madras

the reason is that when something happened over here,it was front page,in holland,france,italy and spain it they kept it quieter.all worse or as bad as england.right now if the world cup was held in europe tomorrow i'd be more worried about italians,poles and germans than us.

Talking about politics, what more do you have next to Labour and Torys? Those 2 are the only parties I hear about in Holland. green party who get about 2 votes, lib dems which gets about 3, bnp I guess you are a Labour man? In Holland the socialistic party was a big winner at the latest elections together with an party of the (imo almost extrme)right. Labour is for the working class, so yes, prove it

it did used to be when AC Milan won the European Cup in 1990 At that time the stadiums were sold out. The best players in the world played in Italy. Dutch kids all were wearing Milan, Juventus and Napoli shirts. And then suddenly it was over and there was the rise of the Premiership! at about that time with van basten,rijkaard andthat other bloke, milan were probably the best team in the world for a couple of years

had juve in the weekends footy bet aswell

parky's mams american

65? There will be. i said not many,5 would be my guess

i'll bet theres not many prem managers won more points in that year.

fat jobless girl age 34

not so long ago we had the clash,ramones and joy division...probably the trendiest half time show in christendom.....musically we are now on an escalator to hell.

The only profit they would be likely to make would be by reselling the club a few years down the line for a lot more than they paid for it. The only way someone would pay more is if the club was doing significantly better than it is now, to do this would necessitate a turn around both in the boardroom and on the pitch, and that would require investment in the team. Even if money is their only goal, they would care a great deal about where we finished, because the higher up the league we get the more money we make, both in terms of prize-money and sponsorship, etc. The Champions' League is where the real money's at, so I'd expect anyone seriously wanting to make any money from a football club would be aiming for that and guess what, to get in there you have to have a pretty good team!! Also, we finished quite a bit higher than 15th last season and in doing so made a huge loss, so I doubt 15th would be considered satisfactory by them, whatever their motivations. In fact as this group's stated aims are to make money, I would be amazed if they touched us with a bargepole. This club is significantly overvalued by its shareholders - well at least one of them anyway - has a huge debt and a poor squad, it's about as far away from an opportunity to make an easy buck as you can get. not necessarily,if DIC follow the same plan they had for liverpool (ie sell within 7 years) by then it's quite possible clubs will be negotiating their own TV rights,outside the top 4 NUFC is probably the biggest available.at a a price less than half the LFC deal i could understand them sniffing. as for the bold bit,do you know something we don't.wouldn't it make more sense if those asking for too much were those in control of the majority shareholding rather than a minority shareholding...if the majority shareholding sells out the position of the minority shareholding is very weak. How much is the Liverpool deal worth like? Also, I only know what has been made public: that the Halls actively want to sell their stake and Shepherd actively doesn't want to sell his stake - to the extent that he has considered buying the whole club, or at least he says he has. Now, it doesn't take a great deal of logic to work out that the price demanded by someone who doesn't want to sell something would probably be higher than that demanded by someone who doesn't, does it? i think the whole deal for lfc was £450mill that may have included stadium and player investment.....and the shares thing,he would be a minority shareholder,thats why after magnier sold to glazier to give him the majority the rest folded.fat fred could ask for 12times how much they were worth,if he hasn't got control or influence over the majority he's fucked.

has this run it's course cos we aint going to agree ?

.....if NUFC won the league but only after spending £200million on players ? ....if NUFC won a trophy with no Englishmen in the squad ? ....would you be happy winning the title with a cynical,boring style of football ? i'm not having a go at other teams,just wondering how far we,on this board would go for success.

for all that if you take out the 2 games V man u we done better against all the rest of the league than they did. it's very easy to look at our defence then and say good player,average player...doesnt matter,it worked,we were nowhere near as bad defensivly as some like to make out,a team who ethos was to attack,go into the last game of the season with a chance of winning the title,can't do it with an average defence,a defence who as seen conceded a similar ammount to the best. i've told this before and it needs telling again,that summer on hols in crete i got talking to some man citeh fans,they reckoned the media done us in,at home when they went a goal down the crowd got on their backs and they folded,but with us,they thought "match of the day says they've got a dodgy defence,come on"...anecdotal i know but it still rattles round my head

