madras

the facts were there were ticketless fans there, there was a push on the gate to get in,liverpool fans have a long history of doing this throughout europe,the police f***ed upin controlling it. if you want to believe that those ticketless fans made no attempt to gain illegal access to the ground then that is up t you. And those fans outside the ground, they were all ticketless and drunk eh? These weren't fans with tickets who had been held up in the roadworks and rail problems? The police could have had the kickoff delayed for half an hour and let the fans in the ground in an orderly way. The police f***ed up, they opened a gate and they failed to direct the fans into the empty pens. where do i say all ? what i am saying is a sizeable ammount enough to tip the balance between the police opening the gate and not. I am not saying you said anything, I am asking you two questions. And had the police done their job and POLICED outside the ground then there wouldn't have been a need to open the gate. I am sure they had intelligence on Liverpool fans and knew about their behaviour. The police also did not allow Liverpool fans with tickets to other areas of the ground go there, they were directed (and in some cases told in no uncertain terms) to the Leppings Lane end, which made the amount of Liverpool fans at that end even greater. Add to that the delays from the rail and road works for fans with tickets (which the police would know about) and it was inevitable that a large amount of fans would be trying to get into the ground late. By opening the gate and not ensuring that the fans went into the empty pens the police allowed this disaster to happen. Add to that the police not opening the gates at the front of the pens when fans were being crushed to death, not allowing ambulances into the ground to assist the injured, and standing like pricks at a wedding when fans were trying to save each other then its obvious where the blame lies. don't try to wriggle out of it. i've already stated numerous times that i don't think they were ALL ticketless and as for drunk you may aswell have asked if i thought they were all one legged lesbians carrying orchids in havasacks. yes i agree the police should have policed it better and f***ed up massivly all round but you are trying to blame the police for not stopping people doing stuff they shouldn't without casting any thought to those people themselves. (yes the police should take the blame if there is enough evidence to catch a shoplifter ,but they dont,but lets blame the shoplifter aswell). take even a couple of hundred away from the gate and i'll guess the police wouldn't have opened that gate.

man utd can carry their debt due to their turnover and profitability. i refer you to quaysiders post. Their strength in the Asian market was cited as the contributing factor as to why they chewed up the debt levied upon the club - via Glaziers borrowing - so quickly. It wasn't attributed to their domestic standing. Do you believe a mid-table hovering Man United would achieved similar results ie. the debt aspect just mentioned & the Asian market? "contributing factor".....so it's wasn't the only basis, it's almost as if you forget they were making sizeable profits for years before that and guess what.....that makes it easier to finance and obtain credit/debt. and the 2nd bit is plain silly as you are answering your own question.

the facts were there were ticketless fans there, there was a push on the gate to get in,liverpool fans have a long history of doing this throughout europe,the police f***ed upin controlling it. if you want to believe that those ticketless fans made no attempt to gain illegal access to the ground then that is up t you. And those fans outside the ground, they were all ticketless and drunk eh? These weren't fans with tickets who had been held up in the roadworks and rail problems? The police could have had the kickoff delayed for half an hour and let the fans in the ground in an orderly way. The police f***ed up, they opened a gate and they failed to direct the fans into the empty pens. where do i say all ? and i never mentioned drunk. stop trying to make out i'm saying things i don't. what i am saying is a sizeable ammount enough to tip the balance between the police opening the gate and not.

But (damn.. it's catching), the problem started when police opened the central gate to let in a much larger amount of fans, are you saying these fans were all ticketless?, there is a good chance that the majority of these had tickets, and remember at this point there were sections of that end of the ground that were not full and had plenty of space, the problem was that the police did not filter this mass of fans into those areas, they instead let these fans surge through into the area already full. no i'm not saying that bit even if you halve the estimated ticketless number to 1000 it would make a hell of a difference perhaps meaning that the gate may not have needeed to be opened.

man utd can carry their debt due to their turnover and profitability. i refer you to quaysiders post.

the facts were there were ticketless fans there, there was a push on the gate to get in,liverpool fans have a long history of doing this throughout europe,the police fucked upin controlling it. if you want to believe that those ticketless fans made no attempt to gain illegal access to the ground then that is up t you.

