Howaythelads

What are the excuses for him today? I know there was a lack of creativity from the centre of the midfield, this is normal when the pairing is Parker and Emre, but for me Luque looked lost up front and yet people claim he's a striker. He sort of looked like a footballer when he drifted out wide once or twice, but that was it. What will it take to get some performances out of this bloke.

I'm not trying to make a point, I was interested to see actually what we'd spent on transfers so started looking. It doesn't matter which way it turns out, I'd just like to know, that's all. I think a lot of money has been spent on buying players over the years. It's a damn shame a lot of it wasn't at the right time.

Until SJH arrived we were an unambitious club, this is not the same as being a selling club. What is the point you're trying to make here, Mick?

Not sure who said we are a selling club. A selling club is one which every year or two MUST sell their best player to keep the clubs finances on track. At least, that's what I thought a selling club was believed to be when I've heard references over the years to the term 'selling club'. Is this not true?

No, in fact we are miles apart. While you and FOOTSOLDIER are intent on looking at the negative qualities of said players, I am prepared to look at the positive, i.e, Shola's local links, recent goals record, running ability, etc... Luque's undoubted class, finishing ability, and the rest. You and Footsoldier are in agreement also, correct? Earlier you said.... We do agree, unless you want to retract the bits I've put in bold. You just have a 'more gentle' way of writing it, especially the bit about the heartless Spaniard. Well I've bolded the bits you seem to have missed just to show another perspective, pretty much different from yours with all respect. bluebiggrin.gif I read all of your post the first time, I didn't miss anything. :winking: The fact is, everything has a bottom line, which is the crux of it all and is the really IMPORTANT bit. We agree that Ameobi isn't good enough for our ambitions and we agree Luque is unlikely to do the business for Newcastle because "he doesn't fancy it". Wrong. Ameobi might not be good enough for our ambitions, but he's a useful squad player as he has proved recently. Robbie Elliott wasn't good enough for our ambitions either last season yet no one is pointing out his lack of quality are they? And if Luque doesn't "fancy it", why did Fat Fred bring him here? We agree on the first bit in bold. He's ok for 4th choice right now, so useful squad player. Is this the same 'Fat Fred' who recently brought Duff to the club because the current manager wanted him to? I expect the answer to your question is that 'Fat Fred' brought Luque to the club because the manager at that time wanted Luque as a replacement for Laurent Robert. I'd say the blame for bringing to the club someone without hunger to play for us rests with the manager. I know you won't agree.

You certainly are the best DJ in N-O. What a whole load of stinking rubbish. Argue as you like, stop speaking on others' behalf and then blame them. Trully Pathetic. Nice contribution there, like. Walk tall.

It's more to do with comparing the abilities of boards that found themselves in similar conditions. So a comparison between the current board and say, that of McKeag's is a less valid comparison than with SJH's due to the economic climate, the relative popularity of football, money bandied about etc. It's not to say we can't compare them at all, but recency is always what people tend towards when making comparisons. Roeder will be compared far more to Souness than to Keegan, I'm sure. It could be, and totally see your point. However, by the same token, tolerating a deterioration in the quality of the board as we can roughly agree to have seen in recent times won't help things get any better. I'm the last one to recommend changing the board for any old Tom, Dick and Harry. However, if this board has nothing to hide and are confident in their competence then they shouldn't be too concerned about getting some objective members in positions that might regulate against possible cronyism/nepotism. At the moment it's not far from a quango. Hell, they should appoint some experienced and successful individuals to the board just to dispel any doubt, would be a small price to pay for some peace of mind and a bit more expertise. That is, if they have nothing to worry about and can put pride aside for the good of the club. We'll have to agree to disagree about the merits of comparing the present board with boards of previous decades due to Sky revenue etc. The economic climate was the same for all clubs, they all had the same opportunity to tap the potential of their support, but our Board didn't. Football was always popular, we attracted huge crowds for those cup ties I mentioned earlier, and for Fairs Cup ties because people were excited by the chance to win a cup by just stringing a few results together in a single competition. People weren't excited by the our ambitions in the league. Had the Board had the ambition to make a challenge in the league I believe people would have flocked to the stadium and we'd have seen those huge attendances become commonplace, as they are now.

