Imagine the uproar

[Renton 17744]

I think you'll find that a lot of transfers in the Dalglish era were forced upon him - certainly the sale of Ferdinand was. And as for Given being a more important signing than Shearer, give me a break. Given is a good keeper but in Shearer we bought the most highly rated striker in the world. It really put Newcastle on the map and that's before you count his 201 goals so far.

 

I think LM will rightly say that it is ridiculous for Shepherd to have the sort of foresight you are suggesting btw.

102495[/snapback]

I have it on pretty good authority Daglish didn't rate Ferdinand, there were others players he could have sold first, if he wished. EDIT: Incidentally, I hope you aren't insinuating the chairman sells players at NUFC

102498[/snapback]

 

Maybe not. But he had to recuperate money and Ferdinand was the prize asset. Shear bad luck that our other star striker was seriously injured preseason (pun intended), leaving a kid by himself.

102510[/snapback]

 

 

Did Souness suffer from the same bas luck then?

102518[/snapback]

 

Actually I think he did have bad luck. Losing Shearer was a huge blow, and not one that could have been predicted (as Shearer was not as injury prone as Owen, for instance). We will never know how he would have played with JDT, who went on to be a successful player in Serie A. I don't recall Dalglish making a song and dance about it though like Souness. Btw, I'm not trying to defend his reign at SJP overall, which was poor, no excuses. But I think the problem with Shepherd has been he never knows when to change managers. Dalglish was a sound choice, who should have been either backed fully for another season in 1998 or replaced. I had the foresight to know Gullit and Souness would be dismal failures, so should have Shepherd. Robson for once was the right bloke at the right time, but that was more luck than design, and if you read Bobby's autobiography, Shepherd and Hall almost cocked that up to.

[LeazesMag 0]

In my most humble and blackest of opinions Shepherd appears to be doing pretty well with the financial side of things. However, i'm curious to see how our recent spending spree has affected how standing.

If the money spent in the close season puts us in serious financial trouble then Shepherd's actions are indefensible. He will have gambled NUFC's fortune on a manager no one important except FS thought capable.

However, my guess is that FS is a bit cleverer than that and that we could afford it, just.

It is fundamental to point out though that FS only makes money available that the club raises itself. He does not put his money in, rather he spends our money.

To say he backs his managers....well, what with? Our money actually. I should say your money because i don't see many games. So, if there's extra money available after costs, he gives to the manager rather than stealing it. That's what he's meant to do.

So we can establish he isn't destructive, crooked chairman but he isn't the Steve Gibson type either. He just does his job, nothing more, nothing less. This doesn't make him a saint or a sinner.

 

His record for appointments have not gone well:

 

Dalgleish.....failure

Gullit...........failure

Robson.......i'd say success

Souness......failure

 

Frankly i don't care if fans wanted this person or that person. We are just the plebs. FS is meant to be a professional and to know his business. The onus is on him to make the right choice, not on us. I couldn't give a f**k if everyone backed Gullit, he didn't work out, he failed spectacularly and FS is meant to know better because IT IS HIS JOB. So ultimatley, if a managerial appoinment doesn't work out, it can be bad luck. If 3 out 4 don't work out it is the empolyers fault. Simple, straight forward, unargueable common sense 

102126[/snapback]

 

The point about his record of managerial appoints chocchip, and I'm answering you as at least you answer questions with common sense and factual info rather than just ducking them, is as I have said all along which is that no-one, absolutely no one, could have forseen a manager, ie Dalglish we are talking about, who had won 4 league titles and 3 FA Cups and 3 manager of the years as being anything other than a top quality, high level appointment of the highest standing. So, what else do you expect Fred / the board, to do ?

 

Reasonable question yes ? I'm sorry but just to say with hindsight that he "turned out to be crap" simply isn't good enough. This is why I ask what alternative criteria

people would use, and they simply do not answer.

 

Likewise Gullit. Craig has said that Gullit built the Chelsea team that won the FA Cup and went on to win more trophies under a different manager, which is correct. So again, what is wrong with the board of NUFC appointing a manager who did that ?

 

Are these 2 appointments not more qualified than some of the current contenders ie O'Neill, Allardyce ? And Dalglish to be on a par with Hitzfeld ? Is this not correct ? The people on this forum are all backing these people on what basis - the same basis that was used to appoint Dalglish and Gullit, yet for some strange reason all they say is the club doesn't attract top managers ? What were Dalglish and Gullit if they were not top managers ?

 

Likewise I consider it fully justified in asking about other chairman of the big city clubs, and our ex chairmen at the club. Because in context, both of these comparisons show how well the current board are doing. And that is very well, not the best, and we won't be either unfortunately as Chelsea while the Russian is there and Manu are always going to have the biggest financial clout and it will take something extremely special to knock them both off their perch. One maybe but not both. Wenger has done it with Arsenal, beating only one of them, however if he stays at the club for longer and they find a way to combat the financial restraints imposed by a new stadium [facts which we at NUFC have already incorporated yet when mentioned by myself are instantly dismissed as "not being part of a long term plan"....what exactly is it if it isn't a company with a forward looking board showing ambitious planning ?] will find it much more difficult. Likewise I ask who the man is who will take over from Shepherd and guaranteed to be better, again - no answer. Simply because there isn't one.

 

The vast majority of big city clubs are behind us competition wise. Apart from Liverpool and Arsenal on the field, in the last decade. I think that will change in Arsenals case if they lose Wenger. Thats quite a few clubs who are not matching us, our turnover and on the field, why not? If they have done it in the past why are the not doing it now ?

 

It is true to say that Shepherd took over a good club from SJH but it's also true that Shepherd has kept it going...I have stated this but again no reply other than a "so what"...as if it is easy....if it was so easy how come big city clubs in the past who were much much bigger than us have lost their way ie Man City, Spurs, Villa, Leeds to name 4.....staying near the top of the league isn't a divine right you will only stay there if you strive to stay ahead of the rest.

 

Likewise, what was stopping our directors before the Halls and Shepherd getting 50,000 gates and buying England players ? What was to stop them from building on our rather unexpected Fairs Cup win in 1969 ? Nothing, but they didn't, why do you think they didn't ?

 

Now, if people are going to reply to this post with one word answers or usual dumb moronic comments like Fred is shit, or untrue ones such as we don't or can't appoint top managers, consider it not to receive a reply, however someone like yourself who will I suspect answer the whole post in general and in context with intelligent points where you may disagree, then I will.