Well it's all about how much effect these ticketless fans actually had on an already badly organised & mismanaged event, isn't it? The actions/inactions of the police/footballing authorities both before, during and after the event, along with the vile *reporting* of various media outlets, eclipse's any finger pointing at a small section of fans who may/may-not of contributed to the disaster, in my book. But each to their own. it does eclipse it. no-one is saying any diffefrent,everyone is saying that, but (you just knew that "but" was coming didncha ?) after having witnessed with my own peepers the tactics of liverpool fans to gain illegal access to grounds i have little alternative but to add this into the blame. note....not all liverpool fans but enough to start in motion, or add to, the chain of events. Again, you must be much more knowledgable than Lord Justice Taylor. Why didn't they call you up to head the enquiry! Maybe your conclusions are based not on the facts of the event, but your own biases against a group of fans eh? if you look i've also addressed three points as posed by scouseman which were taking from the report. as i've siad i'll go off what i have witnessed liverpool fans do before. the day i don't question a government enquiry will be the day i stop thinking. take particular note of note 200 as posted by scouseman, between 200 and 2,000 estimated ticketless fans. now if they carried out the tactics i've seen liverpool fans do and if that was what lead to the openeing of the gate ?

Well it's all about how much effect these ticketless fans actually had on an already badly organised & mismanaged event, isn't it? The actions/inactions of the police/footballing authorities both before, during and after the event, along with the vile *reporting* of various media outlets, eclipse's any finger pointing at a small section of fans who may/may-not of contributed to the disaster, in my book. But each to their own. it does eclipse it. no-one is saying any diffefrent,everyone is saying that, but (you just knew that "but" was coming didncha ?) after having witnessed with my own peepers the tactics of liverpool fans to gain illegal access to grounds i have little alternative but to add this into the blame. note....not all liverpool fans but enough to start in motion, or add to, the chain of events.

He did break the transfer record by double with Forest though don't forget. they'd won the title before francis joined. I know that. So it was earned so to speak, but just thought it deserved a mention. What I don't think really came out from that documentary was just how ordinary a collection of individuals that Forest side were, that won the league in 1978. On paper, they didn't look any better than any other promoted side - ie largely consisting of players who hadn't quite made the big time and had sunk to what appeared to be their correct level in the Second Division. Somehow he got them consistently playing at top form for 90 minutes each game, week after week. I can remember that everyone was assuming at first that it was just another case of a promoted side enjoying a honeymoon period in the top division. We were all waiting for them to blow up, but it didn't happen. Half way through the season, they went to Old Trafford and absolutely pissed on Man U 4-0, and it was only then that people realised it was for real. That season they also won the League cup, and went on a record unbeaten run that eventually stretched into next season and 42 games. Really, nothing like that has ever happened before or since. Fergie with his 40+ trophies has to be Number 1, but this was surely the finest managerial achievement in history. All of the players he bought when they got promoted,were known good players,but with something to prove,Kenny Burns' disciplinary problem,Larry Lloyd's suspect attitude with back injuries and Peter Shilton who'd lost his England spot.Great signings all 3. not to mention the "journeyman" peter withe.

maybe this is too obvious but.......... 200.......how would the police know who had tickets and who didn't ? 201 & 202........that explains what happened after the surge and the dynamics of it....not the reasons for the surge.

He did break the transfer record by double with Forest though don't forget. they'd won the title before francis joined.

