OzzieMandias

It was a very simple question that required a very simple answer, and it related directly to the clarification of something that you said. No surprise, then, that you can't/won't answer it.

Do you think that if you believe in protesting about one thing, then you should believe in protesting about everything?

I don't think it's ironic so much as stupid, tbh.

You're forgetting the question, "Do you honestly think that Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League?", which has been knocking around unanswered for longer than any of these other johnny-come-lately questions.

http://www.newcastle-united-supporters-club.co.uk/events.php http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/tyne/7904698.stm

As opposed to Sir Bobby, who would probably have said, "What? Carl Cort's had a heart attack?"

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great. i tell you that non newcastle supporting friends of mine laughed at NUFC for appointing souness and roeder and it is dismissed. someone else tells you that some non nufc fans think along your lines and it is taken on board and is supposed to mean something. i can see a pattern forming. so can I. Its quite amazing that you can't see mandiarse is the one harping on saying Ashley isn't embarrassing him and causing us to be laughed and the Halls and Shepherd did. mackems.gif The difference is, I know that nobody laughed at us/me when we were qualifying for europe more than everybone but 4 teams. I also don't take the presumption that they are, to heart. I'm so pleased you think all the 87 clubs that haven't qualified for europe as often as us, found something to laugh at. I think you and some others should get out more and stop taking these WUM's on phone ins to heart. Whats your take on Chelsea sacking Phil Scolari ? How can that be, a world cup winner, and I thought it was only us who appointed managers who failed and didn't give them time Have you read the reports that Zola may take over in the summer ? Amazing, someone who has only been a manager for a few months, surely its only us who do things like that too ? erm i'm not actually bothered about what he thought. i'd have disagreed with him about dalglish and also with those who were carrying on about fred the way many are now about ashley ("just want them out and anyone will be better, despite no-one looking like they are willing to step into the breech or carrying the financial clout needed). you shouldn't try to lump everyone who disagrees with you in the same boat and lets face it ,it would need to be a cruise liner. my whole disagreement with you has been about the position the club was in when ashley took over. i'm sure i've answered the scolari one before, but hey ho. it's a one that didn't pay off and was always more of a risk than it seemed due to him never having managed in european league football. even the fact he won a world cup can be lessoned when you think of the players at his disposal. i take it you weren't that miffed when we appointed kinnear in "the lottery" ? I think if we stay up, it will be almost entirely down to Kinnear for getting their heads up and restoring some spirit among the players. Next season will be just the same as this though, until the inevitable happens. And the club will be nearer to where it was when the Halls and Shepherd found it. But I'm sure Ashley continuing his prudency on crowds of 20,000 will be the right policy to get us back into europe again. Why don't you tell us what you would describe the appointments of football managers to be, when such a sure fire certainty as a World Cup Winner is sacked after a few months, and the long term replacement is being touted as someone who has been a manager for only a few months ? Or do you still think we are the only club who ever do this, and all the 87 clubs who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did were getting it right while we were getting it all wrong ?? if we stop up we'll disagree as to why then. i think the squad has enough quality but not enough depth and kinnear hasn't done anything for me to think he's changed things. they don't seem to be playing with extra spirit or extra tactical nouse. you speak of next season but i think had fred and sam stayed this season would have seen championship football and real panic on the financial front (.thats why after backing fred, as things turned, so did I). as for your question about appointments i'll give you an honest and straight forward answer......you'll see that i said scolari,due to his lack of euro league experience wasn't a sure fire bet. personally i'd have went for a manger with euro league experience (preferably english,spanish or german leagues) for the other 87 clubs it should have been easier for us to attract a better quality of manager (instead of souness) as we were a team who had finished 5th and managers tend to want to go to the better performing clubs as we were than. haven't you yet realised the irony that you are defending apointing poor managers on the grounds that they aren't certain to be a success yet are complaining that we aren't trying to buy the best players who are just as uncertain . i'll save you answering to this bit as you'll say that i am saying that we should get a top manager but not top players,my answer is that we should get the best of both that we can afford,even using debt as necessary but not the level of debt fred built up and not with the totally unsustainble wages. At the end of the day. 1. Mike Ashley doesn't have ambition for the club like his predecessors did. 2. 87 other clubs have appointed managers and run clubs inferior to us, yet you say we have "failed" 3. I think relegation is inevitable under the current Mike Ashley "plan" at the start of the day 1. fred was in a position to do that (ie assets to gaurantee lending against,less debt to finance etc) then his gamble failed. 2. lesser clubs will have more problem attracting a better manager. you'd expect a club who finished 5th should attract better than souness, or any prem club should attract better than roeder, it works exactly the same with players, which you don't see as a lottery. 3. i think releagtaion and bankruptcy was a certainty under freds direction. by the way...do you think nufc should have kept borrowing despite making yearly losses till success or bankruptcy ? well, as I have said. The Halls and Shepherd have paid the price you wanted them to pay for their "failure". I hope you are pleased the club is in better hands, but a few years of real mediocrity the likes of which you have never imagined will change your mind I suspect. As has been pointed out by UV, what a shame we didn't take the Ashley direction 9 years ago and we would have avoided all that champions league stuff, getting in the way of the business etc etc. i've already told you about where i saw the club going under fred, and i'd take a few years mediocrity (which i do remember from the 70's and 80's) over that. also i've already stated about when it is wise,if not best practise, to take on debt,however there are also times when it is unwise to take on more debt, ie when your performance on and off the pitch is going backwards,when you are making regular losses and when wages count for over 70% iof your turnover. in this instance do you think it a good thing to build up more debt ? what happens if you take this gamble a two or three times and it fails to pay off, do you keep on doing it ? why are you so s*** scared of answering this question honestly and straightforwardly ? exactly, how can a business run under such massive losses season after season, sooner or later the banks will ask for their money especially nowadays and we would of been screwed, although someone could of snapped the club on the cheap if that had happened to be fair the position was unsustainable even before anyone heard of the credit crunch. As Sir John Hall realised.

