Benwell Lad

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. It has been a case of the press and TV deciding what the popular story would be and then sticking with it. There has been no balance in the reporting, so it's no surprise that's what most people's think after watching TV and reading newspapers. Local TV reporting has been just as prejudiced. I have spoken to people outside the NE who also assume that we're all part of a baying mob looking for Ashley's head and cockney blood. When I tell them that many supporters are not of that opinion at all and have a very different view on Ashley's involvement and Keegan's part in the club's turmoil they are quite surprised.

It's not a boycott. It's a rally. A rally for what ? NUSC So if there are people there chanting for Ashley to leave they are not there for NUSC is that what your saying ? Serious question. I'm not saying anything like that. Many people want Ashley to go and many don't. Many are NUSC members and many aren't. The two things aren't mutually exclusive, so I'm sure you will get some of those chants. But then you get those chants away from NUSC organised rallys too. I've chanted it myself in the stadium without a committee telling me it was ok. But in an organised rally stuff surely has to be organised therefore the leaflets should be all join NUSC, banners saying the same and people in charge of what happens. Thats the whole point of an organised committee and an organised rally. What I predict will happen is you will have an overruling over people chanting for Ashley to go and for cockneys this and that and that is my whole problem with the current set up of NUSC. It appears from the outside to be a solely anti Ashley protest group. I'm sorry but that is how it looks and how it sounds from their meetings. The NUSC can't prohibit members of the public from voicing their own opinions in a public place though. They've taken the precaution of organising their rally away from the stadium so in the event that it does turn into an anti-Ashley gathering it doesn't affect those who disagree, or the players on the pitch. I think 90% of fans are anti-ashley, so on the whole I'd think the NUSC are. But i think they are (for the most part) taking level headed action that doesn't have a negative impact on the team. Even though I do think a couple of their statements have been heavy handed. Poll on this forum shows only 20 percent think the NUSC represent their views. Do you reckon 70 percent of people on here are even more "anti-Ashley" than they are? This forum is VERY pro-Ashley. Or at least too forgiving (in my opinion) of his string of mistakes. I think it stems from previously being the most voiciferously anti-Shepherd forum and lots of posters still clinging onto the hope that the "anyone but Shepherd" view will be proved right...or at least not wanting to admit to NE5 he might have been on to something. But then, as I've said, Pro-NUSC <> Anti-Ashley. So that poll is unrelated to my estimate. Irrespective of people agreeing with the actions, aims or motives of the NUSC, I think at least 90% of fans would say they aren't happy with the direction of the club in the last 2 years. I'd disagree with that, but I think the pragmatists are condemned as being pro-Ashley by NUSC members. It's more a case of he came, he bailed us out, he tried to go but couldn't and now he's the man in charge who shapes our immediate destiny. He's here and we may as well attempt working together for the benefit of Newcastle United. As I've said many times if the so called NUSC ever came up with a viable and realistic alternative to what we've got right now and actually tell us WHO or WHAT they want instead, rather than just blurting the usual anti-Ashley and "cockney mafia" rhetoric then maybe we'd be pro the alternative. However theres a vacuum of alternative suggestions and they do little other than throw cheap insults and make jokes about the present set up.

Two words. Thaskin Shinawatra. Paid £100M Spent £30M Sold for £200M £70M profit in one mid-table season. Two other words: Global recession. Don't be daft man, there hasn't been a global recession it's just another excuse the Asley apollojists (hate that word) are bandying around !

Has anyone ever seen NE5 and Kenneth Shepherd in the same room ??

There was mate. I was in it and it had thousands of members, I've still got the lapel badge. You may remember the Magpie pub/club if you've been going to the match for a few years ? I'd join another one if it had credibility and actually did what it said on the tin (key words Newcastle United - Support ?) and didn't advocate boycotts which has to be the opposite of "support". No this is not a supporters club, this is a parochial political movement who want Ashley out and hi-jacked the term "supporters club" for their own purposes. It would raise their credibility if they actually said who or what they actually want to replace the men they so despise, but typically they are full of protest but never come up with any realistic alternatives.