The main reason is that the state of play between the SJH times and the current period in terms of income, fanbase, global marketing etc. is very similar. Comparing post-SKY to pre-SKY is possible, sure, but it's not as valid. Completely agreed on this front, and have said as much previously. So how about if the current board got some objective advisors in key positions to help forge a long term plan, adopt a director of football, that sort of thing? Fair compromise would be to keep them on for the good they've done but to appoint objective elements to the board to ensure good and fair practice. Why don't they do that? If they had proper ambition and respect for the club and the fans, surely they would? No-one wishes it to be worse. Why is comparing pre and post Sky not as valid? It was the same for all clubs? Re the last bit. Ok, fair enough, I undersand nobody really wishes it to be worse, but many people posting here want the Board out because they don't believe it ever was worse, or could be worse again. It has been, and it could be again. That's the whole point, mate.

It's a point we'll never agree on, Thompers. For example, I see replacing Shearer with Owen as an ambitous move, replacing an ex-England main striker with another. I don't see that as a move to get bums on seats, but I know that some do. Catching those teams we want to catch can only be done with top players.

Sometimes you make good posts mate, but this has been said before, what do you consider failure ? Would you rather we had won the League Cup and been relegated and struggled for most of the time like the smoggies than have the decades in europe etc that we have ? I consider not winning trophies a failure. No, I wouldn't like to be like the Smoggies but that doesn't mean that I can't be disappointed with our current position and the fact that we haven't won a trophy since the UEFA one is the late 60s. It also doesn't mean that we should 'settle' for this position. Last thing, this also doesn't mean that my support has waned over the years or my expectations are too high. True, I may have been spoiled by Keegan's reign but that's because I started supporting 'us' during that time, but yet, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't aim to be the very best. Why settle? You aren't half so pissed of as me we haven't won a trophy mate, I've lived through the [mostly] shite since 1969. We all want to be top, nobody is settling for 2nd best, it just seems to me that some of you expect an ambitous board as a right. It simply doesn't work like that, there are lots of clubs who are taken over by bean counters and unambitous people who don't have the courage to sometimes be bold, which if successful taps the fanbase. I keep pointing out these clubs, who have been more successful than us in the past, and fell a damn sight lower when they changed, or made bad decisions. We have a board who desperately want the club to be successful, believe me there are a lot of clubs who settle for mediocrity and we could easily become the same, again. You should be looking at those clubs that have been and remain successful, instead of harping on about there are a lot worse off than us. Anyway, back on topic .... John There are people here who, for some reason, are only willing to compare the Board against the one of SJH's time. It's all they know. Of course the club has gone backwards since then, the players you listed in your earlier post highlighted that clearly. Nobody is disputing that. Nobody is saying that we shouldn't be comparing current/recent performance against clubs we're trying to catch, because we want to catch them. Nobody is saying they're happy we've won nowt, I've never said that the current Board is great and has made no mistakes, of course they've made mistakes. So have Board's of other clubs, including those we are now trying to catch....again. I don't know what gets into people's heads on this forum when it comes to people making comments about previous decades in the club's history. I've nowt against people who started going to matches in the 90's, my own son did 'cos that's when he became old enough. The people who started going in the early 90's when SJH was Chairman and KK manager should realise that they've seen some great football, we've come close and the disappointment is huge for everbody. What these people don't want to listen to is that those of us who have put up with winning nowt for decades haven't even had the pleasure of watching a decent team, a team that was good enough to even come close. That was life under a shite Board. It could easily go back to being like that. That's all the thread is about, trying to get across to people that it wouldn't be automatic that any replacement for the current lot would be an improvement. Making that statement doesn't mean I'm happy, doesn't mean I don't want improvement and doesn't mean I think the present lot are fantastic and that they couldn't be bettered. It makes me laugh that some appear to think that's what I'm saying, they couldn't be more wrong, I'm desperate for us to win something, to win the league sometime in my lifetime. My disappointment that we've won nowt is absolutely huge, I suspect I'm going to die without seeing us win another trophy, which is something I thought right through until SJH turned the club around. Then we took off and I believed we would do it, to say I'm gutted that we haven't doesn't even come close. The present Board show the ambition ( whether they have the ability is another question ) and want the club to win things. By replacing them there is every chance it could be worse and some of us don't want to go back there. It is shite. All I'm saying is that those who want the current Board removed should be careful what they wish for.