I wonder if NE5 honestly thinks Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League? don't dish out the one liners ozzie lad, when you can't take it. Do you honestly think Ashley will ever get us into the Intertoto Cup, you know, that method of qualifiying for europe that was such a disgrace a few years ago No he won't. But only because there is no longer an Intertoto Cup.

Yes, and it's amazing (or not) that you keep repeating something so utterly imbecilic. The Halls and Shepherd chose the manner of their passing, chose the new owner of the club, got an extremely good price out of him, walked off with £150 million, all in all, and left a financially shattered club behind. Only a moron could say that they "paid the price". Ashley, and us, are now paying it for them.

I wonder if NE5 honestly thinks Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League?

it was always going to be, just people on here who had the fixation with a protest despite over 2 weeks when it was announced and stressed that it wouldn't be a protest but we still get 2 or 3 threads 18-20 pages long talking about a protest that was never going to happen!! Did you listen to the meeting? They spoke about it there. i was at the meeting, i know what was said, i also posted the minutes of the meeting that went in the Times Newspaper when it states that NUSC are emphasising RALLY not PROTEST. fwiw i think the events on Sunday could backfire on NUSC as i can't see that many people turning up, apathy is rife among toon fans and there's too many fans who will be more than happy to be getting a few pints down their necks and will stay in the pub. There must have been at least two hundred people at the public meeting, and they?ll all be in town on Sunday. Most of them are going to turn up. Then there?s another 400 or so NUSC members who didn?t make the last meeting, a fair few of them are likely to want to see what they?ve invested £10 in. Add in other supporters who make a detour on the way to the match to check out the action, and the passers by who invariably stop to gander at any meeting at the monument. Too many people turning up might more of a concern. Despite what some people on this forum think or hope, the NUSC is made up of a lot of committed long term Newcastle United fans and is here to say for the long term. Here to say what? think he meant here to stay. Gosh, really?

