madras

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing" the current top 4 are all debt free though aren't they. been here and already explained it in a straight forward way. no dodging etc. i'll explain in a way a 5yr old could understand if you want . don't bother madras. Even a 5 year old could tell you that if you make profits in transfer windows what will happen to you. and the same 5yr old would understand that you cant borrow for ever if people don't think you'll be able to pay it back. please tell us all how the current top 4, are, eerrr, the top 4, particularly Liverpool and Arsenal. Oooooh easy ones first. goody. through not spending 70% of turnover on wages so more money is left for transfers and finacing loans which makes it a lot better when asking banks etc for loans. through not appointing the likes of souness and roeder (well liverpool did and look how long it took them to recover) through building when you are doing well instead of getting in a free transfer when in touching distance of the champs league instead of spunking 50mill in a failed attempt to catch up. through paying some attention to the club instead of just the first team. rather surprisingly they haven't always been the top 4. We will see what Arsenal do when Wenger calls it a day. They are in debt though, aren't they ? No point telling me about Souness, it was numerous others who supported him, and agreed with all of his signings and sales. i've pointed out lots and lots and lots of times that i'm not against the club having debt. do pay attention. re souness.....does that mean you think fred got it wrong in allowing souness to do those things ? (straight answers only please) I have said on numerous occasions the Halls and Shepherd got it wrong with Souness, unlike many others who supported his actions right to the end. But that doesn't make the Halls and Shepherd bad owners and anybody else "better". i never said they were bad owners,no matter how much you attempt to make out thats what i think. i do however think they were going backwards in 2007,had been for 3 or 4 years and didn't look like turning it round . speculative. We had good owners, now we have bad owners we had to borrow to get by day to day and i personally believe we'd have got relegated with allardyce. neither owners are good or bad. one lot gambled more than the other, fine when the gambles pay off and they were lucky to get out before the price had to be paid.

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing" the current top 4 are all debt free though aren't they. been here and already explained it in a straight forward way. no dodging etc. i'll explain in a way a 5yr old could understand if you want . don't bother madras. Even a 5 year old could tell you that if you make profits in transfer windows what will happen to you. and the same 5yr old would understand that you cant borrow for ever if people don't think you'll be able to pay it back. please tell us all how the current top 4, are, eerrr, the top 4, particularly Liverpool and Arsenal. Oooooh easy ones first. goody. through not spending 70% of turnover on wages so more money is left for transfers and finacing loans which makes it a lot better when asking banks etc for loans. through not appointing the likes of souness and roeder (well liverpool did and look how long it took them to recover) through building when you are doing well instead of getting in a free transfer when in touching distance of the champs league instead of spunking 50mill in a failed attempt to catch up. through paying some attention to the club instead of just the first team. rather surprisingly they haven't always been the top 4. We will see what Arsenal do when Wenger calls it a day. They are in debt though, aren't they ? No point telling me about Souness, it was numerous others who supported him, and agreed with all of his signings and sales. i've pointed out lots and lots and lots of times that i'm not against the club having debt. do pay attention. re souness.....does that mean you think fred got it wrong in allowing souness to do those things ? (straight answers only please) I have said on numerous occasions the Halls and Shepherd got it wrong with Souness, unlike many others who supported his actions right to the end. But that doesn't make the Halls and Shepherd bad owners and anybody else "better". i never said they were bad owners,no matter how much you attempt to make out thats what i think. i do however think they were going backwards in 2007,had been for 3 or 4 years and didn't look like turning it round.

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing" the current top 4 are all debt free though aren't they. been here and already explained it in a straight forward way. no dodging etc. i'll explain in a way a 5yr old could understand if you want . don't bother madras. Even a 5 year old could tell you that if you make profits in transfer windows what will happen to you. and the same 5yr old would understand that you cant borrow for ever if people don't think you'll be able to pay it back. please tell us all how the current top 4, are, eerrr, the top 4, particularly Liverpool and Arsenal. Oooooh easy ones first. goody. through not spending 70% of turnover on wages so more money is left for transfers and finacing loans which makes it a lot better when asking banks etc for loans. through not appointing the likes of souness and roeder (well liverpool did and look how long it took them to recover) through building when you are doing well instead of getting in a free transfer when in touching distance of the champs league instead of spunking 50mill in a failed attempt to catch up. through paying some attention to the club instead of just the first team. rather surprisingly they haven't always been the top 4. We will see what Arsenal do when Wenger calls it a day. They are in debt though, aren't they ? No point telling me about Souness, it was numerous others who supported him, and agreed with all of his signings and sales. i've pointed out lots and lots and lots of times that i'm not against the club having debt. do pay attention. re souness.....does that mean you think fred got it wrong in allowing souness to do those things ? (straight answers only please)

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing" the current top 4 are all debt free though aren't they. been here and already explained it in a straight forward way. no dodging etc. i'll explain in a way a 5yr old could understand if you want . don't bother madras. Even a 5 year old could tell you that if you make profits in transfer windows what will happen to you. and the same 5yr old would understand that you cant borrow for ever if people don't think you'll be able to pay it back. please tell us all how the current top 4, are, eerrr, the top 4, particularly Liverpool and Arsenal. Oooooh easy ones first. goody. through not spending 70% of turnover on wages so more money is left for transfers and finacing loans which makes it a lot better when asking banks etc for loans. through not appointing the likes of souness and roeder (well liverpool did and look how long it took them to recover) through building when you are doing well instead of getting in a free transfer when in touching distance of the champs league instead of spunking 50mill in a failed attempt to catch up. through paying some attention to the club instead of just the first team.