102296[/snapback]

 

LM, i'll try to respond.

I was a bit young at the time so i feel stupid stating my feelings about the Dalgliesh appoinment however, with his record it would seem to the ordinary Joe Bloggs that he had the credentials to take over and push us forward. I do think someone should have asked him at the interview what his plans were though, because if he'd have said ' I plann to sell Ginola, Ferdinand, Asprilla, etc. and replace them with Stephen Glass, Pamela Anderson, Des Hamilton and Carl Serrant, i think he wouldn't have been appointed. I've said it before, i think one of the most important aspects of a new manager is that he wants the players he inherits (especially if they are very expensive and have come VERY close to succeding already). Dalgleish was clearly not at all happy with the squad and replaced them with a load of clangers. IMO, Solano was a very good buy and Given was the most important player this club has signed in the last 10 years, much more important than Shearer, i thought Speed was a goo buy too. However Souness also made decent purchases.

Gullit had only ever managed 1 club i think and he was sacked form that one, why do YOU think he was a good appoinment?

SBR, i think we all agree was good.

GS, same effect as Dalgleish but without the pedigree - result was the same though.

How many failures, and 3 out of 4 have been does it take for people to think that FS isn't capable of employing the right man? Isn't he meant to know the football world inside out? Why would we know any better?

Financially, as i stated, i can't fault him much unless he's f**ked us by allowing GS to spend £50m.

I'd like to ask, you say under FS we haven't gone into a decline like those other big clubs, are you sure? Where did we finish last season? Where are we now? Will we finish top 4? What makes you think we are doing so well?

102494[/snapback]

 

I'd have backed Dalglish selling Arsprilla who I think was a complete waste of space. Buying the 3 players you name wasn't good !!! but you can add Hamann to the list of good buys, and setting up the youth system again. On reflection maybe Dalglish should have had more time, it was so frustrating seeing such a change from Keegan though, very much a case of someone being at the club at the wrong time I feel, if he had succeeded anyone but Keegan we would likely have shown more patience with him.

 

When I say about Shepherd appointing managers what I mean is going by their credentials is the yardstick to use, and he's applied them. If you appoint a manager who has a successful track record, and give him the financial backing and allow him the freedom to create the circumstances to do his job the way he sees fit, what else can you do ? He applied that criteria with Dalglish, Gullit, Robson and even shithead, though it pains me to say it, the difference with him was I looked at his track record and his record of confronting players and not managing them, that is why I had reservations, plus I don't count success in Scotland with Rangers or Celtic as being anything to look at whatsoever which is why I have reservations about O'Neill, although one thing in his favour where he scores over Souenss is he has a brain and will know players have to be treated differently and is intelligent enough to realise some things will need a different approach.

 

I think Souness was appointed for the wrong reasons, he was undoubtedly appointed as a reaction, or short term solution, to solve problems within the club, and for that reason that made it a pig headed stupid decision, whereas all the other 3 were appointed for sound professional reasons with the aim of pushing back up towards the top of the league and hopefully winning trophies with managers who had been there and done it before.

 

As for Dalglish and Gullit "failing"....did they "fail" ? They reached a Cup Final. The vast majority of clubs would consider that to be success, certainly all the big city clubs, who we are in direct competition with because they could match us and beat us having done it in the past, that I mentioned earlier would consider it to be so. Along with our own old club, pre-Shepherd and the Halls, because back in the mid 70's the club was 15th three times but having reached 2 Cup Finals is looked back on as a "golden era". As there are only 2 trophies up for grabs, depending on how your view the League Cup [which I would call a 3rd major Cup personally] its pretty steep odds if you have to win a cup or be nowhere....you can't seriously say that 90 clubs will be unsuccessful, or 18 premiership ones.

 

The conclusion is that its all a matter of expectation. Those saying Fred is shit, well he isn't, IMO he is just unlucky to have followed SJH, who was the best, and he suffers accordingly. The same as Dalglish possibly suffered by following Keegan, all I am doing IMO is putting our financial success and our performance on the field realistically comparable to our rivals, which puts us pretty well among the front runners. The current board has raised our expectations, end of, and the perfect proof of that is the fact that there are so many people [including on here] who don't realise it !

 

For me, Newcastle United has a great set up, everything is there to be successful, it just needs us to get the right manager because everything is geared to it. The credit for this is to the people who run the club. I don't agree that Shepherd needs to be more clued up about football than any of us, in a perfect world he would be but football isn't perfect, directors have not necessarily been as clued up as some fans, everyone makes judgements which maybe aren't bad or great ones, but just don't work out for some reason.

 

We won't be in decline until the crowds starts dropping, consistently, like it did with ourselves in our own past or other big city clubs who went the same way. There is nothing wrong with a club who can afford to give their manager 50m quid to buy players, one of which is the current England top goalscorer and one of the Worlds best.

Edited March 2, 2006 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

I think you'll find that a lot of transfers in the Dalglish era were forced upon him - certainly the sale of Ferdinand was. And as for Given being a more important signing than Shearer, give me a break. Given is a good keeper but in Shearer we bought the most highly rated striker in the world. It really put Newcastle on the map and that's before you count his 201 goals so far.

 

I think LM will rightly say that it is ridiculous for Shepherd to have the sort of foresight you are suggesting btw.

102495[/snapback]

I have it on pretty good authority Daglish didn't rate Ferdinand, there were others players he could have sold first, if he wished. EDIT: Incidentally, I hope you aren't insinuating the chairman sells players at NUFC

102498[/snapback]

 

Maybe not. But he had to recuperate money and Ferdinand was the prize asset. Shear bad luck that our other star striker was seriously injured preseason (pun intended), leaving a kid by himself.

102510[/snapback]

 

 

Did Souness suffer from the same bas luck then?

102518[/snapback]

 

Actually I think he did have bad luck. Losing Shearer was a huge blow, and not one that could have been predicted (as Shearer was not as injury prone as Owen, for instance). We will never know how he would have played with JDT, who went on to be a successful player in Serie A. I don't recall Dalglish making a song and dance about it though like Souness. Btw, I'm not trying to defend his reign at SJP overall, which was poor, no excuses. But I think the problem with Shepherd has been he never knows when to change managers. Dalglish was a sound choice, who should have been either backed fully for another season in 1998 or replaced. I had the foresight to know Gullit and Souness would be dismal failures, so should have Shepherd. Robson for once was the right bloke at the right time, but that was more luck than design, and if you read Bobby's autobiography, Shepherd and Hall almost cocked that up to.

