Mike Ashley approval rating

[Happy Face 29]

Doesn't Pardew have a clause where he can be sacked without compensation? I swear I remember something along those lines when he signed on. I remember thinking the 5 year contract he was given is basically useless because of the non-compensation clause. Or am I imagining things?

 

Handy for us getting compensated if another club poach him though

[Dr Gloom 19837]

it's a no from me.

 

can't imagine anyone voting yes other than CT and assorted wind up merchants.

[Guest alex]

Well if he was on £400k it was more expensive to sack him and bring in a replacement, not less

 

Keep saying "over 5 years". In the short term it was an additional cost, of course, but it was done to save money long term.

 

This is also why I don't think Pardew would be sacked irrespective of performance.

 

His basic pay for the whole 5 year contract is £2.25m. Allardyce and Keegan were on more than that every year.

 

Hughton would (in my opinion) have at least been looking for parity with other managers of relegation bait teams who are generally on £1m a year or more. So Ashley saves £2.75m.

Sort of agree but I don't see how Hughton would've got more, Ashley simply wouldn't have offered it. It's moot though because Hughton was never in his long-term plans. If it was just about money the obvious option would have been to keep Hughton until his contract expired, say ta very much, then appoint Pardew. That would've been cheaper, no? Also, he didn't have to offer anyone a 5 and 1/2 year deal. It's almost unheard of for a manager's contract.

 

Maybe I'm being unfair saying it's always the cheapest option. Best value is probably a better choice of words.

 

Could be that Pardew took another opportunity in those 6 months if hughton was left in place and he wanted to avoid that, or that it was better to for the club to move on sooner rather than later given a managerial change was inevitable by the end of the season.

 

There was always the chance that Hughton could move us further up the table and he'd be harder to shift with the "more experienced manager" cover story. Pardew was in the wings for ages, but Ashley had to wait out a few good results to justify the sacking as it was.

All good points. I think Ashley thought 'Pards' was a better manager though. You have to consider he was appointing a bloke to run a business he'd invested a great deal of money in after all, and someone cheap but crap is potentially more costly in reality.

Edited November 29, 2011 by alex

[toonotl 2431]

Doesn't Pardew have a clause where he can be sacked without compensation? I swear I remember something along those lines when he signed on. I remember thinking the 5 year contract he was given is basically useless because of the non-compensation clause. Or am I imagining things?

 

Handy for us getting compensated if another club poach him though

 

I would say we wouldn't get compensation. That's how I imagine it would work anyway. The club don't have to compensate him for terminating the contract early and neither would we be owed compensation if he went elsewhere. Essentially making the timeframe of the contract worthless.

 

I thought it was drawn up that way so he could be fired for poor performance. Sort of an arsehole's way of motivating a manager to perform.

[ewerk 26441]

I have to say, your thinking is unsurprisingly all over the place here and it shows a lack of rigour in how you are addressing this issue. Keegan's appointment was a mistake in retrospect, with the benefit of hindsight. That does not mean it was a poor decision. In fact, with Redknapp turning it down, the decision you are evaluating was Keegan versus someone else, who we dont know about. The rationale at the time was exactly like a Shepherd appointment (cant believe you wrote that its so obviously wrong). Allardyce was boring, uninspired and played shit football, Keegan (like Souness etc) was the anti-thesis so the previous manager. When you are evaluating a decision you look at the situation before the fact.

 

The Llambias example is to show you that not all appointments are made for our benefit, Ashley has a card up his sleeve, sack the chairman, its a political thing and arguably a clever appointment from his perspective. If Llambias has to run all major decisions by Ashley then all you need in place is someone capable of adminstrating a small / medium business (check) who you can keep in line (check) who is expendable (who know eh?).

 

But thats not important, whats important is Pardew and his staff (Carver, Stone, Beardsley and Donnachie - thats 5 appointments), Charnley, Carr and Del boy acting as his mouthpiece in that circle. Its a good set up and the proof of that is everywhere in front of you.

 

You've not really helped me understand why Ashley would spend months searching for a top senior manager in SD, paying upwards of 60% of that manager's salary (as much if not more than the figures for Hughton and Pardew) to the search agency's services and employing massive amounts of internal resources (because thats exactly how it works everywhere in business) but not in NUFC. His mistakes in the past make this effort more likley and the knowledge gleaned from golfmag about Pardew's appointment proves it.

 

My thinking tails off towards the end because I was using more words than I needed.

 

Keegan - Was never going to work, no need to compare him to anyone else. Their personalities clashed and Keegan was treated like a fucking idiot. He was never going to put up with it and if that was the sort of manager Ashley wanted then he picked the wrong man.