Weren't four of those signed under Ashley's ownership? Yes four of them were signed by Allardyce when Ashley first arrived, is that relevant? Yes it is because he's a tw@t for backing the manager. Err no he's not he's actually a tw@t for NOT backing the manager. Err.... well something like that - he's a tw@t anyway - he must be mustn't he ?

I think I love you It is a great post and written by someone who obviously holds Newcastle United close to her heart. Shows how wrong the attitude of NUSC is - that if you don't agree with them you're not a Newcastle supporter.

Thanks for the insults - it's seems to be NUSC's supporters normal way of dealing with anyone who doesn't agree with their agenda. There's a thread somewhere which indicates about 8% fully agree with your verdict of them. Yeah I've noticed that certain newspapers seem very pro NUSC - I wonder why ? Could it be because the same newspapers love anything which portrays negativity about Newcastle ? Take your point about them being more credible than the "tracksuited mong" you mention. Marginally. P.S. you missed out the word "old" in your insult. One insult in the first line which I felt was fairly apt as that is exactly how you come across. Forget the fact i've made some fairly salient points in the rest of my post. Threads on here aren't worth the bandwidth it takes to view them since the majority of posters on here are so unspeakably anti-NUSC with almost no firm reason to back up their antipathy. You say that newspapers are pro-NUSC because they're anti-NUFC? Do pull the other one daft lad. From what I can gather from visiting other general football messageboards is that the opinion of NUSC amongst other fans is very positive. Only Mackems and a small minority of our lot seem to have an issue with the club. Make your f*cking mind up dimwit.

Thanks for the insults - it's seems to be NUSC's supporters normal way of dealing with anyone who doesn't agree with their agenda. There's a thread somewhere which indicates about 8% fully agree with your verdict of them. Yeah I've noticed that certain newspapers seem very pro NUSC - I wonder why ? Could it be because the same newspapers love anything which portrays negativity about Newcastle ? Take your point about them being more credible than the "tracksuited mong" you mention. Marginally. P.S. you missed out the word "old" in your insult.

Our team is struggling due to lack of investment. Investment ? Get real. Borrowed again from the Grauniad. Accounts recently published by Newcastle, for the year to June 2008, show how much more generous Ashley's contribution has been already, with debts paid off and £100m loaned interest free to the club, compared to the millions relentlessly earned from the club by the Halls and Shepherds. When Sir John, the Gateshead shopping-centre magnate, took over Newcastle, he promised that the club would herald north-east regeneration and revive the "Geordie nation". Whatever the outcome of that, the club certainly became hugely profitable for Sir John and his family. The Halls and Freddy Shepherd, who became a director alongside them, took no salaries for the first few years, then made up for it in 1996: Sir John was paid £836,803, Douglas Hall £793,612 and Shepherd £750,000. The accounts said the payment "recognises the fact that the directors received no remuneration prior to this year". Shepherd, who staunchly defends his and the Halls' record of achievement at Newcastle, acknowledged that after the club floated on the stockmarket in 1997, they never contributed money for the club to invest. Before that, he said, they had guaranteed loans – documents at the time noted that £3.5m of the club's borrowings were guaranteed by the Halls' company, Cameron Hall, and that Cameron Hall had loaned the club money, at 11% interest. The latest accounts provide a final reckoning on the Shepherds' and Halls' era because they sold all their shares to Ashley in June 2007 and have also resigned as directors. Altogether, the two families made an extraordinary £145.8m from their years of involvement – the Halls made £95.7m, the Shepherds £50.1m, mostly in salaries, dividends and ultimately selling their shares. The Halls had already made £20.35m from selling portions of their shares before Ashley paid £55m for their remaining stake. Shepherd did not want to sell – he had steadily bought more shares – but was effectively forced to – Ashley paid Freddie and Bruce £38m. Shepherd did not receive a pay-off when he resigned as a director in July 2007 but Douglas Hall, paid a £494,655 salary package in 2007 via a Newcastle United company registered in the tax haven of Gibraltar, was entitled to two years' pay in compensation and received an additional £1.17m when he resigned. The unrest and despondency on Tyneside now make it easy to forget how Ashley's arrival put a smile on local faces, a new owner who watched matches with supporters, drank on the Bigg Market and had £1bn in his pocket, too. The accounts show that having bought the club for £134m, Ashley paid off borrowings of £43m and cleared the overdraft, lending the club £100m on which he has chosen to waive interest. He has not declared a dividend nor paid himself a salary. In short, he has put a chunk of his considerable fortune on the line, and not taken a penny out.[/b]

