madras

I think he could and would, I also think he'd have a good chance of winning his case. I agree, we knew what we were signing when we did, and we proceeded to play him in our first team AFTER the Liverpool incident. If the club had have taken the moral high ground they would not have used him in the later games in the season. As we have played him and nothing has changed since then other than a judge has passed ruling Newcastle probably wouldn't have a leg to stand on. but he hadn't been found guilty then nor had the finer details of the case been made public. Exactly - innocent until proven guilty. Those who accuse the fans who applauded Barton of hypocrisy should remember this. He was still legally innocent at the time and for all anyone knew about the case he might have been in line for a fine, doing some community service or even been acquitted. When the facts became known I don't mind admitting my attitude changed. I find it hard to believe he has a defence if the club want to rip up his contract for the Liverpool incident. If they then want to offer him a new one at half the wages its up to him whether he takes it or not. It doesn't strike me as a great idea by the club though because if he does end up accepting it's unlikely to do much for his motivation. The Dabo case is potentially more serious and he could get sent down for even longer. But as someone above said it was a known risk when he signed so unless something was specifically written into the contract I can't see how the club could claim it to be a breach of contract. but his present incarceration clearly is a breach of contract. I would have thought so. I don't know what the contract says but, as I said, I find it hard to believe that getting imprisoned doesn't give the club the right to rip up the contract. Trouble is it would mean writing off an asset valued at several million and financial considerations are never ignored in any business let alone a football club. So the club are trying to keep him on the books but use the imprisonment as a lever to get his cost of employment down. Bit of a mess really... the mutu case (he has to pay chelsea for their losses on him) could be worth a look to see if it could be used here. It's probably beeing looked at by the clubs legal people. But as someone above said Mutu's actions put himself out of action for a whole season whereas Barton's Mcdonaldgate incident could see him miss only a few matches. surely it's the principal rather than the timescale ?

I think he could and would, I also think he'd have a good chance of winning his case. I agree, we knew what we were signing when we did, and we proceeded to play him in our first team AFTER the Liverpool incident. If the club had have taken the moral high ground they would not have used him in the later games in the season. As we have played him and nothing has changed since then other than a judge has passed ruling Newcastle probably wouldn't have a leg to stand on. but he hadn't been found guilty then nor had the finer details of the case been made public. Exactly - innocent until proven guilty. Those who accuse the fans who applauded Barton of hypocrisy should remember this. He was still legally innocent at the time and for all anyone knew about the case he might have been in line for a fine, doing some community service or even been acquitted. When the facts became known I don't mind admitting my attitude changed. I find it hard to believe he has a defence if the club want to rip up his contract for the Liverpool incident. If they then want to offer him a new one at half the wages its up to him whether he takes it or not. It doesn't strike me as a great idea by the club though because if he does end up accepting it's unlikely to do much for his motivation. The Dabo case is potentially more serious and he could get sent down for even longer. But as someone above said it was a known risk when he signed so unless something was specifically written into the contract I can't see how the club could claim it to be a breach of contract. but his present incarceration clearly is a breach of contract. I would have thought so. I don't know what the contract says but, as I said, I find it hard to believe that getting imprisoned doesn't give the club the right to rip up the contract. Trouble is it would mean writing off an asset valued at several million and financial considerations are never ignored in any business let alone a football club. So the club are trying to keep him on the books but use the imprisonment as a lever to get his cost of employment down. Bit of a mess really... the mutu case (he has to pay chelsea for their losses on him) could be worth a look to see if it could be used here.

I think he could and would, I also think he'd have a good chance of winning his case. I agree, we knew what we were signing when we did, and we proceeded to play him in our first team AFTER the Liverpool incident. If the club had have taken the moral high ground they would not have used him in the later games in the season. As we have played him and nothing has changed since then other than a judge has passed ruling Newcastle probably wouldn't have a leg to stand on. but he hadn't been found guilty then nor had the finer details of the case been made public. Exactly - innocent until proven guilty. Those who accuse the fans who applauded Barton of hypocrisy should remember this. He was still legally innocent at the time and for all anyone knew about the case he might have been in line for a fine, doing some community service or even been acquitted. When the facts became known I don't mind admitting my attitude changed. I find it hard to believe he has a defence if the club want to rip up his contract for the Liverpool incident. If they then want to offer him a new one at half the wages its up to him whether he takes it or not. It doesn't strike me as a great idea by the club though because if he does end up accepting it's unlikely to do much for his motivation. The Dabo case is potentially more serious and he could get sent down for even longer. But as someone above said it was a known risk when he signed so unless something was specifically written into the contract I can't see how the club could claim it to be a breach of contract. but his present incarceration clearly is a breach of contract.

