OzzieMandias

I haven't thought of this, but it's certainly sounds like it's possible. Given's lawyers comments came out a day after Ashley announced it was off the market. Aye, but that was just a cynical attempt to manipulate the news agenda.

What colour scarf is Llambias supposed to wear, then?

He means HE made a profit.

Ozzie is a right bastard for supporting the appointment of Souness, the bloke who appointed him is great. And anyway I didn't support the appointment of Souness. That must make Shepherd a cunt. well, your support of Souness was well documented, unfortunately on the old server, if it isn't true that you supported him right to the end, why not confirm that from the moment he kicked out Bellamy he was getting it wrong, as was the case. Anyway, I found this. http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,38118.msg765469.html#msg765469 And remember when UV and myself were asked to provide proof of anyone wanting "anyone but fred", which you denied, and UV found your comment "nothing to fear from a change at the top". Didn't you also comment lately on how sad you found the lads who walked around inside the ground with the banner ? http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31195.msg582620.html#msg582620 http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,31195.msg591099.html#msg591099 Can't find a single thing in there about me "supporting the appointment of Souness". So here's yet another chance for you to admit you were talking out of your arse (the only available orifice when someone has his head as deep in the sand as you do), and say sorry for making up stories.

Could he be confusing the stadium debt with the rest of the mess?

Do you honestly think adopting Ashley's methods (hiring an inexperienced DoF over the manager, net £0 transfers, allowing the star striker's contract to run down to get him off the wages, trying to sell the club, bringing in a manager unable to find a job anywhere else) back in 2001 would have got us into the CL? Is hindsight only ok to use when it's about Ashley then? Hindsight is used when you agree (or disagree) with actions at the time but subsequent events prove them to be wrong (or correct). In this case I agreed with the decision to push forward then and it proved successful, so it's not using hindsight on my part. Besides, Ozzie is the hindsight king. He'll love it. Remember the financial and on field situation at the time: The debt (£66m) was larger than the turnover (£55m) which relative to turnover is more than the "debt" now The club was making loses (£15.5 in 2000, £8.9m in 2001) which relative to turnover are equivalent to the loses now The club had finished 13, 13, 11, 11 in the previous years which is worse than our last 4 years. As I asked in another thread, should we have Cut back on signings and not brought in Bellamy & Robert Sold the likes of Dyer for a good profit Let injury prone Shearer's contract run down so he could leave on a free and we could get his high wages off the bill (after all, we had a ready made replacement coming through from the youth team). Got someone like Vinnie Jones in to buy and sell players over Robson's head. If it pissed off Robson and he left, should we have replaced him with someone like Dave Basset. Can I assume that the people commending Ashley for his prudence and vision for the club now would agree that we should have taken a similar approach back in 2001? Ozzie asked if Shepherd was going to get us back in the CL. Well in a similar position back in 2001, by being speculative, we DID get back into the CL. At the moment I can only see Ashley's way of handling the situation taking the club in one direction, and that's down. simply can't argue with any of that, unless you have your head buried in the sand and blindly still support Ashleys direction for the club. Spot On Aye, let's just ignore all the problems that developed after Robson.

Ozzie is a right bastard for supporting the appointment of Souness, the bloke who appointed him is great. And anyway I didn't support the appointment of Souness. That must make Shepherd a cunt.

He still ignores the basic reality, however. Shepherd gambled what money we had on Souness and Roeder. It didn't work, and left us in deep financial shit. Now we are paying the bill.

But we did that, it's been going awry since about 2004, success has eluded us, and now there's no money left to spend, rendering NE5's basic point pointless.

I've no intention of trying to put people right in this thread Dave. Suffice to say, we will see how long it drags on, or how many people look back on Ashleys lack of ambition and fail to still grasp the basic point that if you want to succeed you have to spend big bucks. Ashleys current direction will never achieve anything near the league positions we have seen since 1992, so if thats what people want its up to them. Just like when they all said they wanted rid of Shepherd [for anybody] they won't be so keen on the reality when it happens though. So much so, that those european qualifications will be nothing other than a fond memory. So, now you're up to speed on the lamentable state of the club's finances, and the degree to which Ashley is pumping in cash just to keep things going at all, perhaps you can explain to us where the money is going to come from.

