Howaythelads

Eh?

Eh?

Do you think he should stay or go? I'll not throw it back in your face if you've changed your mind as we all change opinions, I get the feeling that you have, or, are close to doing so although I might be wrong. Mick, I've never changed my mind on this. What I said was the error of Souness was huge and has cost the club a massive amount. The replacement has to be correct and if not Fred should consider his position as Chairman. What do you think that means, like? It seems obvious to me.

A mistake we're still paying the price for, agreed? The club may pay the ultimate price at the rate it's going. I think it'll take a few years to recover from the Souness debacle. You mean bankruptcy? Do you blame anyone in particular for this mistake? No, I mean relegation.

I may have come back with childish shite but at least I don't come out with the shite you and your "mate" keeps coming out with when you back Shepherd while he ruins something you both claim to care about. I can't answer your question with a yes or no, it's not as easy as that and depends on who the manager is. I was happy to see Keegan and Robson backed but not Souness, backing him has resulted is the record loss that has been widely reported today. How the hell can you defend Shepherd when he appointed somebody who was obviously going to fail the way he did. I could see what was going to happen and you could. How can he get away with appointing the person who has financially crippled this club and by appointing him, Shepherd has crippled the club. You stick up for him as long as you want, you really are backing yourself into an embarrassing position for yourself, and you obviously can't see that you are looking like a total idiot. Take a long hard look at yourself because you are sticking up for Shepherd in the same way as Shepherd stuck up for Souness when everybody knew Souness should go and you look just as daft. I'm not defending Fred. I said ages ago that if the replacement for Souness turns out to be shite he should consider his position. I assume you missed that.

A mistake we're still paying the price for, agreed? The club may pay the ultimate price at the rate it's going. I think it'll take a few years to recover from the Souness debacle.

Errr, I was in a definite minority when being slated for saying I thought Fred shouldn't give Souness a penny in that January transfer window. I don't recall you backing me up on that one at the time. Are you now saying I was right? By inference you are suggesting that we should have kept faith with Ronny Johnsen and Robbie Elliott as our central defence, rather than strengthening and replacing Woodgate (who was sold so late to the window closing than no replacement could be brought in)? We also bought Faye and Babayaro as squad players. Was this a good move or not? It was a bad move. The club should have sacked Souness and allowed a competent manager to spend the money. That is what I said at the time. Sorry like. So you'd have sacked him after 4 months in the job? I'd have sacked him after the match away to Charlton, however long into the season that was. Fair enough. I wouldn't have even interviewed him for the job. :| Well aye, huge mistake, as has been said many times.

Errr, I was in a definite minority when being slated for saying I thought Fred shouldn't give Souness a penny in that January transfer window. I don't recall you backing me up on that one at the time. Are you now saying I was right? By inference you are suggesting that we should have kept faith with Ronny Johnsen and Robbie Elliott as our central defence, rather than strengthening and replacing Woodgate (who was sold so late to the window closing than no replacement could be brought in)? We also bought Faye and Babayaro as squad players. Was this a good move or not? It was a bad move. The club should have sacked Souness and allowed a competent manager to spend the money. That is what I said at the time. Sorry like. So you'd have sacked him after 4 months in the job? I'd have sacked him after the match away to Charlton, however long into the season that was.

Errr, I was in a definite minority when being slated for saying I thought Fred shouldn't give Souness a penny in that January transfer window. I don't recall you backing me up on that one at the time. Are you now saying I was right? By inference you are suggesting that we should have kept faith with Ronny Johnsen and Robbie Elliott as our central defence, rather than strengthening and replacing Woodgate (who was sold so late to the window closing than no replacement could be brought in)? We also bought Faye and Babayaro as squad players. Was this a good move or not? It was a bad move. The club should have sacked Souness and allowed a competent manager to spend the money. That is what I said at the time. Sorry like.

Errr, I was in a definite minority when being slated for saying I thought Fred shouldn't give Souness a penny in that January transfer window. I don't recall you backing me up on that one at the time. Are you now saying I was right? Edited to add some more above - Yes, you were right. Freddy was wrong, as usual. The actual correct response would have been to sack Souness, as well as not giving him a penny, but at least the latter would have been preferable. But I don't think having a shite manager and no players would have got us anywhere either. Of course if he was going to stick with Souness for the duration of his contract, like he was pretending at the time, he might as well have given him cash. Backing him and sacking him was possibly the worst thing he could have done, however. A balls up of Shepherd-style proportions. Yes, I advocated sacking him too, but I was slated for that idea because it was claimed it would make the club a laughing stock. You couldn't make it up.