 

Llambias - Absolute cunt with no experience in running anything like a football club. I can't imagine any scenario where Ashley would sacrifice him to appease the fans, in fact he'd be more likely to keep him simply to show that he will not be forced into any decision by the fans.

 

Coaching staff - Should have largely been the manager's appointments (with the exception of Beardsley, who has his tongue up Ashley's arse). I doubt Ashley was too concerned with the appointments at that level.

 

And as for your point about appointments at SD; I'm sure they do their homework. I'd bet that they take advice from people who specialise in appointments for the retail industry. Why then did he appoint a casino boss to manage the club? He can offer no advice on appointments. Ashley himself has no expertise. What evidence do we have that he took advice from anyone? On the balance of things I'm inclined to say that he took the decision without seriously consulting anyone.

Edited November 29, 2011 by ewerk

[hostile_statue 0]

No, I don't like Mike Ashley.

You'd have to be utterly clueless to give him credit for our success on the pitch.

[bobbyshinton 59]

No, I don't like Mike Ashley.

You'd have to be utterly clueless to give him credit for our success on the pitch.

 

put me down as clueless then. How can you blame the bloke for relegation and not give credit for where we are now. Who approves the buying of Tiotte, Cabaye, Santon, etc. We cannot have our cake and eat it.

 

I hate the fucker but not for the condition of our team at the moment, the re naming, the life in a carrier bag look of SJP, his smug fucking look and so on

[hostile_statue 0]

No, I don't like Mike Ashley.

You'd have to be utterly clueless to give him credit for our success on the pitch.

 

put me down as clueless then. How can you blame the bloke for relegation and not give credit for where we are now. Who approves the buying of Tiotte, Cabaye, Santon, etc. We cannot have our cake and eat it.

 

I hate the fucker but not for the condition of our team at the moment, the re naming, the life in a carrier bag look of SJP, his smug fucking look and so on

 

I didn't even mention the relegation season but ok...you'll have to forgive me for blaming the Keegan affair on Ashley (among others) but that of course was one of the main causes that led to our relegation. Several players (our captain for example) being spineless mercenaries without any real feelings for the club didn't help.

 

Of course Ashley approved those signings, they were cheap. Do you think he did it because he knew of their football skills?

[Toonpack 6871]

I voted no as I don't like him but I approve of his strategy in it's present guise but dislike his attitude towards the fans. That conditional approval of the current strategy is based on my own supposition of what that is, as no one knows for sure. It's that lack of communication that pisses me off the most. The reason I give a nuanced response is because I certainly approve of Pardew, Colo as our captain and the rest of the lads. As much as we are loathe to admit it, someone needs a pat on the head for appointing Pardew as it was far from an obvious or popular choice.

 

2nd'ed (on the no vote as well, just for clarity)

[LeazesMag 0]

Doesn't Pardew have a clause where he can be sacked without compensation? I swear I remember something along those lines when he signed on. I remember thinking the 5 year contract he was given is basically useless because of the non-compensation clause. Or am I imagining things?

 

Handy for us getting compensated if another club poach him though

 

such as someone like Stoke city, or another team who actually allow their managers to manage their own football club.

 

Still, I'm sure that won't dent the belief of knackers lijke mancmag, jaysouthernmag, Gejon, CT and Toonpack, that think Newcastle United are on the right lines because they have won a few games against weaker opposition.

Edited November 30, 2011 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

"Like" is irrelevant anyway, it doesn''t matter if you "like" someone or not, so long as the team is attempting to or actually being successful, and to date, it isn't.

 

Whatever a small flash in the pan run of results suggests.

 

I realise some people don't like Ashley, but plenty do

 

So then, plenty of people like Mike Ashley (they don't) and it's irrelevant if they do or not anyway.

 

Great stuff Leazes. I agree with you and will happily remind you that I do in four years time.

 

Incidentally, to employ one of your favourite argumentative techniques, when will this 'flash in the pan' be lengthy enough to be considered genuine progress? End of the year, end of next year or when everyone declares their undying agreement with you?

 

Make idiotic statement to support argument. Be quantitatively proven wrong. Declare said statement irrelevent. Move the goal posts. Repeat.

 

I've been correct in how I've called Mike Ashley since he got his feet under the table chum.

 

I'm not moving any goal posts, I've said exactly the same thing as I've been saying for years.

 

More fool you and certain thick twats who were completely unable to see the blatantly obvious.

Edited November 30, 2011 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

it's a no from me.

 

can't imagine anyone voting yes other than CT and assorted wind up merchants.