It has to be macbeth. He has a website and his numbers are bigger. bigger font size or bigger in the sense of all the money fat freddy shepherd wasted? WAHEY!!! we should have got Bob Murray in, he's an accountant and he really showed the scap metal dealer how its done Oh he's finally commented after all the lurking he has done on this thread. first time I've looked at it, couldn't resist pointing out that Bob Murray was an accountant Oh, well that changes everything. Suddenly the fact that the old board fucked the club's finances big time doesn't matter anymore!

If Shepherd had bought the club we'd be saddled with the cost of the takeover -- if the club cost £140 million and his share was £55 million, he'd have had to borrow £85 million, minimum -- on top of the already existing £30 million per annum shortfall.

Money wasn't a problem? The man, like his supporters, is a fantasist.

Do you honestly think adopting Ashley's methods (hiring an inexperienced DoF over the manager, net £0 transfers, allowing the star striker's contract to run down to get him off the wages, trying to sell the club, bringing in a manager unable to find a job anywhere else) back in 2001 would have got us into the CL? Probably not, or not in a hurry, but I'm not the one setting CL qualification as a benchmark. The point re Shepherd should be clear. It's not about where we had been under the old board, but where we were going. If Shepherd had stayed, I honestly think we\d be in a bigger mess than we are right now. Unless you have inside information about his plans to get in control of a situation where we were losing £30 million a year before they sold the club?

What a fucking pointless argument.

what have you got against Tories ? Do Labour, Liberal, BNP, UKIP mp's, or even Mike Ashley, always answer straight questions ? I've told you, the Halls and Shepherd did a great job, they left the club unrecognisable and a million miles superior to how they found it, I wouldn't call that "blame", I would call it a great credit. Sir you are a baboon then. If you believe perilously close to bankruptcy through bad management and mortgaging the club beyond belief with a bank which needed to be bailed out by the government itself was a fantastic thing then you are just mad. I cannot disagree that the football was great, but had Shepherd remained in charge we would have been bankrupted. Your head in the sand attitude and deluded belief that Freddy Shepherd was not a bad apple who was stinking out the barrel at Newcastle is astonishing. Sir John Hall had a vision for this club, which his son and Freddy Shepherd distorted and abused to make their own financial gains. While we are certainly miles away from where we were prior to Sir John Hall's intervention, it is laughable that you continue to stand up for Freddy Shepherd, a man who most others lost any respect they had for him when he was caught out by the NOTW with his contempt for his peers and his customers. rubbish. mackems.gif Did you see many protestors standing up for their principles a few months after that "contempt for his peers and customers" when FA Cup Final tickets were being dished out, for the first time in 24 years, I may add. When do you think the automatically better board will reach another Cup Final or even qualify for the UEFA Cup ? Under Mike Ashley I don't think we will. But you keep on telling yourself that Freddy was a top bloke, and wasn't bothered first and foremost with lining his pockets from the money he could make from Newcastle United. I think Freddy Shepherd has a nerve telling anyone how to run Newcastle United as a successful business. you find a post where I have said he was a "top bloke". Apology accepted. None given. So will you now please answer my question. Is Freddy Shepherd (at least partially) responsible for Newcastle's financial state? Why can you not answer this yes or no? Why can't you stop waffling on about other things? What are you talking about ? The saleable value of the club increased from 1.25m to anywhere between 100m and 200m quid while they ran it ? Maybe you should go back to the financial statement thread and re-read it if you cannot understand what I am asking you about. I think you should look at the league positions I posted and the history of the club if you don't understand exactly how much better off the club became while the Halls and shepherd ran it. Thank you I know exactly what happened with the club when Sir John Hall came in. I can remember what it was like before he came in. And I know what happened when Sir John Hall and Freddy Shepherd were here in regards of football. I also know that Fred Shepherd mortgaged the club to the hilt and he was lucky not to financially ruin the club. I know that Mike Ashley was not the only person to look at the books with a view of taking over the club, but the mess Freddy Shepherd had made with the finances put everyone else off. I don't need a history lesson, but you need a reality check! So, it's a mystery to you that the top 4 have massive debt?? man utd's is dropping dramatically, chelsea are fucked should abramovic walk away,arsenal have had to redefine their plans and liverpool are trying to sell up. So you admit it takes massive expenditure and debt risk to gain a chance at success? And when massive expenditure and debt buys only a steady decline until there's nothing left to borrow against? Not as simple as that is it. People come into these threads (not you) saying FS is a cunt, KK is a cunt, Wise is a cunt etc...it's more complex than that (as you know). Sometimes little things go against you (Luque's career threateing inj or Boumsong being half decent) and history can be re-written. And sometimes throwing money at the problem only makes things massively worse, if there's consistently poor decision-making in other areas. And that ain't that simple either. What was Coloccini? Youth? Or a cheap buy?

