NJS

I would also clarify that I don't agree with Bobby about Geordies running/managing the club. The same argument goes for players - I would like to see locals in the team but not at the expense of success. I don't care where the manager or owner comes from but in this case I'd argue that what people object to is the club being run "from" London as much as the personnel involved. A role as defined in the "fact" statement demands day to day hands on involvement and I dunno - actually going to the fucking matches.

This moral high horseness about regionalism makes me fucking sick. Football is (or should be) about tribalism. That's where the passion comes from. Fans have the "right" to "hate" mackems, cockney's, scousers and mancs etc, etc and the idea that its is somehow an embarrasment is the biggest load of shit I've ever read on here. The pedantism of saying "Well actually Ashley's from Buckinghamshire" is petty - apart from the fact that most of the vitriol as far as I can tell is directed at Wise and LLmabias who are cockneys anyway. Did any of the pedants ever object to Bobby Robson being referred to as a geordie?

The only person who should be questioned is the man responsible for the overall quality and quantity of the squad - will he have the guts to take responsibility for it? - will he fuck.

First time back in the country/post SD AGM?

If things are worked out between the two then it just shows those running the club on a daily basis should be sacked. Why? For all you know the likes of Llambias, Wise and Jimenez were just doing their job. That's fair enough but if Wise's role was as beefed up and crucial as they claimed last week I'd expect day to day involvement (in Newcastle).

Yeah it would be interesting to know how many people would want Keegan back under the current or even a revised system. The only way it could work is if he claimed he hadn't been involved with any of the events and had trusted Llambias and Wise and now that he was returning to "take charge" that trust was misplaced and was revoked with p45s to follow. That may have had some truth in it and I could even see him trying it on after realising what the reaction has been. It might have been feasible a day or two after the resignation but not now.

The 'being highly regarded by people more qualified than you or I' is a convenient thing to throw in to try and strengthen your point, how many managers have rated Shola? Does that mean we're all wrong because the likes of Sir Bobby thought he was quality? That's really clutching at straws. The fact is the club now has N'Zogbia and Duff down the left and Jonas and Geremi down the right, I can't remember a time we've ever started a season this better off for wide men, can you? Did Robson ever think Shola was quality? Has there ever been a time when Shola was above 3rd choice striker at best? Milner was 1st choice RW for a number of managers. I'd say Solano, Milner, N'Zogbia, Duff 2 seasons ago were equal to the current selection, and if you can stretch your mind back 4 years, I'd say Robert, Dyer, Bowyer, N'Zogbia, Milner was a far better selection. "it was my decision to sell james milner" - kevin keegan FAIL! Missing bit he didn't say: "Because I've been told that's the only way to get the players I've been promised all summer which have failed to materialise"

Taking away the Milner money, we spent about £12m so if that was the budget then none of these players could have been signed anyway. Unless theres some inconsistencies in the club's statements of course.....

It's a chicken and egg scenario - as people have said it works for Arsenal for two reasons - Wenger and the fact they started it from a position of strength. As I've said we are now expected to wait n number of years before we're a good/challenging team - I think we need an initial boost with the system we have now as a sort of plan b/parallel road. That's why before all of this shit I'd have been happy for Ashley to find a minority investor to fund the spree while maintaining the current vision (though working how it was sold not how it's been defined now). Now I'd rather he sold up and the new owner recognises the good elements and retains them while giving more control to the manager (not necessarily Keegan).

The overriding emphasis in the FACT statement and the smear article was financial restraint and residual value of players. Theres also the "every player has a price" story which has come from several articles - do you honestly not think that money comes before football success at the club now? It's pretty hard to build football success while making a loss. The only players who were supposedly offered for sale were Barton, Smith and Owen. Why not stick to those three to make your point rather than using players who were brought in by the Evil Empire in the first place? If people are willing to accept some of the shit being hoyed then there was the one about 10m being written next to Given's name. As I said I'm yet to read anything which indicates an overall mission statement or even a vague target for the short, medium and long term. If the plan is to subsist at this level of spending then I see the flip side being that we will always be open to "good deals" like Milner's without any real thought for the football strength of the club. This was the point I think Bobby was making about day to day contact for a DOF so that he knows the state of the squad and how the manager sees it progressing. With the alleged working relationship as it is I could easily see Wise deciding he needs to raise money and choosing players(s) in an arbitrary fashion to sell without consulting the manager. If there is pressure to do that for example to make the club look better for a potential buyer then I think its fundamentally wrong on so many levels.

They've come up with that figure by discounting Milner's sale to make it look like it was almost perfectly on budget..

The overriding emphasis in the FACT statement and the smear article was financial restraint and residual value of players. Theres also the "every player has a price" story which has come from several articles - do you honestly not think that money comes before football success at the club now?

Andy Gray made the comment during the Man U match that if Jonas continued to show what he had in that game then one of the bigger teams would be in for him - nauseating but true - and suits Ashley. Let's hope we don't sign any more good prospects in case he wants to sell them on at a profit Aye. My point is that if he were showing the slightest ambition to actually build a successful FOOTBALL club rather than a successful business we could look forward to good players staying rather than waiting for the big boys to come knocking. THeres a difference between accepting it as part of life and relishing it as this regime look like doing.

Andy Gray made the comment during the Man U match that if Jonas continued to show what he had in that game then one of the bigger teams would be in for him - nauseating but true - and suits Ashley.

