dyer

[David Kelly 1117]

Of all of the clubs in this country Newcastle United has one of the best base of resources.  The Fat Man didn't produce this it was there well before his arrival (actually it was there before Hall arrived but before then it was just wasted by greedy short sighted individuals who could rape the club when it was a private concern).  All he has done is provided the managers with the transfer funds that have been available due to our revenue base.

This does not put him in the running for chairman of the year in my book, as Gol pointed out any chairman could have done the same.

99324[/snapback]

 

And as anyone who can remember beyond the arrival of John Hall knows ( unless they have a selective memory, or something ), not every Chairman would do the same.

 

How many times does it have to be said....nobody is saying FS is the best thing since sliced bread, or that he hasn't made mistakes. But he's not as bad as some appear desperate to make out ( god knows what their agenda is ), and we could do a whole lot worse.

 

He backs his team manager, he gives them every chance to succeed but then it's down to them to make the right footballing decisions. They're paid well to do this and he doesn't tie their hands behind their back by selling our best players ( I can go back to Pop Robson ).

 

If the manager got it right nobody would be slagging FS, but the pity of it is that people wouldn't be giving him any credit either. This is a fact, after all, FS was Chairman when Robson took us to 4th, 3rd and 5th, but that's ignored of course.

99347[/snapback]

 

I've highlighted the bit I posted earlier because you've either ignored it or didn't understand what I was getting at. Firstly your right not every chairman would make the funds available and as I said the clowns we had before Hall were just greedy and incredibly short sighted. But what is also important to understand is that we are now a PLC and as such the chairman of such a company cannot just rape it blind as he see's fit. He has shareholders (even if FS and Hall are the major one) and the city to answer to. As such his actions are under much more scrutiny and restriction. He has to act in the clubs best interests and therefore if he can make money available he must.

 

Yet despite this he still manages to pay himself and Hall fantastic dividends every year so I'm sure he's quite happy taking what he is allowed out.

 

As for why people don't like him I think I have just mentioned a big one and you can add his treatment of Sir Bobby, appointing Souness, the whole Spanish brothel incident and generally spending far too much time in front of the camera's sounding like a twat and making us look stupid!

Edited February 22, 2006 by David Kelly

[Howaythelads 0]

Of all of the clubs in this country Newcastle United has one of the best base of resources.  The Fat Man didn't produce this it was there well before his arrival (actually it was there before Hall arrived but before then it was just wasted by greedy short sighted individuals who could rape the club when it was a private concern).  All he has done is provided the managers with the transfer funds that have been available due to our revenue base.

This does not put him in the running for chairman of the year in my book, as Gol pointed out any chairman could have done the same.

99324[/snapback]

 

And as anyone who can remember beyond the arrival of John Hall knows ( unless they have a selective memory, or something ), not every Chairman would do the same.

 

How many times does it have to be said....nobody is saying FS is the best thing since sliced bread, or that he hasn't made mistakes. But he's not as bad as some appear desperate to make out ( god knows what their agenda is ), and we could do a whole lot worse.

 

He backs his team manager, he gives them every chance to succeed but then it's down to them to make the right footballing decisions. They're paid well to do this and he doesn't tie their hands behind their back by selling our best players ( I can go back to Pop Robson ).

 

If the manager got it right nobody would be slagging FS, but the pity of it is that people wouldn't be giving him any credit either. This is a fact, after all, FS was Chairman when Robson took us to 4th, 3rd and 5th, but that's ignored of course.

99347[/snapback]

 

I've highlighted the bit I posted earlier because you've either ignored it or didn't understand what I was getting at. Firstly your right not every chairman would make the funds available and as I said the clowns we had before Hall were just greedy and incredibly short sighted. But what is also important to understand is that we are now a PLC and as such the chairman of such a company cannot just rape it blind as he see's fit. He has shareholders (even if FS and Hall are the major one) and the city to answer to. As such his actions are under much more scrutiny and restriction. He has to act in the clubs best interests and therefore if he can make money available he must.

 

Yet despite this he still manages to pay himself and Hall fantastic dividends every year so I'm sure he's quite happy taking what he is allowed out.

 

As for why people don't like him I think I have just mentioned a big one and you can add his treatment of Sir Bobby, appointing Souness, the whole Spanish brothel incident and generally spending far too much time in front of the camera's sounding like a twat and making us look stupid!