what have you got against Tories ? Do Labour, Liberal, BNP, UKIP mp's, or even Mike Ashley, always answer straight questions ? I've told you, the Halls and Shepherd did a great job, they left the club unrecognisable and a million miles superior to how they found it, I wouldn't call that "blame", I would call it a great credit. Sir you are a baboon then. If you believe perilously close to bankruptcy through bad management and mortgaging the club beyond belief with a bank which needed to be bailed out by the government itself was a fantastic thing then you are just mad. I cannot disagree that the football was great, but had Shepherd remained in charge we would have been bankrupted. Your head in the sand attitude and deluded belief that Freddy Shepherd was not a bad apple who was stinking out the barrel at Newcastle is astonishing. Sir John Hall had a vision for this club, which his son and Freddy Shepherd distorted and abused to make their own financial gains. While we are certainly miles away from where we were prior to Sir John Hall's intervention, it is laughable that you continue to stand up for Freddy Shepherd, a man who most others lost any respect they had for him when he was caught out by the NOTW with his contempt for his peers and his customers. rubbish. mackems.gif Did you see many protestors standing up for their principles a few months after that "contempt for his peers and customers" when FA Cup Final tickets were being dished out, for the first time in 24 years, I may add. When do you think the automatically better board will reach another Cup Final or even qualify for the UEFA Cup ? Under Mike Ashley I don't think we will. But you keep on telling yourself that Freddy was a top bloke, and wasn't bothered first and foremost with lining his pockets from the money he could make from Newcastle United. I think Freddy Shepherd has a nerve telling anyone how to run Newcastle United as a successful business. you find a post where I have said he was a "top bloke". Apology accepted. None given. So will you now please answer my question. Is Freddy Shepherd (at least partially) responsible for Newcastle's financial state? Why can you not answer this yes or no? Why can't you stop waffling on about other things? What are you talking about ? The saleable value of the club increased from 1.25m to anywhere between 100m and 200m quid while they ran it ? Maybe you should go back to the financial statement thread and re-read it if you cannot understand what I am asking you about. I think you should look at the league positions I posted and the history of the club if you don't understand exactly how much better off the club became while the Halls and shepherd ran it. Thank you I know exactly what happened with the club when Sir John Hall came in. I can remember what it was like before he came in. And I know what happened when Sir John Hall and Freddy Shepherd were here in regards of football. I also know that Fred Shepherd mortgaged the club to the hilt and he was lucky not to financially ruin the club. I know that Mike Ashley was not the only person to look at the books with a view of taking over the club, but the mess Freddy Shepherd had made with the finances put everyone else off. I don't need a history lesson, but you need a reality check! So, it's a mystery to you that the top 4 have massive debt?? man utd's is dropping dramatically, chelsea are fucked should abramovic walk away,arsenal have had to redefine their plans and liverpool are trying to sell up. So you admit it takes massive expenditure and debt risk to gain a chance at success? And when massive expenditure and debt buys only a steady decline until there's nothing left to borrow against?

