madras

bugger! thought i'd be at work when this is on but i'm not. i have no excuse to hide from this match.

i thought he was in talks with olympiakos ?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/patrick_barclay/article6083144.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2 just borrow the money they need.....simples. aye, just think. If 91 clubs all went bust, we would be champions of England. we'd also be bottom of the league.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/patrick_barclay/article6083144.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2 just borrow the money they need.....simples.

in truth it comes down to this................................. the reaction of others when they find out which team you follow.

"spin spin spin the wheel of justice, see how fast the bastard turns" at watford toms diner merging into a grease medley at port vale

And one less body at the back where you're...strong? I think having anything other than 4 in defence will just screw up your chances, tbh. It's the players themselves IMO that need to prove their worth. Defence is our best area, our best players are probably Beye, Bassong and Enrique. The reason we concede is down to the pressure on the defence, which results from the **** midfield. obvious answer is to play 4-5-2

some clubs are unique in the atmosphere that surrounds them, an atmosphere that goes beyond the football itself, athletic bilbao,st pauli, not particularly succesful but unique. newcastle united is like this.

benny kristensen. possibly the coolest dude ever to wear stripes.

i've searched all over and can't find the aerial thread. maybe daves deleted it ?

butt was our best midfielder yesterday by quite a long way. on form butt should be in the team ahead of nolan.

well thats me away out to watch the match. good luck lads and lasses (even NE5........he loves me really)

i'll pre-empt NE5 by saying we might do a leeds anyways! doesn't change the fact that pre-ashley we were headed for trouble though, of course if you want to succeed at anything in life, you have to take risks. And football is pretty much as risky as anything going. We know that wages etc are out of control, but its the same for everybody. it's not the same for everybody...who else had 70% of turnover going on wages ? lets say, for example the club were on course, even with all the cost cutting, to make a loss of £30mill for example for the current financial year. do you think we should borrow more on top of that to "compete" ? may feeling is we wouldn't have got anyone to lend us money even if we wanted to take the risk..........like anyone gambling, you can't gamble indefinitly if you are losing. don't bother competing then, like Ashley. You have what you wanted. compete as and when you can....we didn't compete very hard when signignkevin gallacher and such as we were in no position. the financial position of the club has to change before we can hope to compete. will you come clean and admit you'd like the club, even though it may well lose £30mill this financial year,added on to previous losses and poor on field performances (under both regimes), to borrow more to compete with the top 4 ? even you don't think fred would have followed that route. of course I realise this, but don't you realise that making a profit in 3 transfer windows while watching us go down is not "re-building". big profit or smallish change compared the losses the club is making. i'm willing to wager the next financial results will show a £30mill-ish loss and yes i'd rather ashley had spent more of his money on re building. it would have been his money as i doubt we'd have gotr money from elsewhere. he took over a club in the s*** and hasn't improved its position. I'm fed up of going on about this mate. To be successful you have to compete and take risks. Newcastle United are one of the biggest clubs in the country so should behave like one. If they don't, then we have the wrong owners. And if we don't, and especially if we make profits in transfer windows like we have done, we are right back to the old days of being a selling and underachieving club. There is no way back to the top other than competing at the levels it demands. UV made a post ages ago spelling out methods of finding money, which has to be spent well, and you have to be realistic and realise that not everybody appoints the right manager every time. But a good board backs their appointment, and refuses to settle for mediocrity when they get it wrong. Having a board with no ambition, will result in a massive drop in revenue - as happened when we were last run for decades by a board with no ambition, and leaves you further away than ever. We are certainly - now - heading the way of Leeds and Sheff Wed, and a host of other clubs who have found themselves in the old 3rd division, but we were not heading this way under the old board. End of story. You won't change my mind. Because I'm confident that time will show that I am right, and if nothing changes in the foreseeable future, you and others like you will look back on the old board as the highlight and best years of your time supporting the club, because it is certainly mine. so fred was "the wrong owner"as even you say he wouldn't have competed with the top 4 (thats why he brought allardyce in). so where was the money going to come from....club needing to lend to pay its current debts, future revenue stream of sponsorship already gone years in advance. even if we got more credit we wouldn'thave got much.... WHERE WAS THE MONEY GOING TO COME FROM AND THEN DO WE DO THE SAME NEXT YEAR AND THE YEAR AFTER AND AFTER IF WE PERFORMED AS WE HAVE DONE OVER THE PAST FEW SEASONS ? PS time won't tell as we wont know where fred would have took us and my guess is that, for all it's bad now, it would have been worse had he stayed.