He must be, because Luque is the GREATEST striker in the world, and anyone who saw him last season and though the was very poor is WRONG, He must be GREAT, he has a showreel, and everything. Come on Albert, show us how FANTASTIC you are. Top post. Why? because he is taking the piss out of Luque and everyone who wants him to succeed. Or because he's making a stand for all those people who don't rate Luque and don't want to be proved wrong. Who might they be? Are you claiming there any genuine Newcastle supporters who think Luque is shit who for some reason want him to be shit? The club comes first, which is why I'm so pissed off at this lazy bastards 'efforts' of last season.

He must be, because Luque is the GREATEST striker in the world, and anyone who saw him last season and though the was very poor is WRONG, He must be GREAT, he has a showreel, and everything. Come on Albert, show us how FANTASTIC you are. Top post.

To be perfectly fair - you've either missed my point or ignored it. Were you part of the board of directors during the 60's, 70's and 80's?? If, as I suspect, you weren't - how do you know so much about the reasons why they came to the decisions they eventually did? Did you read about them in the newspaper? Do you believe everything you read in the newspapers of today? How could you possibly be in a position to know the dynamics of the board and the situations they found themselves in? Were you privvy to the innermost feelings of the players of the time or did you believe every word they said to the local rags? The only fact I know is that you may have stood on the terraces at the time but you knew **** all about the workings of the club. Neither did I. You are merely stating your precious opinion as your interpretation of what you were told and passing it off as 'fact'. I'm pretty sure you're spot on about some of the things you pontificate to us mere mortals about, but the majority is just your opinion. As i've already stated, I agree with a lot of what you actually post but the tone of your posts sickens me to be perfectly honest. You're an extremley patronising and old chap aren't you? Am I glad I don't sit in front of you at matches... :roll: Rant over. In that case I suggest you and your barmy mates all shut up about the current Board. Since I doubt any of you are on the current Board you obviously don't have the first idea of why they take the decisions they do and you and your mates have no idea of whether they are doing a good job or not. I suppose you'll tell me, "that's different". You’re absolutely correct – I’m not on the current board. Neither are you. You don’t know what goes on in the boardroom and neither do I. You never knew and neither did I. You obviously experienced their decisions and formed an opinion. So did your fucking bellend of a mate. How you interpreted the decisions of the board is up to you. Just don’t go slinging shit every other **** who disagrees with you. So you stood on the terraces in the 60’s and 70’s??? So ****? Does that mean whatever you say is correct? You and that **** of a mate of yours are giving your own personal opinions of the decisions of the board. You have your points of view and others have theirs. They’re entitled to them and so are you. Doesn’t mean you are right and they are wrong and vice versa. P.S. while I’m on a bit of a rant…Why the **** do you pair of scum-sucking pig fuckers continue to patronise the living daylights out of the rest of us?? You’re not stupid by any stretch but your condescending attitude to the opinions of others is fucking staggering. You bore the cheese from our cock-ends and then cry like fucking babies when you’re questioned. I just wish to **** that the pair of you would somehow, miraculously, change the fucking record and realise you’re living in 2006 and not the fucking 60’s. Things are different. Just because you’re old doesn’t mean you’re right. Learn some fucking tolerance you miserable set of ****. You fucking disgust me, you fucking ****. Now that's fucking different. Fucking prick. :roll:

Andy Cole. Yes I know, it was a while ago like I said. We would sell any of our current players if we were offered a British record. Would that make us a selling club? What defines a selling club? It'll take more than £30m to prize Amady Faye away, make no mistake. Bloody hell. My sides are splitting, your jokes are just so funny.

Don't you mean get over it, turn the page? Mate? bluebiggrin.gif bluebiggrin.gif Gan back to stealing cars, you have to know more about that than Newcastle United.