oh dear, I remember people saying that people like me were talking nonsense when we said Ashley was turning the club into a 2nd rate selling club again, and heading for relegation through selling players and looking for cheap replacements. When exactly do you think we will match the european qualifications that we have seen for the last 15 years, under Ashleys strategy ? stretch the question further and ask if fred would have matched the european qualifications we've seen for the last 15years ? would he have just spent the banks money to try and emulate it ? Lets go back to the appointment of Allardyce, and the point made by HTT, when he said that it was thought to be a good appointment at the time of someone waiting for a big job, coupled with the fact that his track record suggested he could build a pretty good side with little money. Whether he could make the top 4 is arguable, and we won't now know, but it suggested that the Halls and Shepherd were aware of this need, in the short term. I'm pretty sure that their ultimate ambitions would have remained as high as they always were, which are much higher than Ashleys, and I'm also pretty sure that at the current moment in time, they wouldn't be sitting back and watching the team heading for relegation and try to reverse it. Mind, the amount of u-turns by people who urged them to keep spending, and backed Souness in his spending spree, but now say how wrong it was, is quite amazing. i'd reckon ashleys ambition was to do aswell as possible without running up massive debt.........your way sees everton of having a lack of ambition, a lack that sees them regularly finish well clear off ambitious freds outfit. Everton are just the team doing the best for the moment of a whole load of clubs that don't have the big ambition that they should. Thats all, nothing more and nothing less. If you are saying you would swap their last decade for ours, then I wouldn't agree, and if you are saying what they have done in the past decade is good enough for you, then thats up to you. It;s this mistaken idea that you and others have that everybody else has done things better than us, and the grass is always greener. despite results to the contrary which is pretty daft like. You thought the grass was greener when the Halls and Shepherd ran the club and now they have gone, we are sinking like a stone. Has Shay Given gone yet ? All we need is Ashleys mouthpiece to come out again and say its "good business", and I'm sure a lot of gullible people will swallow it whole. i'd swap their last 5 years for ours. as for sinking like a stone i'll claim you are LYING if you think it's only since fred left. I'm not talking about the last 5 years, I'm talking about the entire tenure of the chairman you are slating, not part of it. Do you still think having an owner who runs the club down is no different to having an owner(s) who have ambition and have shown it ? Amazing. and you know i wouldn't slag off the entire tenure in the same way forest fans wouldn't slag off cloughs entire tenure....but everyone i know says he should have gone before he did as he was damaging the club and wasn't going to improve it,same with fred. you know this and we've been here before. the next bit.........where did i say it was no different. but i'll GIVE YOU A STRAIGHT ANSWER ANYWAY.......i don't think ashley is running the club down,he's changing the ethos as the ambitious plan as followed by fred was eventually leading to bankruptcy so then...would you rack up debt year after year chasing the dream with no plan for if it fails ? I don't think he is doing anything other than taking the piss, asset stripping the club, and running it down. Do we need to be relegated to ram this point home ? So to that degree, he needs to find some money from somewhere to avoid the drop, which I'm sure the Halls and Shepherd would have done, and I'm sorry to have to tell you that i wouldn't have "blamed" them for it at all. So what assets has he stripped, then? Its a phrase that was used a few times when you said - about that hedge fund, that there was "nothing to be feared from a change at the top". So how many appointments did you agree would succeed ozzie, was it 3 out of 6, 4 out of 6, or 5 out of 6 ? So you admit you were talking bollocks when you spoke of "asset-stripping". Thanks. So you admit you were talking bollocks - and lying - when you said you only agreed with 1 out of the 6 appointments Do you still think the change of owner has left us in a better position than the shite board who qualified for europe more than every club bar 4 ? "nothing to fear from a change at the top" mackems.gif No, you'd have to be a complete fucking loon to understand that from my question about asset-stripping. so do you admit you've been talking bollocks for about the last 4 years ? Man, you've talked more bollocks just on this thread than most people manage in an entire lifetime. The only question is how much of it is deliberate, and how much is because you're as thick as a whale omlette.

