OzzieMandias

would you support the appointment of Allardyce again then, to run the club on a smaller budget, like you did the last time ? Or do you think he should be looking for someone who has won the title 4 times with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards ? Serious question, because we still really don't know what your criteria is for appointing managers ?

It's hardly news that his fortune tanked in the meltdown, and this has already been much discusseed here, although the earlier estimates of what he had were more like £800 million than £700 million. Obviously it's not good that the man whose money is keeping the club out of insolvency has less money than he used to.

What's ambition got to do with it? I thought it was all supposed to be down to blind luck.

If Shepherd can't be blamed for his bad decisions, I don't see how he can be given any credit for his good ones.

We have only played football worth watching under two managers in my time watching Newcastle, SBR and Keegan. As you must know I am no Keeganite but whatever the rights and wrongs of his latest stint as manager, this was the closest we have come to playing passing football again in ages. Compare the footy we were playing at the beginning of the season to the travesty we served up against Stoke and it was light years apart. And this relates to the question of his motivations for coming back and then leaving again... how exactly?

Because its losses are still being underwritten by Keegan? I don't think it's ever been in profit.

That Keegan was a bit disillusioned with the game is not a matter of opinion. He's on record expressing that disillusionment, in quotes that were subsequently posted on here, and saying that he had no desire to go back into management. You can feel it also in his outburst after the Chelsea game. And I think most of us could see that he wasn't quite the same man. He'd took quite a few knocks between leaving and coming back, and seemed to have lost some of the vivacity and fearlessness of his younger days. Financial probs at Soccer Circus are also a matter of public record. The unproven leap is in connecting that with his decision to take the job, not long after declaring that he would never go back into management.

Indisputably. I'd usually say from the Partizan game, but maybe the exact moment was the 2-6 against Man U.

We appointed a manager who won four titles with two different clubs and three manager of the year awards.

And Liverpool are teetering on the edge of real trouble.

Man U are sustaining this kind of debt because they're regularly in the Champions League, not the other way around.

I wonder how much it costs to get a sick note from the Egypt team doctor.

No one is above criticism.

I always imagined he'd be a Dalglish type manager.

Which is a code word for his misses has just rolled in a big fucking cheesecake on a hostess trolley.

We didn't qualify for the CL though did we. Arguably in part due to spending the Summer budget early and buying Woodgate we had our highest finish under Robson and finished in a CL qualifying round position, but by no means were we guaranteed the money from getting into the CL proper. We lost out in a 2 legged game, didn't qualify, and didn't get the cash bonus that would have paid for the players you are suggesting we bought. Anyone who goes on about not spending that Summer is advocating being far more reckless with the clubs finances than the old board is ever accused of being. What you are saying is that we should have gambled money that the club couldn't budget for without the CL money in the hope that the player(s) bought with that money would make a significant difference in their first couple of competitive games for us (ie would be the difference between losing the tie with the existing established players and winning it with the new one's involvement). That's a ridiculous risk to take. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when it's combined with the surety that doing something differently would have had a positive outcome - if only we'd bought unidentified player X he'd have stopped the Partizan goal/scored the home equaliser/scored the pen that Shearer or Dyer or Woodgate or Hughes missed. Bollocks. New players not fully integrated are as likely to cost you a game as win you one. The hilarious irony is that had we spent more money that Summer in the assumption that we were going to qualify, and had we still lost that tie, you and those like you would be slating the old board (not the manager who would have chosen the player btw, but the board) for spending that money before we were guaranteed the income. What was the official line from Shepherd though? "keeping our powder dry" is what I remember. Nowt about waiting to see if we got into the CL proper, and more of an indication that a crocked Woodgate was the final piece of SBR's jigsaw - a complete and competitive squad with enough depth to cover for injuries, loss of form and suspensions, and push on for successive top 4 finishes regardless of the Partizan game. Risky business? damn right it was, as the squad was nowhere near complete to be competitive. Good post though it is, I can also look at things from the above perspective and critique as I wish. Oh, also, was Shepherd thinking that a reactive appointment like Souness was worth "backing" with 50m quid? Did he really think Souness had the credentials and quality to finish in the top 4? IMO he spent the 50m to pacify the criticism he got for the whole Rooney saga, sale of Woodgate and for undermining Sir Bobby. If I were chairman and truly believed that Souness was worth backing with 50m, I wouldn't have sacked him when Shepherd did, and I would have stuck by him. THAT is what backing a manager really means. You do not back a manager with an obscene amount of money, then sack him a year later for anything other than gross misconduct or breach of contract. No, you back a manager by allowing him to build his own team within pre-set financial constraints. Hanging onto an underperforming manager at the expense of the club itself and its followers is an entirely different thing and coincidentally is what we are currently witnessing. Can you build a team in one and a half seasons? Shepherd backed a manager who had a history of heart problems, a reputation for being confrontational, and paid a fee to sign him on from a club that was bottom of the table. He gave Souness the 50m to spend in the hope that we'd win the Carling cup as he'd done with Blackburn. It was Shepherd's last call, hoping he'd go out all guns blazing. Shepherd had no intention of backing Souness to build a team. He wanted to live the pipe dream of being the one to win that elusive trophy for NUFC. In this sense, we're basically a sort of failed Portsmouth.