I'd be horrified. But I was horrified at us selling two Young Players of the Year too. The PR spin was better at the club with both Bellamy and Jenas so that we viewed it as being justifiable. At teh time I was also horrified at the sale of Robbie Elliot Whether someone was a young player of the year is irrelevant. Selling Jenas was fantastic, glad he couldn't hack it at a big club. Selling Bellamy was down to the lack of managerial ability of Souness, but then everybody knows these things already, so I don't know why you're mentioning them. I was also pissed off at the sale of Elliott, but that was the managers decision, not the player. I don't know why you're mentioning that either. Cheers for now

Err aye. Q. Why aren't you directing your question to the people who claim the Board is crap? I've never yet started the subject off, it's always in reply to someone else making a false claim. Well, you're right, it should be also directed to HTT, Mick, Macbeth et al, but at least for them this is just a small part of what they write, whereas for you and NE5 this seems to be all you ever write about. I'm not trying to tell you what to write and what not to write. Suit yourself. Just my observation for what its worth. bluecool.gif That's because I'm a parody, mate, I've given up quite a while ago. Hardly anybody wants to debate, they just want to try to sound smart, or something. bluedead.gif

He wasnt to be fair. He was gash and danced around a Mickey Mouse defender and slotted it past a Minnie Mouse keeper. I doubt Luque would be able to skip around Andy OBrien like that. Oh sorry, I forgot how shit Lillistrome's defence was, that's why the likes of Emre, Milner, Shola, N'Zogbia and Solano all scored as well right?... Woosh of the century!

