madras

just be the latest in your recent long line of excuses though jill.

surely then protesting when the object of the protest is out of earshot and safely tucked away is just as daft then ?

i'm guessing "couldn'tgiveafuck" when translated into spanish and back into english could come out as "overconfident"

some people may think that protesting when players are coming into the stadium may have the opposite effect to supporting them when on the pitch. Were they even protesting when the players were coming into the ground like? It's f***ing stupid this. The players got support when they were playing football, and they won. As if they're so precious that protests (not against them) BEFORE the game could make them play worse. Ridiculous. i've no idea. but i know one or two of the younger lads from work said they wouldn't go to the earlier protes as they didn't want to protest where and when the players were coming in.

accy went down due to gateshead. up on the rugby.......82p down.

He's about 9 was you then

some people may think that protesting when players are coming into the stadium may have the opposite effect to supporting them when on the pitch.

i know of at least a few who didn't want to protest before the game lest it affected the team. How the f*** would protesting before the game affect the team? The excuses are getting ridiculous. We won 3-1 today and probably played the best we have all year. was the protest not at the main entrance.

I never seen any like. couldn't make the match today due to wotrk but it said so on the radio.

skirge enters the legal minefiled. i don't think you are allowed as for although it wasn't televised footage the match is still protected content. not sure though.

i know of at least a few who didn't want to protest before the game lest it affected the team.

sorry if i missed it but i aint reading through it all to find out but some scuffling (toon fans and stewards) in level 7 after the final whistle.....anyone know anything ?

he wouldn't have if he'd done due dilligence. in fact if that was the reson he'd have been better off putting together a 50mill package with fred for shirt-ground sponsorship and marketing rites. Possibly not, but he must have had a reason to buy it. So what was it? You’re quick to suggest he bought it to promote sportsdirect is utter s*** - presumably you have a better suggestion for why he bought the club? my guess is that he bought the club because with the crowds and money coming into prem football he thought that if he could get shot of the massivly under performing huge fucking earners he could make a go of it and with an iproved off the field position could probably sell us on for a tidy profit. unfortunatly he didn't do due diligence which eant he didn't know the sponsor money had already been done in or that the change of ownesrhip menat a surprise assivly outlay from the off. thats my guess. seems more likely than him paying close on 250mill in order to advertise his company......no ?

he wouldn't have if he'd done due dilligence. in fact if that was the reson he'd have been better off putting together a 50mill package with fred for shirt-ground sponsorship and marketing rites.

I doubt it was a retreat. The plan was almost certainly to rename the ground after Mr Ashley’s other business all along, and you can be sure he never had any intention of sportsdirect paying proper money for the privilege. Obviously he couldn’t just come straight out and say “St James Park will be reamned The Sportsdirect Arena and the club will receive no money” as that would have resulted in even great anger than there was when supporters thought we might end up playing at the Adidas Arena. His plan was to spread the bad news over a period of time to reduce the potential of a full scale riot. Mr Ashley clearly bought NUFC to use it to promote his sports retail empire. He doesn’t care what happens to our club as long as it makes money for his other business. and hes going to pay owards of 250mill for the pleasure ?. utter shite in my humble opinion.

presuming that the new stadium title is going to be adorned at the ground entrance you have to wonder if it may be vandalised or altered some way. i'd like to think nufc fans have more intelligence than to just rip it off the wall but re-arranging the letters can give....... sceptic dorm rots correct dim spots scrimped cost rot priced cost storm or maybe.........corrects dim post

you do realise that he's doing the local reporters gee up. what d'you expect him to say "looks like we're fucked "