I think he could and would, I also think he'd have a good chance of winning his case. I agree, we knew what we were signing when we did, and we proceeded to play him in our first team AFTER the Liverpool incident. If the club had have taken the moral high ground they would not have used him in the later games in the season. As we have played him and nothing has changed since then other than a judge has passed ruling Newcastle probably wouldn't have a leg to stand on. that is one of the funniest lines ever on here. i know if i was sent to prison i'd get sacked from my job as i'm unable to fulfill my side of the contract. i know because it has happened (but not to me) and even the unions solicitors refused to try and keep him his job.

We'll just have to wait and see. i suppose so. the problem for the club is that they may well have insured against him getting put away fro the "dabo" incident. but this isn't the case now and have the choice of keeping him or taking a £5.8mill(?) loss.

The Dabo incident wasn't a one off, he was always likely to re-offend, that would probably be his defence. but it's not a defence

I think he could and would, I also think he'd have a good chance of winning his case. how ? he can not fulfill his side of the contract through his own doing. bizzarely had he been put away for the dabo incident,because that was before he signed for us and we knew the case was imminent,he may have had a case. as it it i dont see what case he has.

then again he couldn't complain about getting sacked either

aye. i like the idea of a traditional away kit at least in substance even if the style changes a bit (like the home strip)

But there is no risk in us not having sold them, who needs a guarantee on something 99% sure? banks and financial institutions also i think we may see more attendances starting with the figure "4" than we have for a while.

yellow top,sky blue shorts,black and white striped trim on collar and cuffs (the way croatia do the checks on the away strip) please.

Nearly everyone thought Allardyce was just what we needed at the time (and in the circumstances before the takeover) tbf. Me included, and I've admitted so a number of times. Same here. 85% of us did according to that thread. 75% of us thought appointing Roeder after he had got us into Europe was the right decision. My point isn´t that these have turned out to be great appointments, just that they weren´t `wrong` when they happened, they just turned out to be.. In my opinion with the way Shepherd was willing to spend on players more than our competition at the time he couldn´t have done much more than he did. Oh, and I was referring to Ozzie and NE5´s discussion above.. i wonder what would happen if you contrasted those figures with the question "would you like souness/roeder as the manager "before they actually got their jobs or could those figure reflect fans backing the new manager...regardless of who (or how bad) he is ?

Agree with that. you'd also have agreed with it this time last season ?

mine came this morning....................................and i'm 50-50 on wether to renew or not.

what do you think when brown plays right back or o'shea on the left ? they arent good players there. i agree we do need defensive cover but not in the chelsea style of 2 starters in each position

You should take your own advice and consider euthanasia bit harsh like

immature. If you aren't up for a mature discussion, its time you went to bed. And you aren't, are you ? if you arent up to following the spirit of the thread then you should go to bed

Of course not, but if the majority of kids failed their GCSEs then the parents/LEA would start to think that there was something wrong with the school. I only mentioned that he supports Celtic so that people wouldn't automatically assume that it was a 'rival' fan, it's not really relevant who he supports, but the fact that he views Newcastle in this light is a bit worrying. Yes, but you can buy the right players and you can buy the wrong players, and the personnel at the club affect the club's reputation on the outside. Since 2004 we have had more bad buys than good buys and this has given us a bad reputation. This is no dig at anyone in particular, but our transfer policy in recent years has been unsuccessful and this is reflected in the league tables. "unsuccessful" in terms of judgement, but not necessarily policy. There is a difference Aye, but when that policy is consistently underperforming, when does it become unsound? how much underperformed is what you would call "underperformed" Be realistic. Personally I would say qualifying pretty regularly for europe and the Champs League isn't so bad, especially as others on this message board are now saying that we aren't any bigger or better than clubs such as Villa, Spurs, Leeds etc. Doesn't that mean we have performed quite well as we've achieved higher league positions and played in europe more than these teams, with presumably good or better directors than what we had ? regularly but not he recent past eh ?

Its fuking depressing but spot on though. The squad we've got is the weakest i've seen in a long time. hang on....even when you look at man utd they use centre halves as cover for full backs. like wes brown and o'shea that many deem arent good enough for us.

i would abuse your mam if she wasnt your dad

his sons geordie by birth (i think)

wearing old man style sandals

saw a keef-a-like at south gosforth metro today. clean shavenish though.