Errr, I was in a definite minority when being slated for saying I thought Fred shouldn't give Souness a penny in that January transfer window. I don't recall you backing me up on that one at the time. Are you now saying I was right?

Freddy, You'll not fool anybody except yourself, we know it wasn't your fault for appointing the managers, it was the managers faults for being crap and asking you to spend money, you're totally innocent. Do you really have to come back with childish shite like than in place of actually addressing the point? We all know it was a mistake appointing Souness and it's been said more than once that if Roeder turns out to be another bad appointment the Board should examine their position. Your post is basically stupid, Mick. Do you want the Board to back their manager in the transfer market or not? A straight yes or no will do. If it's yes then why do you hold the Board to blame for the manager spending the money on players who hindsight shows haven't been good enough? If it's no, then fair enough, you have no ambition for the club to succeed. I suspect the answer will be yes, but then how do you guarantee the manager will get it right? No doubt you know how to choose a manager than can't fail. I'm waiting for you to tell me how that is done.

I'm making a note of the people who believe interference by the Board in team affairs is ok.

So you're in favour of interference in team affairs by the Board? Not being funny, just want to get it clear because I'd expect never to hear any moaning from you again about any supposed moves by Fred to buy or sell players behind his manager's back. BTW I call the ex manager "Souness" because that's his name.

Many people predicted it, mate. We had to sign replacements for those discarded due to Souness's lack of managerial ability.

Not 100% sure how the signing of Owen and playing 10 game prevented relegation, i think it was more the change of a manager which encouraged the players to push on. Owen so far has been a waste of money and I don't think anyone can argue that fact. Granted we weren't to know that but it's true. The club I have no doubts will not sack Roeder, thats not to say however that he will get a new contract. He was given a 2 year contract and I believe that is all he will get. Hindsight. If you don't see the signing of Owen at the time he was signed as being acknowledgement of a lack of goals in the team bringing about a worry of relegation then I think you need to reconsider. In the end, with Souness as manager and without Owen (which was a large part of the season ) we would have been in serious trouble but of course Souness was sacked in the end to avoid that situation. aye cos Owen was the only available striker on the market blueyes.gif Not sure what you expect in reply to the typical sarcasm like, so are you trying once againi to derail a thread? Souness decided to sign Owen, I've never said or implied Owen was the only striker on the market. I'm stating the fact that we signed Owen, and that's it. Are you suggesting the Board should have told Souness to sign someone else, therefore opening the door to the criticism of interference in team affairs that people get so agitated about?

No of course not, I am however blaming the board for bringing in manager who has such little ability and caused these problems. Granted they backed the manager but they then can't blame manager purchases for the state of finances which they backed. Of course they can, but if that's your position it still indicates that a team manager isn't required, unless you're going to pile 100% credit on the Board when the manager gets it right, which is very unlikely as nobody would be thinking about the Board in that scenario.

Not 100% sure how the signing of Owen and playing 10 game prevented relegation, i think it was more the change of a manager which encouraged the players to push on. Owen so far has been a waste of money and I don't think anyone can argue that fact. Granted we weren't to know that but it's true. The club I have no doubts will not sack Roeder, thats not to say however that he will get a new contract. He was given a 2 year contract and I believe that is all he will get. Hindsight. If you don't see the signing of Owen at the time he was signed as being acknowledgement of a lack of goals in the team bringing about a worry of relegation then I think you need to reconsider. In the end, with Souness as manager and without Owen (which was a large part of the season ) we would have been in serious trouble but of course Souness was sacked in the end to avoid that situation.

True I believe after this season the wage ratio will drop because of player sales but the problem is we are simply spending too much money. We spend over £3m getting shot of Souness. We spend over £2m a year on staff wages (non players) someone needs to go through the club and get rid of some of the daft spending cause I have no doubt in parts we are being run like leeds where they had something daft like 250,000 a year going out on fish. Looking at just the wage ratio isn't all we can do but look at the club debts, the club needs to start brining in the correct players who we know have a better chance of doing well and stop wasting cash. The statement actually says at the top that the board has the final say on player purchases so they are to blame if they agree to waste cash we don't have. Peter Risdale is a great example of this. Of course the Board has the FINAL say, but that's far too simplistic. It seems you're absolving O'Leary of any responsibility in the signing of players for Leeds, and of Souness for creating the situation at Newcastle of good players leaving for next to nowt and players we didn't need then being required to be brought in as supposed replacements. In the end, this route you're going down calls into question the need for a team manager at all. Why not just leave it all to the Board since you're putting the responsibility for managers selection of players onto them anyway?

