madras

un-keegan like if it is. he's more the "you were shit...explain yourself" variety

was linked with us for about as long as ronnie glavin was.

my guess (like all the others) is keegan just showing his authority to the outside world over the playing staff.

i wouldn't actually be too surprised or too bothered. originally i only wanted him in as an interim manager as i'm still not too sure he wants it all that much (see my keegan isn't keegan and interim manager threads). yes i'd rather keegan was given £200mill in the summer but it's unlikely. the problem is who is THE man to create arsenal MK II.

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ...... Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about. As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have. It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know. I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too. Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players. Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment. Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his budget. Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams. Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can. Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument. EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players. fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument. Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ? the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic. maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now. maybe, if it was spent well, but I hope you aren't criticising the club for spending money they don't have when you say that. theres a difference between spending money you don't have a being reckless Well I think buying Woodgate in January before anyone else knew he was available, ahead of the summer, was pretty smart going myself. yes it was........but not strengthening the midfield (bowyer) or forward line when in a position of strength on the field and financially was silly. after that they got very reckiless when not in a position to do so. you mean the manager got reckless ? and they backed their man ? Should have sacked him mind, but they backed their man, he was their choice, not mine or yours, but they backed their man. Shouldn't have appointed him. Back him or sack him. Thats the question. Every club faces it with every manager. If you want to talk about the debt, well very few clubs don't have debts, and when its due to a stadium expansion that you need, its a no brainer. Ask Arsenal and Liverpool THEY backed their man with money that wasn't THEIRS. I'm not saying the club might have went to the wall put the future of the club was being put in doubt (limited credit for the future) because of the position they were putting us in. their managerial appointments were far for the club worse than than giving a good manager a moderate ammount of cash. who's money was it if it wasn't theirs ? the banks. how much of their own cash did they risk/put in ? (how much did they take out for that matter ? why is it all you can say is "they backed the manager" as if this was the be all and end all and gloss over the horrendous appointments they made latterly as manager ? not once, not twice but three of the fuckers ?

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ...... Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about. As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have. It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know. I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too. Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players. Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment. Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his budget. Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams. Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can. Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument. EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players. fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument. Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ? the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic. maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now. maybe, if it was spent well, but I hope you aren't criticising the club for spending money they don't have when you say that. theres a difference between spending money you don't have a being reckless Well I think buying Woodgate in January before anyone else knew he was available, ahead of the summer, was pretty smart going myself. yes it was........but not strengthening the midfield (bowyer) or forward line when in a position of strength on the field and financially was silly. after that they got very reckiless when not in a position to do so. you mean the manager got reckless ? and they backed their man ? Should have sacked him mind, but they backed their man, he was their choice, not mine or yours, but they backed their man. Shouldn't have appointed him. Back him or sack him. Thats the question. Every club faces it with every manager. If you want to talk about the debt, well very few clubs don't have debts, and when its due to a stadium expansion that you need, its a no brainer. Ask Arsenal and Liverpool THEY backed their man with money that wasn't THEIRS. I'm not saying the club might have went to the wall put the future of the club was being put in doubt (limited credit for the future) because of the position they were putting us in. their managerial appointments were far for the club worse than than giving a good manager a moderate ammount of cash.

Absolutely!, agree with that. harper should stay in on form. however the "dominating his box" thing is one of those phrases people trot out that doesn't actually mean anything when you watch what actually happens.

without using that we done some in the pub to match our personalities or looks i was antagonista......we also had a kwikee martinez,militanta and a morbido

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ...... Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about. As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have. It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know. I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too. Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players. Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment. Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his budget. Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams. Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can. Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument. EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players. fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument. Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ? the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic. maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now. maybe, if it was spent well, but I hope you aren't criticising the club for spending money they don't have when you say that. theres a difference between spending money you don't have a being reckless Well I think buying Woodgate in January before anyone else knew he was available, ahead of the summer, was pretty smart going myself. yes it was........but not strengthening the midfield (bowyer) or forward line when in a position of strength on the field and financially was silly. after that they got very reckiless when not in a position to do so.

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ...... Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about. As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have. It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know. I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too. Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players. Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment. Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his budget. Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams. Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can. Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument. EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players. fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument. Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ? the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic. maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now. maybe, if it was spent well, but I hope you aren't criticising the club for spending money they don't have when you say that. theres a difference between spending money you don't have a being reckless

