James

That's all I reckon we are getting off Keegan. Didn't recall it being posted last week.

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=49066.50

There was something I found bizarre and cagey with unclear context on Friday. Not sure we'll get much more right now.

Dave, what has become of you, hoping for something of interest from Oliver? You really must be a broken man.

From BBC; some direct quotes from his current club manager. That was one of the things I was trying to say the other day, I didn't see him bothering to hold a particular position on the pitch and this is important when defending the ball. A big club may sign him but not get the best of him without compromising in other areas, whereas Newcastle could stick two defensive players into the midfield and build the team around his individual brilliance. He is in the Le Tissier, Kinkladze, Berkovic, Juninho category. Brilliant, but not one for a bigger team. I couldn't disagree more he is one of the best players I have seen in the last 10 years and is in a different class to any of the guys you have named. Ok in football you have to defend but you also have to give the opposition something to worry about and Arshavin with his pace, passing, dribbling, crossing ability does this in abundance. If you look at England this is where we fall short yes we are well organised and work hard but with the exception of Rooney (on occasion) who do the other teams fear when they have the ball? In a different class to Juninho? You sure? Yes as much as I enjoyed watching Juninho I can't remember him being the difference for Brazil in a major tournament the way Arshavin has been for Russia. Holland were the team everyone was talking about and rightly so with very good players like Schnejder, VDV, Robben, Van Persie, RVN, Arshavin out performed them all on the night and was the difference, it remains to be seen if he can do it in the semi and hopefully in the final (having put a bet on Russia before the Euros started) but I love the way he plays and really think that he will go onto be a truly massive player for the next few years. Very much the case that Juninho played for Brazil whom had better players, and therefore Juninho had to play in a reduced team role to be included. Whereas Arshavin plays in a Russia side that is built around him. As for the mention of the likes of Pele, Maradona, Best, Cruyff, Zidane, Ronaldo you've pretty much listed players that played in one-man teams just like Arshavin does for Russia. He isn't at the same level to be part of a one man team for Brazil, Argentina, Manchester United, Holland, Barcelona. He may struggle if he isn't a team's focal point.

Yep.

Woooooo, we have a new ITK

From BBC; some direct quotes from his current club manager. That was one of the things I was trying to say the other day, I didn't see him bothering to hold a particular position on the pitch and this is important when defending the ball. A big club may sign him but not get the best of him without compromising in other areas, whereas Newcastle could stick two defensive players into the midfield and build the team around his individual brilliance. He is in the Le Tissier, Kinkladze, Berkovic, Juninho category. Brilliant, but not one for a bigger team. I couldn't disagree more he is one of the best players I have seen in the last 10 years and is in a different class to any of the guys you have named. Ok in football you have to defend but you also have to give the opposition something to worry about and Arshavin with his pace, passing, dribbling, crossing ability does this in abundance. If you look at England this is where we fall short yes we are well organised and work hard but with the exception of Rooney (on occasion) who do the other teams fear when they have the ball? Perhaps he is better than the players I've named, but in my view, Dick Advocaat's view, the view of Zenit's ex-captain, he is an individual, a maestro, just like the players I've named. you'll get the best out of Arshavin by making him the first name on the teamsheet and getting the rest of the side to play around him. At the larger clubs, his value as an individual is diminished and he'll be expected to play as part of the team/unit, and I do not think that will have any positive impact on his performances. As I see it, Arshavin is worth over £15m to us, Everton, Manchester City, yet he is worth less than half than that to the Top Four. This doesn't mean that he won't sign for a bigger club, but it would be a big mistake for both him and the purchaser.

Richard Money's appointment as Academy Director has been confirmed.

From BBC; some direct quotes from his current club manager. That was one of the things I was trying to say the other day, I didn't see him bothering to hold a particular position on the pitch and this is important when defending the ball. A big club may sign him but not get the best of him without compromising in other areas, whereas Newcastle could stick two defensive players into the midfield and build the team around his individual brilliance. He is in the Le Tissier, Kinkladze, Berkovic, Juninho category. Brilliant, but not one for a bigger team.

You talk about expectations of others then mention Ashley beating the best finishes under Shepherd. Do they not have to beat the first four years before going onto the best years? You know, the ones when we finished 13th twice followed by 11th twice. Shepherd was never the major shareholder or owner. Ashley has never been the chairman. bump. Ashley wasn't the chairman, and Shepherd was never the major shareholder or owner I realise it has to be put in fairly simplistic terms for you, even after all this time. Shepherd never owned the club, he was never able to make decisions on his own. Ashley can. Understand ? [somehow I doubt it very much that you will or admit you do] So for those left with half a brain........... If you think that Shepherd was clueless and shite, then what does that make the major shareholders for putting him in charge of their multi million pound business without having any input ? For those who are still left with more than half a brain........consider this........who is going to say the new owner of the club will match their first 5 years against the first 5 years of the old owners/major shareholder , with the same manager ? Any takers ? Your first question: That is why refer to the "old board" rather than singling out Shepherd. Second question: Different environment in the footballing world this time around, so you can't expect the same results. Now answer Ozzie's sodding question! At least you have had the bottle to reply, unlike some others I suspect. Its not an answer though. My reply is that, as I said, you have to put the owners against the owners. Do YOU think the new owner will match the old owners first 5 years, with the same manager Answer the question. I answered the question. Last time, there was less money in the game, and the league remained very domestic. It was easy for Newcastle to sign Ginola. If a Ginola became available today, we would find ourselves behind many other clubs just due to the changes in the ways transfers are conducted these days. Furthermore, if a club looked like breaking the top four monopoly, that club could spend £40m on three players to keep themselves there, and we couldn't compete. So the answer is no, but you can't blame the owners for the changing football environment.