102526[/snapback]

 

Dalglish got it wrong, in a strange way he also got a lot right and may not have been so far away from being a success in spite of the big overhaul of the club he made. As you said he didn't make a song and dance about Shearers injury as Souness did, one thing he also did was sell Arsprilla, a crowd favourite, for footballing reasons with no fuss or orchestrated campaign about him being a cancer or bad egg, he just did it for what he thought was the best for the club and was prepared to take any flak he got for it.

 

His PR didn't help him. I wonder if we would have put up with the more negative way of playing for a bit longer if we could have seen that he was looking to become more attacking minded or had explained to us via the press what he was doing. People who met him said he was a great warm guy, a real supporters and players man, yet at press conferences he was the opposite and on some occasions supposedly was unforgivingly downright rude, and had no appreciation at all that up here in the NorthEast, rightly or wrongly, people like to be fed info on the club, maybe too much .... but it didn't go down well.

 

If we had beaten Arsenal if the Cup Final he wouldn't have been replaced, however negatively we played, testament that when it comes to the crunch attractive football isn't so important if you are winning then supporters are happy.

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

[manc-mag 1]

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

102684[/snapback]

 

The best chairman anticipate events etc etc etc etc etc etc ad infinitum tbh.

[LeazesMag 0]

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

102684[/snapback]

 

The best chairman anticipate events etc etc etc etc etc etc ad infinitum tbh.

102685[/snapback]

 

The same Liverpool directors who sacked Souness mid season, Evans mid season, and even appointed Evans and Houillier as a double act ????????

 

David Dein appointing Wenger mid season ?

 

As I said, just because they did it once doesn't mean they do it all the time, meaning it isn't down to being "best", they just decided to do it on that occasion.

Why don't you read the thread instead of just making up anti Shepherd comments as you go

 

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

Of course we should have sacked Souness in the summer, or earlier, are you saying there was a "good time" to sack Souness, because in this case , or ANY case, the best time to sack a manager IMO is when you realise he isn't up to it, whenever that time is. If you by your comments are saying that you should keep a manager who you want rid of just because it isn't the close season, which you are, then that is totally stupid.

[manc-mag 1]

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

102684[/snapback]

 

The best chairman anticipate events etc etc etc etc etc etc ad infinitum tbh.

102685[/snapback]

 

The same Liverpool directors who sacked Souness mid season, Evans mid season, and even appointed Evans and Houillier as a double act ????????

 

David Dein appointing Wenger mid season ?

 

As I said, just because they did it once doesn't mean they do it all the time, meaning it isn't down to being "best", they just decided to do it on that occasion.

Why don't you read the thread instead of just making up anti Shepherd comments as you go

 

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

Of course we should have sacked Souness in the summer, or earlier, are you saying there was a "good time" to sack Souness, because in this case , or ANY case, the best time to sack a manager IMO is when you realise he isn't up to it, whenever that time is. If you by your comments are saying that you should keep a manager who you want rid of just because it isn't the close season, which you are, then that is totally stupid.

102688[/snapback]

 

 

I was being facetious tbh.

 

And by the way, I made no comment about sacking people mid season or close season. If you ask me whether David Dein deserves praise for appointing Wenger (whenever that appointment might have been made) as you have done however, then I would answer very strongly in the affirmative.

[peasepud 59]

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

102688[/snapback]

 

well if we're on the subject, I dont think that comment wqas a problem it was the other dozen or so that got me,

 

The fans are stupid, they pay £45 for a shite shirt that cost us a fiver to get.

 

Its a great life me and Douggy go whoring round the world and the club pays for it...

 

etc etc etc

 

Those comments alone probably lost us a fortune in lost sponsorship and reworked PR to get us out of the hole he dug.

 

By the standards you quote as well does that mean Douggie is a good board member by association?

[LeazesMag 0]

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

102684[/snapback]

 

The best chairman anticipate events etc etc etc etc etc etc ad infinitum tbh.

102685[/snapback]

 

The same Liverpool directors who sacked Souness mid season, Evans mid season, and even appointed Evans and Houillier as a double act ????????

 

David Dein appointing Wenger mid season ?

 

As I said, just because they did it once doesn't mean they do it all the time, meaning it isn't down to being "best", they just decided to do it on that occasion.

Why don't you read the thread instead of just making up anti Shepherd comments as you go

 

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

Of course we should have sacked Souness in the summer, or earlier, are you saying there was a "good time" to sack Souness, because in this case , or ANY case, the best time to sack a manager IMO is when you realise he isn't up to it, whenever that time is. If you by your comments are saying that you should keep a manager who you want rid of just because it isn't the close season, which you are, then that is totally stupid.

102688[/snapback]

 

 

I was being facetious tbh.

 

And by the way, I made no comment about sacking people mid season or close season. If you ask me whether David Dein deserves praise for appointing Wenger (whenever that appointment might have been made) as you have done however, then I would answer very strongly in the affirmative.

102689[/snapback]

 

"Anticipating events" means anticipating good runs of results, and bad, you can't have it both ways. He anticipated our continuing with Souness was going to end in relegation [which some people on here didn't]. Happy with that ?

 

You insinuated you agreed that changing managers was the ONLY sensible time to do it, so I pointed out that the directors who have just done it have also changed their managers mid season. If you didn't mean that, be more specific. That was a long post, you chose to answer it in a few words.

[manc-mag 1]

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

102684[/snapback]

 

The best chairman anticipate events etc etc etc etc etc etc ad infinitum tbh.

102685[/snapback]

 

The same Liverpool directors who sacked Souness mid season, Evans mid season, and even appointed Evans and Houillier as a double act ????????

 

David Dein appointing Wenger mid season ?

 

As I said, just because they did it once doesn't mean they do it all the time, meaning it isn't down to being "best", they just decided to do it on that occasion.

Why don't you read the thread instead of just making up anti Shepherd comments as you go

 

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

Of course we should have sacked Souness in the summer, or earlier, are you saying there was a "good time" to sack Souness, because in this case , or ANY case, the best time to sack a manager IMO is when you realise he isn't up to it, whenever that time is. If you by your comments are saying that you should keep a manager who you want rid of just because it isn't the close season, which you are, then that is totally stupid.