oh dear, I remember people saying that people like me were talking nonsense when we said Ashley was turning the club into a 2nd rate selling club again, and heading for relegation through selling players and looking for cheap replacements. When exactly do you think we will match the european qualifications that we have seen for the last 15 years, under Ashleys strategy ? stretch the question further and ask if fred would have matched the european qualifications we've seen for the last 15years ? would he have just spent the banks money to try and emulate it ? Lets go back to the appointment of Allardyce, and the point made by HTT, when he said that it was thought to be a good appointment at the time of someone waiting for a big job, coupled with the fact that his track record suggested he could build a pretty good side with little money. Whether he could make the top 4 is arguable, and we won't now know, but it suggested that the Halls and Shepherd were aware of this need, in the short term. I'm pretty sure that their ultimate ambitions would have remained as high as they always were, which are much higher than Ashleys, and I'm also pretty sure that at the current moment in time, they wouldn't be sitting back and watching the team heading for relegation and try to reverse it. Mind, the amount of u-turns by people who urged them to keep spending, and backed Souness in his spending spree, but now say how wrong it was, is quite amazing. i'd reckon ashleys ambition was to do aswell as possible without running up massive debt.........your way sees everton of having a lack of ambition, a lack that sees them regularly finish well clear off ambitious freds outfit. Everton are just the team doing the best for the moment of a whole load of clubs that don't have the big ambition that they should. Thats all, nothing more and nothing less. If you are saying you would swap their last decade for ours, then I wouldn't agree, and if you are saying what they have done in the past decade is good enough for you, then thats up to you. It;s this mistaken idea that you and others have that everybody else has done things better than us, and the grass is always greener. despite results to the contrary which is pretty daft like. You thought the grass was greener when the Halls and Shepherd ran the club and now they have gone, we are sinking like a stone. Has Shay Given gone yet ? All we need is Ashleys mouthpiece to come out again and say its "good business", and I'm sure a lot of gullible people will swallow it whole. i'd swap their last 5 years for ours. as for sinking like a stone i'll claim you are LYING if you think it's only since fred left. I'm not talking about the last 5 years, I'm talking about the entire tenure of the chairman you are slating, not part of it. Do you still think having an owner who runs the club down is no different to having an owner(s) who have ambition and have shown it ? Amazing. and you know i wouldn't slag off the entire tenure in the same way forest fans wouldn't slag off cloughs entire tenure....but everyone i know says he should have gone before he did as he was damaging the club and wasn't going to improve it,same with fred. you know this and we've been here before. the next bit.........where did i say it was no different. but i'll GIVE YOU A STRAIGHT ANSWER ANYWAY.......i don't think ashley is running the club down,he's changing the ethos as the ambitious plan as followed by fred was eventually leading to bankruptcy so then...would you rack up debt year after year chasing the dream with no plan for if it fails ? I don't think he is doing anything other than taking the piss, asset stripping the club, and running it down. Do we need to be relegated to ram this point home ? So to that degree, he needs to find some money from somewhere to avoid the drop, which I'm sure the Halls and Shepherd would have done, and I'm sorry to have to tell you that i wouldn't have "blamed" them for it at all. So what assets has he stripped, then? Its a phrase that was used a few times when you said - about that hedge fund, that there was "nothing to be feared from a change at the top". So how many appointments did you agree would succeed ozzie, was it 3 out of 6, 4 out of 6, or 5 out of 6 ? So you admit you were talking bollocks when you spoke of "asset-stripping". Thanks. So you admit you were talking bollocks - and lying - when you said you only agreed with 1 out of the 6 appointments Do you still think the change of owner has left us in a better position than the shite board who qualified for europe more than every club bar 4 ? "nothing to fear from a change at the top" mackems.gif No, you'd have to be a complete fucking loon to understand that from my question about asset-stripping.