True, like. What do you think of this one, Yorkie? http://img79.imageshack.us/img79/1540/ponyhirtnm9.jpg delete that fucker straight away...if the girls see it i'll never hear the last. (you had a shave recently keef ?)

I think its embarrassing. I also think that if Shepherd had did it he would have been slaughtered. Such is the way though. Not that I'm embarrassed personally. In fact I'm more embarrassed by the blatant hypocrisy if anything. What hypocrisy? Shepherd never did anything like that in order to make a compareable reaction. Newcastle United supporters like a chairman who presides over a club that imposes wage restrictions, loses its best players and lose out on major transfer dealings, but they think he's a great bloke because he does the conga ? And you wonder why people laugh ? Supporters of the successful clubs will be pissing themselves laughing at such crap and rightly so. Of all the people that found the incident funny, i bet there was a selection of both those that thought he did a good job, and those that thought he did a bad job. They were laughing at the situation tbh; people would have to be very short-sighted if the hilarity of the conga in Quinn's face is an equal measure of his performance at the club. I'm sorry mate, but I honestly don't really care about this. I think its completely irrelevant to anything. It certainly doesn't mean someone is a good chairman, and I'm sure if you and the people on here who actually have a brain are honest with themselves, you will agree. I'll judge Chris Mort on the players we didn't sign and the players we wanted to sign but were beaten to by an inferior club if thats alright. so you'll judge the previous board on the players they went after and didn't get ? I'll judge them on the players they did get that qualified for europe and the Champions League massively more than any other period in the clubs history. Unless you care to dispute this ? i never have and you know that....however there weren't any during the souness or roeder years and i don't think allardyce would have either. dare i suggest that we were going backwards for 3 years on and off the pitch. unless you care to dispute this ? Owen, Martins........ signed during the reigns of these managers. For big fees too, fancy that. We only qualified for europe once in 3 years, shocking. You are forgetting we finished 7th under Roeder, a position that we bettered once during the whole of the 1960's, 70's and 80's. You have high expectations ? Who raised them for you then ? What do mean about going backwards "off the pitch" ? Do you think they should have expanded the stadium again or something ? Funny that like. mackems.gif Can I file you in the KBJ corner ? you don't think we were going backwards on the pitch ? off the pitch i meant racking up debts that the on pitch side couldn't sustain. KBJ ? you know i'm not. my opinion is we werent going to qualify for europe any time soon,appeared to be getting worse and the debts were getting bigger......not a good situatiion. I just think that - as I always said - there was nothing wrong that a good manager wouldn't put right. And its unrealistic to expect to make good choices every time. The main thing is the bricks were in place ie a board prepared to compete with the big boys and understanding this. It doesn't matter what sort of perceived "professional" setup you have behind the scenes, if the board don't have the ambition and aren't prepared to reach for the top prizes and the top other clubs, you will never join them. Because football has moved into a new era of mega rich owners, NUFC too have to keep pace with the other clubs and if the Halls and Shepherd couldn't match them then someone better is always welcome. So long as they are better, but replacing directors who have done well for the club with better ones was never going to be so automatic and easy as people thought. Which is all I've ever said. But I'm far from convinced about Ashley. Just right now, they [ie he and his appointed chairman]have shown themselves to be naive and lacking in this ambition. what bricks ? 3 very poor managerial choices off the belt,worsening on the field and rising debts ? no one denies the euro qualifications but they were fast disappearing over the horizon by 2007 and in no matter what field you are in if you preside over 3 years of worsening results that could well be attributable to your decisions your position will be in question regardless of your previous history. Like I said, the debt has been explained. The trophy winners all have debts - attributable to stadium expansions - that hasn't stopped them winning things, Liverpool are shockingly putting their entire expectation of winning trophies in jeapordy by building a new stadium. Surely they realise it will send them backwards As I also said, there was nothing wrong that the right manager wouldn't have put right. Trouble is, all those other pesky clubs have money to burn/debts [or both somehow], and are also looking for him too. I've nowt against the Halls and Shepherd standing aside for someone better [which I've said many times and not just in my last post] my problem with Ashley and Mort is so far they haven't been better and at times have been clueless. The 2 managers have both indicated this. Anyway. I'm off. Got a long day today. and as i've pointed out on numerous occasions the level of debt it is safe to carry is dependent on turnover. they have much larger turnover so can afford larger debt...think of a mortgage...the more you earn the bigger one you can get. oh and that bit about "nothing wrong that the right manager wouldn't have put right" ......how many goes does he get at picking the right one ? he seemed to always pick the wrong ones.