I don't get what you mean. If you reduce the operating costs you already cover the drop in income, because income is used to pay the operating costs.. Plus when you sell the player you not only reduce costs through cutting wages but you also bring money in through transfer fees (if you get a fee that is). My point is we won't need to sell half the squad to break even if we reduce the costs enough to begin with. I’m not surprised. It confuses the hell out of me. There‘s three ‘separate’ losses in the event of relegation. The fall in TV revenue (£44m) The fall in gate receipts and corporate stuff (£19) The predicated operating loss if we’d stayed up (£7m) Grand total of to break even next season if we go down, £70m. Now forget Owen. His wages have already been paid upfront with the Northern Rock sponsorship money, and having him off the wage bill would have already been factored into the predicted £7m loss for next season. The same goes for Viduka and probably Geremi who is also out of contract at the end of the season. So if we are to break even we have to find £40m (after parachute payments) to break even. <pause for inevitable quibbling> He's creating an efficient business mate. Doesn't really matter what league we are in or anything, he's just creating an efficient business. Many people on here wanted this. So they ought to be happy with it. Good old Mike, and the "plan" he had which his predecessors never had, ever. We might get some good away trips at Blackpool, Bournemouth, Southend and Plymouth in the next few years. who ? as i remember it most just saw that we couldn't just go on racking up more and more debt year on year. as plenty other clubs have come to realise. why bother? I could say the same. Particularly when you - and he - knows perfectly well that my statement that the vast majority of this board disagreed with me is true, and thought that Ashley looking to make profits rather than show ambition on the pitch was the way to go. This is what sets Ashey apart. The performance of the team isn’t the driver for his business. He’s looking to make his money in other ways. It’s a revolutionary approach to running a PL football club of NUFC's size. Is that tongue in cheek? I've been as supportive of Ashleys way of running the club this season, but he has one idea of how to bring success and money into the club and that is to have a structure in place which will uncover 6 or 7 young gems who will either be moulded into a team or moved on. To the side of this is the need to remove large earners with low impact (Viduka et al). This has on the surface all gone pear shaped this season and I can't even begin to defend the current situation but below the first team this is continuing. There is very little evidence that he is looking at making money through Newcastle in any other way respect your opinion mate, but honestly in reality it doesn't work like this in football. Football only works on the "how well are you doing on the field" principle. like valencia ? like portsmouth ? nah, like Liverpool, Arsenal and ironically ourselves when we were also playing in the Champs League and qualifyign regularly for europe. you've nailed it................"when we were". but now we are not and can't pretend we have the same finances they have. if you think those two would be spending like they have if they spent three or more seasons outside the champs league you are deluded. as i've said to you before. They have gone, are you happy with the replacements ? Or do you accept in your haste to replace them, you made a serious error of judgement in appearing to think that anyone would be better ? Would you have sacked Alan Shearer for missing that penalty against Partizan Belgrade, and missing the chance in the 1998 Cup final when Keown stepped on the ball, or not showing more leadership in the 1999 Cup Final after Keane went off and he never got a kick ? To replace him with "anybody", for instance, Shola Ameobi --- who lots of people on here insisted that he would fill the boots of Shearer This is your argument mate. You say they are accountable. They have been made accountable. So what exactly is your beef ? To be fair, you are far from the only one who didn't understand the need to back managers, thinking it would be automatic, rather than a choice, like myself and one or two others pointed out. Hopefully, you all won't make the same mistake again. What amazes me - even now - is the fact that you and others like you, were so naive, you actually thought I/we were trying to "wind you up". I hope now you can see that I was being deadly serious. you know where i think we'd have been had the previous stayed and no, ashley hasn't worked out anywhere near like i'd wanted. would i have sacked shearer for that one thing...of course not, if he turned in consistently poor performances over 3 years i'd look to get shot though. whats my beef ? you know full well that it's that by the end of the shepherd era we were going backwards quickly both on and off the pitch. something you are blind to because of what they done previously. i agree about the need to back managers but i also understandf you can't do it year on year,losing money,racking up debts,failing on the pitch as plenty other clubs are now finding out. (and didn't you say allardyce was brought in to run the place on next to nowt as at bolton). and you are confusing me with someone else as i never said "anyone but fred". ask your brother at the time of polygon etc i was coming out with the careful what you wish for line but as time went on and things got worse and worse the straws i would grab at to get out of it got shorter and shorter. in short i accept we are in the shit, but i also think we'd have been in as much if not more shit had fred stayed.