oh dear, I remember people saying that people like me were talking nonsense when we said Ashley was turning the club into a 2nd rate selling club again, and heading for relegation through selling players and looking for cheap replacements. When exactly do you think we will match the european qualifications that we have seen for the last 15 years, under Ashleys strategy ? stretch the question further and ask if fred would have matched the european qualifications we've seen for the last 15years ? would he have just spent the banks money to try and emulate it ? Lets go back to the appointment of Allardyce, and the point made by HTT, when he said that it was thought to be a good appointment at the time of someone waiting for a big job, coupled with the fact that his track record suggested he could build a pretty good side with little money. Whether he could make the top 4 is arguable, and we won't now know, but it suggested that the Halls and Shepherd were aware of this need, in the short term. I'm pretty sure that their ultimate ambitions would have remained as high as they always were, which are much higher than Ashleys, and I'm also pretty sure that at the current moment in time, they wouldn't be sitting back and watching the team heading for relegation and try to reverse it. Mind, the amount of u-turns by people who urged them to keep spending, and backed Souness in his spending spree, but now say how wrong it was, is quite amazing. i'd reckon ashleys ambition was to do aswell as possible without running up massive debt.........your way sees everton of having a lack of ambition, a lack that sees them regularly finish well clear off ambitious freds outfit. Everton are just the team doing the best for the moment of a whole load of clubs that don't have the big ambition that they should. Thats all, nothing more and nothing less. If you are saying you would swap their last decade for ours, then I wouldn't agree, and if you are saying what they have done in the past decade is good enough for you, then thats up to you. It;s this mistaken idea that you and others have that everybody else has done things better than us, and the grass is always greener. despite results to the contrary which is pretty daft like. You thought the grass was greener when the Halls and Shepherd ran the club and now they have gone, we are sinking like a stone. Has Shay Given gone yet ? All we need is Ashleys mouthpiece to come out again and say its "good business", and I'm sure a lot of gullible people will swallow it whole. i'd swap their last 5 years for ours. as for sinking like a stone i'll claim you are LYING if you think it's only since fred left. I'm not talking about the last 5 years, I'm talking about the entire tenure of the chairman you are slating, not part of it. Do you still think having an owner who runs the club down is no different to having an owner(s) who have ambition and have shown it ? Amazing. and you know i wouldn't slag off the entire tenure in the same way forest fans wouldn't slag off cloughs entire tenure....but everyone i know says he should have gone before he did as he was damaging the club and wasn't going to improve it,same with fred. you know this and we've been here before. the next bit.........where did i say it was no different. but i'll GIVE YOU A STRAIGHT ANSWER ANYWAY.......i don't think ashley is running the club down,he's changing the ethos as the ambitious plan as followed by fred was eventually leading to bankruptcy so then...would you rack up debt year after year chasing the dream with no plan for if it fails ? I don't think he is doing anything other than taking the piss, asset stripping the club, and running it down. Do we need to be relegated to ram this point home ? So to that degree, he needs to find some money from somewhere to avoid the drop, which I'm sure the Halls and Shepherd would have done, and I'm sorry to have to tell you that i wouldn't have "blamed" them for it at all. So what assets has he stripped, then? Its a phrase that was used a few times when you said - about that hedge fund, that there was "nothing to be feared from a change at the top". So how many appointments did you agree would succeed ozzie, was it 3 out of 6, 4 out of 6, or 5 out of 6 ? So you admit you were talking bollocks when you spoke of "asset-stripping". Thanks.