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing" the current top 4 are all debt free though aren't they. been here and already explained it in a straight forward way. no dodging etc. i'll explain in a way a 5yr old could understand if you want . don't bother madras. Even a 5 year old could tell you that if you make profits in transfer windows what will happen to you. and the same 5yr old would understand that you cant borrow for ever if people don't think you'll be able to pay it back.

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing" the current top 4 are all debt free though aren't they. been here and already explained it in a straight forward way. no dodging etc. i'll explain in a way a 5yr old could understand if you want .

what exactly do you want to "argue" about ? Our league positions ? The fact that they transformed a club with one foot in the 3rd division and going bust into one worth between 100m - 200m quid and qualified for europe more than everybody but 4 other clubs ? Explain. I'm absolutely fascinated here........ alternativly freds last 10 years gave 6 below half way finishes, 2 of those euro qualifications came via cup runners ups like cardiff and millwall. over freds last 3 years both everton and spurs done better and looked like doing better in the future. the garden wasn't rosy,he'd done well previously but the gambles didn't pay off and he was in danger of losing the house. stop arguing and cherry picking man. Even "freds" last 10 finishes are higher than where Ashley is going to leave us and where the club was before the Halls and Shepherd found us and how their predecessors did. And they understood HOW to be successful. What's your problem with this ? cherry picking ? :mackems: stop arguing....translation......"NE5 won't answer direct questions about the way we were going or how we were going to continue the way he wants which he even admits fred wasn't going to do" I'm showing you a board who understood how a big club with ambition to succeed should behave. You don't get it. You have insisted they are "accountable" for errors, despite overall showing themselves to be a good board. They have been held "accountable". The club is now being run "like a business", with a "plan". Be happy. I'm tired of this. You have got what you wanted. please link to where this is what i wanted. i can link you to where anyone with sense legged it when they saw the accounts. tell me back in 2007 when the previous board brought in allardyce were they going to invest the way you want or behave the way you said ie run it on a shoestring ? I'm tired of this. At least I can admit that I was wrong about Allardyce, and I've explained what I think the thought process was behind appointing him. what have i been wrong about ?

indeed. Have you looked at the league table recently ? Never mind though, its all a good business plan. i see so where was your congrats last season for finishing higher than the previous ? why didn't you whinge at the drop form 3rd to bottom half ? hypocrite.

what exactly do you want to "argue" about ? Our league positions ? The fact that they transformed a club with one foot in the 3rd division and going bust into one worth between 100m - 200m quid and qualified for europe more than everybody but 4 other clubs ? Explain. I'm absolutely fascinated here........ alternativly freds last 10 years gave 6 below half way finishes, 2 of those euro qualifications came via cup runners ups like cardiff and millwall. over freds last 3 years both everton and spurs done better and looked like doing better in the future. the garden wasn't rosy,he'd done well previously but the gambles didn't pay off and he was in danger of losing the house. stop arguing and cherry picking man. Even "freds" last 10 finishes are higher than where Ashley is going to leave us and where the club was before the Halls and Shepherd found us and how their predecessors did. And they understood HOW to be successful. What's your problem with this ? cherry picking ? :mackems: stop arguing....translation......"NE5 won't answer direct questions about the way we were going or how we were going to continue the way he wants which he even admits fred wasn't going to do" I'm showing you a board who understood how a big club with ambition to succeed should behave. You don't get it. You have insisted they are "accountable" for errors, despite overall showing themselves to be a good board. They have been held "accountable". The club is now being run "like a business", with a "plan". Be happy. I'm tired of this. You have got what you wanted. please link to where this is what i wanted. i can link you to where anyone with sense legged it when they saw the accounts. tell me back in 2007 when the previous board brought in allardyce were they going to invest the way you want or behave the way you said ie run it on a shoestring ?