not bad, some of what I said doesn't really look like I wanted.......look at it as meaning that even I can accept that every player can't cost 20m quid, and take it also as meaning that of course I'm aware that sometimes you find a gem for less money ...... Its the general attitude of the club, is what I'm talking about. As said in the other post, when players become available, players so good that you have to have, then you simply MUST try and get the money and get them. For a club like Newcastle, this is quite simply not a problem or shouldn't be a problem. The club is too big to be run on over stringent prudency, but it bothers me that the new board appear to be making noises that suggest this is what they are going to do. You should ALWAYS be looking at buying players for any position, better than what you have. It is what has led to the events of this week, and Keegan should know. I've never denied that Shepherd may have been a c*** sometimes, but basically I'm not bothered by off the field things, up to a point. I just don't care. I don't want a nice man running the club who doesn't have any ambition for it, I saw that for 30 years, many other clubs still have it. I just don't want it. I just want a board who back its manager and aim for real success, and I don't care who they are, what their backround is, or what they do, so long as they deliver this. This is what the successful clubs do. Chelsea fans don't care where Abramovic makes his money, ManU fans didn't care about Edwards and for the moment may not like the Glaziers but aren't making any noises because they are winning trophies too. Thanks for calling me a miserable old bugger ......... I'm neither, you young whippersnapper you .... Good post. I actually agree to some extent with alot of sentiment thats it that post but some of it regarding financial prudency is a bit unfair - esepcially as we have had substantials bits made for anumber of players. Well, if we bought a centre forward with more mobility than Viduka, say Ashton - a midfield player such as Modric would have been, and a centre back like Richard Dunne to go alongside Taylor and Faye and fight for places and give us strength in depth, I'd be fairly pleased with that for the moment. Then David Bentley came along and the club said he had spent his budget. Well, I would be unhappy with this. This is what I mean. Newcastle are too big to exercise such prudency. The spend would be worth it, and I'd be be dismayed to miss out on such a player and such an opportunity. This the difference between a truly ambitious club and a lesser one. Especially considering the ground we want to make up on the top teams. Also consider that a "sell to buy" policy is inappropriate in such circumstances too.I can accept that in this event, one or two players would go ie Milner and/or Duff if he doesn't come good, but you sort the books out later and get the player while you can. Again thats a fair point but id actually be more unhappy if it was the other way round and we missed out on Dunne, Ashton and Modric and got just Bentley instead. This is the crux of my argument. EDIT: well how do you sort the books out later if what you do doesnt lead to success and financial benefits - at which point would we call it time on our expenditure and look to sell or lower wages, that seems a bit contradictory. Especially as that is exactly the situation we were in when Ashley came in. There needs to be a compromise somehwere and for me the best way to do it is to stick to a given budget - as much as id hate to miss out on Bentley if he were to come available but we had already spent our lot on him then thats tough - theres is always next season adn there are always other players. fair enough, but essentially the truly successful clubs that win trophies would operate like that and buy Bentley. Thats my argument. Wenger is the one manager that has been able to operate differently but now that he is losing his best players, even he may come to the conclusion that he'll have to modify his stance And Arsenal now have a big debt due to building a new stadium, bad news for him eh ........ ring any bells ? the truly succesful clubs have the money to do that or the turnover to finance the debt or abramovic. maybe if we had built on our champs league appearances we'd be in liverpools place now.

the thing that escapes you here laddie is that KK knows how to treat and manage footballers, and manage a good club, as he did the last time with the support from his board in respect of they backed him when he wanted to sign players and extend their contracts. This was the Liverpool way of doing things when Keegan was a player in fact, but don't let any blind support of the current board putting prudency before anything get in the way of common sense and putting correct value in your best players. Only the 2nd rate clubs behave like that. Oh dear, what have I just described. absolute tosh. the liverpool way was to keep everything indoors. whats that got to do with signing players and extending their contracts and making them feeling wanted ? Simple fact is.........and any long term Newcastle supporter knows this.........first time round, Keegan made it a policy to extend all the players contracts long before their current ones ended when he thought they were worth it, and was completely backed by his board. But don't let any silly agenda or desire to paint a negative point where it didn't happen get in the way of your opinion. first time round bosman wasn't in force so players were happy to get the security rather than run their contracts down and scoot off for the wages. completely irrelevant where players are made to feel wanted and be part of a progressive club............ and paid the money of course money they can afford We are the 3rd biggest supported club in the country, with the capability of more. If you don't want the club to punch its weight, then fair enough. In actual fact, Keegan is probably just telling us that we shouldn't expect the meteoric rise to 3rd etc that we got the last time, but that in itself isn't the sort of thing he usually says. There must be a reason why, especially when he does know the potential of the club, and hopefully this in itself doesn't dampen his enthusiasm which is one of his biggest strengths ref managerial style. we don't have the worldwide support of the others tiofill the coffers or the champs league money. they have higher turnover which means they can afford to finance more debt.

got yo take issue with you on that mate. i haven't seen many get round him and i'd certain;y prefer beye ove chimbonda whos looked poor when ever i've watched him (apart from the game for wigan when he went centre half....even then he only done well as someone playing ouy of position)

you lot are ruining my plan of letting it drift off page 1 then me dragging it back

i do not believe i'm gonna post this and this may well go all round europe but out of those 3 i'd take crouch.

