80

IIRC, he said pretty much what he said here a few years back - injuries meant he the clock was already ticking for him.

Given the 'loan till Christmas' thing, I got the impression it might even have been an 'agent owns' type deal.

Looking at the name, the most obvious conclusion is that it's been done to piss people off. There'll be other motives, but that was definitely one of them. Ashley flew in with his helicopter like the big boss, handed Hughton a contract, took the club off the market and gave the stadium a comedy name which has left fans up and down the country laughing at us again. He wants to prove he's in charge. Who's going to argue with him? Llambias? Hughton? Just to eliminate any doubt in your mind, I will remind you of our stadium's new name: Sports Direct @ St James Park Stadium. It's clearly a pisstake man, look at it. They have even tagged 'stadium' on the end of 'park' just to emphasize the name change. Ask fans of other clubs what they think and they will tell you it's clearly a pisstake, that's half the reason they're finding it so funny. absolutely. Ashley seems to have this siege mentality in whatever he does, ie 'parking the tanks on the lawn' of his opponents or calling his shareholders 'crybabies' or the dubai shenanigans or offering unqualified outsiders like Llambias, Hughton & Kinnear contracts. He does things his own way and revels in causing a controversy. I don't buy the line that he's ran the club into the ground out of spite - that makes no sense. And i genuinely think he wants to sell the naming rights to make some money. But the temporary naming, a move which gives the club absolutely no benefit whatsoever, is clearly a two fingers up at detractors. I'm an outsider, so god forbid me to know MA more than you do, but I think that the current name is just one of those "trying to please everyone" hackjobs that end up horribly. It seems to me that he just tried to tag a commercial name while being able to say he's kept the original name of the stadium and thus respected its history, and the result has been worse and more humiliating than if he just swapped the name outright. Just to clarify, sticking 'stadium' on the end of ours is akin to calling yours the 'Camp Nou Arena'. It's just totally illogical. I'd have gone along with your explanation until that point.

As the Japs say, the nail that sticks out will get hammered flat

Likewise. Bit of a clichéd response, but a great shame.

So... make a load of predictions. Find them to be quite significantly wrong and then factor reality into those initial predictions in order to create more predictions, which history suggests will also be significantly wrong. I see. Ashley will definitely hang on to us now AND sell the entire squad because we are DEFINITELY staying in the Premiership for more than one season.

The only problem there's been with protests is their absence and/or lack of severity. He got a very easy ride over the relegation, and received no real indication then or since that hanging on isn't a good idea. The trouble is that in real terms our bolt as been shot, shy of anything probably inadvisedly extreme happening - we need another one before we get another opportunity to aim, be that fresh impetus gained from news developments (seemingly unlikely), or straight-forwardly the next round of season ticket renewals (only really useful should we not go up - which I sometimes consider the preferability of (consider us going up, him hanging on even longer and us going back down yet again)).

Pah, sod it

Sounds like a front for an evil corporation. Out of the frying pan and into this bloke > http://img132.imageshack.us/i/prisonbreakgeneral.jpg/?

Not that long, this is his first season anywhere near the team. Six appearances. The lad's a busted flush, fuck him off.

Somalis wandering around South London singing Sunderland till I die Didn't know the score until then...

You mean emulating the tree that fell in the uninhabited woods? If you want to make a noise (let alone achieve something), you'll have to bite the bullet and do it mid-season. It really is your only serious option.

Some people on here, fully accepting that Keegan is capable of coming the game with the hierachy of NUFC but generally accepting that in doing so, he is doing it in the genuine and honest hope that it will be of the benefit of the club in the long term - fair point I feel. Keegan sitting down, thrashing out the issues, and if that failed, making things public and walking with his head held high forcing Ashley and co to explain themselves you could argue would show a 'genuine and honest hope that it will be of the benefit of the club in the long term'. Disappearing, suing the club binding all parties to a non disclosure agreement leading to confusion, impotant anger, boycotts and childish threats, continuing instability, and by the look of things, a masive hit to the club coffers that may have delayed any potential sale you could argue shows little to no indication of any interest in anything other than himself. It has been said that his contract allowed had him liable to pay Ashley a couple of million should he have left it early. If true, he'd have to make himself legally impervious to be certain of avoiding paying that sum i.e. demonstrating it was Ashley and not he who had broken the terms. Saying that, it's just occurred to me that there'd be some who'd think him paying up £2m, regardless of the rights and wrongs of the dispute, would be a good thing - as it would aid the club accounts.