You talk about expectations of others then mention Ashley beating the best finishes under Shepherd. Do they not have to beat the first four years before going onto the best years? You know, the ones when we finished 13th twice followed by 11th twice. Shepherd was never the major shareholder or owner. Ashley has never been the chairman. bump. Ashley wasn't the chairman, and Shepherd was never the major shareholder or owner I realise it has to be put in fairly simplistic terms for you, even after all this time. Shepherd never owned the club, he was never able to make decisions on his own. Ashley can. Understand ? [somehow I doubt it very much that you will or admit you do] So for those left with half a brain........... If you think that Shepherd was clueless and shite, then what does that make the major shareholders for putting him in charge of their multi million pound business without having any input ? For those who are still left with more than half a brain........consider this........who is going to say the new owner of the club will match their first 5 years against the first 5 years of the old owners/major shareholder , with the same manager ? Any takers ? Your first question: That is why refer to the "old board" rather than singling out Shepherd. Second question: Different environment in the footballing world this time around, so you can't expect the same results. Now answer Ozzie's sodding question!

Allardyce's 21 games vs identical 21 games under Roeder in 06/07: Allardyce P21, GS=27, GA=33, Points=26 Roeder P21, GS=24, GA=20, Points=30 Keegan vs Roeder: Keegan P16, GS=18, GA=26, Points=17 Roeder P16, GS=14, GA=25, Points=13 So in other words, Allardyce got beaten by his own benchmark of bettering the previous season's results, while Keegan helped a failing team do better than they had done the previous season with the games he had left.

I remember in the early stages of last season, we'd just beaten Spurs 3-1, and everyone was euphoric and convinced that things had changed for the better, and I came in with a thread comparing our record against the clubs we'd played so far with the results in those games the previous season and pointed out that we were actually doing worse and people told me to fuck off Come January, Allardyce was probably well behind the Roeder record that saw us 6 points ahead of relegation, although I never had the heart to check.

I would have though that too had I not seen the interview, but he seemed so confident that something better was going to come up in the next few months, I'm not so sure. Either he jumped before getting officially rejected by Blackburn and is confident that the first PL side to sack their manager next season will be his new destination, or Shepherd wants him to manage Mallorca.

Shepherd and Allardyce to Mallorca tbh.

Although it is not certain one way or the other, I wouldn't read too much into the Arshavin to Spain stuff see today. The stories originated from AS, a Spanish newspaper, and I've seen English papers do similar for England's opposition. Perfect distraction mind game.

Don't forget that he also rescued Macclesfield from an unrescuable situation.

No offence like.

The point Dave was making I believe was that you have a tendency to lump in anyone who criticises the old board in any way at all with the few, and its a very small few from what I've seen, who do fail to give them any credit whatsoever for anything. My opinion of the old board/Shepherd was that their hearts were in the right place, they were genuinely trying to take the club forward, but their decision making at key times in their latter years of power seemed to indicate that they were always likely to struggle to get us there. I reckon quite a few share this opinion, and its very unfair to lump in anyone who does with the very few who fail to give them any credit whatsoever. Given the size of the club, it's reasonable to argue that there's nothing really stopping us from getting up among the top teams in the country again. Except, of course, how the club is run by those in charge. So for that reason I think people were happy to see a change at board level. Is the new board in any way gauranteed to be better? Not at all. But my feeling was that Shepherd's reign had run its course, and while nobody is denying there were some good times in there I do believe we'd gone as far as we were ever going to under him. So people are generally optimistic about having someone new in charge, and are waiting to see what happens. If they do a shite job and in a couple of years we're still stranded in mid-table, then you can bet that they won't be popular on here. But surely the deserve a fair chance first? And surely people don't deserve to be attacked for giving them that chance? Good post. The bit in bold is EXACTLY what I meant. The previous board did several things excellently. I don't have a problem with acknowledging what they did well. They quite obviously weren't 'the worst board ever', what a ridiculous thing that would be to say. They did, however, also screw some things up royally and we were due for a change. Will it 'automatically be an improvement'? Of course not. But who has actually said they thought it would be better by default? Nobody that I can remember, it's a strawman argument used time and time again. To wit: Old board - did well most of the time, fucked some key things up. New board - barely had a chance yet, let's see in a few years how well they're fairing. complete tripe. Lots of people said they just wanted rid of them, and anytime at all any names were mentioned, even that hedge fund, they were all in favour. Lots of people. Selective memory or what. Anyway, it doesn't matter. It seems that some people are now coming over to what some of the better posters used to tell you, you know those that have gone from the board, for one reason or another. Gemmill and Alex? i didn't mean you Well, clearly. That wouldn't make sense, seeing as I've gone nowhere. is the correct answer !!! If you qualified ........ Wonder how many others will leave Yes NE5. The departure of members from this forum has everything to do with the change from the old board to the new board. Well let me tell you something. In the last five years, this board has done better than the other boards such as http://z3.invisionfree.com/NUFCforum/index.php?act=idx and www.toontastic.com. What do you say to that eh? eh?

NE5, you are obsessed with the old board. You have nothing else to say, so I won't ask.

Only signed one shit player in my opinion, although four others didn't work out as hoped.

Even sadder that people believe it.

Shola had developed the ability to become invisible hence three deflections of others shots. This has its advantages: He can guide the ball into the goal from an offside position without being seen He can use his hand to control the ball without being seen He can grab hold of people and unnecessarily push them to the ground, yet make it look to the referee that the player has just tripped over his own feet. Yes, his team mates wont be able to see him, but there'd be a 12th player on the pitch. I say we keep him.

Just read the guy's bio. His life story seems to be contradicted by the content of the blog.