Our team is struggling against it's worst ever injury crisis and some terrible refereeing decisions, our manager is in hospital awaiting heart surgery, our senior management team are desperately trying to create some stability and we have 13 of the most important games in our history coming up. So what do the so called "Newcastle United Supporters Club" do - they organise a protest march to be played out for the benefit of TV cameras and the London based tabloids immediately before an important game. You just couldn't make it up ! Does anyone suppose the supporters of West Brom, Middlesbrough, Portsmouth, Tottenham, Bolton, Sunderland or anyone else may be contemplating doing the same ? Not likely - they'll be supporting their teams as normal and having (yet another) laugh at our expense. No doubt the protest march will attract the usual self important rent-a-quotes and (non match attending) slack jawed charvas to grin, sing and provide the usual soundbites for the nation's amusement. Sky TV and certain hacks must be salivating at the prospect already. Could I suggest that instead of a distracting protest march, Newcastle fans do something REALLY extraordinary like getting to the stadium 15 minutes early and creating a rocking atmosphere to help our team win a match which will be the first of 13 "cup finals" we will play between now and the end of the season.

Granted some people have stayed away to protest against the "cockney mafia" thing. BUT it's really missing the point to blame a fall in attendance on that reason alone. Business everywhere is down and that includes football - it's more about the economic climate than anything else. Clubs with seemingly happy supporters have lost just as many, if not more, fans this season - look at what they did down the road recently. Niall Quinn is a great blarney merchant but thuth is what he dressed up as a grand gesture was nothing more than a panic move as he watches his attendances steadily decreasing.

"Failings of the current regime" ?? - From The Grauniad. Accounts recently published by Newcastle, for the year to June 2008, show how much more generous Ashley's contribution has been already, with debts paid off and £100m loaned interest free to the club, compared to the millions relentlessly earned from the club by the Halls and Shepherds. When Sir John, the Gateshead shopping-centre magnate, took over Newcastle, he promised that the club would herald north-east regeneration and revive the "Geordie nation". Whatever the outcome of that, the club certainly became hugely profitable for Sir John and his family. The Halls and Freddy Shepherd, who became a director alongside them, took no salaries for the first few years, then made up for it in 1996: Sir John was paid £836,803, Douglas Hall £793,612 and Shepherd £750,000. The accounts said the payment "recognises the fact that the directors received no remuneration prior to this year". Shepherd, who staunchly defends his and the Halls' record of achievement at Newcastle, acknowledged that after the club floated on the stockmarket in 1997, they never contributed money for the club to invest. Before that, he said, they had guaranteed loans – documents at the time noted that £3.5m of the club's borrowings were guaranteed by the Halls' company, Cameron Hall, and that Cameron Hall had loaned the club money, at 11% interest. The latest accounts provide a final reckoning on the Shepherds' and Halls' era because they sold all their shares to Ashley in June 2007 and have also resigned as directors. Altogether, the two families made an extraordinary £145.8m from their years of involvement – the Halls made £95.7m, the Shepherds £50.1m, mostly in salaries, dividends and ultimately selling their shares. The Halls had already made £20.35m from selling portions of their shares before Ashley paid £55m for their remaining stake. Shepherd did not want to sell – he had steadily bought more shares – but was effectively forced to – Ashley paid Freddie and Bruce £38m. Shepherd did not receive a pay-off when he resigned as a director in July 2007 but Douglas Hall, paid a £494,655 salary package in 2007 via a Newcastle United company registered in the tax haven of Gibraltar, was entitled to two years' pay in compensation and received an additional £1.17m when he resigned. The unrest and despondency on Tyneside now make it easy to forget how Ashley's arrival put a smile on local faces, a new owner who watched matches with supporters, drank on the Bigg Market and had £1bn in his pocket, too. The accounts show that having bought the club for £134m, Ashley paid off borrowings of £43m and cleared the overdraft, lending the club £100m on which he has chosen to waive interest. He has not declared a dividend nor paid himself a salary. In short, he has put a chunk of his considerable fortune on the line, and not taken a penny out.[/b]