Obviously people will see the small picture and complain about the wages ratio for example, and it's worth worrying about for sure but unfortunately it's all some will see. I'd like someone to tell me how this could have been avoided in order to recover from the error of Souness? The problem comes back to the shite management of that one bloke, the booting out of good players he couldn't manage and the signing of players we didn't need. In the end we needed to splash out on Owen otherwise in the big picture scenario we risked relegation, which would of course put the club in a much worse situation today than we see right now. Just my opinion. The finances need to be considered with an eye on how it's come about and what the alternative may have been. It's not that simple.

Oh dear, I predict another 20 page thread once NE5 and Macbeth get going on this Don't see much problem discussing the clubs finances ? All depends on whether it's treated as a footnote to previous threads Macbeth "There, I TOLD you they're doing a shit job. They're driving the club to the wall. £33m in dividends and we're spending 63% of our income on wages" NE5 "Do you want a club with no ambition? Do you want to sign England internationals at the peak of their careers or not. Why did Waddle and Beardsley leave?" and so on. and on. and on. :bigbro: The big picture is sometimes hard to understand, yes.

I wasn't milking it, I wanted some abuse, I love it when you talk down to me. :winking: Not sure why you think I'd give you abuse over that post. Not sure why you think I'd post abuse anyway, I generally post contrary opinions to the juveniles, they just interpret any opposing opinion as abuse. You big bully. Been eyeing me up in the shower? gay.gif I'm no use to you, mate. I prefer the bearded clam. Wow, such wit! And you call others juvenile! For the record I don't swing that way either, so don't worry. Wow, such inabililty to spot a bit of banter when you see it! Don't worry, for the record I won't try that again. If I call you a wanker at any time you won't need to wonder whether I mean it or not. The irony Sponger. I didn't understand the adult stuff either when I was a kid, so don't worry about it, things will hopefully get better for you.......

I wasn't milking it, I wanted some abuse, I love it when you talk down to me. :winking: Not sure why you think I'd give you abuse over that post. Not sure why you think I'd post abuse anyway, I generally post contrary opinions to the juveniles, they just interpret any opposing opinion as abuse. You big bully. Been eyeing me up in the shower? gay.gif I'm no use to you, mate. I prefer the bearded clam. Wow, such wit! And you call others juvenile! For the record I don't swing that way either, so don't worry. Wow, such inabililty to spot a bit of banter when you see it! Don't worry, for the record I won't try that again. If Ii call you a wanker at any time you won't need to wonder whether I mean it or not. I've seen better banter at a Wycombe game. Or do you think that "big bully" was a serious accusation?! Err no, of course I didn't, which is why I replied with a bit of banter. The problem is that YOU didn't recognise it, which is just tough shit. Trust me, I wasn't taking anything seriously. Just thought that were a pretty lame bit of banter. Been good bantering with you. bluebigrazz.gif So if we're handing out marks out of ten do you think "big bully" was quality banter? hohoho

3 at the back again! It doesn't work easily and it won't work for us. Footballers in England are brought up on 4 at the back from a very young age, it's a massive ask of players to go to 3 at the back as it calls for an entirely different way of defending for centre backs. For example, they don't know what positions to take up and so they struggle with it.

I wasn't milking it, I wanted some abuse, I love it when you talk down to me. :winking: Not sure why you think I'd give you abuse over that post. Not sure why you think I'd post abuse anyway, I generally post contrary opinions to the juveniles, they just interpret any opposing opinion as abuse. You big bully. Been eyeing me up in the shower? gay.gif I'm no use to you, mate. I prefer the bearded clam. Wow, such wit! And you call others juvenile! For the record I don't swing that way either, so don't worry. Wow, such inabililty to spot a bit of banter when you see it! Don't worry, for the record I won't try that again. If Ii call you a wanker at any time you won't need to wonder whether I mean it or not. I've seen better banter at a Wycombe game. Or do you think that "big bully" was a serious accusation?! Err no, of course I didn't, which is why I replied with a bit of banter. The problem is that YOU didn't recognise it, which is just tough shit.