102688[/snapback]

 

 

I was being facetious tbh.

 

And by the way, I made no comment about sacking people mid season or close season. If you ask me whether David Dein deserves praise for appointing Wenger (whenever that appointment might have been made) as you have done however, then I would answer very strongly in the affirmative.

102689[/snapback]

 

"Anticipating events" means anticipating good runs of results, and bad, you can't have it both ways. He anticipated our continuing with Souness was going to end in relegation [which some people on here didn't]. Happy with that ?

 

You insinuated you agreed that changing managers was the ONLY sensible time to do it, so I pointed out that the directors who have just done it have also changed their managers mid season. If you didn't mean that, be more specific. That was a long post, you chose to answer it in a few words.

102693[/snapback]

 

His powers of anticipation/foresight are of course ultimately measured against trophies and therefore he is found wanting. His appointment of Souness in particular was and always will be viewed as a dreadful reaction to the Robson situation-getting rid when there was nee decent bugger available. Incidentally,anticipation doesnt just refer to results-practically anyone can see when a situation looks irredeemable-it's about weighing things up by taking a long term view of where the club is going, and constantly judging that against what other manegerial candidates are out there to see whether the prospects and direction can be improved (simple example-Liverpool getting rid of Houllier who'd won 5 trophies to bring in Benitez). To my mind Freddy doesnt have any of these qualities at all. His PR 'gaffes' are insult to injury and as for his spending-it's OUR money, generated in spite of him tbh.

[LeazesMag 0]

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

102688[/snapback]

 

well if we're on the subject, I dont think that comment wqas a problem it was the other dozen or so that got me,

 

The fans are stupid, they pay £45 for a shite shirt that cost us a fiver to get.

 

Its a great life me and Douggy go whoring round the world and the club pays for it...

 

etc etc etc

 

Those comments alone probably lost us a fortune in lost sponsorship and reworked PR to get us out of the hole he dug.

 

By the standards you quote as well does that mean Douggie is a good board member by association?

102690[/snapback]

 

To be honest PP, that comment didn't bother me personally one iota.

 

It's all well and good to apply business rules to football, but they are different. Its not a high street store, where business will crash and people will go to the other jeweller around the corner. Fred and Doug were banished for a while but they came back , no one could stop them, and the "customers" didn't want to go anywhere else. Its the name of the game mate.

 

The finance of the club has been unaffected by it, in the long run, hasn't it ? Do you think that fans aren't going to buy shirts of a successful top flight club they support simply because the chairman is caught in a brothel saying the shirts aren't worth 45 quid ? Don't you already know that ???? He was right mate .... just buy the shirts or don't, you call him a fat twat and he thinks your daft for buying the shirts because he gets his for nowt ? So what ? You can't beat them, buy some more shares? You have been around a lot to know there are a lot worse people could get their hands on those shares. How would you like to owned by the French gasboard ? Or a US basketball owner ? Or a Japanese railway tycoon ? This is the reality. None of these would in all likeliehood have any interest in the club whatsoever mate, none.

[manc-mag 1]

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

102688[/snapback]

 

well if we're on the subject, I dont think that comment wqas a problem it was the other dozen or so that got me,

 

The fans are stupid, they pay £45 for a shite shirt that cost us a fiver to get.

 

Its a great life me and Douggy go whoring round the world and the club pays for it...

 

etc etc etc

 

Those comments alone probably lost us a fortune in lost sponsorship and reworked PR to get us out of the hole he dug.

 

By the standards you quote as well does that mean Douggie is a good board member by association?

102690[/snapback]

 

To be honest PP, that comment didn't bother me personally one iota.

 

It's all well and good to apply business rules to football, but they are different. Its not a high street store, where business will crash and people will go to the other jeweller around the corner. Fred and Doug were banished for a while but they came back , no one could stop them, and the "customers" didn't want to go anywhere else. Its the name of the game mate.

 

The finance of the club has been unaffected by it, in the long run, hasn't it ? Do you think that fans aren't going to buy shirts of a successful top flight club they support simply because the chairman is caught in a brothel saying the shirts aren't worth 45 quid ? Don't you already know that ???? He was right mate .... just buy the shirts or don't, you call him a fat twat and he thinks your daft for buying the shirts because he gets his for nowt ? So what ? You can't beat them, buy some more shares? You have been around a lot to know there are a lot worse people could get their hands on those shares. How would you like to owned by the French gasboard ? Or a US basketball owner ? Or a Japanese railway tycoon ? This is the reality. None of these would in all likeliehood have any interest in the club whatsoever mate, none.

102698[/snapback]

 

It shows that he's a complete dick though and causes the club no end of media bother and sets the wrong example to the players who come here. Does any of that occur to you?

 

Freddy-the fans are dicks for paying 45 quid for shirts worth a fiver=Dyer-the fans are dicks for paying me 40 grand a week.

 

Simple as.

[LeazesMag 0]

 

The thought that the summer is the best time to replace managers has basis, but just because Liverpool did it with Benitez doesn't mean clubs always do it because they don't. ManU and Arsenal appointed Ferguson and Wenger during the season, I think you just have to accept that Fred like any chairman is reacting to events, we all wanted Dalglish and Gullit to start those seasons well, in fact in Gullits case a lot of people thought we would start it well, so why would anyone say we should sack the manager if you think we are going to have a good start to the season ?

102684[/snapback]

 

The best chairman anticipate events etc etc etc etc etc etc ad infinitum tbh.

102685[/snapback]

 

The same Liverpool directors who sacked Souness mid season, Evans mid season, and even appointed Evans and Houillier as a double act ????????

 

David Dein appointing Wenger mid season ?

 

As I said, just because they did it once doesn't mean they do it all the time, meaning it isn't down to being "best", they just decided to do it on that occasion.

Why don't you read the thread instead of just making up anti Shepherd comments as you go

 

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

Of course we should have sacked Souness in the summer, or earlier, are you saying there was a "good time" to sack Souness, because in this case , or ANY case, the best time to sack a manager IMO is when you realise he isn't up to it, whenever that time is. If you by your comments are saying that you should keep a manager who you want rid of just because it isn't the close season, which you are, then that is totally stupid.

102688[/snapback]

 

 

I was being facetious tbh.

