Teasy

Playing the martyr eight months in. Acting like we're a charity case and he's done us a big favour. we were and he has He hasn't paid OUR debt off, he's paid HIS debt off. He hasn't given US any money. He's invested it in HIS business, from which HE will get the profits. Falling hook line and sinker for the old Shepherd guff. So when he does something good like pays off £100 million of debt he's only paying off "his debt" but when he does something bad he's making a fool of "our club". Do you ever post anything positive you miserable little person?

To be honest Enrique made him look a fool a couple of times until he switched sides so he could pick on the easy option (Carr). He took his second goal very well though, but overall he's a cheating nancy boy who's skill on the ball is massively overated (excellent finisher and very dynamic player though).

His first season was ok? Before he took over we'd played 7 games and we were rooted to the foot of the table with 1 point and no hope. He got us 51 points from the remaining 31 games and took us to 11th, which was an amazing achievement (the same points tally per game for all 38 games would have gotten us to 6th). Yes the second season was average, but the important thing was he consolidated us and moved on quickly in the following season. Also how on earth can you say only two very good seasons. If you think a 5th place finish wasn't very good then I don't know what you must be saying with our recent Premiership finishes... Robson did the second best job in our recent history (last 11-12 years), he saved us in his first season, stabalised us and then took us to 4th, 3rd and 5th, to say he did a good job and nothing more is just pathetic really.

rubbish mate, tbh. Blame the current people running the club. The players bought in the summer, that people said were "good business" ..... have really done the business. Average low priced players = embarrassing hammerings from clubs who have real ambition and show it. Whatever you think of Shepherd, its been said before and ignored, but they backed their managers to try and bring quality footballers to the club. Remind me, who brought in the man who decided to buy those shit players NE5?...

Delusional

Yeah, you're right. We deserved at least a point.... Why are you agreeing with something he didn't say?, what a total dickhead... Everything he says is right more or less, not sure about Ferdinand, think he was just onside, but the rest is fair enough.

It would have been 10:0 or more without Given you fucking clown!! mackems.gif

It should only have been three nil then. Onwards and upwards................ 3:1 actually

Probably told him to stop taking bungs, which is pretty stupid considering what Manure offer refs these days.

The lineswoman.

http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=48803.msg1150867#msg1150867

It's clear that they just didn't feel they could back Allardyce at all, he was never their man and was never going to be. I just don't see the point in keeping him when our season is pretty much a write-off at this point anyway. I'm disappointed as anyone that our sights seem to be set fairly low on the managerial food chain, but I don't see how swapping one above average manager whom you don't trust for another above average manager that you do trust is quite the shambles some seem to think it is. As for how poorly it's been handled, it'll make absolutely no difference in the long run as far as I can see. have we made that swap? thought redknapp turned us down tbh. had redknapp joined it still would've been a poor decision but he didn't want it so it's even worse. the difference between sacking allardyce now (aside from the argument of giving him a full season) and waiting till the end of the season is that it is far easier to find managers in the close season, especially in an international tournament year where a host of big changes will be made after the final ball of euro 2008 is kicked. if you change mid-season you better make sure you have a new man lined up, as spurs did. Hold on, so your argument hinges on Harry Redknapp's decision? Which neither Mort or Ashley can do anything about? Clearly Redknapp was very interested in the job, which is why they decided to go ahead and offer it too him. How can Mort or Ashley be held accountable for the hundred and one things rushing through Redknapps head on Friday night that finally brought him to the decision to stay at Portsmouth?

Firstly, no he wasn't a decent manager. Secondly obviously he was interested and they knew he was interested before they offered him the job. How exactly would you have preferred them to do things? Actually offer him the job with Allardyce still in charge and have it all over the papers how we'd just taken a big s*** all over Sam and what a bunch of c***s we are?.. Only for Harry to then turn us down and then have to deal with the fallout of having Allardyce still in charge knowing that we just want over his head to another manager? You think that would be a preferrable situation?...

Agreed

Oh f*** off man, Jol was worse then sacked the minute people found out Spurs were after Ramos, he was a dead man managing and you think that was a better situation then just being honest and sacking him first? Right, here's a scenario for you. You wake up and find the news all over the papers that we've offered Redknapp the job with Sam still in charge and he's turned us down. We're now left with a manager who knows he's sacked, who we've shat on from a great height and will still be in charge for todays game against Manure. What is your reaction? Be honest now, you'd have come on here and said what a complete and utter disgrace it was, wouldn't you?