The only profit they would be likely to make would be by reselling the club a few years down the line for a lot more than they paid for it. The only way someone would pay more is if the club was doing significantly better than it is now, to do this would necessitate a turn around both in the boardroom and on the pitch, and that would require investment in the team. Even if money is their only goal, they would care a great deal about where we finished, because the higher up the league we get the more money we make, both in terms of prize-money and sponsorship, etc. The Champions' League is where the real money's at, so I'd expect anyone seriously wanting to make any money from a football club would be aiming for that and guess what, to get in there you have to have a pretty good team!! Also, we finished quite a bit higher than 15th last season and in doing so made a huge loss, so I doubt 15th would be considered satisfactory by them, whatever their motivations. In fact as this group's stated aims are to make money, I would be amazed if they touched us with a bargepole. This club is significantly overvalued by its shareholders - well at least one of them anyway - has a huge debt and a poor squad, it's about as far away from an opportunity to make an easy buck as you can get. not necessarily,if DIC follow the same plan they had for liverpool (ie sell within 7 years) by then it's quite possible clubs will be negotiating their own TV rights,outside the top 4 NUFC is probably the biggest available.at a a price less than half the LFC deal i could understand them sniffing. as for the bold bit,do you know something we don't.wouldn't it make more sense if those asking for too much were those in control of the majority shareholding rather than a minority shareholding...if the majority shareholding sells out the position of the minority shareholding is very weak.

but can you think of 1,man u thought "what we need is an alan shearer"

none of the wolves one when when some kid got a firework to the head.

looks like carlton palmer.

defensivly the midfield were non-existent,the defenders didn't actually miss much but if the midfield don't close down their men and stop the space 25yds out any defence will be put under too much pressure.

at the time we had the 5th best defence in the league(37coceded),comparing favourably with the best arsenal (32),liverpool(34) and villa and champions man u(34each).are some falling into the nufc shit defence myth.all our defenders were in their prime.on the scoring front we were 3rd (66) behind man u(73) and liverpool (70).it's where our goals came from that make shearer the necessity,25 from the 29yr old ferdinand and 8 each from lee and beardsley.......to sign the best froward in britain ,possibly the world at that time was a good move on and off the pitch. thinking how much shearer cost in real terms he was a steal and a necessity we could afford,for once nufc done what was right both in the long and short term.

