Leazes?

[LeazesMag 0]

Didn't Leazes say that Martins was a good signing? And Duff?

 

Always right though.

 

precisely

 

http://www.skunkers.net/Reunited/showthread.php?t=38607

[LeazesMag 0]

So we're shit because of the Souness appointment? Has anyone seen the results in Robson's last 25 games as manager?

 

Aye, do you now mean he was right to sack Robson and not stick to the plan ?

 

Have I ever said any different?

 

The timing was shocking, but the decision was right.

 

By the way, I wasn't happy with either the Duff or Martins signings especially. I questioned the fact that we'd signed a left winger who we didn't need instead of strikers/defenders/right winger who we did.

 

the timing is irrelevant. I've said this before. Were Arsenal wrong to sack Rioch and replace him with Wenger early in the season ? Were we wrong to sack gullit and replace him with Robson early in the season ? Clubs have always done this, and always will. You don't stick with managers who are losing games, but people like you think they should stick with their plan ... should Arsenal have stuck with Rioch ? Should we have stuck with Gullit ? What a load of bollocks. Just because other people say this tripe doesn't mean its right. Get a mind of your own and realise the only thing that matters is who the new bloke is.

 

Note - we do not need defenders before forwards, we didn't in the summer, and we still don't. There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a player like Duff, for 5m quid, and the best years of his career ahead of him, when he was available. This is what makes me smile about "damned if they do, damned if they don't" people like you, because you would have done your nut and called the board everthing if he had gone somewhere else for that price instead of here, and whats more you know it.

[LeazesMag 0]

Didn't Leazes say that Martins was a good signing? And Duff?

 

Always right though.

 

martins ? Def not, I am one of the first to say he might be another expensive waste. Duff has proved he is a good premiership player. I am interested as to why you are blaming the board for those 2 though, again.

Not to mention the fact that everyone was happy enough when we bought Duff. Hindsight rules supreme it would appear. If only everybody including club directors had hindsight like you

 

Of course everyone was happy, he is a proven quality player at what was at the time thought to be a bargain price.

 

What we fans did not know at the time was that £5 million for Duff was only a bargain if it was from spare cash. As we were soon to find out, we didn’t have any cash left for more pressing needs within the team, and it was £5 mill we could ill afford.

 

The only people who were aware of the real financial position (the Chairman/Directors) should have had the foresight to see that, it is only we fans who can see in hindsight the folly of the buy.

 

The Directors get no free pass on “in hindsight we were wrong” because "in hindsight they were incompetent" it is their job to have foresight

 

You did know. It was obvious to a blind man. It was also pointed out by various people, including me, that money was tight. Althought those who backed the spending spree of the Scottish fuckpig still said we should carry on bankrolling him, now they got what they said was good for the club and are still whinging on. And in my view the club did the right thing buying a quality player for a position that was able to be strengthened at a bargain price when it was available. But I know that people with their heads in the sand and a "damned whatever they do" attitude will look on the negative side of things anyway. See my post to sheargol.

 

And - that last comment is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has foresight. Do you have foresight ? What planet do you live on. Quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and thats saying something.

Edited November 8, 2006 by LeazesMag

[Guest Patrokles]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

[Renton 17799]

So we're shit because of the Souness appointment? Has anyone seen the results in Robson's last 25 games as manager?

 

Aye, do you now mean he was right to sack Robson and not stick to the plan ?

 

Have I ever said any different?

 

The timing was shocking, but the decision was right.

 

By the way, I wasn't happy with either the Duff or Martins signings especially. I questioned the fact that we'd signed a left winger who we didn't need instead of strikers/defenders/right winger who we did.

 

the timing is irrelevant. I've said this before. Were Arsenal wrong to sack Rioch and replace him with Wenger early in the season ? Were we wrong to sack gullit and replace him with Robson early in the season ? Clubs have always done this, and always will. You don't stick with managers who are losing games, but people like you think they should stick with their plan ... should Arsenal have stuck with Rioch ? Should we have stuck with Gullit ? What a load of bollocks. Just because other people say this tripe doesn't mean its right. Get a mind of your own and realise the only thing that matters is who the new bloke is.