it was always going to be, just people on here who had the fixation with a protest despite over 2 weeks when it was announced and stressed that it wouldn't be a protest but we still get 2 or 3 threads 18-20 pages long talking about a protest that was never going to happen!! Did you listen to the meeting? They spoke about it there. i was at the meeting, i know what was said, i also posted the minutes of the meeting that went in the Times Newspaper when it states that NUSC are emphasising RALLY not PROTEST. fwiw i think the events on Sunday could backfire on NUSC as i can't see that many people turning up, apathy is rife among toon fans and there's too many fans who will be more than happy to be getting a few pints down their necks and will stay in the pub. There must have been at least two hundred people at the public meeting, and they?ll all be in town on Sunday. Most of them are going to turn up. Then there?s another 400 or so NUSC members who didn?t make the last meeting, a fair few of them are likely to want to see what they?ve invested £10 in. Add in other supporters who make a detour on the way to the match to check out the action, and the passers by who invariably stop to gander at any meeting at the monument. Too many people turning up might more of a concern. Despite what some people on this forum think or hope, the NUSC is made up of a lot of committed long term Newcastle United fans and is here to say for the long term. Here to say what?

That's because not everyone shares your tendency to make shite up. such as ? Such as... Obviously. Did you start drinking earlier than usual today?

He's doing a particularly s**** job of it then, isn't he!?! Simple logic suggests that you and your friends are wrong, try and answer this question and you'll hopefully figure it out: Why would Ashley invest a huge amount of his personal fortune in what everyone knows is a highly risky business with spend a few years of his life putting in all the work and effort and getting all the grief associated with running a football club, simply to get his money back. Some things to consider: - He could have left his money in the bank and earned interest with zero risk and zero effort/grief involved. - He could have invested in other industries which would have given him a much higher rate of return for a much lower risk. - He could have invested in a different team, which would have given him potential to make a bigger profit. eg buy a Championship side get them promoted, keep them up a couple of seasons, sell them on. - He could have tried to buy a Premiership club that gave him a better chance of making money. You make a good point. I'm personally unsure of the bloke. Football teams, especially in England have been seeing so many billionaire takeovers that could be an argument he wants to get us into a better position and then sell us off. He tried to sell us off for alot more then we were worth after KK. Everyone including the tea lady told him needs to lower his price. On that point, he didn't try too hard to state his case, gave into supporters pressure almost immediately. Secondly, he may not have known what he was getting himself into. He see's us sell out our stadium week in, week out with on paper top players, underperforming - maybe even thinking he was grabbing a bargain. Too good to refuse so grabs at it, then being stung with true state of our finances and having to begrudgingly support us to protect his investment. Thirdly, how many people in the world had ever heard of Mike Ashley before he took us over? for a reclusive man he was enjoying all the popularity he was receiving at the start. As Mick says the people behind Man City tried for us before them and Ashley told them where to go, these are some of the very richest people on Earth, who have since demonstrated the kind of money they're happy to spend, do you really think he was simply holding out for someone richer? I'm not sure that I've ever seen anything other than speculation over what his price was, but even if he did start out with a high price, I'm sure that would have been open to negotiation as everything is in business. Also, everything he's done has been about planning for the long-term; buying loads of kids, getting the wages and finances under control, bringing in the much derided system and so-on. These are hardly things that are going to secure him a short-term profit, particularly through selling to some mega-rich money-is-no-object type, I mean how many youth team players are in Chelsea's side each week and how many do you reckon will be in Citeh's side after a couple of seasons? The only things those kind of people are interested in are success on the pitch and the kudos of owning a big-name club, that's why City's owners tried for us first and why DIC are only interested in Liverpool. Therefore a much better way of trying to attract those kind of people would have been to make a few big-name signings get a world-renowned manager, play good football, win games and fuck the debt, fuck the youth team, fuck the expense, fuck the club's future, as he wouldn't have intended being around to see it anyway. Also, as you say there's the lack of proper due-diligence thing, that's not the actions of someone looking for a profit, is it? If all you're interested in is making money then surely you go over the finances with a fine-tooth comb beforehand don't you? Especially if you know that others have already done due-diligence and subsequently not proceeded with the purchase. Whilst it's obvious he's not prepared to walk away having got totally burnt financially, there's simply no logic in the argument that he only ever intended to make a quick buck. You're second point is more valid and you're right that he did seem to give in quite easily after KK walked out, but I think that was more to do with just how shocked he was at the reaction and the way everyone seemed to just decide that the club was entirely in the wrong and that Keegan entirely in the right, despite not knowing any of the facts. That's continued since despite Keegan not actually having said anything about it directly, whilst everything the club has said has been dismissed out-of-hand as lies by the vast majority. I think it makes much more logical sense that he had gotten into this for a bit of fun and thought: "fuck that!" when it all kicked off. You're third point could therefore well be true, but I don't really see what the problem is with that, if it is? Again, whist I think that there is truth in what you say about him not having realised the true state of the club's finances I don't think that would be the reason that he would now simply be begrudgingly protecting his investment - if indeed that is what he's doing, rather than genuinely trying to give it another go. Like I've said above, if he was only interested in the money he'd have done the financial checks more thoroughly before he bought the club. I think it's much more likely that he would be begrudgingly trying to protect his investment due to becoming disillusioned with owning the club due to the fans reaction after KK's departure turning something enjoyable into something that was anything but enjoyable. If that's what's happened then I think it's much more likely that he fell out of love with the club - so to speak - rather than for purely financial reasons. This is why I was so against the protests and is one of the reasons that I'm so opposed to NUSC. People say that they only have the club's best interests at heart and I'm sure that's what they think they're doing, but personally I think that they are totally mistaken and their actions are absolutely diametrically opposed to what's best for the club in reality. I think that the biggest single danger facing the club is the threat of it's owner seeing it as something that's not worth the bother and deciding to simply keep it ticking over until the recession is over and he can get rid of it without totally screwing himself financially. Perhaps that's already happened and it's too late, but we as fans better hope and pray that him deciding to take the club off the market and get more involved is due to a genuine desire to give it another go, I think that there are signs there that it could be, I hope so. Some people need to face up to a couple of facts, namely; Mike Ashley is our owner and he will remain our owner for the foreseeable future, as there simply isn't anyone else out there. Given that, the best thing the fans can do, for the good of the club, is to try and get him to enjoy owning it, so that he wants it to be successful and is willing to spend his money on it. Whatever your views on the Keegan thing - and let's face it; that's what's caused everyone to kick-off, as most were happy previously - it's in the past, it's time to get over it - if not, forget it - and look at what's best for the club, our club, the thing we're supposed to support. However much people love him, Keegan is one man, and one man can never be allowed to be bigger than the club. I'm not saying that people need to love Mike Ashley, or even like him, but that they need to put their feelings towards him for what he did or didn't do to Kevin Keegan aside and realise that we need him more than he needs us at present and it is in our (the club's) best interests to encourage him, rather than force him away. Otherwise we will run the risk of cutting our nose off to spite our face and the only thing that will suffer is us and NUFC. People need to understand and accept that before it's too late, I hope they do, as being able to say I told you so will not provide me with any pleasure whatsoever. If things change and a shining knight comes along and NUSC can finally answer the question "what happens next?" then great, but until then NUSC and those who think like they do need to think about the consequences of their words and actions or in other words they need to shut the fuck up. Oodles of good sense there.