the thing that escapes you here laddie is that KK knows how to treat and manage footballers, and manage a good club, as he did the last time with the support from his board in respect of they backed him when he wanted to sign players and extend their contracts. This was the Liverpool way of doing things when Keegan was a player in fact, but don't let any blind support of the current board putting prudency before anything get in the way of common sense and putting correct value in your best players. Only the 2nd rate clubs behave like that. Oh dear, what have I just described. absolute tosh. the liverpool way was to keep everything indoors. whats that got to do with signing players and extending their contracts and making them feeling wanted ? Simple fact is.........and any long term Newcastle supporter knows this.........first time round, Keegan made it a policy to extend all the players contracts long before their current ones ended when he thought they were worth it, and was completely backed by his board. But don't let any silly agenda or desire to paint a negative point where it didn't happen get in the way of your opinion. first time round bosman wasn't in force so players were happy to get the security rather than run their contracts down and scoot off for the wages. completely irrelevant where players are made to feel wanted and be part of a progressive club............ and paid the money of course money they can afford

OMG Redknapp must be at crisis point with the Pompey board. I liked the "And for Toon fans it was crushingly disappointing to hear such realism from The Messiah — a man they still believe can deliver the Premier League title" too. I also think he can pick the winning lottery numbers. he'll have to do it every week.

the thing that escapes you here laddie is that KK knows how to treat and manage footballers, and manage a good club, as he did the last time with the support from his board in respect of they backed him when he wanted to sign players and extend their contracts. This was the Liverpool way of doing things when Keegan was a player in fact, but don't let any blind support of the current board putting prudency before anything get in the way of common sense and putting correct value in your best players. Only the 2nd rate clubs behave like that. Oh dear, what have I just described. absolute tosh. the liverpool way was to keep everything indoors. whats that got to do with signing players and extending their contracts and making them feeling wanted ? Simple fact is.........and any long term Newcastle supporter knows this.........first time round, Keegan made it a policy to extend all the players contracts long before their current ones ended when he thought they were worth it, and was completely backed by his board. But don't let any silly agenda or desire to paint a negative point where it didn't happen get in the way of your opinion. first time round bosman wasn't in force so players were happy to get the security rather than run their contracts down and scoot off for the wages.

Carr and Ramage aren't good enough iyam. who mentioned Carr and Ramage ? You meant Troisi? f****** hell mackems.gif errrr..........not quite. I mean't Woodgate, Modric, Owen, Zoggy and who knows to come .... then the penny may drop So long as the books are balanced and the club isn't in debt to the tune of 350m quid like Arsenal, double that of manure, and similar to Liverpool if their stadium plans go ahead....... Shame on the s**** boards they all have for accumulating so much debt eh mackems.gif they can afford their debt due to their earnings. oh f*** here we go again. complete rubbish. If you aren't prepared to demand the club match Liverpool, go back to the McKeag days that you obviously thought was the right way to go about things. liverpool have a higher turnover than us which means more financial clout due to being in the champs league for a few years. where we were remember. when they strengthened we got souness.

can they afford to finance the debt on their turnover ? if the answer is yes it aint so bad

the thing that escapes you here laddie is that KK knows how to treat and manage footballers, and manage a good club, as he did the last time with the support from his board in respect of they backed him when he wanted to sign players and extend their contracts. This was the Liverpool way of doing things when Keegan was a player in fact, but don't let any blind support of the current board putting prudency before anything get in the way of common sense and putting correct value in your best players. Only the 2nd rate clubs behave like that. Oh dear, what have I just described. absolute tosh. the liverpool way was to keep everything indoors.

and that is the killer.......good move gejon.

Carr and Ramage aren't good enough iyam. who mentioned Carr and Ramage ? You meant Troisi? f****** hell mackems.gif errrr..........not quite. I mean't Woodgate, Modric, Owen, Zoggy and who knows to come .... then the penny may drop So long as the books are balanced and the club isn't in debt to the tune of 350m quid like Arsenal, double that of manure, and similar to Liverpool if their stadium plans go ahead....... Shame on the s**** boards they all have for accumulating so much debt eh mackems.gif they can afford their debt due to their earnings. oh fuck here we go again.

KK deserves to be treated better than the way he is right now, maybe he let of steam because he thought it was justifed. What way is he being treated? If it's true that Vetere has removed and replaced one of KK's appointments without telling him (as suggested in the Telegraph) I think KK would have reason to believe that things need to be sorted out in the mooted 'clear-the-air' talks. As I said in the other thread, the Telegraph hinted at unrest between the hierachy. The Mail take it a step further by talking about conspiracy and apparent chaos, God knows what the Sun will say. TBH, I can see some similarity with Spurs at the start of the season just before the rumours about Jol going/Ramos coming started up in earnest. Just rumblings about unrest, not everyone pulling together, then MJ didn't have the complete support of the full first team squad, and so on. The truth of the matter is KK is not the man appointed by Wise (or Vetere). I may be wrong, I hope I am, but it wouldn't surprise me to see it start to get messy resulting in KK's departure and Wise bringing in the man he wants. FWIW, I don't believe for a minute that Wise actually wants to be the manager of NUFC. The only people Keegan brought to the club are Arthur Cox and Chris Hughton and both are still here. thats what i thought....the other fellah was a hangover from allardyce i think.

What a pile of absolute s****. dunno...i think theres lots of mileage in the idea that the mail hate us more than the mackems hate us.