 

Note - we do not need defenders before forwards, we didn't in the summer, and we still don't. There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a player like Duff, for 5m quid, and the best years of his career ahead of him, when he was available. This is what makes me smile about "damned if they do, damned if they don't" people like you, because you would have done your nut and called the board everthing if he had gone somewhere else for that price instead of here, and whats more you know it.

 

 

You are seriously supporting Shepherd's (and Hall's) decision to sack Robson 4 games into the season with ABSOLUTELY NO PLAN ON HIS REPLACEMENT whatsoever? This, after publically undermining him by stating he was in his last year no matter what (and the interference with his transfers which you choose to deny).

 

Can you tell me why on Earth we couldn't PLAN ahead just a little bit and have got his replacement in during the summer, like Liverpool did? I know you don't believe in planning, but how can other clubs make decisions with foresight (again, something you claim does not exist), unlike us, who have made the same mistake THREE times in succession (the mistake being letting a manger spend during the summer only to sack him very early on in the following season), which has led to our present sad and sorry placing.

 

And if as you claim there really is no such thing as foresight, how was it possible to predict Souness would be a disaster? No hindsight required there, was there?

 

Basically I don't think you are capable of ever seeing the damage Shepherd and Hall have done to this club in the last 10 years. I get the feeling that even if we are relegated, which I still think looks like more than a possibility, you will be unable to blame him, instead clinging to some bizarre belief that it was all inevitable.

 

I agree we needed forwards more than defenders btw, it's just a pity Shepherd appointed a manager who is clueless in the transfer market and consequently bought extremely poorly imo. As always though, the buck stops at the top - two apalling managerial appointments have completely undone any good work Shepherd had done previously, and Shepherd is on the brink of leaving the club in its worst state in its entire history. His latest mistake, his decision to stick with Roeder, could well be the straw to finally break the camel's back.

 

Btw, if we were right to sack Robson after 4 games in 2004, can you explain to me why it's alright to give obviously inferior managers much longer and more funds despite much worse starts to the season. Can you explain that one to me Leazes?

[Guest alex]

So we're shit because of the Souness appointment? Has anyone seen the results in Robson's last 25 games as manager?

 

Aye, do you now mean he was right to sack Robson and not stick to the plan ?

 

Have I ever said any different?

 

The timing was shocking, but the decision was right.

 

By the way, I wasn't happy with either the Duff or Martins signings especially. I questioned the fact that we'd signed a left winger who we didn't need instead of strikers/defenders/right winger who we did.

 

the timing is irrelevant. I've said this before. Were Arsenal wrong to sack Rioch and replace him with Wenger early in the season ? Were we wrong to sack gullit and replace him with Robson early in the season ? Clubs have always done this, and always will. You don't stick with managers who are losing games, but people like you think they should stick with their plan ... should Arsenal have stuck with Rioch ? Should we have stuck with Gullit ? What a load of bollocks. Just because other people say this tripe doesn't mean its right. Get a mind of your own and realise the only thing that matters is who the new bloke is.

 

Note - we do not need defenders before forwards, we didn't in the summer, and we still don't. There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a player like Duff, for 5m quid, and the best years of his career ahead of him, when he was available. This is what makes me smile about "damned if they do, damned if they don't" people like you, because you would have done your nut and called the board everthing if he had gone somewhere else for that price instead of here, and whats more you know it.

If Shepherd had pulled off a coup and got someone of Wenger's calibre, he would have rendered the timing of Robson's dismissal irrelevent. However, when the timing of that sacking (combined with no contingency plan) meant we ended up with Souness as manager, the timing is highly relevent imo.

[Guest alex]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

[sweetleftpeg 0]

Roeder chose the signings, then Fred threw the list in the bin and sent Kenny on a jolly to Italy.

[Renton 17799]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

 

Roeder's proven himself to be a shit manager at three other clubs. People (like Leazes) who believed he might be different here should ask themselves why.