That's because not everyone shares your tendency to make shite up.

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great. Link? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

they are all absolutely correct, but you can bet that a few particular people on here would tell you whatever Mike Ashley does is wonderful, even if we get relegated and end up like Sheff Wed they will still think he's doing all the right things for the club and so long as he doesn't "embarrass them" [whatever that means, poor dears] he will be just, er, great. Link? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

what a load of shite mackems.gif

He must be sick of his mates laughing at him.

That was a dumb post the first time you posted it. It looks even more pathetic the second time.

Who gives a fuck what these friends of yours think?

You expect £25 - £30 million on top of the £50 million lost in two years? Welcome to the real world. He seems reluctant to join it.

He'd have to be some kind of magician to post a link to an answer he has never given.

For the last time. If you back your managers and have a big fanbase like we do, then you can qualify for the Champions League, they had proved they knew how to do it. So. In accordance with your prediction which is in my sig, do you think Ashley will do better or even match them, and do you think that an unbacked Joe Kinnear is more qualified to do it than a backed manager who has won 4 titles with 2 different clubs and 3 manager of the year awards. A 4 year old could answer this. So, if that's an answer, let's try and translate it from NE5 bullshit into English. Do you mean that you honestly think Shepherd was going to get us back into the Champions League? A simple yes or no will suffice. Any other answer isn't an answer.

If you're not telling a brazen lie, it would be easy to prove me wrong by linking to your "answer". But you can't, because you haven't answered it. Honest, it's like dealing with a five-year-old.