what exactly do you want to "argue" about ? Our league positions ? The fact that they transformed a club with one foot in the 3rd division and going bust into one worth between 100m - 200m quid and qualified for europe more than everybody but 4 other clubs ? Explain. I'm absolutely fascinated here........ alternativly freds last 10 years gave 6 below half way finishes, 2 of those euro qualifications came via cup runners ups like cardiff and millwall. over freds last 3 years both everton and spurs done better and looked like doing better in the future. the garden wasn't rosy,he'd done well previously but the gambles didn't pay off and he was in danger of losing the house. stop arguing and cherry picking man. Even "freds" last 10 finishes are higher than where Ashley is going to leave us and where the club was before the Halls and Shepherd found us and how their predecessors did. And they understood HOW to be successful. What's your problem with this ? cherry picking ? :mackems: stop arguing....translation......"NE5 won't answer direct questions about the way we were going or how we were going to continue the way he wants which he even admits fred wasn't going to do"

no, you're wrong. Pretty much the majority of people insisted it should be run like a "business" rather than a football club and we would be better off for it. Which always astounded me, tbh more businesslike as in "look at whats happened to other clubs that thought they could just keep on borrowing"

what exactly do you want to "argue" about ? Our league positions ? The fact that they transformed a club with one foot in the 3rd division and going bust into one worth between 100m - 200m quid and qualified for europe more than everybody but 4 other clubs ? Explain. I'm absolutely fascinated here........ alternativly freds last 10 years gave 6 below half way finishes, 2 of those euro qualifications came via cup runners ups like cardiff and millwall. over freds last 3 years both everton and spurs done better and looked like doing better in the future. the garden wasn't rosy,he'd done well previously but the gambles didn't pay off and he was in danger of losing the house.

Aye Diamond in Ponteland, they were both watching the game so it's probably true. I'm sure i've heard Shearer say he likes Souness on an interview before aswell. surely goes without saying, Souness and Shearer would laud each other in the press like a husband and wife's oral sex agreement doesn't it just mean everyone on the summariser couch circuit is complimentary about each other ?

in the pro game does anyone say they don't like someone ?

i agree, i'm hoping for a man utd/barce final.

hopes.......barce wins reckons...... chelsea on pens.

hasn't really been proved by othere euro teams waltzing through them though. maybe they emphasise attacking that bit more and it's worked so far. certainly has aestheticaly. how many times in recent years have Madrid been found seriously wanting defensively in the champs league? Their capitaulation at Anfield says it all as did liverpools at home to chelsea ?

hasn't really been proved by othere euro teams waltzing through them though. maybe they emphasise attacking that bit more and it's worked so far. certainly has aestheticaly.

OOOoooo are you a Milburn(band) fan? Opposed to Jackie, the 17 made me think the band? Unless Jackie wore a number 17 shirt? fairly sure if the resi girl keeps looking she'll find a tommy gibb link

Or that in a season where Derby got 11 points they picked up 4 from you? (Although BS Allardyce can only be partially accountable for 3 of them) He was still manager when they drew at SJP. drew at SJP and should have won.

very neatly sums up where we are and why.

Religion and science aren't arguing anymore. Religion's mam came out and told them to pack it in, Science's mam heard her, came out and said Religion was a stuck up little git and had been picking on Science for ages now, Religion's mam called Science's mam a trollop and they are now having a screaming match on the front green. Meanwhile Religion and Science are away for a kickabout and leaving them to it. aye but it's scientology they are kicking about,weird little fucker that he is.

barton will probably start so we should have cutting edge aswell and also a blunt instrument.

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ? Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ? Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ? that decision wasn't mandiarses, just like you say kinnear wasn't your decision (in an attempt to deflect from the "managers are just a lottery" thing) as you know there are no set criteria beyond getting what you think is the best available,same goes for players. my question is what is his criteria for appointing managers, other than using hindsight - especially when he has agreed with and backed at least 3 of the 6 to succeed, after Keegan, (ie Allardyce, Robson and Souness) on this very message board. Basic stuff this. out of curiosity what is your criteria for appointing managers ?.....would souness and roeder have past that criteria ? my criteria ? Well, if I agree and back an appointment, I don't criticise it later. Thats what mandiarse does. I would have backed, at the time, Dalglish, Robson and Allardyce myself, and saw merit in Gullit and Roeder, for different reasons. That means I can't criticise the board for appointing these managers when I saw some reasoning and merit in them. Hindsight is where you criticise the board for only "getting 1 right" when you backed at least 3 of them at the time, and thats before he finds the balls to admit he backed a manager who had won 4 titles with 2 different clubs, a couple of FA Cups, and 3 manager of the year awards. See one of the quotes in my sig for his remarkable foresight, no wonder he applies hindsight instead. This isn't rocket science. sure you can criticise the board if you admit you were wrong aswell. the difference is,as you have pointed out, you didn't make those decisions. thats what it all comes down to,admitting mistakes. if i'd been manager of nufc i'd have been sacked years ago, does it mean i can't put in my two'penneth ? or i shouldn't say "they got it wrong" just because it means i got it wrong also ? just admit it, fred was getting an awful lot wrong,regardless of who agreed with him and who didn't,from managers to finances. edit......the other difference is that fred paid himself a salary of best part of half a mill a year so there ought to more reason to say he got it wrong as opposed to a fan who opinion counts for sod all realistically.

I knew that was coming. You're just being contrary again. So did Gullit need to strip Lee of his squad number and make him play with the bairns? Did he f***. I knew that was coming. You're just being contrary again. So did Gullit need to strip Lee of his squad number and make him play with the bairns? Did he f***. that has nowt to do with wether he should have been in the starting 11 though.