[Guest alex]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

 

Roeder's proven himself to be a shit manager at three other clubs. People (like Leazes) who believed he might be different here should ask themselves why.

Logic of Shepherd - big name managers don't work, so let's go for one who isn't a big name. Then say he was the fans' choice if/when it goes tits up.

[Renton 17799]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

 

Roeder's proven himself to be a shit manager at three other clubs. People (like Leazes) who believed he might be different here should ask themselves why.

Logic of Shepherd - big name managers don't work, so let's go for one who isn't a big name. Then say he was the fans' choice if/when it goes tits up.

 

That seems to have been Leazes logic too. We've tried the proven big-name managers and it hasn't worked. We've tried a big-name manager who is shit and that didn't work. So let's try a shit manager who isn't a big name instead. Genius.

[Fop 1]

And - that last comment is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has foresight. Do you have foresight ? What planet do you live on. Quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and thats saying something.

 

 

That's just stupid, hindsight is 20:20, and any moron can see what went wrong.

 

But foresight is NOT the same thing, foresight is looking for potential problems as well as potential benifits and changing todays path to avoid as many problems as possible and achieve as many benifits as possible.

 

 

What you're saying like claiming you may as well be sitting backwards when driving a car, because you cannot be certain what is coming around the corner (where as you can be certain of where you've just been) - ie utter tosh.

 

 

 

 

 

Here I'll even give you the defination of it as you seem to be somewhat struggling:

 

fore·sight (fôr'sīt', fōr'-) pronunciation

n.

 

1. Perception of the significance and nature of events before they have occurred.

2. Care in providing for the future; prudence. See synonyms at prudence.

3. The act of looking forward.

 

 

 

At NO POINT does it mention Mystic Meg, nor flawless prediction of the future.

 

 

Foresight is probably THE most important thing in running any business (except NUFC, of course).

[Guest alex]

And - that last comment is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has foresight. Do you have foresight ? What planet do you live on. Quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and thats saying something.

 

 

That's just stupid, hindsight is 20:20, and any moron can see what went wrong.

 

But foresight is NOT the same thing, foresight is looking for potential problems as well as potential benifits and changing todays path to avoid as many problems as possible and achieve as many benifits as possible.

 

 

What you're saying like claiming you may as well be sitting backwards when driving a car, because you cannot be certain what is coming around the corner (where as you can be certain of where you've just been) - ie utter tosh.

 

 

 

 

 

Here I'll even give you the defination of it as you seem to be somewhat struggling:

 

fore·sight (fôr'sīt', fōr'-) pronunciation

n.

 

1. Perception of the significance and nature of events before they have occurred.

2. Care in providing for the future; prudence. See synonyms at prudence.

3. The act of looking forward.

 

 

 

At NO POINT does it mention Mystic Meg, nor flawless prediction of the future.

 

 

Foresight is probably THE most important thing in running any business (except NUFC, of course).

Nicely put.

[Renton 17799]

And - that last comment is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has foresight. Do you have foresight ? What planet do you live on. Quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and thats saying something.

 

 

That's just stupid, hindsight is 20:20, and any moron can see what went wrong.

 

But foresight is NOT the same thing, foresight is looking for potential problems as well as potential benifits and changing todays path to avoid as many problems as possible and achieve as many benifits as possible.

 

 

What you're saying like claiming you may as well be sitting backwards when driving a car, because you cannot be certain what is coming around the corner (where as you can be certain of where you've just been) - ie utter tosh.

 

 

 

 

 

Here I'll even give you the defination of it as you seem to be somewhat struggling:

 

fore·sight (fôr'sīt', fōr'-) pronunciation

n.

 

1. Perception of the significance and nature of events before they have occurred.

2. Care in providing for the future; prudence. See synonyms at prudence.

3. The act of looking forward.

 

 

 

At NO POINT does it mention Mystic Meg, nor flawless prediction of the future.