Agreed, i'd join a proper supporters club but at the moment they are meerly afront for an Ashley out group from what i've read/listened too. With recent events or lack off, do you not think they are justified in wanting Ashley out? Looking at the state the club is in I think they are holding the clubs interests at heart by attacking the man that's caused it. Think most of you have been hooked again by this 5 year plan bollocks, just remember a leopard never changes it's spots. As I remember recent events they shouted "Ashley out" then Ashley said "OK I'm getting out" then the world's financial markets collapsed and he couldn't get out. Right now the REALITY is he's here for the forseeable future, so the best thing for the immediate, short and medium term future of NUFC may be to drop the ridiculous "cockney mafia out" stance and look for pragmatic ways to go forward. As you say "a leopard never changes it's spots" - so it's highly unlikely this so called NUSC will move away from it's single agenda driven protest. Very true! and the only way I see that changing is if Ashley's plans start paying dividends, but if not then he deserves all the flack that's coming his way. To be honest I don't like Ashley or what he has done to this great club, but if he does start to turn it around and we do see improvement then he'll get my full backing again. I ain't holding my breath Take your pick. - From The Grauniad. Accounts recently published by Newcastle, for the year to June 2008, show how much more generous Ashley's contribution has been already, with debts paid off and £100m loaned interest free to the club, compared to the millions relentlessly earned from the club by the Halls and Shepherds. When Sir John, the Gateshead shopping-centre magnate, took over Newcastle, he promised that the club would herald north-east regeneration and revive the "Geordie nation". Whatever the outcome of that, the club certainly became hugely profitable for Sir John and his family. The Halls and Freddy Shepherd, who became a director alongside them, took no salaries for the first few years, then made up for it in 1996: Sir John was paid £836,803, Douglas Hall £793,612 and Shepherd £750,000. The accounts said the payment "recognises the fact that the directors received no remuneration prior to this year". Shepherd, who staunchly defends his and the Halls' record of achievement at Newcastle, acknowledged that after the club floated on the stockmarket in 1997, they never contributed money for the club to invest. Before that, he said, they had guaranteed loans – documents at the time noted that £3.5m of the club's borrowings were guaranteed by the Halls' company, Cameron Hall, and that Cameron Hall had loaned the club money, at 11% interest. The latest accounts provide a final reckoning on the Shepherds' and Halls' era because they sold all their shares to Ashley in June 2007 and have also resigned as directors. Altogether, the two families made an extraordinary £145.8m from their years of involvement – the Halls made £95.7m, the Shepherds £50.1m, mostly in salaries, dividends and ultimately selling their shares. The Halls had already made £20.35m from selling portions of their shares before Ashley paid £55m for their remaining stake. Shepherd did not want to sell – he had steadily bought more shares – but was effectively forced to – Ashley paid Freddie and Bruce £38m. Shepherd did not receive a pay-off when he resigned as a director in July 2007 but Douglas Hall, paid a £494,655 salary package in 2007 via a Newcastle United company registered in the tax haven of Gibraltar, was entitled to two years' pay in compensation and received an additional £1.17m when he resigned. The unrest and despondency on Tyneside now make it easy to forget how Ashley's arrival put a smile on local faces, a new owner who watched matches with supporters, drank on the Bigg Market and had £1bn in his pocket, too. The accounts show that having bought the club for £134m, Ashley paid off borrowings of £43m and cleared the overdraft, lending the club £100m on which he has chosen to waive interest. He has not declared a dividend nor paid himself a salary. In short, he has put a chunk of his considerable fortune on the line, and not taken a penny out.

Agreed, i'd join a proper supporters club but at the moment they are meerly afront for an Ashley out group from what i've read/listened too. With recent events or lack off, do you not think they are justified in wanting Ashley out? Looking at the state the club is in I think they are holding the clubs interests at heart by attacking the man that's caused it. Think most of you have been hooked again by this 5 year plan bollocks, just remember a leopard never changes it's spots. As I remember recent events they shouted "Ashley out" then Ashley said "OK I'm getting out" then the world's financial markets collapsed and he couldn't get out. Right now the REALITY is he's here for the forseeable future, so the best thing for the immediate, short and medium term future of NUFC may be to drop the ridiculous "cockney mafia out" stance and look for pragmatic ways to go forward. As you say "a leopard never changes it's spots" - so it's highly unlikely this so called NUSC will move away from it's single agenda driven protest.