first class contribution. Yes, it was, wasn't it? A very economical way of pointing out that anyone who believes Keegan is likely to return, or that the Keegan of today, in the football climate of today, would be likely to repeat his successes of 15 or more years ago, is living in a total fantasy world. Even Keegan knows it, as his outburst after the Chelsea match made very clear to anyone not blinded by sentiment and an inability to distinguish 2009 from 1992. no it wasn't, it was childish in the extreme, and pretty daft IMO by you, again. You are right about the need to succeed, and you are right about Keegan knowing it, but did you say this at the time, or have you cottoned on yet that Ashley - unlike his predecessors - doesn't understand what it takes to be successful ? So you think that football today is the same as it was in 1992, and that Keegan, even though he explicitly does not believe so himself, would have the same impact on a league now ruled by CL revenue and mega-investment? If so, sorry, but you're completely deluded.

first class contribution. Yes, it was, wasn't it? A very economical way of pointing out that anyone who believes Keegan is likely to return, or that the Keegan of today, in the football climate of today, would be likely to repeat his successes of 15 or more years ago, is living in a total fantasy world. Even Keegan knows it, as his outburst after the Chelsea match made very clear to anyone not blinded by sentiment and an inability to distinguish 2009 from 1992.

Obviously not very closely!

It seems the scrap metal Shepherd lives on Jesmond Park West, so I think it's unlikely that the fat former football club chairman does too, or the article (which does mention the NUFC chairman) probably would have logged the coincidence. http://www.northeastexclusive.co.uk/property/article.aspx?id=183

By where Matthew Bank meets Jesmond Dene Road, on the Jesmond side. The street where Shepherd lives (Bemersyde Drive) runs along the southern boundary of the grounds. I used to do a paper round in that area. Bemersyde Drive was the worst street of the lot, all these really long garden paths you had to traipse up and down. doesnt freddy live on jesmond park east/west Obviously, I thought he lived on Bemersyde, but of course I could be wrong, you are. link? Which house on Bemersyde? Dunno. I read it somewhere. Or think I did.

By where Matthew Bank meets Jesmond Dene Road, on the Jesmond side. The street where Shepherd lives (Bemersyde Drive) runs along the southern boundary of the grounds. I used to do a paper round in that area. Bemersyde Drive was the worst street of the lot, all these really long garden paths you had to traipse up and down. doesnt freddy live on jesmond park east/west Obviously, I thought he lived on Bemersyde, but of course I could be wrong, you are. link?

The Tooth Fairy?

Anyone? There isn't any reason Ashley would want to do this. The story is shite, pure and simple.

There's also no way the old board could have dealt with the debts that they themselves had created. Fred should be in his knees every morning thanking god that Ashley came along.