 

 

Foresight is probably THE most important thing in running any business (except NUFC, of course).

Nicely put.

 

Agree. We should by Leazes a dictionary for Christmas actually.

[Isegrim 8872]

"Foresight / Planning"

[Guest alex]

And - that last comment is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has foresight. Do you have foresight ? What planet do you live on. Quite simply one of the stupidest things I've ever read, and thats saying something.

 

 

That's just stupid, hindsight is 20:20, and any moron can see what went wrong.

 

But foresight is NOT the same thing, foresight is looking for potential problems as well as potential benifits and changing todays path to avoid as many problems as possible and achieve as many benifits as possible.

 

 

What you're saying like claiming you may as well be sitting backwards when driving a car, because you cannot be certain what is coming around the corner (where as you can be certain of where you've just been) - ie utter tosh.

 

 

 

 

 

Here I'll even give you the defination of it as you seem to be somewhat struggling:

 

fore·sight (fôr'sīt', fōr'-) pronunciation

n.

 

1. Perception of the significance and nature of events before they have occurred.

2. Care in providing for the future; prudence. See synonyms at prudence.

3. The act of looking forward.

 

 

 

At NO POINT does it mention Mystic Meg, nor flawless prediction of the future.

 

 

Foresight is probably THE most important thing in running any business (except NUFC, of course).

Nicely put.

 

Agree. We should by Leazes a dictionary for Christmas actually.

I'll look for a 2 for 1 deal and get you one too if you like

[nufc4ever 0]

It helps if people running businesses are proactive. Shepherd has proven himself to be purely reactive.

 

You lot are lucky, you only have one deluded know-all to cope with on here.

[Renton 17799]

It helps if people running businesses are proactive. Shepherd has proven himself to be purely reactive.

 

You lot are lucky, you only have one deluded know-all to cope with on here.

 

We sent HTL back.

[nufc4ever 0]

And don't we know it.

[LeazesMag 0]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

 

Roeder's proven himself to be a shit manager at three other clubs. People (like Leazes) who believed he might be different here should ask themselves why.

 

without labouring the point Renton, I don't think a person like you should be making a judgement on a person doing a job when they are suffering from a brain tumour. You ought to know better. These things can affect people for a long time before they become obvious to the point where you seek treatment.

 

There are reasons for his fortunes at the other 2 clubs, not many people at Watford blame him for the teams demise, and Gillingham too. Fans of both these clubs wished him well when he got our job, on the rivals network when I asked them about what happened to him there.

 

I have no idea if he will be better, than another big name would have been. I made the point that big names had not succeeded, in most cases they were more concerned with their big name than the best interests of the club, and Roeder at least deserved some support and a positive outlook on the 7th place he gained at West Ham before he had his health problems, which supported a view that he may have been capable of doing at least a decent rebuilding and stabilising job on the back of what he did for us last season too.

Edited November 8, 2006 by LeazesMag

[LeazesMag 0]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

 

has he or hasn't he ? Such wild groundless comments like this...pathetic to be honest, another one who should get a mind of their own rather than make things up to say things because other people do.

[LeazesMag 0]

So we're shit because of the Souness appointment? Has anyone seen the results in Robson's last 25 games as manager?

 

Aye, do you now mean he was right to sack Robson and not stick to the plan ?

 

Have I ever said any different?

 

The timing was shocking, but the decision was right.

 

By the way, I wasn't happy with either the Duff or Martins signings especially. I questioned the fact that we'd signed a left winger who we didn't need instead of strikers/defenders/right winger who we did.

 

the timing is irrelevant. I've said this before. Were Arsenal wrong to sack Rioch and replace him with Wenger early in the season ? Were we wrong to sack gullit and replace him with Robson early in the season ? Clubs have always done this, and always will. You don't stick with managers who are losing games, but people like you think they should stick with their plan ... should Arsenal have stuck with Rioch ? Should we have stuck with Gullit ? What a load of bollocks. Just because other people say this tripe doesn't mean its right. Get a mind of your own and realise the only thing that matters is who the new bloke is.

