BlueStar

15 quid taxi to rush to a pub and catch the last 60 minutes of this fucking shite, should have spent it on heroin.

Football looks like such a simple game when you're playing against us.

Could they not get Stuart Pearce's brother instead? Would be a good continuation from PDC.

You're a cynical chap aren't you? FWIW I think Ashley would be taking this free advertising even if we didn't owe him any money, he probably just sees it as a perk of owning a football club. I'm sure he would as well. We can't have it both ways though. Ashley is stopping advertising money coming into the club by using the billboards as freebies for himself instead of paying sponsors. If the justification for that is "Oh, but he'd be charging that much in interest on the loan so it's just like payment for that" then it's no longer really an interest free loan which can be pointed as as a rare example of benevolence.

So next time someone tells us Ashley has given us an interest free loan, we can clarify he's actually taking millions out of the club as his interest, just in a roundabout and dishonest manner.

Someone fill me in here, what's the connection between the loan and the adverts? Why not just say 'Well, he could take the adverts down but then he'd have to take exactly 4.2m out of our transfer fund'? Where's the evidence he's using the free adverts as his 'interest' on the loan? The club certainly aren't saying that, quite the opposite, theyre saying if there were people buying the adverts then the Sports Direct signs wouldn't be there. And I don't think anyone believes if EA Sports buy out all the space we're suddenly going to have to pay interest. What about the stadium naming, was that instead of loan interest as well? Because he wasn't charging interest before we became the Sports Direct Arena, and we're not charging it now we've changed back. Does it stretch to anything else? Like if we complain about Joe Kinnear, "Well, if he wasn't allowed to take money out the club to give his mates a job as a favour, he'd have to charge interest on the loan. Is that what you want?"

Suarez with a brace. Should have had one 20 years ago really.

A scam doesn't have to be illegal, just dishonest. The claim that the alternative to having 75% of the advertising at the ground taken up with Sports Direct freebies is blank hoardings rather than paying advertisers is where the dishonesty comes in.

My favourite RTG response to the SMB pics

They're receiving a seven figure sum, which is more than the one figure sum we're getting from Sports Direct. Stoke say Bet365 were the highest bidder, Newcastle say Sports Direct don't have to bid and just get it all for nowt. Without access to both clubs books that's all you or I have to go on.

Sky Sports doing a Suarez compilation with the music from Jaws in the background will go down well on Merseyside

I thought it was pretty obvious that the issue people have is that Sports Direct were getting free adverts which was cutting off income from paying advertisers. Thus the multi-million pound deal Bet365 have made with Stoke to put adverts on their kits and stadium isn't a very good comparison. For debating purposes it's usually better to know the answer to rhetorical questions before you ask them to make sure it's your side of the argument they support.

What do B365 pay for their shirt and stadium advertising at Stoke? A "substantial seven-figure deal", but no specific numbers released as far as I can see. http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/Stoke-City-bet365-shirts-Stoke-City/story-16022167-detail/story.html#axzz2gI5aIRa7 Funny, I was expecting "No-one was really interested, if they hadn't come along we'd just have left everything blank"

What? Has he been watching Triple H?

Basically the opposite of Man City, where if they need some extra transfer funds Etihad can just buy one advertising hoarding for £30m.

It's so obvious is barely merits saying, but what utter bollocks. Bury have individuals sponsoring players just to have their names in the programme all season. Companies sponsor a player's socks. And we can't find anyone willing to pay any money to have their logo in the background of a Premier League game against Man United, broadcast all over the world, live, on highlights and photographed in every paper? They're just placeholders, just there to fill a gap, but they're regularly worked on and changed to advertise in French and plug their new European operations or whatever? What a load of shit. Next time someone says Ashley doesn't take money out of the club, think of all the advertising revenue we've lost through this scam, and how much healthier his Sports Direct account is from not needing to outlay a penny to get this level of exposure.

The melodrama of Man U fans on the internet. The sense of entitlement that they shouldn't have to watch sub-standard performances for even a quarter of a season of their entire football following life. My.

Someone posted it on Reddit as a reaction gif and I had to dig out Sexy Mick. Flipped the bird one so it looked in the same direction

http://i.imgur.com/DdX4n15.gif http://paddytheflea.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/mick_mccarthy_anim1.gif

So they've gone straight from "We need someone who'll knock the players into shape and not take any of their shit" to "Let the players decide who manages them"?

To be fair, it's a bit stupid to sack Di Canio after 13 games of doing exactly what Di Canio does.

Liverpool managing director Ian Ayre has admitted Luis Suarez's racist abuse and biting incidents have damaged the Premier League club's brand. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11661/8942403/

Ah, yes, that was it. In the same email he was kicking of about paper clackers being left on the seats.

Seems like the five year plan was going really well last season, we pretty much matched them exactly Newcastle United have five-year plan to emulate Aston Villa

Use the match thread now please http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,94591.0.html