...just a bit. To sack Sam at such a ridiculous time without, now we find, anybody at all lined up is scarily reminiscent of Shepherd's decision to sack Bobby. Yet what would have happened if they'd tried to find out for sure about Redknapp before sacking Allardyce? We'd have a situation where we approached another manager with Allardyce still in charge, had that manager turn us down publically as Allardyce sits in the background still Newcastle United manager. What would people say then "Its a shambles, they should have let Allardyce go if they wanted another manager, now he's been undermined and we have nowhere to go from here but to sack him". How can they win with some people around here? There's a way of doing things. Ashley's best friend is very well acquainted with Redknapp, i'm sure it wouldn't have been difficult to find out if he was interested without the press getting hold of it. Who says that wasn't done? It took Redknapp time to finally decide to turn the offer down and Peter Storie says at one point he thought he'd decided to leave for Newcastle. So clearly he was interested, but in the end decided against it. No amount of checking up on what someone wants will ever make something 100% certain, especially when that person is otherwise very happy where he is. Until they're actually asked full on to make a decision you can never tell.

The real question is how could we get him out of his contract with 'King of the Hill'?

Ban!! I don't care what the rules are on suggesting bans, this is a special situation

...just a bit. To sack Sam at such a ridiculous time without, now we find, anybody at all lined up is scarily reminiscent of Shepherd's decision to sack Bobby. Yet what would have happened if they'd tried to find out for sure about Redknapp before sacking Allardyce? We'd have a situation where we approached another manager with Allardyce still in charge, had that manager turn us down publically as Allardyce sits in the background still Newcastle United manager. What would people say then "Its a shambles, they should have let Allardyce go if they wanted another manager, now he's been undermined and we have nowhere to go from here but to sack him". How can they win with some people around here?

Why are we an embarassment? Because a manager turned us down your embarassed? We sack our manager, appoint Graeme Souness who fights with all and sundry. We sack him, stick Roeder in charge, fight for him to be able to manage the club against the wishes of the FA, then sack him. We appoint an experienced, proven manager, and hound him out from day one, sack him, then have no replacement lined up. Then we get turned down by a bog standard manager. You don't find any of this embarassing? Have you no shame? Ashley and Mort have nothing to do with any of that... As for hounding Allardyce out from day one, rubbish, he got support at first and spat it back in people's faces with his s*** Football and arrogant nature. He deserved to be sacked. Yes he shouldn't be sacked unless we have a replacement lined up, but obviously we did think so. After all we couldn't actually approach Portsmouth and Redknapp until Allardyce was sacked or we'd then have a situation like that of Jol at Spurs, which you would then be pissing and moaning about as well, so its a no win for them really.. They've done things the right way and been honest about everything, its just unfortunate for them that it hasn't gone how they wanted it to with Redknapp turning the job down.

.. sorry Parky but....

Well I can't say I'd be disapointed if I found out Redknapp wasn't going to be our next manager. As long as we don't hire someone worse anyway, like Mark Hughes.

If you expect there's another Robson coming, end the discussion now. Robson comes in just because he is a Geordie who is willing to save the club from the mess. It is just a miracle and it ain't going to happen again. To compare Robson with Redknapp is an insult tbh. The point is, top class managers would never join another club during season unless they are fired. Would you expect someone like Wenger will leave at January to join Barca? Of course you can say it's just a dream to get those managers but then if Ashley isn't willing to try it then why pay so much money just to employ a manager that is the same level as BS but with better attacking style football? There's no reason why Redknapp can achieve more in here than in Portsmouth. He has even more money to spend there. So what you meant to say was that successful managers are never appoined during the season.. appart from when they are but it won't happen this time because it only happens sometimes? Nah I know what you mean, I just disagree with using the word never.

The fact that successful managers are never appointed during season bothers me most. Robson wasn't successful? If Redknapp can take us to the top four regularly like Bobby did I'd consider him a success,.

Another difference is Redknapp doesn't have an incredibly stilted and negative Football philosophy that he sticks to no matter what. Though I have to admit that Portsmouth's shocking lack of goals at home does worry me a little bit.. But not too much given how well the team have played overall this season. did you see our shocking lack of goals at home? Yes, but firstly I don't want the same s*** that Allardyce gave me and secondly Portsmouth's lack of home goals was even worse then ours. They haven't scored a single goal in there last 6 home games. Having said that I don't think its a major concern, just seems like one of those strange things that happens sometimes. Or does anyone know other reasons that have caused this?