I'd be prepared to take the gamble myself despite accepting that things could go bad and things are not always so simplistic. FS has put none of his own personal wealth into the club so can afford to be wreckless and he's also in a position where he answers to no-one so the burden of responsibility doesn't weigh so heavily on his mind, where as someone buying the club for over 100m is hardly likely to piss about or mess things up. In fact I'd say the opposite is far more likely, i.e. wanting to make the most of that investment and we all know for NUFC to make money it has to be successful. As far as I'm concerned there is no hope under FS and the current board and unless they grow some new brains this is as good as it gets under them, mid-table mediocrity which has been our average finish under them in terms of final league table placings. We need some fresh, independent ideas, some new enthusiasm, some new goals. The current board are hoping by throwing money at the club some fucker is going to one day get it right and that is no way to run a club, i.e. pot luck. That type of management never yeilds sustained success or stability. They've had a good number of years at the job, been paid massive wages and have failed, time for them to move over and give someone else a try, after all isn't that what we do with managers? None of that guarantees they will appoint the right man, or even that they will back him properly. Appointing the right man is the key. I agree, but there is no guarantee this board will appoint that right man either, so vis a vis. Do you think, because there is a possibility that a new board could be just as bad or worse than this one, that we should just accept this board and not look at other alternatives? At what point do you say, hold on, this isn't working? They've had 10 years at the job and spent vast sums as well as hiring and firing a whole host of managers but we are going backwards, and have done every season with the exception of 3 years under SBR a manager who fell into their laps who actually asked them for the job. Could it be that they themselves are part of the problem? A serious question for you HTL: Do you honestly trust and have confidence in the board? Another one, given that there is a possibility that a new board may not be better than this one by the same token could there be a possibility that a new board could be better than this one? I agree with you on many points regarding a new board and the dangers of that but I personally would take the gamble and as a club we should never accept that this lot is our lot and that no-one else can do better, that would be foolish and dangerous. If the board were managers, they'd have been sacked long ago and there would be no complaints, from yourself included. Why the difference of attitude when it comes to the board? We've had shite managers before, yet you wanted rid of Souness who based on what past managers acheieved, did well. You claim he took us backwords and wasted money (which he did) so should be sacked, well so have the board. Yes, I do have faith in them. It's important to have a board that will back the manager and they will do that, all they need is some luck along the way in picking the right man, and by that I mean the kind of luck that extends to the manager not sending out weakened teams in a competition we could win, and the players turning up for the big games. It could so easily have been different and that is down to the manager and the players, not the board. The board has done their bit and with some mistakes along the way, yes. Your second question is one I don't really know why you're asking. I've said before it's a two way thing. Of course a new board could be better, I'm just intelligent enough and realistic enough to understand there is as good a chance (if not better) that a new board could be worse. It is other people who are naive enough to believe this can only go one way, that the current board is so bad a new board is bound to be better. The difference here is that you are in favour of the gamble and I'm not. Without patronising you I think that is because I've seen sub 15,000 crowds, I've lived through the frustration of one good season making me think that if we sign just a couple of players we could challenge the top 6, only to see the board instead sell our best player(s). It's happened time and time again and it could easily happen again if the wrong people are in charge. I don't feel patronised so no offence taken, calle me unrealistic or whatever, I want better for my club though than this current mob and having taken us backwards since taking over, coupled with me losing any faith in them backed by some big mistakes and bad management, I'd like to see them gone and would gamble on new owners, although wary that the grass isn't always greener. Like you said yourself the next time they get it wrong will be time up for them, so I think even you can see they're on borrowed time and rightly so. In the meantime we'll agree to disagree? Yeah, fair enough. I'm happy to agree to disagree, there's no problem with doing that. Others could learn something from the concept. next up hamas and the knesset

I'd be prepared to take the gamble myself despite accepting that things could go bad and things are not always so simplistic. FS has put none of his own personal wealth into the club so can afford to be wreckless and he's also in a position where he answers to no-one so the burden of responsibility doesn't weigh so heavily on his mind, where as someone buying the club for over 100m is hardly likely to piss about or mess things up. In fact I'd say the opposite is far more likely, i.e. wanting to make the most of that investment and we all know for NUFC to make money it has to be successful. As far as I'm concerned there is no hope under FS and the current board and unless they grow some new brains this is as good as it gets under them, mid-table mediocrity which has been our average finish under them in terms of final league table placings. We need some fresh, independent ideas, some new enthusiasm, some new goals. The current board are hoping by throwing money at the club some fucker is going to one day get it right and that is no way to run a club, i.e. pot luck. That type of management never yeilds sustained success or stability. They've had a good number of years at the job, been paid massive wages and have failed, time for them to move over and give someone else a try, after all isn't that what we do with managers? None of that guarantees they will appoint the right man, or even that they will back him properly. Appointing the right man is the key. I agree, but there is no guarantee this board will appoint that right man either, so vis a vis. Do you think, because there is a possibility that a new board could be just as bad or worse than this one, that we should just accept this board and not look at other alternatives? At what point do you say, hold on, this isn't working? They've had 10 years at the job and spent vast sums as well as hiring and firing a whole host of managers but we are going backwards, and have done every season with the exception of 3 years under SBR a manager who fell into their laps who actually asked them for the job. Could it be that they themselves are part of the problem? A serious question for you HTL: Do you honestly trust and have confidence in the board? Another one, given that there is a possibility that a new board may not be better than this one by the same token could there be a possibility that a new board could be better than this one? I agree with you on many points regarding a new board and the dangers of that but I personally would take the gamble and as a club we should never accept that this lot is our lot and that no-one else can do better, that would be foolish and dangerous. If the board were managers, they'd have been sacked long ago and there would be no complaints, from yourself included. Why the difference of attitude when it comes to the board? We've had shite managers before, yet you wanted rid of Souness who based on what past managers acheieved, did well. You claim he took us backwords and wasted money (which he did) so should be sacked, well so have the board. the problem for people like myself,htl and ne5 is that we have lived the other side,through the truly crap boards.we want to know what will come in before a change,we can't risk going back to a westwood or a mckeag,you may want to take that risk,i dont......i'm pretty sure if the right man comes along myself,ne5 and htl will shout for him to take over.....till he appears,for us the risk of throwing everything in the air and seeing what happens is too great. Well, I've lived through the same crap boards and I want Fred to go. Fuck this "better the devil you know" nonsense. We're now at a point analagous to the point where SJH took over. This board has had its day and has clearly taken the club as far as it can go -- unless we're to drop even further down the leagues, of course. Football is now going through a period of renewed investment. Despite our massive resources, current board have managed us into a position where we haven't even got any money to buy players, never mind invest in other areas of the club. They've had their chance. They've made fortunes out of us. But they've failed to take us up another level and as long as they remain in charge we're going to remain a mediocre, mid-table outfit who'll be lucky to get into the UEFA Cup every now and again -- which is pretty much what we were when I first started going to matches all of 40 years ago. to contrast where we are now to the mckeag days is lying to win argument.

