UV

"they've got a point in despising me as i tried to bleed the club of every penny possible and get a move instead of just putting in a transfer request when i wanted to move. yes, i am just a greedy,underhanded t***." Because we know that if you put in a transfer request the supporters would have understood and been happy with you leaving for more money and better prospects elsewhere. Bet he's gutted he doesn't have a Championship winners medal to go alongside his intertoto one. well going from myself,midds and many of my friends a lot of people felt this way. others may feel differently. He did put in a transfer request in the end. Not going to hold it against him for trying it on first. If anything it should have strengthened the club's position in negotiating a price with City (though not much admittedly). He saw what happened with Milner where the club asked him to keep his transfer request quiet (which was to do with them not renegotiating his contract which they verbally agreed to do when he signed it, and not about wanting to leave), and then announced it when it suited them to make it look like Milner was forcing their hand at the end of the window when clubs were interested. So I don't blame him for releasing that statement to the press and trying to be in control of the situation. Obviously it didn't do much good, as it doesn't matter how or when you leave the club, unless you're being sold to get someone better in or retire you're a "Judas mercenary cunt" and will get booed when you come back, but I don't blame him for trying.

"they've got a point in despising me as i tried to bleed the club of every penny possible and get a move instead of just putting in a transfer request when i wanted to move. yes, i am just a greedy,underhanded twat." Because we know that if you put in a transfer request the supporters would have understood and been happy with you leaving for more money and better prospects elsewhere. Bet he's gutted he doesn't have a Championship winners medal to go alongside his intertoto one.

But, but, he handed in a transfer request. Surely he was sold immediately, they'd have no option!

So Shay, what exactly did you achieve in that extra six months that the likes of Duff and Bassong missed out on by leaving in the summer? "I managed to fluff up a move to Arsenal and be their No1 keeper for the rest of my career playing for a proper big club with the NUFC fans blessing" Just as Duff and Bassong are now respected by Newcastle supporters for staying until the team were relegated. I agree that he was overrated, but disagree that Harper is average in comparison. From the 06-07 season they both played in about half the games and every time we conceded less goals with Harper in goal than Given. In the relegation season, Given let in 37 goals in 22 games, whereas Harper conceded 22 in 16.

It's an excellent idea to get season tickets sold for next year, there's no question about it, and it's a very good deal for ST holders, but I think it's more a short term fix to try and sell STs for next season despite the current disillusionment with the club rather than a smart plan for the long term future. I'd think most ST holders will take it up - there's only a 1 year tie-in - but longer term, in 5+ years time, we could be left behind other clubs with smaller crowds in match day revenues. Especially as we'll be in the Champions League and competing for the title by then. Matchday revenue should still be £30m+, so at a modest 3% compound interest that's potentially (very roughly) £7m revenue lost in 2019, £8m in 2020, £9m in 2011, £10m in 2022. It's an act borne of necessity rather than an altruistic move, and indicates we'll be trying to keep attendances up through price cuts (in real terms) rather than increasing the desire to go whatever the cost. It's a shame that wont be the case, but taking that into consideration this is a decent move in the circumstances, and quite frankly if it's to the benefit of match going supporters and keeps attendances up, it's better than the alternative of seeing a half empty St James' for a lot of less attractive league games next season.

Headline: "Quinn despises Sunderland fans"

Racialist!!!

I'm not particularly concerned about the average age or sex of Man U supporters tbh. The above Luque quotes are proven bollocks, at very least in respect to the transfer fee, but if you want to go there: The only club in for him and we offered to double his wages. I guess this was Shepherd's fault too? Remind me again, which one of Luque's or Coloccini's wages affects our current finances?

People of course have a right to criticise it and I'm fucking pissed off over the lack of acknowledgement of the support which I and 3,500 brilliant toon supports gave tonight . But many posters and NUFC fans will always use the player performances and join it with the agendas they have against Ashley etc. Fact is when those players go onto the pitch they have only themselves to blame for the performance they put in. The lack of firepower is mismanagement of transfer policy but their is no excuse for lack of effort. It was partially due to the abuse that was given to Duff that spurred him on to score his first goal of the season.

I'd like you to explain how in any way whatsoever the running of the club today is affected by the previous owners (except for the fact that thanks to them investing in the team and the ground we have a larger supporter base and attendance potential than most other teams in the league). It was a somewhat legitimate argument 2 or 3 years ago, but now surely there can be no question that Ashley has to take credit or blame if we rise or fall from where we are as a club now. Edit: When we avoided relegation to the 3rd division, then won the 2nd division title, then came 3rd in the Premier League and people were praising SJH were you saying "hang on a sec, McKeag deserves some of the credit too"? If a club has been overspending for a long period, and credit is no longer easily available, it has to make pretty significant cuts to its costs (or increases in its income) in order to survive. 2 or 3 years is no time at all to put our financial issues right. I'm not saying Ashley isn't to blame for his mistakes, but they've got to be understood in the proper context. No, I'm not having that at all. The availability of credit has nothing to do with it. From the start Ashley paid off all the debts he could voluntarily, not just the ones he had to, and we pay for players up front when most teams would be accepting of paying in instalments as that is how every other top club operates, even those with rich sugar daddy owners like Man City. The cuts have been made. We have a thin squad, and the wage bill is now easily manageable within our PL revenue. We are not struggling to survive, I am certain we would easily have made a cash profit this year without the Carroll sale, and if you think otherwise I'd like to see your figures as to why. ALL of the club's spending is now down to Ashley. There isn't a single player or senior employee who is not now on a contract signed off by Ashley.