 

Note - we do not need defenders before forwards, we didn't in the summer, and we still don't. There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a player like Duff, for 5m quid, and the best years of his career ahead of him, when he was available. This is what makes me smile about "damned if they do, damned if they don't" people like you, because you would have done your nut and called the board everthing if he had gone somewhere else for that price instead of here, and whats more you know it.

If Shepherd had pulled off a coup and got someone of Wenger's calibre, he would have rendered the timing of Robson's dismissal irrelevent. However, when the timing of that sacking (combined with no contingency plan) meant we ended up with Souness as manager, the timing is highly relevent imo.

 

eeerr...thats what I'm saying, that I have always done Alex. Its not the timing that matters, its the replacement. And if you need to sack your manager, you have to turn to who is available, because believe it or not, if you have an eye on someone under a 4 year contract, you can't poach them because its against the rules.

[LeazesMag 0]

So we're shit because of the Souness appointment? Has anyone seen the results in Robson's last 25 games as manager?

 

Aye, do you now mean he was right to sack Robson and not stick to the plan ?

 

Have I ever said any different?

 

The timing was shocking, but the decision was right.

 

By the way, I wasn't happy with either the Duff or Martins signings especially. I questioned the fact that we'd signed a left winger who we didn't need instead of strikers/defenders/right winger who we did.

 

the timing is irrelevant. I've said this before. Were Arsenal wrong to sack Rioch and replace him with Wenger early in the season ? Were we wrong to sack gullit and replace him with Robson early in the season ? Clubs have always done this, and always will. You don't stick with managers who are losing games, but people like you think they should stick with their plan ... should Arsenal have stuck with Rioch ? Should we have stuck with Gullit ? What a load of bollocks. Just because other people say this tripe doesn't mean its right. Get a mind of your own and realise the only thing that matters is who the new bloke is.

 

Note - we do not need defenders before forwards, we didn't in the summer, and we still don't. There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a player like Duff, for 5m quid, and the best years of his career ahead of him, when he was available. This is what makes me smile about "damned if they do, damned if they don't" people like you, because you would have done your nut and called the board everthing if he had gone somewhere else for that price instead of here, and whats more you know it.

 

 

You are seriously supporting Shepherd's (and Hall's) decision to sack Robson 4 games into the season with ABSOLUTELY NO PLAN ON HIS REPLACEMENT whatsoever? This, after publically undermining him by stating he was in his last year no matter what (and the interference with his transfers which you choose to deny).

 

Can you tell me why on Earth we couldn't PLAN ahead just a little bit and have got his replacement in during the summer, like Liverpool did? I know you don't believe in planning, but how can other clubs make decisions with foresight (again, something you claim does not exist), unlike us, who have made the same mistake THREE times in succession (the mistake being letting a manger spend during the summer only to sack him very early on in the following season), which has led to our present sad and sorry placing.

 

And if as you claim there really is no such thing as foresight, how was it possible to predict Souness would be a disaster? No hindsight required there, was there?

 

Basically I don't think you are capable of ever seeing the damage Shepherd and Hall have done to this club in the last 10 years. I get the feeling that even if we are relegated, which I still think looks like more than a possibility, you will be unable to blame him, instead clinging to some bizarre belief that it was all inevitable.

 

I agree we needed forwards more than defenders btw, it's just a pity Shepherd appointed a manager who is clueless in the transfer market and consequently bought extremely poorly imo. As always though, the buck stops at the top - two apalling managerial appointments have completely undone any good work Shepherd had done previously, and Shepherd is on the brink of leaving the club in its worst state in its entire history. His latest mistake, his decision to stick with Roeder, could well be the straw to finally break the camel's back.

 

Btw, if we were right to sack Robson after 4 games in 2004, can you explain to me why it's alright to give obviously inferior managers much longer and more funds despite much worse starts to the season. Can you explain that one to me Leazes?