Defenders up front, Sam? Major tactician indeed. what about the sort of manager who gives 4 points (and should've been 6) to the worst team in premiership history ?

i'll pre-empt NE5 by saying we might do a leeds anyways! doesn't change the fact that pre-ashley we were headed for trouble though, of course if you want to succeed at anything in life, you have to take risks. And football is pretty much as risky as anything going. We know that wages etc are out of control, but its the same for everybody. it's not the same for everybody...who else had 70% of turnover going on wages ? lets say, for example the club were on course, even with all the cost cutting, to make a loss of £30mill for example for the current financial year. do you think we should borrow more on top of that to "compete" ? may feeling is we wouldn't have got anyone to lend us money even if we wanted to take the risk..........like anyone gambling, you can't gamble indefinitly if you are losing. don't bother competing then, like Ashley. You have what you wanted. compete as and when you can....we didn't compete very hard when signignkevin gallacher and such as we were in no position. the financial position of the club has to change before we can hope to compete. will you come clean and admit you'd like the club, even though it may well lose £30mill this financial year,added on to previous losses and poor on field performances (under both regimes), to borrow more to compete with the top 4 ? even you don't think fred would have followed that route. of course I realise this, but don't you realise that making a profit in 3 transfer windows while watching us go down is not "re-building". big profit or smallish change compared the losses the club is making. i'm willing to wager the next financial results will show a £30mill-ish loss and yes i'd rather ashley had spent more of his money on re building. it would have been his money as i doubt we'd have gotr money from elsewhere. he took over a club in the shit and hasn't improved its position.

i'll pre-empt NE5 by saying we might do a leeds anyways! doesn't change the fact that pre-ashley we were headed for trouble though, of course if you want to succeed at anything in life, you have to take risks. And football is pretty much as risky as anything going. We know that wages etc are out of control, but its the same for everybody. it's not the same for everybody...who else had 70% of turnover going on wages ? lets say, for example the club were on course, even with all the cost cutting, to make a loss of £30mill for example for the current financial year. do you think we should borrow more on top of that to "compete" ? may feeling is we wouldn't have got anyone to lend us money even if we wanted to take the risk..........like anyone gambling, you can't gamble indefinitly if you are losing. don't bother competing then, like Ashley. You have what you wanted. compete as and when you can....we didn't compete very hard when signignkevin gallacher and such as we were in no position. the financial position of the club has to change before we can hope to compete. will you come clean and admit you'd like the club, even though it may well lose £30mill this financial year,added on to previous losses and poor on field performances (under both regimes), to borrow more to compete with the top 4 ? even you don't think fred would have followed that route.

doesn't say he's been sacked but left by mutual consent.

i'll pre-empt NE5 by saying we might do a leeds anyways! doesn't change the fact that pre-ashley we were headed for trouble though, of course if you want to succeed at anything in life, you have to take risks. And football is pretty much as risky as anything going. We know that wages etc are out of control, but its the same for everybody. it's not the same for everybody...who else had 70% of turnover going on wages ? lets say, for example the club were on course, even with all the cost cutting, to make a loss of £30mill for example for the current financial year. do you think we should borrow more on top of that to "compete" ? may feeling is we wouldn't have got anyone to lend us money even if we wanted to take the risk..........like anyone gambling, you can't gamble indefinitly if you are losing.

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/9877/85873946.jpg "i'm stuck!"

thats basically right, from start to finish. Unfortunately, there are still several people who either genuinely and stupidly disagree, and some who are only disagreeing because its me who is saying it. There are also others who still make childish comments like "Shepherds lovechild", which, if it was any other situation than the huge dive we have taken since they sold the club, would be the most laughable thing ever. I still bet the poster who said that, doesn't respond to the comments made by myself and HTL to him a week or so ago. I won't reference him in this post in this context again, but am more than happy to reply to any constructive comments he DOES make in the other threads. I'm so pleased my "Freddie's lovechild" jibe has gotten under your skin. As I've said to you before, you either are Freddie Shepherd or a relation of his because of the way you carry on defending him and refusing to accept that he was on the verge of bankrupting our club. I find it interesting that you haven't refuted my earlier suggestion that Shepherd was following the Peter Ridsdale business model for Premiership clubs, and that Ashley is indeed our saviour. Perhaps you secretly subscribe to this view but can't admit it because of the huge hole you've dug for yourself by your dogged defence of Shepherd. I'm so pleased for you that you think such a load of tosh bothers me. Basically, I have the results in terms of qualifications for europe more than any other team bar 4 to back up my "opinions". What do you have ? I see you are still running away and not responding to the posts by myself and HTL which were a direct response to comments made by yourself ? That makes me right again then ......... unless you rather stupidly think that relegation is better than qualifying for europe more than every other club bar 4, and you increasingly appear to look you honestly believe it Just to make it easier for you, here is the link to the thread that you decided to run away from when you realised you were completely trumped http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,60559.msg1745883.html#msg1745883 And I'm right - AGAIN - when I said you wouldn't respond. yes and champs league is exactly where we were when fred sold up isn't it ?