Theres been no real statement of intent from the board/Ashley apart from Ashley's"I want to enjoy it". It's been left to keegan to say that the initial aim was to win a trophy and challenge for 5th - those ambitions being his as a manager who is realistic. Even with this "new Arsenal" stuff there has been no "which will see us rise to position x" in the league and find a level challenging teams a,b and c - whether that's 5th as I said or top 4. It is obvious with the referral in the smear release to "resale value" of players that they have no footballl ambitions only financial and that for me is the biggest crime of all. I think they will find out frm the next few home crowds that there is a flaw in their model (Hull may be different).

I think the club statement's emphasis on the director of football who Keegan works under suggests Wise.

Macca: The "two lists" rumour previous to this week suggested a list of moderate/low value players - I expect Guthrie was on it as well as Richard Dunne - nothing wrong in that. Theres also nothing wrong in principle with a team of people suggesting new talent and I don't think Keegan had a problem with that as long as his input/say was taken into account. I also remember when we signed Ferdinand that the other team in for him was Villa - none of Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal or Blackburn were in for him or for any of the other players you mention (ie they weren't the top, top players). It's true he had some failures in squad players but he also made very shrewd signings in people like Rob Lee, Scott Sellars an Ruel Fox. As I keep saying a mixed approach is the correct one in my view - up and coming players alongside "instant" fixes - I feel if we do get a spanish coach or someone like that then we will be expected to accept one side of the coin for the forseeable future - not a prospect I relish. Edit: I'd also add that this emphasis on "sell on value" is at odds with any kind of real ambition and the way fans see Newcastle United.

Because as I said Keegan has made several statements since January which stated that he knew there wasn't going to be a huge budget. We are expected to believe he said all that and then presented that list. Take for example his post Chelsea comments where he said something like "we won't touch them even if we spent stupid money which we aren't going to" I could see him suggesting Ronaldinho after Man City were supposedly after him but a multi-list including Lampard? - no way. It's also a myth that Keegan always signed top notch players - Shearer is the only one and even he was supposedly a "gift" from Hall. The wages thing is a strange one - of course they are stupid but then again I want to see good players and they cost money. Again you say "little benefit to the club" but I'd say challenging for UEFA places is a benefit. The club have realised that there is a lot of resentment over this. Despite what Indi thinks I actually do have a bit of disappointment in Keegan for not putting more effort into it and leaving us in a bit of a mess but statements which contain at best distortions of the truth and a smear campaign making out someone I respect to be an idiot will only harden my attitude. There have been times in the past that even knowing Hall and Shepherd had major failings that I still defended NUFC to the hilt because I still saw it as my club. That isn't the case now.

I still can't believe that anyone actually thinks this is true. Apart from making Keegan sound stupid which he isn't, he has said many times since Jan that he knew the budget was reasonable but not substantial (a lie by the eay). Also this "long term benefit" is shite - just say it was true, how is wanting to try and win something NOW and not in 5 years time so wrong? it's not shite actually is it? it's how every single club in the PL is operating now with the exception of the mega-rich, seeing players as investments, if they don't not only will the not be able to compete but they'd probably go under just think what it would cost to purchase and pay for lampard, beckham and henry man...get it now? I'm talking about the attitude not those players which as I said were always ridiculous. Medium/long term benefit is fine but as I said elsewhere we're expected to just sit back and wait for it to bear fruit and in the meantime get nowhere near the business end of the league. One of my main objections to Allardyce was that he suggested we had to wait 3 to 5 years before seeing any sort of challenge. A combination of this long term "Arsenal" thing which nobody has argued against combined with an initial spree is what was required in my view - not £200m but I certainly expected the new TV money and the usual ST cash (not even thinking of 3 years worth) to mean a decent £30m-40m being spent. What we have now is a cash rich club with a small, average squad I just hope that means its ripened for sale.

I still can't believe that anyone actually thinks this is true. Apart from making Keegan sound stupid which he isn't, he has said many times since Jan that he knew the budget was reasonable but not substantial (a lie by the eay). Also this "long term benefit" is shite - just say it was true, how is wanting to try and win something NOW and not in 5 years time so wrong?

Sorry but I haven't seen anyone saying Keegan was lied to from the start or him saying he didn't know what he was getting into. I read as him being happy with the system until the Milner/deadline day alleged bust ups - what's contradictory about that?

Indi - I'm missing something - what's the big difference between those articles/statements?

yep, doesnt make us look especially ambitious. what happened to caring about how good the player was on the pitch and what they can bring to the club while they are here? turns out for various reasons that Craig Bellamy and Laurent Robert had very litle resale value, but the impact they had on the club being a success on the pitch was massive. Think of players as sports clothes brands or retail chains then the statement makes sense - that's the problem.

Bob, you seriously don't believe that do you, honestly? If anything I think KK wanted the best of both worlds, he was very complimentary about Jonas et al and seemed excited about the kind of talent the new set-up could find him, while I'm sure he'd have liked some of his own targets brought in but I don't for one minute think that included Henry, Lampard and Ronaldinho, players he actually laughed at at the end of last season as dreamworld signings and that fans should not expect such players. Again it points to the sale of Milner for me. I was exaggerating to make a point. To put it better - Keegan wanted ready made players with an established reputation. The Board were looking at players that could be developed. Whats wrong with both? Basically we've been asked to be patient and wait for the new system to evolve (fair enough) but at the same time turn up this season and expect no great push for climbing the table. Do they think that fits Newcastle?

Despite all the comments he'd made since Jan where he was very realistic?