other clubs have clauses written into the contracts for pay c uts in the event of relegation. I'd be very surprised if anyone in the PL had a 50% relegation wage cut in his contract. There are also a lot of costs which stay the same, like stadium maintance, match day expenses, etc. I'm not saying that there's no need for stricter financial regulations, but the proposed restrictions would kill of a lot of clubs. I'd be also interested in how exactly the Glazers or the Pool owners or Real Madrid are planning to pay back their entire loan in 3 years, and since they won't, and it would be insane to ban them because of their huge following and the economic power thereof, I'm pretty sceptical about the enforcement of this whole mess. there was a story to the effect that only nufc out of all the clubs in the bottom half of the prem last season didn't have these type of clauses and i never mentioned 50%, thats you putting words where i didn't. yes other costs remain the same ,if not rise, but the wages are the biggest outgoing from the club and any substantial reduction in that is what practically every relegated club does. platinis plans would improve the game but i'm not sure if the opposition to it from the bigger clubs wouldn't be too strong. I was referring to the fact that our revenues have fallen 50% so without loans allowed we would've had to cut back the wage bill by at least 50%, or, as a lot of other costs remained the same, even more. Also another thing: stadium developement. How on earth would a club be able to raise money for a new stadium without loans? Will the club owners be allowed to set up another company, take out a shitload of loans, build a stadium, then rent it out to a club? If yes, what's the point? Another scenario: a club sells it's stadium to a company/bank, then rents it for like 7-8% of the sum/yr for 20 years. It wouldn't go against the rules afaik, yet it's basically a loan. I'm not entirely sure this thing would help football a whole lot, the big clubs have significantly higher revenues than the rest, so they'd remain the big clubs after all. It wouldn't ban rich people from buying clubs and splashing the cash, as long as it's not a loan but an investment. Clubs and chairmen would find the loopholes to take out loans, Real Madrid would sell a training center for 2bn to the government, and they'd continue to buy players for mad money. I support a wage cap though, but only if it's Europe-wide, and is a net amount bc of the the differences in taxes. i'm not so sure the revenues have fallen 50% why do we need a new stadium ? the way to look at it (to me at least) is like stopping credit card companies offering people more than they can service. imagine that on a business level.

Hopefully the Trust can buy him out in the near future. Yes thats not exactly a forgone conclusion, but hopefully. In the mean time you could say the reasons to act are: a) Not letting him get back into the comfort zone like the last time, the SJP farce deserves a response from a moral point of view. b) To put off any brands thinking of taking the stadium rights. you'll have to expand on that a bit.

It was the first time I'd ever noticed you could change that when editing your post...thought I'd see how it worked. I love Dave really. you love dave really + dave is a cock = you love cock.

other clubs have clauses written into the contracts for pay c uts in the event of relegation. I'd be very surprised if anyone in the PL had a 50% relegation wage cut in his contract. There are also a lot of costs which stay the same, like stadium maintance, match day expenses, etc. I'm not saying that there's no need for stricter financial regulations, but the proposed restrictions would kill of a lot of clubs. I'd be also interested in how exactly the Glazers or the Pool owners or Real Madrid are planning to pay back their entire loan in 3 years, and since they won't, and it would be insane to ban them because of their huge following and the economic power thereof, I'm pretty sceptical about the enforcement of this whole mess. there was a story to the effect that only nufc out of all the clubs in the bottom half of the prem last season didn't have these type of clauses and i never mentioned 50%, thats you putting words where i didn't. yes other costs remain the same ,if not rise, but the wages are the biggest outgoing from the club and any substantial reduction in that is what practically every relegated club does. platinis plans would improve the game but i'm not sure if the opposition to it from the bigger clubs wouldn't be too strong.

even i agree with that.

other clubs have clauses written into the contracts for pay c uts in the event of relegation.

quite possibly but if you think they are affected by support then we should support them during the game. if you don't think they are affected by support then don't sing or chant or shout from now on. Maybe the players could join in, and they'd be part of the gang. if they join in then i will. Nah. Wait for Ashley to join up and you'll be on solid ground. that'll be everyone though and i can't go along with everyone. wheres the argument in that ?

quite possibly but if you think they are affected by support then we should support them during the game. if you don't think they are affected by support then don't sing or chant or shout from now on. Maybe the players could join in, and they'd be part of the gang. if they join in then i will.