 

And by the way, I made no comment about sacking people mid season or close season. If you ask me whether David Dein deserves praise for appointing Wenger (whenever that appointment might have been made) as you have done however, then I would answer very strongly in the affirmative.

102689[/snapback]

 

"Anticipating events" means anticipating good runs of results, and bad, you can't have it both ways. He anticipated our continuing with Souness was going to end in relegation [which some people on here didn't]. Happy with that ?

 

You insinuated you agreed that changing managers was the ONLY sensible time to do it, so I pointed out that the directors who have just done it have also changed their managers mid season. If you didn't mean that, be more specific. That was a long post, you chose to answer it in a few words.

102693[/snapback]

 

His powers of anticipation/foresight are of course ultimately measured against trophies and therefore he is found wanting. His appointment of Souness in particular was and always will be viewed as a dreadful reaction to the Robson situation-getting rid when there was nee decent bugger available. Incidentally,anticipation doesnt just refer to results-practically anyone can see when a situation looks irredeemable-it's about weighing things up by taking a long term view of where the club is going, and constantly judging that against what other manegerial candidates are out there to see whether the prospects and direction can be improved (simple example-Liverpool getting rid of Houllier who'd won 5 trophies to bring in Benitez). To my mind Freddy doesnt have any of these qualities at all. His PR 'gaffes' are insult to injury and as for his spending-it's OUR money, generated in spite of him tbh.

102697[/snapback]

 

PR gaffe in the brothel is irrelevant.

 

How do you know there isnt' a long term plan ? Why don't you read the posts, what do you think of the development of the stadium, and the building of the training academy ? Is this not a long term plan ? Was keeping Bobby Robson an attempt at building long term stability ? I've asked these questions before, they are part of a long term business plan, yet people still say there isn't one.

 

And as I've already said, as there are only 3 trophies, do you mean there are 89 out of 92 failures a season ?

 

You choose to spend your money on the club I'm afraid, so it isn't yours anymore. It isn't yours anymore than buying a bar of chocolate from a shop it's still yours, it isn't. Its amazing that you quote "business rules" when it suits you then apply different ones when they don't.

 

Liverpool have done better than us on the field. Have Man City, Leeds, Birmingham, Villa, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Everton, Spurs done better than us ? Why not ? They are big city clubs that can match our turnover, so why don't they ? Most of them did once, so why not now? Like I said, read the thread.

[LeazesMag 0]

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

102688[/snapback]

 

well if we're on the subject, I dont think that comment wqas a problem it was the other dozen or so that got me,

 

The fans are stupid, they pay £45 for a shite shirt that cost us a fiver to get.

 

Its a great life me and Douggy go whoring round the world and the club pays for it...

 

etc etc etc

 

Those comments alone probably lost us a fortune in lost sponsorship and reworked PR to get us out of the hole he dug.

 

By the standards you quote as well does that mean Douggie is a good board member by association?

102690[/snapback]

 

To be honest PP, that comment didn't bother me personally one iota.

 

It's all well and good to apply business rules to football, but they are different. Its not a high street store, where business will crash and people will go to the other jeweller around the corner. Fred and Doug were banished for a while but they came back , no one could stop them, and the "customers" didn't want to go anywhere else. Its the name of the game mate.

 

The finance of the club has been unaffected by it, in the long run, hasn't it ? Do you think that fans aren't going to buy shirts of a successful top flight club they support simply because the chairman is caught in a brothel saying the shirts aren't worth 45 quid ? Don't you already know that ???? He was right mate .... just buy the shirts or don't, you call him a fat twat and he thinks your daft for buying the shirts because he gets his for nowt ? So what ? You can't beat them, buy some more shares? You have been around a lot to know there are a lot worse people could get their hands on those shares. How would you like to owned by the French gasboard ? Or a US basketball owner ? Or a Japanese railway tycoon ? This is the reality. None of these would in all likeliehood have any interest in the club whatsoever mate, none.

102698[/snapback]

 

It shows that he's a complete dick though and causes the club no end of media bother and sets the wrong example to the players who come here. Does any of that occur to you?

 

Freddy-the fans are dicks for paying 45 quid for shirts worth a fiver=Dyer-the fans are dicks for paying me 40 grand a week.

 

Simple as.

102699[/snapback]

 

I think you shouldn't be so sensitive.

 

I see that Michael Owen and Jonathon Woodgate, 2 England players, were deterred from coming to the club were they ?

 

Another paranoid comment the same as the ones who say we can't attract top managers when we have.

 

We didn't attract top players and top managers before Shepherd and the Halls. Now, under them, we can and we do. FACTAMUNDO.

Edited March 2, 2006 by LeazesMag

[manc-mag 1]

No one said he is the "best" anyway, just one of the "best" and the clubs performance proves it. You may not like that, because he draws his dividend and calls women dogs [what that has to do with the football beats me though] but its a fact.

 

102688[/snapback]

 

well if we're on the subject, I dont think that comment wqas a problem it was the other dozen or so that got me,

 

The fans are stupid, they pay £45 for a shite shirt that cost us a fiver to get.

 

Its a great life me and Douggy go whoring round the world and the club pays for it...

 

etc etc etc

 

Those comments alone probably lost us a fortune in lost sponsorship and reworked PR to get us out of the hole he dug.

 

By the standards you quote as well does that mean Douggie is a good board member by association?

102690[/snapback]

 

To be honest PP, that comment didn't bother me personally one iota.

 

It's all well and good to apply business rules to football, but they are different. Its not a high street store, where business will crash and people will go to the other jeweller around the corner. Fred and Doug were banished for a while but they came back , no one could stop them, and the "customers" didn't want to go anywhere else. Its the name of the game mate.

 

The finance of the club has been unaffected by it, in the long run, hasn't it ? Do you think that fans aren't going to buy shirts of a successful top flight club they support simply because the chairman is caught in a brothel saying the shirts aren't worth 45 quid ? Don't you already know that ???? He was right mate .... just buy the shirts or don't, you call him a fat twat and he thinks your daft for buying the shirts because he gets his for nowt ? So what ? You can't beat them, buy some more shares? You have been around a lot to know there are a lot worse people could get their hands on those shares. How would you like to owned by the French gasboard ? Or a US basketball owner ? Or a Japanese railway tycoon ? This is the reality. None of these would in all likeliehood have any interest in the club whatsoever mate, none.