rumour has it he knew he was ill so took one last pay day away from the hassle of the england job (he was getting a load of grief off the press before he left) He announced his illnesss in 1987,10 years after jumping the England ship,and he died in '89.It was his last pay day because the FA banned him for 10 years. he'd been ill for a long time before he announced it. like i say it's a rumour.

direct question to blufescu....what lead to the police making the decision to open the gate ? no one is saying "the supporters are solely to blame" it was a mixture of circumstances in which a section of the liverpool support have to accept some responsibilty.

different times altogether, think of the likes of malmo reaching the champions league final.

rumour has it he knew he was ill so took one last pay day away from the hassle of the england job (he was getting a load of grief off the press before he left)

everything about the police there is true. they f***ed up big style that day. but anyone with experience of liverpool fans of the time and previous will tell you the same. how would i feel ? i'd feel as mad as hell towards anyone trying to gain entry to the ground without a ticket and the tactics they used to try to get in. You're a police apologist. Of course you are going to get some fans trying to get into the game by any means necessary, many fans of various teams, including us, were doing that kind of thing in those days (and for many years before). The police would of known this and are guilty of f***ing up big style, when they should of been there to help they did f*** all apart from make things worse. i said the police fucked up,i have experience of the police behaviour in those situations. but lots of people with experience of a sizeable section of liverpool fans of that time will say the same as me.

it's what some have been saying for years about manager/player interviews etc

surely that must go for more mature players aswell then. i agree with your 2nd bit. Sort of, though it's a lot easier for supporters to know if were buying quality or dross. It doesn’t change the glaring whole in Ashley's club saving youth policy. It’s not just Europe’s elite that are scouring the world for the best kids. All clubs have scouts, dressing the job up with a fancy title doesn’t make our system superior to anyone else’s. i dont think that was his entire plan but certainly improving that side of things should've feateured highly no matter who was in charge as it had been a shambles for years.

surely that must go for more mature players aswell then. i agree with your 2nd bit.

I don't get what you mean. If you reduce the operating costs you already cover the drop in income, because income is used to pay the operating costs.. Plus when you sell the player you not only reduce costs through cutting wages but you also bring money in through transfer fees (if you get a fee that is). My point is we won't need to sell half the squad to break even if we reduce the costs enough to begin with. I’m not surprised. It confuses the hell out of me. There‘s three ‘separate’ losses in the event of relegation. The fall in TV revenue (£44m) The fall in gate receipts and corporate stuff (£19) The predicated operating loss if we’d stayed up (£7m) Grand total of to break even next season if we go down, £70m. Now forget Owen. His wages have already been paid upfront with the Northern Rock sponsorship money, and having him off the wage bill would have already been factored into the predicted £7m loss for next season. The same goes for Viduka and probably Geremi who is also out of contract at the end of the season. So if we are to break even we have to find £40m (after parachute payments) to break even. <pause for inevitable quibbling> He's creating an efficient business mate. Doesn't really matter what league we are in or anything, he's just creating an efficient business. Many people on here wanted this. So they ought to be happy with it. Good old Mike, and the "plan" he had which his predecessors never had, ever. We might get some good away trips at Blackpool, Bournemouth, Southend and Plymouth in the next few years. who ? as i remember it most just saw that we couldn't just go on racking up more and more debt year on year. as plenty other clubs have come to realise. why bother? I could say the same. Particularly when you - and he - knows perfectly well that my statement that the vast majority of this board disagreed with me is true, and thought that Ashley looking to make profits rather than show ambition on the pitch was the way to go. This is what sets Ashey apart. The performance of the team isn’t the driver for his business. He’s looking to make his money in other ways. It’s a revolutionary approach to running a PL football club of NUFC's size. Is that tongue in cheek? I've been as supportive of Ashleys way of running the club this season, but he has one idea of how to bring success and money into the club and that is to have a structure in place which will uncover 6 or 7 young gems who will either be moulded into a team or moved on. To the side of this is the need to remove large earners with low impact (Viduka et al). This has on the surface all gone pear shaped this season and I can't even begin to defend the current situation but below the first team this is continuing. There is very little evidence that he is looking at making money through Newcastle in any other way respect your opinion mate, but honestly in reality it doesn't work like this in football. Football only works on the "how well are you doing on the field" principle. like valencia ? like portsmouth ? nah, like Liverpool, Arsenal and ironically ourselves when we were also playing in the Champs League and qualifyign regularly for europe. you've nailed it................"when we were". but now we are not and can't pretend we have the same finances they have. if you think those two would be spending like they have if they spent three or more seasons outside the champs league you are deluded.