Is it really fair to judge after only 9 transfer windows though? Don't we need to give him 10 or 20 years before we can really tell what his plan is? Apart from the £35m that we got from a player who came from a non-existant youth academy (we didn't have a youth policy until Ashley put his plans in place you know) he's still battling to overcome Hall and Shepherd's legacy of a team with a massive supporter base and revenues constantly in the top 15 in the world.

It wasn't even a court case, it was an arbitration hearing.

It's based on the fact that we've sold Milner, N'Zogbia, Bassong and now Carroll who were all arguably our best young players at the time they were sold*. However who have we hung onto that we had a serious offer for? * You could argue that Enrique was our best younger player when N'Zogbia & Bassong were sold, but he was generally seen from the outside as a player who was part of a very poor defence, whose distribution and passing was very hit and miss (and that's being kind, there were games it was shocking).

I'd like you to explain how in any way whatsoever the running of the club today is affected by the previous owners (except for the fact that thanks to them investing in the team and the ground we have a larger supporter base and attendance potential than most other teams in the league). It was a somewhat legitimate argument 2 or 3 years ago, but now surely there can be no question that Ashley has to take credit or blame if we rise or fall from where we are as a club now. Edit: When we avoided relegation to the 3rd division, then won the 2nd division title, then came 3rd in the Premier League and people were praising SJH were you saying "hang on a sec, McKeag deserves some of the credit too"?

He made up stuff after he left the club because he had a grudge against the club/Shepherd/Roeder. Nothing like the situation Carroll is in now on just joining Liverpool. BTW the exchange rate at the time EUR-GBP was 0.68240 (08/26/2005), so £9.5m = €13.9 Not very good with numbers is he Luque. Maybe we were only paying him £8,500 a week and he didn't notice. What appalling "journalism" btw, just letting him get away with saying obvious bollocks and printing it without question as fact. However, if you really want to argue this point, here's a more relevant article with quotes from the agent of a player trying to get a move where money is the primary reason : Should we be applauding him for his honesty or booing him for being a Judas money grabbing cunt in solidarity for the Deportivo fans? Interesting dilemma.

He didn't even seem to know how long his contract was for. The honesty of Albert Luque. A classic thread. Edit: My bad. It was late. For some reason I though he was here for 3 years, it just seemed like it. He got one thing right, he did have 3 years left.

A thread about Luque's honesty, when what he's said is so obviously and easily shown to be a load of bollocks. Did we also give him a 6 year contract? More of his honesty when he signed, not when he left with a grudge:

It'll deflate, but it wont burst. Football has always been about money. The richest clubs/owners have always taken the best players from the poorer ones. For a couple of decades we've been mostly shielded from the harsh reality of what that means to a supporter of a club lower down the pecking order because we've been one of the rich kids taking the players not losing them. Despite what people would have you believe we're still one of the richest teams in the league and the world - we'd have made a profit this year without the sale of Carroll, and will now make a club record profit which will probably only be bettered by Arsenal, and maybe Spurs, but we're still acting like paupers an if it continues we genuinely will be.

Shola's frustrating as hell, but he's better than most give him credit for and he's decent enough, but unfortunately he's a complete crock a la Woodgate, Dyer, etc. His injury last night was a freak one which could have happened to any player, but we all know he would have been out anyway within a couple of weeks. He's useful in the squad because when fit he's good enough to play, but you can't seriously run a team which relies on him.

I know we can't expect to compete with the likes of Birmingham, but the club Larsson plays for managed to pick up a striker and a winger on loan, so it's not entirely impossible you know.

For those saying it was all a bit last minute and too late to get a replacement in, Nolan's in the Chronicle saying they knew Carroll would be out for the next 8 weeks or so anyway.

2 years ago you'd probably have used 45,000 and 40k in those posts. Apathy is the enemy of protest, but it will also eventually be Ashley's downfall too. Keep running the club as he has been and crowds will only get lower which will mean less spent on the team which will mean it will be sooner rather than later that we get relegated again, and it wont be so easy to bounce back next time. Then it will only depend on whether he decides to cut his losses at that point to avoid the agro, or decides he's nothing to lose and keep it ticking over as a plaything hoping to get lucky.

Chelsea panic bought and paid over the market price for Torres. The reason Chelsea had to pay £50m for Torres was because it left Liverpool in a bad position to get in a replacement and they in turn would have to pay over the odds for whoever they got in (fee and/or wages), so the Torres price was inflated with an amount to mitigate that extra expense. This allowed them to panic buy and pay over the market price for Carroll because they didn't want it to mess up their season and are trying to get into Europe. The reason Liverpool paid £35m for Carroll was because it left Newcastle in a bad position to get in a replacement and they in turn would have to pay over the odds for whoever they got in (fee and/or wages), so the Carroll price was inflated with an amount to mitigate that extra expense. This allowed Ashley to rub his hands and put the extra money in the bank because he thinks we have enough points already to avoid relegation. If we'd had to pay over the odds for a replacement, then that's what we should have done as a one-off if we wanted to try to avoid derailing the season as that's precisely why we got an inflated price for Carroll. The fact we didn't even get a loan player in shows once again exactly where Ashley's priorities lie.

But that was different, that was a great deal because we'll easily be able to bring in a better winger than Milner for half the money we got for him. Eventually, I'm sure...

I don't particularly pay much attention to other club's players, so I looked up his stats. 16 league goals & 15 assists in over 150 appearances in 5 and a half seasons. On average a goal and an assist every 10 games, or 3 goals & 3 assists per season. I guess he must be in the form of his life now for you to say that then?