102698[/snapback]

 

It shows that he's a complete dick though and causes the club no end of media bother and sets the wrong example to the players who come here. Does any of that occur to you?

 

Freddy-the fans are dicks for paying 45 quid for shirts worth a fiver=Dyer-the fans are dicks for paying me 40 grand a week.

 

Simple as.

102699[/snapback]

 

I think you shouldn't be so sensitive.

 

I see that Michael Owen and Jonathon Woodgate, 2 England players, were deterred from coming to the club were they ?

 

Another paranoid comment the same as the ones who say we can't attract top managers when we have.

 

We didn't attract top players and top managers before Shepherd and the Halls. Now, under them, we can and we do. FACTAMUNDO.

102701[/snapback]

 

 

Yes....we really attracted Michael Owen didnt we.....jesus wept tbh.

[manc-mag 1]

PR gaffe in the brothel is irrelevant.

 

How do you know there isnt' a long term plan ? Why don't you read the posts, what do you think of the development of the stadium, and the building of the training academy ? Is this not a long term plan ? Was keeping Bobby Robson an attempt at building long term stability ? I've asked these questions before, they are part of a long term business plan, yet people still say there isn't one.

 

And as I've already said, as there are only 3 trophies, do you mean there are 89 out of 92 failures a season ?

You choose to spend your money on the club I'm afraid, so it isn't yours anymore. It isn't yours anymore than buying a bar of chocolate from a shop it's still yours, it isn't. Its amazing that you quote "business rules" when it suits you then apply different ones when they don't.

 

Liverpool have done better than us on the field. Have Man City, Leeds, Birmingham, Villa, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Everton, Spurs done better than us ? Why not ? They are big city clubs that can match our turnover, so why don't they ? Most of them did once, so why not now? Like I said, read the thread.

102700[/snapback]

 

If you're counting all clubs in England then 1. there are more than three trophies but 2. more importantly, (and I hope I'm not guilty of being arrogant here) I see us as bigger than the likes of Torquay United and think that our prospects of winning something should also be greater than theirs.

 

On turnover I think I'm right in saying theres only Chelsea, Manu, U Arse and Liverpool ahead of us*. All of them win trophies. We dont. End of.

 

Couldnt give a rats arse about the stadium and facilities. Stadium=Hillsborough and the Taylor report, academy's= the norm throughout modern football. Dont give me any of this Shepherd bollocks.

 

I agree on one thing- you're totally right about the fact that there are murky characters out there who are more dodgy than Freddy and no I wouldnt want them in preference, however if thats the best thing you can say about him it's a telling and lamentable indictment. Nothing about the way Shepherd conducts any of the business associated with Newcastle United suggests he has a fucking clue.

 

*edit: and thats fluctuated over recent years and we've been amongst those places

Edited March 2, 2006 by manc-mag

[LeazesMag 0]

PR gaffe in the brothel is irrelevant.

 

How do you know there isnt' a long term plan ? Why don't you read the posts, what do you think of the development of the stadium, and the building of the training academy ? Is this not a long term plan ? Was keeping Bobby Robson an attempt at building long term stability ? I've asked these questions before, they are part of a long term business plan, yet people still say there isn't one.

 

And as I've already said, as there are only 3 trophies, do you mean there are 89 out of 92 failures a season ?

You choose to spend your money on the club I'm afraid, so it isn't yours anymore. It isn't yours anymore than buying a bar of chocolate from a shop it's still yours, it isn't. Its amazing that you quote "business rules" when it suits you then apply different ones when they don't.

 

Liverpool have done better than us on the field. Have Man City, Leeds, Birmingham, Villa, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Everton, Spurs done better than us ? Why not ? They are big city clubs that can match our turnover, so why don't they ? Most of them did once, so why not now? Like I said, read the thread.

102700[/snapback]

 

If you're counting all clubs in England then 1. there are more than three trophies but 2. more importantly, (and I hope I'm not guilty of being arrogant here) I see us as bigger than the likes of Torquay United and think that our prospects of winning something should also be greater than theirs.

 

On turnover I think I'm right in saying theres only Chelsea, Manu, U Arse and Liverpool ahead of us*. All of them win trophies. We dont. End of.

 

Couldnt give a rats arse about the stadium and facilities. Stadium=Hillsborough and the Taylor report, academy's= the norm throughout modern football. Dont give me any of this Shepherd bollocks.

 

I agree on one thing- you're totally right about the fact that there are murky characters out there who are more dodgy than Freddy and no I wouldnt want them in preference, however if thats the best thing you can say about him it's a telling and lamentable indictment. Nothing about the way Shepherd conducts any of the business associated with Newcastle United suggests he has a fucking clue.

 

*edit: and thats fluctuated over recent years and we've been amongst those places

102705[/snapback]

 

Its not the best thing I can say about him, its saying that there isn't much of a demand among business people to take over and buy football clubs. However yes there are more murky characters now you mention it, a lot more.

 

The whole point of this is I am putting forward comparisons showing that whatever you think of Shepherd ie your last paragraph, he has more ideas than most.

We have came nearer to winning a domestic trophy under the Shepherds and Halls than we have for 50 years, so they must have some idea. I think the club has a great setup and just needs the right manager and he has shown the ambition in his appointments and his backing, but you don't. So, what exactly do you think he isn't doing that he should be doing ?

[manc-mag 1]

PR gaffe in the brothel is irrelevant.

 

How do you know there isnt' a long term plan ? Why don't you read the posts, what do you think of the development of the stadium, and the building of the training academy ? Is this not a long term plan ? Was keeping Bobby Robson an attempt at building long term stability ? I've asked these questions before, they are part of a long term business plan, yet people still say there isn't one.

 

And as I've already said, as there are only 3 trophies, do you mean there are 89 out of 92 failures a season ?

You choose to spend your money on the club I'm afraid, so it isn't yours anymore. It isn't yours anymore than buying a bar of chocolate from a shop it's still yours, it isn't. Its amazing that you quote "business rules" when it suits you then apply different ones when they don't.

 

Liverpool have done better than us on the field. Have Man City, Leeds, Birmingham, Villa, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Everton, Spurs done better than us ? Why not ? They are big city clubs that can match our turnover, so why don't they ? Most of them did once, so why not now? Like I said, read the thread.

102700[/snapback]

 

If you're counting all clubs in England then 1. there are more than three trophies but 2. more importantly, (and I hope I'm not guilty of being arrogant here) I see us as bigger than the likes of Torquay United and think that our prospects of winning something should also be greater than theirs.