Now you're doing it too, I thought it was only NE5 !! A fact is something like "Newcastle won the FA Cup in 1932". An opinion would be something like (as NE5 puts it ) "Luque is crap". It is easy to see which is which. Now stating that those players left the club because "all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did" is not a fact, it is an opinion. It is a subjective view taken from reading what others have said. It may well be an opinion repeated hundreds and thousands of times which may well make it look like a fact, but it really is just an opinion. I do believe most of those players did leave because they saw more chances of winning things elsewhere, but it is only an opinion I have on the matter, it is not a fact. If I met them all and asked them all personally why they left and heard them say it was so, then I'd have an even stronger belief in my opinion. When we see a double figure number of players leaving the club during the tenure of a certain Board, all reported as slagging the club off for a lack of ambition, I take that as pretty solid information. I know why you don't, however. I do say that I believe it too, (in bold above) cos I do think it it why many of them left. I understand why you ignore that comment of mine, however. :winking: You obviously believe in coincidence and also in fairies. There were too many similar reports in the media, made by too many different players over that particular time period for it not to be fact. Your tactic of deflection is pretty weak, trying to turn the discussion away from the point to one of discussing the difference between a fact and an opinion is a bit of a refuge, mate. No, it just highlights that the things we often quote as facts are just other peoples opinions repeated many times. For example anyone reading only NE5 comments on here would genuinely belive that it was a fact that Newcastle were the "5th best side in the Premiership over the last decade". If he was our only source of information and he has repeated it so many times that it is now a fact in his eyes. That it is based on a dubious statistical analysis is ignored completely. Similarly if another poster had posted continuously that we have an average position of 8th or 9th, or whatever it is, also views that repeated bit of info as an opposing fact. I have no time for the board form the 70s or 80s, and you will find nowhere where I have supported them. I may well have pointed out that they occasionally did something postive, but that doesn't mean I backed them. I have also pointed out that the fhinancing of the ground development in 1999 was superbly done, or that we had the 2nd best wages policy in the Premiership up to 2003. That doesn't mean that I support everything the current board has done. As I've just said to the biscuit man, in conclusion, if people want to discuss only things that are proven to be from the inside of the club then the forum may as well close down. We can discuss nothing. I agree absolutely. My 'problem' comes from when I was creating my web site. It was easy to create, anyone can make a web-site. I had access to the financial figures published by the club so that was easy too. The huge problem was trying to take opinion out of it. I was contacted by a guy who said I didn't recognise how much the current board had put in, how they had saved the club, how the current board were great in everything they did. There was also a veiled threat at the end of the email, suggesting if I wasn't careful my site would be closed down. I replied to the guy saying I was more than happy to publish anything he had which gave the board's position as long as it was factual, and not just hearsay. He never replied. (I had tens of emails from people who accused the board of financial misdemeanours but not of them could be backed up either, so weren't published). I know you think there are still opinions in the site but it took ages to get it refined to the stage it is now. What the exercise did for me was teach me how to recognise what was fact and what was opinion. The site has no quotes from people, so nothing from Freddie or Douglas that I could have used to make cheap shots at. I received so many emails from people suggesting the Boumsong deal was corrupt that it must be true. No one had any facts though, it was just repeated wisdom, or repeated urban myth. I will always be boring and fall back to the clubs published financial position as that is a stated fact, most other things are opinion, and should always be recognised as such . Not that any of us have any way of knowing if somebody here is or was involved in some capacity with the club. Macca was though. Perhaps he might shed some light on the thoughts of people such as Irving Nattrass, who left for the nappy rippers to 'win the league'. Did you not read the Mag interview with Nattrass ? It nearly made me cry. He so regretted leaving. He was my hero, the only challenger to Woodgate as a great defender in black and white. (Opinion !!) I suppose the straight question for you is do you think today's Board is performing better than all Board's of the club before 1992 going back to at least the end of the War? Here's where you'll immediately start thinking about finances. I have no idea how the clubs finances were then. I can see the current ones, so it is unfair to compare. Well here's a tip. Look at the league tables, because the league performance is the overall measure. Look at the players who departed and those who arrived and where they arrived from, because that shows you the quality that wanted to leave and the level of ambition we had for improving the team with the players we brought in. Look at the attendances, because that shows you how the people of Newcastle viewed the ambitions of the club to succeed. Yes that's a convincing argument I suppose. :winking: But that logic makes Murray a great chairman for sunderland too. My concern is financial. At the end of the McKeag regime we were close to bankruptcy. Unfortunately at the time we had no means of seeing the books to know that was how it was. Now we do. Now we have the opportunity to see how the custodians of the club are doing, to highlight how things are. You seem to have fallen for NE5's view that 'ambition' is the key factor in a board, and that spending bucketloads of borrowed money shows ambition. I want to pass my team on to my son, if the current board's borrowing policy which gets sold to us as 'ambition' is allowed to continue then he won't have that opportunity. There are many ways to view the financial mess the club is in. The key one for me is the dividend policy. £35m has been given away by the club in dividends, and share buybacks. We are now borrowing money to pay for that giveaway. We now have no money for our current manager to spend because of that giveaway. I have no doubt that the Halls and Shepherds are Newcastle supporters, but their prime concern is their own bank balances, not being supporters. They view it as being preferable for them to have had that £35m and the club to currently have a £17m overdraft. I cannot accept, and never will, that that can be viewed as being the right sort of attitude to have. The future of the club matters to me more than their personal wealth. Since 1991 we have had better league positions and played in Europe more than ever in my life. I am a person who reads everything about the club, is a boring statto on past players. I do know where we have been, and where we are in comparison. I still shake my head in disbelief at our ground and that it is full. Having the sense of history means I am always nervous of returning to how it was. In the 5 seasons since 2000 and the ground extension I have seen no progress on the previous five years. We have had an advantage due to our ground size, and we seem not have used it while we had it. I believe that the current board has lost its way, and that their current policies are threatening the future, while making the present seem exciting with the occasional expensive signing financed on borrowed money. A few points. I've never examined your website, mate. I couldn't really care less whether you put opinions or facts on there, just do what you claim and that's good enough, isn't it? My description does not make Bob Murray look like a top Chairman. Makes him look pretty shite in fact. Taking as a fact that many, many players left the club while firing the shot of 'lack of ambition' at the club is not the same as one person repeating ONE thing over and over, eg that Newcastle are 5th best over the last decade, or Newcastle are 8th or 9th best or whatever someone said. What I'm on about is a lot of different people making the same claim about the club over a period of time, results, performances and transfers supporting that accusation to the hilt. An open question to anybody.... How would you feel if after we were promoted and finished 3rd, that instead of signing players as we did our top 3 players all demanded transfers and left claiming the club has no ambition? Those players then subsequently being replaced by older and inferior players? Would you believe the board to be unambitious and so slag them off for being shit? Just your opinion will do.

Err aye. Q. Why aren't you directing your question to the people who claim the Board is crap? I've never yet started the subject off, it's always in reply to someone else making a false claim.

In fact we did win a trophy when SJH was here. Your book must be the same as grass's.