 

zzzzzzzzz

[LeazesMag 0]

"Like" is irrelevant anyway, it doesn''t matter if you "like" someone or not, so long as the team is attempting to or actually being successful, and to date, it isn't.

 

Whatever a small flash in the pan run of results suggests.

 

I realise some people don't like Ashley, but plenty do

 

So then, plenty of people like Mike Ashley (they don't) and it's irrelevant if they do or not anyway.

 

Great stuff Leazes. I agree with you and will happily remind you that I do in four years time.

 

Incidentally, to employ one of your favourite argumentative techniques, when will this 'flash in the pan' be lengthy enough to be considered genuine progress? End of the year, end of next year or when everyone declares their undying agreement with you?

 

when he at least matches the league positions of the despicable Fred and his equally despicable trophy signings ?

[LeazesMag 0]

I voted no as I don't like him but I approve of his strategy in it's present guise but dislike his attitude towards the fans. That conditional approval of the current strategy is based on my own supposition of what that is, as no one knows for sure. It's that lack of communication that pisses me off the most. The reason I give a nuanced response is because I certainly approve of Pardew, Colo as our captain and the rest of the lads. As much as we are loathe to admit it, someone needs a pat on the head for appointing Pardew as it was far from an obvious or popular choice.

 

if you search on Newcastle Online, I made a post about 4-5 years ago saying he was a good manager. So I for one am not surprised in the slightest. It should be easy enough to find............

 

Of course, that was before I was banned for posting such rubbish that nobody "agreed" with

[Happy Face 29]

 

Incredible powers of ignorance in blanking the results of the poll.

[Happy Face 29]

"Like" is irrelevant anyway, it doesn''t matter if you "like" someone or not, so long as the team is attempting to or actually being successful, and to date, it isn't.

 

Whatever a small flash in the pan run of results suggests.

 

I realise some people don't like Ashley, but plenty do

 

So then, plenty of people like Mike Ashley (they don't) and it's irrelevant if they do or not anyway.

 

Great stuff Leazes. I agree with you and will happily remind you that I do in four years time.

 

Incidentally, to employ one of your favourite argumentative techniques, when will this 'flash in the pan' be lengthy enough to be considered genuine progress? End of the year, end of next year or when everyone declares their undying agreement with you?

 

Make idiotic statement to support argument. Be quantitatively proven wrong. Declare said statement irrelevent. Move the goal posts. Repeat.

 

I've been correct in how I've called Mike Ashley since he got his feet under the table chum.

 

I'm not moving any goal posts, I've said exactly the same thing as I've been saying for years.

 

More fool you and certain thick twats who were completely unable to see the blatantly obvious.

 

Apart from when you predicted he'd bring back Champions league.

[toonotl 2431]

I've been correct in how I've called Mike Ashley since he got his feet under the table chum.

 

 

If you'd care to have a look at the little poll at the top of this thread you'd plainly see that that is not the issue, has never been the issue, and will continue to not be the issue.

 

None of us like Ashley (except CT).

 

It often seems like you want to give yourself credit for being the only one that recognises Ashley for what we all already think he is through building strawmen, droning on about lessons you've given people which they clearly have no memory of, and recalling the same old tired data points in what I must admit is a very impressive text based impersonation of Rainman.

Then there is the kicker. This actual thread which you are posting in which you are blatantly ignoring the results of due to it punishing all over you and your bullshit.

 

However, I'm sure you'll attempt to console yourself in the thought that at least you were the first to notice Ashley was a knob.

I wasn't around the forums then, but if I can use your current day penchant for making shit up as a reference point when I say, I'm sure that is bullshit as well. I don't think I'd be ar from the truth of the matter.

 

 

Que LM Bingo time. I'll take 'consistant champions league football'. It may seem grossly off topic but I believe it can be done.

[McFaul 35]

I'd like to know who the wrongun 6 are.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

CT, CT's other accounts, and a couple of WUMs.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

Or our Sunderland contingent.

[toonotl 2431]

CT, CT's other accounts, and a couple of WUMs. Or our Sunderland contingent.

 

So just CT then?

[Andrew 4224]

CT, CT's other accounts, and a couple of WUMs.

 

Leazes himself surely

[JawD 31]

Id be interested to see who you disliked more, MA or DL. DL for me by a fucking mile.

[Monroe Transfer 0]

I get the impression that Leazes suffers from split personality disorder. Leazes = CT?

[toonotl 2431]

I get the impression that Leazes suffers from split personality disorder. Leazes = CT?

 

The first rule of Freddy Club...