 

On turnover I think I'm right in saying theres only Chelsea, Manu, U Arse and Liverpool ahead of us*. All of them win trophies. We dont. End of.

 

Couldnt give a rats arse about the stadium and facilities. Stadium=Hillsborough and the Taylor report, academy's= the norm throughout modern football. Dont give me any of this Shepherd bollocks.

 

I agree on one thing- you're totally right about the fact that there are murky characters out there who are more dodgy than Freddy and no I wouldnt want them in preference, however if thats the best thing you can say about him it's a telling and lamentable indictment. Nothing about the way Shepherd conducts any of the business associated with Newcastle United suggests he has a fucking clue.

 

*edit: and thats fluctuated over recent years and we've been amongst those places

102705[/snapback]

 

Its not the best thing I can say about him, its saying that there isn't much of a demand among business people to take over and buy football clubs. However yes there are more murky characters now you mention it, a lot more.

 

The whole point of this is I am putting forward comparisons showing that whatever you think of Shepherd ie your last paragraph, he has more ideas than most.

We have came nearer to winning a domestic trophy under the Shepherds and Halls than we have for 50 years, so they must have some idea. I think the club has a great setup and just needs the right manager and he has shown the ambition in his appointments and his backing, but you don't. So, what exactly do you think he isn't doing that he should be doing ?

102706[/snapback]

 

My answer to your question (in bold) is answered by your point (in italics). That of course is his single most important function.

 

As for everything else (business plan/stadium/set-up) I dont doubt these put us on a prima facie parr with other top clubs but I dont honestly see it as an outstanding contribution when weighed against the steps other top clubs have taken. It's all much of a muchness. I also refuse to accept that this makes up for the things I consider to be counter productive about him. But obviously we're not going to agree.

 

If Glenn Roeder manages to win the FA Cup this season* I'll gladly buy you a pint. Ironically though (and you'll accuse me of having my cake and eating it here) you'd be seriously hard pushed to attribute this to a Shepherd masterstroke. Though even I'd give him a modicum of acknowledgement/praise.

 

* sound of nail sinking into coffin lid.

[LeazesMag 0]

PR gaffe in the brothel is irrelevant.

 

How do you know there isnt' a long term plan ? Why don't you read the posts, what do you think of the development of the stadium, and the building of the training academy ? Is this not a long term plan ? Was keeping Bobby Robson an attempt at building long term stability ? I've asked these questions before, they are part of a long term business plan, yet people still say there isn't one.

 

And as I've already said, as there are only 3 trophies, do you mean there are 89 out of 92 failures a season ?

You choose to spend your money on the club I'm afraid, so it isn't yours anymore. It isn't yours anymore than buying a bar of chocolate from a shop it's still yours, it isn't. Its amazing that you quote "business rules" when it suits you then apply different ones when they don't.

 

Liverpool have done better than us on the field. Have Man City, Leeds, Birmingham, Villa, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Everton, Spurs done better than us ? Why not ? They are big city clubs that can match our turnover, so why don't they ? Most of them did once, so why not now? Like I said, read the thread.

102700[/snapback]

 

If you're counting all clubs in England then 1. there are more than three trophies but 2. more importantly, (and I hope I'm not guilty of being arrogant here) I see us as bigger than the likes of Torquay United and think that our prospects of winning something should also be greater than theirs.

 

On turnover I think I'm right in saying theres only Chelsea, Manu, U Arse and Liverpool ahead of us*. All of them win trophies. We dont. End of.

 

Couldnt give a rats arse about the stadium and facilities. Stadium=Hillsborough and the Taylor report, academy's= the norm throughout modern football. Dont give me any of this Shepherd bollocks.

 

I agree on one thing- you're totally right about the fact that there are murky characters out there who are more dodgy than Freddy and no I wouldnt want them in preference, however if thats the best thing you can say about him it's a telling and lamentable indictment. Nothing about the way Shepherd conducts any of the business associated with Newcastle United suggests he has a fucking clue.

 

*edit: and thats fluctuated over recent years and we've been amongst those places

102705[/snapback]

 

Its not the best thing I can say about him, its saying that there isn't much of a demand among business people to take over and buy football clubs. However yes there are more murky characters now you mention it, a lot more.

 

The whole point of this is I am putting forward comparisons showing that whatever you think of Shepherd ie your last paragraph, he has more ideas than most.

We have came nearer to winning a domestic trophy under the Shepherds and Halls than we have for 50 years, so they must have some idea. I think the club has a great setup and just needs the right manager and he has shown the ambition in his appointments and his backing, but you don't. So, what exactly do you think he isn't doing that he should be doing ?

102706[/snapback]

 

My answer to your question (in bold) is answered by your point (in italics). That of course is his single most important function.

 

As for everything else (business plan/stadium/set-up) I dont doubt these put us on a prima facie parr with other top clubs but I dont honestly see it as an outstanding contribution when weighed against the steps other top clubs have taken. It's all much of a muchness. I also refuse to accept that this makes up for the things I consider to be counter productive about him. But obviously we're not going to agree.

 

If Glenn Roeder manages to win the FA Cup this season* I'll gladly buy you a pint. Ironically though (and you'll accuse me of having my cake and eating it here) you'd be seriously hard pushed to attribute this to a Shepherd masterstroke. Though even I'd give him a modicum of acknowledgement/praise.

 

* sound of nail sinking into coffin lid.

102709[/snapback]

 

you're on

 

I reckon if we do it will be well deserved by everybody to be honest for a long overdue and well earned success, I will be extremely pleased that Roeder would go down in history as having done it rather than undeservedly Souness, and I also hope that people remember the 2 people who started it and saved the club when they were most needed, Keegan and SJH.

 

Now that will be the kiss of death .....

[manc-mag 1]

PR gaffe in the brothel is irrelevant.

 

How do you know there isnt' a long term plan ? Why don't you read the posts, what do you think of the development of the stadium, and the building of the training academy ? Is this not a long term plan ? Was keeping Bobby Robson an attempt at building long term stability ? I've asked these questions before, they are part of a long term business plan, yet people still say there isn't one.

 

And as I've already said, as there are only 3 trophies, do you mean there are 89 out of 92 failures a season ?