What an idea.

The sale price of something is somewhere between the least it's possessor will accept for it and the most anyone else will pay for it. A business is not an entity separate from it's debts and assets - they are part of the business. Moat (possibly) isn't prepared/able to pay £100m for this particular business if it still owes Barclays a certain amount of money. I imagine he wouldn't mind buying this business even if it had those debts if Ashley only wanted £85m from him (this is possibly not the case, but that's another discussion). Quite straight-forward - Ashley is playing a role the club not being sold. Does that make him a bad man? Don't care, I'll leave that to you lot, but the price of this club isn't £100m until it's sold for that (here's a statement of the obvious - the worth of this club to most people would obviously be very different if Ashley isn't wanting the money he's loaned it back to what it is if he is). If Moat's still quibbling over it's debts and isn't handing over a heavy suitcase to Ashley then it's pretty clear he hasn't agreed to buy it for that figure - if Barclays were able to make clear they aren't shifting then he isn't (necessarily) going to buy it anyway. Any agreement is at present non-existent in real terms. As for the idea the club's sale price is £100m, that's as much a fantasy of Ashley's as me saying I want to sell my trousers but won't accept less than £40k for them (they are very nice trousers) - the number doesn't matter until someone is actually willing to engage with it. Is anyone willing to engage with Ashley's number for the business as it stands (debts, assets and all)? We'll see.

The comments aren't that bad, really. And he's hardly slagging of Duff's former self.

Keefaz, going on this thread, you've not heard many people speak mate. Guile and Nullify? They're just words

I appreciate the self-motivation - most of them are showing desire to compete and win. More than I expected. Better keep it up though... Hopefully the fact it's paying off (so clearly, in the case of Nolan chasing down the ball for the second) will act as positive reinforcement.

Now there's a manager that wouldn't be the end of the world.

Don't get all this Hughton appreciation. I mean, he's from London - we must think he's a twat, right?

Would just like to make sure my name's included in the O'Leary Hate camp.

http://img10.imageshack.us/i/1980sfashion.jpg Promising youngster departs 2nd division Newcastle for Spurs? I love a bit of nostalgia.

What does that mean? Name me 5 managers who have. How often do reigns end in something other than resignation or sacking? It's a maxim in football that a team's form dives when the players know their manager will be leaving at a defined time. If it helps, he probably could've turned England and us the second time around into sackings without too much difficulty. Arguably did with us, in fact - he was being steadily 'relieved of his duties'. Rafa, Moyes, Ferguson, Wenger have all seen out their initial contracts. Sure Southgate has as well, but sort of ruins any point i was going to make that the best and most successful mangers see out their deals So has Keegan, then - he signed a three year contract with us in 1992. he signed a 10 year contract in 1994. Two responses; A) That's a ludicrous contortion you'd be pulling to maintain your ground. B) Then none of T'sT lot have seen out their contracts either and my original question remains unanswered.

What does that mean? Name me 5 managers who have. How often do reigns end in something other than resignation or sacking? It's a maxim in football that a team's form dives when the players know their manager will be leaving at a defined time. If it helps, he probably could've turned England and us the second time around into sackings without too much difficulty. Arguably did with us, in fact - he was being steadily 'relieved of his duties'. Rafa, Moyes, Ferguson, Wenger have all seen out their initial contracts. Sure Southgate has as well, but sort of ruins any point i was going to make that the best and most successful mangers see out their deals So has Keegan, then - he signed a three year contract with us in 1992.

What does that mean? Name me 5 managers who have. How often do reigns end in something other than resignation or sacking? It's a maxim in football that a team's form dives when the players know their manager will be leaving at a defined time. If it helps, he probably could've turned England and us the second time around into sackings without too much difficulty. Arguably did with us, in fact - he was being steadily 'relieved of his duties'.