7th only 12 months before Mike Ashley bought the club. We broke our transfer record for Michael Owen, who at the time was Englands nr 1 striker, and got to the quarter final of the UEFA Cup twice.

 

Nobody is denying that Souness was a bad appointment, however every club makes bad appointments, its a myth that nobody else makes bad appointments, this is the basis of me reminding people of the overall record of the Halls and Shepherd. You can't cherry pick and say they were "shit" by pulling 18 months out of 15 years.

 

We reached heights nobody else has reached at the club in half a century, THAT'S fact. And they all have the same club, the same potential support, they made more of the advantages than anybody else has done, by miles.

 

And there is NO guarantee, absolutely none, that anybody else will come in and do it again. Ever, or for a long time. There is NO way of knowing, ambition is a choice , the Halls and Shepherd chose to show it, and the younger generation and bandwagon jumpers grew to expect it, they were victims of their own higher standards the the raised expectations that they created. Which means they must have done a fuckin good job.

 

Just looking at this and he's not wrong is he?

 

Is he still alive or did he have a coronary in the bacon shed on 24th June 2016? ....

[Monkeys Fist 38665]

Went to join ISIS in Syria. 

[Anorthernsoul 1221]

You couldn't write this script. The messiah is home.

[TheGingerQuiff 2412]

23 minutes ago, Ugly Mackems said:

If he signs he'll score more than Rondons 10. No loss if it's pay as you play. 

 

If you think he'll score more than 10 in about 5 games you're a bigger whopper than I even thought 

[trooper 940]

3 minutes ago, TheGingerQuiff said:

 

If you think he'll score more than 10 in about 5 games you're a bigger whopper than I even thought 

Aye the blokes a walking sick note 

Edited August 8, 2019 by trooper