just google itv player. on the main page there is an a-z option, choose G-H-I and it's the first thing there. any forum nazis out there ok it for me to provide a link to it ?

everything about the police there is true. they fucked up big style that day. but anyone with experience of liverpool fans of the time and previous will tell you the same. how would i feel ? i'd feel as mad as hell towards anyone trying to gain entry to the ground without a ticket and the tactics they used to try to get in.

I don't get what you mean. If you reduce the operating costs you already cover the drop in income, because income is used to pay the operating costs.. Plus when you sell the player you not only reduce costs through cutting wages but you also bring money in through transfer fees (if you get a fee that is). My point is we won't need to sell half the squad to break even if we reduce the costs enough to begin with. I’m not surprised. It confuses the hell out of me. There‘s three ‘separate’ losses in the event of relegation. The fall in TV revenue (£44m) The fall in gate receipts and corporate stuff (£19) The predicated operating loss if we’d stayed up (£7m) Grand total of to break even next season if we go down, £70m. Now forget Owen. His wages have already been paid upfront with the Northern Rock sponsorship money, and having him off the wage bill would have already been factored into the predicted £7m loss for next season. The same goes for Viduka and probably Geremi who is also out of contract at the end of the season. So if we are to break even we have to find £40m (after parachute payments) to break even. <pause for inevitable quibbling> He's creating an efficient business mate. Doesn't really matter what league we are in or anything, he's just creating an efficient business. Many people on here wanted this. So they ought to be happy with it. Good old Mike, and the "plan" he had which his predecessors never had, ever. We might get some good away trips at Blackpool, Bournemouth, Southend and Plymouth in the next few years. who ? as i remember it most just saw that we couldn't just go on racking up more and more debt year on year. as plenty other clubs have come to realise. why bother? I could say the same. Particularly when you - and he - knows perfectly well that my statement that the vast majority of this board disagreed with me is true, and thought that Ashley looking to make profits rather than show ambition on the pitch was the way to go. This is what sets Ashey apart. The performance of the team isn’t the driver for his business. He’s looking to make his money in other ways. It’s a revolutionary approach to running a PL football club of NUFC's size. Is that tongue in cheek? I've been as supportive of Ashleys way of running the club this season, but he has one idea of how to bring success and money into the club and that is to have a structure in place which will uncover 6 or 7 young gems who will either be moulded into a team or moved on. To the side of this is the need to remove large earners with low impact (Viduka et al). This has on the surface all gone pear shaped this season and I can't even begin to defend the current situation but below the first team this is continuing. There is very little evidence that he is looking at making money through Newcastle in any other way respect your opinion mate, but honestly in reality it doesn't work like this in football. Football only works on the "how well are you doing on the field" principle. like valencia ? like portsmouth ?

in fact on the itv player you can watch the half hour special with clough and revie just after clough left leeds as featured in the above documentary. look for "goodbye Mr Clough"