 

There is no explanation for this. Robson started the season badly, and so they decided they needed to change. Clubs do it all the time. The fact that some of us think it could have been done in the summer, is neither here nor there....the majority of supporters didn't say this at the time, many on here too, they were happy with the summer signings ie Kluivert, Butt, Milner and Carr, so why would they advocate the sacking of the manager at that stage ? The people who know this is what they thought, but now say they advocated something else, are basically liars.

 

I was happy to go with Robson at the time, but I had reservations about how long he had left. When we started the season badly, I went with the view that a change could work out well as the entire season stood in front of us. As we know, they gave the job to the Scottish fuckpig, and backed him. Why ? Fuck knows, Gemmill and Craig could tell us as they stuck with him even after he assaulted his player on the training ground. The disastrous decision. Don't ask me why they stuck with him, I haven't a clue, I wanted him out from day 1 just like you did.

 

Regarding foresight....you can make a judgement, and you may be wrong. But you can't have foresight, it is not the same thing, and .... nobody is employed to show foresight....fucking hilarious statement that like

[Guest alex]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

 

Roeder's proven himself to be a shit manager at three other clubs. People (like Leazes) who believed he might be different here should ask themselves why.

 

without labouring the point Renton, I don't think a person like you should be making a judgement on a person doing a job when they are suffering from a brain tumour. You ought to know better. These things can affect people for a long time before they become obvious to the point where you seek treatment.

 

There are reasons for his fortunes at the other 2 clubs, not many people at Watford blame him for the teams demise, and Gillingham too. Fans of both these clubs wished him well when he got our job, on the rivals network when I asked them about what happened to him there.

 

I have no idea if he will be better, than another big name would have been. I made the point that big names had not succeeded, in most cases they were more concerned with their big name than the best interests of the club, and Roeder at least deserved some support and a positive outlook on the 7th place he gained before he had his health problems.

Whether it's a case of excuses or mitigating circumstances is open to debate. His managerial record is not imo.

[Renton 17799]

If many accounts are true, I blame Shepherd far, far more than Roeder for our inability to address problem positions in the summer. I think Roeder can see everything that we fans can, but has maybe been frustrated in his efforts due to disagreements with the chairman.

Roeder chose the signings though. Martins was his number 1 target after all

 

Roeder's proven himself to be a shit manager at three other clubs. People (like Leazes) who believed he might be different here should ask themselves why.

 

without labouring the point Renton, I don't think a person like you should be making a judgement on a person doing a job when they are suffering from a brain tumour. You ought to know better. These things can affect people for a long time before they become obvious to the point where you seek treatment.

 

There are reasons for his fortunes at the other 2 clubs, not many people at Watford blame him for the teams demise, and Gillingham too. Fans of both these clubs wished him well when he got our job, on the rivals network when I asked them about what happened to him there.

 

I have no idea if he will be better, than another big name would have been. I made the point that big names had not succeeded, in most cases they were more concerned with their big name than the best interests of the club, and Roeder at least deserved some support and a positive outlook on the 7th place he gained before he had his health problems.

 

I'm sorry but that's bullshit. Roeder has never to my knowledge claimed that the tumour was affecting his health or giving him symptoms before it became critical, and I suspect he wouldn't like other people use it as an excuse either.

 

His record speaks for itself, it's very poor, at four clubs now including us. When you select a manager, the main thing you have to go on when you appoint someone is their previous record, quite frankly alarm bells should have been ringing when looking at Roeder's, whatever his health problems or other excuses were. Not to mention the fact that someone's record as a caretaker should be largely discounted because successful caretakers almost never make successful managers.

 

Of course a manager that has previously been successful at other clubs has no guarantee of being successful at NUFC, but one that has a previously disastrous record should be avoided like the plague. Even Souness is not as adept at relegating clubs as Roeder, and this is a fact.

 

You know the fact you can't even agree with these elementary points really does make you look foolish Leazes, for once stop being so blinkered towards the leadership of this club and accept that they have dropped a clanger, and not for the first time. Or keep on in La La land as we are relegated if you like, I suppose you are at least good for comic value in these dark times.