if you say his surname quick enough you can make it "on ya way you"

bloke on the right "if people on the internet who watch us all the time don't know who i am what chance has the big yank"

I'd be prepared to take the gamble myself despite accepting that things could go bad and things are not always so simplistic. FS has put none of his own personal wealth into the club so can afford to be wreckless and he's also in a position where he answers to no-one so the burden of responsibility doesn't weigh so heavily on his mind, where as someone buying the club for over 100m is hardly likely to piss about or mess things up. In fact I'd say the opposite is far more likely, i.e. wanting to make the most of that investment and we all know for NUFC to make money it has to be successful. As far as I'm concerned there is no hope under FS and the current board and unless they grow some new brains this is as good as it gets under them, mid-table mediocrity which has been our average finish under them in terms of final league table placings. We need some fresh, independent ideas, some new enthusiasm, some new goals. The current board are hoping by throwing money at the club some fucker is going to one day get it right and that is no way to run a club, i.e. pot luck. That type of management never yeilds sustained success or stability. They've had a good number of years at the job, been paid massive wages and have failed, time for them to move over and give someone else a try, after all isn't that what we do with managers? None of that guarantees they will appoint the right man, or even that they will back him properly. Appointing the right man is the key. I agree, but there is no guarantee this board will appoint that right man either, so vis a vis. Do you think, because there is a possibility that a new board could be just as bad or worse than this one, that we should just accept this board and not look at other alternatives? At what point do you say, hold on, this isn't working? They've had 10 years at the job and spent vast sums as well as hiring and firing a whole host of managers but we are going backwards, and have done every season with the exception of 3 years under SBR a manager who fell into their laps who actually asked them for the job. Could it be that they themselves are part of the problem? A serious question for you HTL: Do you honestly trust and have confidence in the board? Another one, given that there is a possibility that a new board may not be better than this one by the same token could there be a possibility that a new board could be better than this one? I agree with you on many points regarding a new board and the dangers of that but I personally would take the gamble and as a club we should never accept that this lot is our lot and that no-one else can do better, that would be foolish and dangerous. If the board were managers, they'd have been sacked long ago and there would be no complaints, from yourself included. Why the difference of attitude when it comes to the board? We've had shite managers before, yet you wanted rid of Souness who based on what past managers acheieved, did well. You claim he took us backwords and wasted money (which he did) so should be sacked, well so have the board. the problem for people like myself,htl and ne5 is that we have lived the other side,through the truly crap boards.we want to know what will come in before a change,we can't risk going back to a westwood or a mckeag,you may want to take that risk,i dont......i'm pretty sure if the right man comes along myself,ne5 and htl will shout for him to take over.....till he appears,for us the risk of throwing everything in the air and seeing what happens is too great.

dudeabides,can i ask you a simple yes or no question........do you think nufc would be in a better position if shepherd packed in and just sold his shares to the highest bidder ?