I couldn't father a son so thick. In fact, I haven't. My 14 year old son is proof enough of that.

Now you're doing it too, I thought it was only NE5 !! A fact is something like "Newcastle won the FA Cup in 1932". An opinion would be something like (as NE5 puts it ) "Luque is crap". It is easy to see which is which. Now stating that those players left the club because "all left the club because the Board didn't have the same level of ambition to succeed as those individuals did" is not a fact, it is an opinion. It is a subjective view taken from reading what others have said. It may well be an opinion repeated hundreds and thousands of times which may well make it look like a fact, but it really is just an opinion. I do believe most of those players did leave because they saw more chances of winning things elsewhere, but it is only an opinion I have on the matter, it is not a fact. If I met them all and asked them all personally why they left and heard them say it was so, then I'd have an even stronger belief in my opinion. When we see a double figure number of players leaving the club during the tenure of a certain Board, all reported as slagging the club off for a lack of ambition, I take that as pretty solid information. I know why you don't, however. You obviously believe in coincidence and also in fairies. There were too many similar reports in the media, made by too many different players over that particular time period for it not to be fact. Your tactic of deflection is pretty weak, trying to turn the discussion away from the point to one of discussing the difference between a fact and an opinion is a bit of a refuge, mate. As I've just said to the biscuit man, in conclusion, if people want to discuss only things that are proven to be from the inside of the club then the forum may as well close down. We can discuss nothing. Not that any of us have any way of knowing if somebody here is or was involved in some capacity with the club. Macca was though. Perhaps he might shed some light on the thoughts of people such as Irving Nattrass, who left for the nappy rippers to 'win the league'. I suppose the straight question for you is do you think today's Board is performing better than all Board's of the club before 1992 going back to at least the end of the War? Here's where you'll immediately start thinking about finances. Well here's a tip. Look at the league tables, because the league performance is the overall measure. Look at the players who departed and those who arrived and where they arrived from, because that shows you the quality that wanted to leave and the level of ambition we had for improving the team with the players we brought in. Look at the attendances, because that shows you how the people of Newcastle viewed the ambitions of the club to succeed.

To be perfectly fair - you've either missed my point or ignored it. Were you part of the board of directors during the 60's, 70's and 80's?? If, as I suspect, you weren't - how do you know so much about the reasons why they came to the decisions they eventually did? Did you read about them in the newspaper? Do you believe everything you read in the newspapers of today? How could you possibly be in a position to know the dynamics of the board and the situations they found themselves in? Were you privvy to the innermost feelings of the players of the time or did you believe every word they said to the local rags? The only fact I know is that you may have stood on the terraces at the time but you knew **** all about the workings of the club. Neither did I. You are merely stating your precious opinion as your interpretation of what you were told and passing it off as 'fact'. I'm pretty sure you're spot on about some of the things you pontificate to us mere mortals about, but the majority is just your opinion. As i've already stated, I agree with a lot of what you actually post but the tone of your posts sickens me to be perfectly honest. You're an extremley patronising and old chap aren't you? Am I glad I don't sit in front of you at matches... :roll: Rant over. In that case I suggest you and your barmy mates all shut up about the current Board. Since I doubt any of you are on the current Board you obviously don't have the first idea of why they take the decisions they do and you and your mates have no idea of whether they are doing a good job or not. I suppose you'll tell me, "that's different".

No, in fact we are miles apart. While you and FOOTSOLDIER are intent on looking at the negative qualities of said players, I am prepared to look at the positive, i.e, Shola's local links, recent goals record, running ability, etc... Luque's undoubted class, finishing ability, and the rest. You and Footsoldier are in agreement also, correct? Earlier you said.... We do agree, unless you want to retract the bits I've put in bold. You just have a 'more gentle' way of writing it, especially the bit about the heartless Spaniard. Well I've bolded the bits you seem to have missed just to show another perspective, pretty much different from yours with all respect. bluebiggrin.gif I read all of your post the first time, I didn't miss anything. :winking: The fact is, everything has a bottom line, which is the crux of it all and is the really IMPORTANT bit. We agree that Ameobi isn't good enough for our ambitions and we agree Luque is unlikely to do the business for Newcastle because "he doesn't fancy it".