thats basically right, from start to finish. Unfortunately, there are still several people who either genuinely and stupidly disagree, and some who are only disagreeing because its me who is saying it. There are also others who still make childish comments like "Shepherds lovechild", which, if it was any other situation than the huge dive we have taken since they sold the club, would be the most laughable thing ever. I still bet the poster who said that, doesn't respond to the comments made by myself and HTL to him a week or so ago. I won't reference him in this post in this context again, but am more than happy to reply to any constructive comments he DOES make in the other threads. it's basically right ? does it answer what happens when you spend like that and slide down the table, so you speculate again to the point where 70% of incomings are spent on wages alone. you don't think this needed controlled ? as i've siad in the past, nowt wrong with debt or speculating but if you do it and it doesn't pay off, you'll end up in trouble, very naive,unrealistic and, i believe just being used as a stick to beast the current regime with as the main protagonist on the "borrow to speculate" argument himself thinks the previous regime probably wouldn't have. (not mentioning any names but ne5 reckons allardyce was brought in to run the place on numbers not really competing with the top 4)

like wenger and ferguson.

dave only got that wrong as there are no commas in the concept of the difference between 3 and 6.

They're aren't getting it wrong, they're in the Champions League, we're not. Leeds tried to budget on getting CL football every season and look what happened. ......... and we have tried to balance the books - or make a profit in transfer windows - and look whats happened. don't even think they've attempted to balance the books yet...just tried to stop losing soooo much money. i'll make it easy again for you. just copy and paste what i type below,saves you typing it out. I believe we should just borrow more and more until we achieve success. we are the only club in debt then ? i don't believe i said that. we ceratinly aren't the only club outside the champs league having to change their finances because they can't afford to keep on going the way they were. your dodging it again....you think we should just keep on borrowing regardless until we are succesful don't you ?. (i believe this is a yes/no situation) what you are saying, is you think the club deliberately borrows money to deliberately go bust ? Madras, you have what you wanted mate. The old board were accountable for their mistakes, and paid the price, so you have their replacements. Unfortunately, you can't see that it is like wanting rid of Alan Shearer for missing a couple of penalties and replacing him with Shola Ameobi. More like replacing Sibierski with Smith Still happy with the replacement for the fat b****** ? Was I ever? Turns out two fats don't make a right. aye, qualifying for europe and the champions league more than every club bar 4 was really crap, wasn't it ? ne5 has a point as that is exactly where we were when fred sold up.

They're aren't getting it wrong, they're in the Champions League, we're not. Leeds tried to budget on getting CL football every season and look what happened. ......... and we have tried to balance the books - or make a profit in transfer windows - and look whats happened. don't even think they've attempted to balance the books yet...just tried to stop losing soooo much money. i'll make it easy again for you. just copy and paste what i type below,saves you typing it out. I believe we should just borrow more and more until we achieve success. we are the only club in debt then ? i don't believe i said that. we ceratinly aren't the only club outside the champs league having to change their finances because they can't afford to keep on going the way they were. your dodging it again....you think we should just keep on borrowing regardless until we are succesful don't you ?. (i believe this is a yes/no situation) what you are saying, is you think the club deliberately borrows money to deliberately go bust ? Madras, you have what you wanted mate. The old board were accountable for their mistakes, and paid the price, so you have their replacements. Unfortunately, you can't see that it is like wanting rid of Alan Shearer for missing a couple of penalties and replacing him with Shola Ameobi. nope. what i'm saying is after you've borrowed so much it is dangerous to carry on doing so. it is even more dangerouds to borrow money and give it to people who are very poor at their job. erm exactly how did the previous board pay for their mistakes ? it's not a bit like wanting rid of shearer for missing a couple of penalties. it's more like wanting rid of micky burns after playing poorly for two years. edit...and so you do think we should be borrowing even more regardless of our losses and wage bill of near 70% etc no you aren't. You are saying you want the club to compete at the levels of Bolton, Charlton etc, instead of attempting to challenge with the other big clubs. Well, you have your wish. it's what fred would have wanted if you are to be believed ie the reason for bringing in allardyce. are you saying with our debts and wages and on going losses you want us to borrow more to compete with the top 4 ? yes/no