99367[/snapback]

 

I understood clearly what you posted, the bit you highlighted wasn't the primary section I was responding to. Read the last part of the sentence again that includes the bit I highlighted.

 

Other points.

 

1. I don't give a shite what dividend FS gets paid. It's a PLC, it's how they operate.

2. I don't give a shite what FS said in a brothel. As I've said before, we all say daft things in a brothel.

3. I generally don't feel stupid after anything Fred says, but I do feel stupid when I hear Shearer tell the country that Geordies want to win the FA Cup more than win the League.

[David Kelly 1117]

You say you understood so then you must be ignoring it. Shepherd cannot simply treat the club like his personal cash cow because of the restrictions of it being a PLC. Therefore he has to provide cash to managers if it is available. As such I would most chairmen who could be put in charge of this club would make money available whereas in the past before the club went public they could avoid it to line their own pockets as they do at other clubs.

 

As to whether or not you agree with my reasons for disliking the man I couldn't care less. But you asked the question why people think he is a bad chairman and those reasons I gave for disliking him are what I believe the anwer is for many people.

[LeazesMag 0]

i thought dyer was the man of the match by a country mile yesterday.

 

good to see him back and fit. hopefully he can stay injury free for the rest of the season.

 

if dyer was fit and able to put performances in like that every week he'd be in the england squad and well worth the reported £80k a week wages.

 

we looked a different side with his pace and movement up front.

97359[/snapback]

 

Bellamy used to play like that every week.

 

Shame there were people who insisted we were better off without him. Meaning also that if Bellamy were still here we wouldn't have missed Dyer in the slightest.

98925[/snapback]

 

some compare owen to bellamy,not a midfielder playing up front...however dyer done a good job filling in,wouldn't you agree leazes ?

98982[/snapback]

 

if we buy a replacement for shearer in the summer will you agree that owen was bellamys replacement ?

99008[/snapback]

 

We will have to buy a new forward in the summer, but I doubt very much if we will have anywhere near 15m to buy him, unless its the only buy we make. Which would not really be a good move I think.

 

Especially as Shepherd himself said the club had earmarked part of the budget over the years to replace Shearer, and Owen had became available a year early.

Which is actually good planning, good foresight and just the sort of excellent transfer dealing that all the other shit chairman do for their clubs.

 

I think its extremely amusing that someone can think you can sell a player for 4.5m quid and somehow conjure up 16m to "replace" him, then find the same amount again 12 months later.....

 

Do you think this club has a bottomless pit of money, and do you think Fred is "shit" because he can't find 30m quid a year to buy players with ?

99014[/snapback]

 

If the money was there at the club in the first place, any chairman could "find it". No?

99043[/snapback]

 

You think the club has a bottomless pit of money don't you

99311[/snapback]

 

No, not at all, which is why I started the sentence with the word "if".

 

It was a rhetorical question. Have we got no money because FS gave it to the wrong managers (something which you praise him for; backing his man)?

 

If we've got no money, then surely he's put us in financial difficulties by letting his managers spend to much. Admittedly, it's them who spent that money badly, but who actually manages the budget? Who actually decides on contracts? Who has final say at the club?

99322[/snapback]

 

Backing his man is indeed what a chairman should do, so he did his job properly. However in this case he got the wrong man, not men, which I said so I can criticise him in this instance, unlike those who said he should continue backing the wrong man.

 

Everyone makes mistakes, those who said Fred should back Souness made the same one as Fred, and Fred should not be crucified for making one mistake, he has admitted his error and sacked him. So what more do you want ?

 

The chairman manages the budget, but has to let the manager make professional footballing related decisions, so if the clubs money is spent badly, it is the managers fault and no one elses. If the club overspends it is the chairmans.

Souness decided to spend 25m quid of the clubs money on 2 players, only to moan later about a "thin squad", and he also decided he wanted players like Boumsong recommending his value to his chairman when Rangers asked for the fee, the same as Souness decided to allow Bellamy, Hughes, Ambrose, and Robert to leave the club for HIS assessment of their transfer values, for which his chairman trusted the professional.

 

Then complained later, again, that he had a "small squad".

 

This club will not have the money to carry out another summers transfers like last year, and it is Souness's fault. The chairman allocated him an [huge] amount of money and he chose where he wanted it spent.

Edited February 22, 2006 by LeazesMag