A bunch of self important rentaquotes who are more bothered about their own tinpot political aspirations than the genuine welfare of the club. Such people thrive on the bad times and have a vested interest in highlighting everything bad while denying anything good or progressive. One or two journalists (with very dubious NUFC credentials) have latched on to them because they are saying exactly what those journalists want to hear. The truth (and irony) is they seem to have more support amongst "cockney journalists" than they have from Newcastle supporters on Tyneside. They have been arrogant and rude from the start thereby giving themselves no chance of any meaningful dialogue with those in power. As a supporter of almost 50 years, when I politely declined one of their leaflets I was told "so you're not a Newcastle fan are you ?" and that just about sums up their narrow minded agenda and bullying tactics. Fortunately no one other than a few proven anti-NUFC journalists seem to be taking this minority group seriously.

A Sunderland supporters movement couldn't have planned it better ! Our detractors around the country and in the press will just LOVE this rally.

Ashley breaks trading cartel to sell overpriced replica shirts at a price the man in the street can afford. - What a tw@t ! It really shows how prejudiced some people are against him, although I'm sure Dave Whelan would agree with every word. I know he's presently blamed for everything from the recession to global warming so we may as well persecute him for having the audacity to sell cheap football shirts too.

Kevin Keegan comes out of the shower and the last 6 months was all a dream...... Mike Ashley gets shot - but by who ? Team bus drives into River Tyne......... Dennis Wise discovers he's Keegan's long lost lovechild............

Lets be honest if a club can sell a season ticket at full price or even a full junior or OAP price it's not going to sell them at £16. Sunderland obviously have a problem with the stadium only about 65% full for some games so good luck to them in trying to fill up with what are virtually freebies. But it's more desperation than kind gesture. Every club (and leisure business) in the land is going to suffer in the next few years as the economic depression bites hard so most clubs will have to look at ways to keep the punters coming through the gates.

At the end of the day he's like any other greedy b*stard footballer, he happily signed a long and very lucrative contract to play for a club he claimed to love, the moment a bigger offer came along HE chose to break that contract and f@ck off ! Easiest thing for him to do is take a swipe at an unpopular regime to deflect from his own actions, and try to pretend he was forced out and didn't really want to leave. He couldn't wait to get out once bigger money was on the table. Cheap shot Shay. Good luck at City.

The usual "love the fans" blah blah that most players spout when being transferred. "Regime were very unhelpful" - well we may be in a mess but "unhelpful" ? Did he expect Newcastle to lie back and let him go easily after him and his agent went public ? Come on Shay we might be daft but were not that bloody daft.

Don't think he'd be anywhere near the first team now if we could get the rest of them fit, but needs be......

Cool down guys. Even with our present squad if everyone is fit he's no longer first choice. You need squad players - he's experienced and has a decent fitness record. Decent squad player.

I personally thought it was more important to appoint a manager who knew what he was doing. The players are good enough to stay up. Kinnear is taking us down like, but say we sacked him and brought in someone else, who is to say that will make any difference to the players? I feel they have had as much as they can stomach regardless of who sits in the dugout now at this late stage which is worrying because we'll be relying on them to pull themselves together and to show some professional pride irrespective of their feelings about the manager or his total ineptitude. I don't for one minute believe the Kinnear 3 year contract thing, if we stay up a new manager will come in, if we go down theres no way he'll stay. It may have been a "red herring agreement" to increase his value to any future employer. Kinnear was never the answer but when everyone else was walking out on us or refusing to touch us, he came and if nothing else we had a manager in the dressing room. Of course no one wanted him but to imply the players are not playing for him is crazy - most have shown superb attitude in the face of the recent adversity and terrible injury crisis (not to mention a spate of awful refereeing decisions). Joe will go - but right now he's what we've got and he's doing his best.