You choose to spend your money on the club I'm afraid, so it isn't yours anymore. It isn't yours anymore than buying a bar of chocolate from a shop it's still yours, it isn't. Its amazing that you quote "business rules" when it suits you then apply different ones when they don't.

 

Liverpool have done better than us on the field. Have Man City, Leeds, Birmingham, Villa, West Ham, Southampton, Portsmouth, Everton, Spurs done better than us ? Why not ? They are big city clubs that can match our turnover, so why don't they ? Most of them did once, so why not now? Like I said, read the thread.

102700[/snapback]

 

If you're counting all clubs in England then 1. there are more than three trophies but 2. more importantly, (and I hope I'm not guilty of being arrogant here) I see us as bigger than the likes of Torquay United and think that our prospects of winning something should also be greater than theirs.

 

On turnover I think I'm right in saying theres only Chelsea, Manu, U Arse and Liverpool ahead of us*. All of them win trophies. We dont. End of.

 

Couldnt give a rats arse about the stadium and facilities. Stadium=Hillsborough and the Taylor report, academy's= the norm throughout modern football. Dont give me any of this Shepherd bollocks.

 

I agree on one thing- you're totally right about the fact that there are murky characters out there who are more dodgy than Freddy and no I wouldnt want them in preference, however if thats the best thing you can say about him it's a telling and lamentable indictment. Nothing about the way Shepherd conducts any of the business associated with Newcastle United suggests he has a fucking clue.

 

*edit: and thats fluctuated over recent years and we've been amongst those places

102705[/snapback]

 

Its not the best thing I can say about him, its saying that there isn't much of a demand among business people to take over and buy football clubs. However yes there are more murky characters now you mention it, a lot more.

 

The whole point of this is I am putting forward comparisons showing that whatever you think of Shepherd ie your last paragraph, he has more ideas than most.

We have came nearer to winning a domestic trophy under the Shepherds and Halls than we have for 50 years, so they must have some idea. I think the club has a great setup and just needs the right manager and he has shown the ambition in his appointments and his backing, but you don't. So, what exactly do you think he isn't doing that he should be doing ?

102706[/snapback]

 

My answer to your question (in bold) is answered by your point (in italics). That of course is his single most important function.

 

As for everything else (business plan/stadium/set-up) I dont doubt these put us on a prima facie parr with other top clubs but I dont honestly see it as an outstanding contribution when weighed against the steps other top clubs have taken. It's all much of a muchness. I also refuse to accept that this makes up for the things I consider to be counter productive about him. But obviously we're not going to agree.

 

If Glenn Roeder manages to win the FA Cup this season* I'll gladly buy you a pint. Ironically though (and you'll accuse me of having my cake and eating it here) you'd be seriously hard pushed to attribute this to a Shepherd masterstroke. Though even I'd give him a modicum of acknowledgement/praise.

 

* sound of nail sinking into coffin lid.

102709[/snapback]

 

you're on

 

I reckon if we do it will be well deserved by everybody to be honest for a long overdue and well earned success, I will be extremely pleased that Roeder would go down in history as having done it rather than undeservedly Souness, and I also hope that people remember the 2 people who started it and saved the club when they were most needed, Keegan and SJH.

 

Now that will be the kiss of death .....

102712[/snapback]

 

To be honest, when the Chelsea ball came out of the 'hat' although there was much derision and fatalism on here my instinct was actually to be up for it. On the one hand, as you say, we could honestly say we deserved it if we managed something like putting Chelsea out and on the other if we were going to fail I'd actually rather do it at this stage than the sickener of losing in the final having had virtual byes in every other round. Theres more of a dignity to it this way and if the lads can look at it that way while Glenn's new broom is still having its effect then who knows? Plus the pressure is off us as we're away.*

 

*Sound of coffin being lowered into ground.

[LeazesMag 0]

To be honest, when the Chelsea ball came out of the 'hat' although there was much derision and fatalism on here my instinct was actually to be up for it. On the one hand, as you say, we could honestly say we deserved it if we managed something like putting Chelsea out and on the other if we were going to fail I'd actually rather do it at this stage than the sickener of losing in the final having had virtual byes in every other round. Theres more of a dignity to it this way and if the lads can look at it that way while Glenn's new broom is still having its effect then who knows? Plus the pressure is off us as we're away.*

 

*Sound of coffin being lowered into ground. 

102713[/snapback]

 

I don't like making predictions where NUFC are concerned, I always think we can win any one game though, it's only the Souness era that made me despondent.

 

On the other hand one of my best 2 mates is a mackem, and he says we will beat Chelsea and then lose to the smoggies or something...

[manc-mag 1]

To be honest, when the Chelsea ball came out of the 'hat' although there was much derision and fatalism on here my instinct was actually to be up for it. On the one hand, as you say, we could honestly say we deserved it if we managed something like putting Chelsea out and on the other if we were going to fail I'd actually rather do it at this stage than the sickener of losing in the final having had virtual byes in every other round. Theres more of a dignity to it this way and if the lads can look at it that way while Glenn's new broom is still having its effect then who knows? Plus the pressure is off us as we're away.*

 

*Sound of coffin being lowered into ground. 

102713[/snapback]

 

I don't like making predictions where NUFC are concerned, I always think we can win any one game though, it's only the Souness era that made me despondent.

 

On the other hand one of my best 2 mates is a mackem, and he says we will beat Chelsea and then lose to the smoggies or something...

102715[/snapback]

 

I seldom make any predictions where the toon are concerned, I leave that to Gemmill-he knows everything as he is clairvoyant. It's a gift but also his curse.

[adios 717]

I seldom make any predictions where the toon are concerned, I leave that to Gemmill-he knows everything as he is clairvoyant. It's a gift but also his curse. 

102716[/snapback]

 

 

Gemmill

 

 

Leazes

 

 

Alex

 

?

[manc-mag 1]

I seldom make any predictions where the toon are concerned, I leave that to Gemmill-he knows everything as he is clairvoyant. It's a gift but also his curse. 

102716[/snapback]

 

 

Gemmill

 

 

Leazes

 

 

Alex

 

?

102717[/snapback]

 

 

 

You got Gemmill's hair bob on anyways!

[Guest alex]

Like it

[manc-mag 1]

Like it

102780[/snapback]

 

To be fair.....when Leazes name goes into itallics and you know he's responding with a fucking massive critique, I can well imagine him with Jack Nicholson's expression at the time.