oh dear, I remember people saying that people like me were talking nonsense when we said Ashley was turning the club into a 2nd rate selling club again, and heading for relegation through selling players and looking for cheap replacements. When exactly do you think we will match the european qualifications that we have seen for the last 15 years, under Ashleys strategy ? stretch the question further and ask if fred would have matched the european qualifications we've seen for the last 15years ? would he have just spent the banks money to try and emulate it ? Lets go back to the appointment of Allardyce, and the point made by HTT, when he said that it was thought to be a good appointment at the time of someone waiting for a big job, coupled with the fact that his track record suggested he could build a pretty good side with little money. Whether he could make the top 4 is arguable, and we won't now know, but it suggested that the Halls and Shepherd were aware of this need, in the short term. I'm pretty sure that their ultimate ambitions would have remained as high as they always were, which are much higher than Ashleys, and I'm also pretty sure that at the current moment in time, they wouldn't be sitting back and watching the team heading for relegation and try to reverse it. Mind, the amount of u-turns by people who urged them to keep spending, and backed Souness in his spending spree, but now say how wrong it was, is quite amazing. i'd reckon ashleys ambition was to do aswell as possible without running up massive debt.........your way sees everton of having a lack of ambition, a lack that sees them regularly finish well clear off ambitious freds outfit. Everton are just the team doing the best for the moment of a whole load of clubs that don't have the big ambition that they should. Thats all, nothing more and nothing less. If you are saying you would swap their last decade for ours, then I wouldn't agree, and if you are saying what they have done in the past decade is good enough for you, then thats up to you. It;s this mistaken idea that you and others have that everybody else has done things better than us, and the grass is always greener. despite results to the contrary which is pretty daft like. You thought the grass was greener when the Halls and Shepherd ran the club and now they have gone, we are sinking like a stone. Has Shay Given gone yet ? All we need is Ashleys mouthpiece to come out again and say its "good business", and I'm sure a lot of gullible people will swallow it whole. i'd swap their last 5 years for ours. as for sinking like a stone i'll claim you are LYING if you think it's only since fred left. I'm not talking about the last 5 years, I'm talking about the entire tenure of the chairman you are slating, not part of it. Do you still think having an owner who runs the club down is no different to having an owner(s) who have ambition and have shown it ? Amazing. and you know i wouldn't slag off the entire tenure in the same way forest fans wouldn't slag off cloughs entire tenure....but everyone i know says he should have gone before he did as he was damaging the club and wasn't going to improve it,same with fred. you know this and we've been here before. the next bit.........where did i say it was no different. but i'll GIVE YOU A STRAIGHT ANSWER ANYWAY.......i don't think ashley is running the club down,he's changing the ethos as the ambitious plan as followed by fred was eventually leading to bankruptcy so then...would you rack up debt year after year chasing the dream with no plan for if it fails ? I don't think he is doing anything other than taking the piss, asset stripping the club, and running it down. Do we need to be relegated to ram this point home ? So to that degree, he needs to find some money from somewhere to avoid the drop, which I'm sure the Halls and Shepherd would have done, and I'm sorry to have to tell you that i wouldn't have "blamed" them for it at all. So what assets has he stripped, then?

oh dear, I remember people saying that people like me were talking nonsense when we said Ashley was turning the club into a 2nd rate selling club again, and heading for relegation through selling players and looking for cheap replacements. When exactly do you think we will match the european qualifications that we have seen for the last 15 years, under Ashleys strategy ? stretch the question further and ask if fred would have matched the european qualifications we've seen for the last 15years ? would he have just spent the banks money to try and emulate it ? Lets go back to the appointment of Allardyce, and the point made by HTT, when he said that it was thought to be a good appointment at the time of someone waiting for a big job, coupled with the fact that his track record suggested he could build a pretty good side with little money. Whether he could make the top 4 is arguable, and we won't now know, but it suggested that the Halls and Shepherd were aware of this need, in the short term. I'm pretty sure that their ultimate ambitions would have remained as high as they always were, which are much higher than Ashleys, and I'm also pretty sure that at the current moment in time, they wouldn't be sitting back and watching the team heading for relegation and try to reverse it. Mind, the amount of u-turns by people who urged them to keep spending, and backed Souness in his spending spree, but now say how wrong it was, is quite amazing. i'd reckon ashleys ambition was to do aswell as possible without running up massive debt.........your way sees everton of having a lack of ambition, a lack that sees them regularly finish well clear off ambitious freds outfit. Everton are just the team doing the best for the moment of a whole load of clubs that don't have the big ambition that they should. Thats all, nothing more and nothing less. If you are saying you would swap their last decade for ours, then I wouldn't agree, and if you are saying what they have done in the past decade is good enough for you, then thats up to you. It;s this mistaken idea that you and others have that everybody else has done things better than us, and the grass is always greener. despite results to the contrary which is pretty daft like. You thought the grass was greener when the Halls and Shepherd ran the club and now they have gone, we are sinking like a stone. Has Shay Given gone yet ? All we need is Ashleys mouthpiece to come out again and say its "good business", and I'm sure a lot of gullible people will swallow it whole. i'd swap their last 5 years for ours. as for sinking like a stone i'll claim you are LYING if you think it's only since fred left. Either lying or he's very, very stupid. are you still happy with the progress we've made since the change of owner then, and previous to that, the buying and selling of the manager you backed all the way to turn into the new Alex Ferguson because he got rid of the "cancer" ? Well, that post was a bit of both.

oh dear, I remember people saying that people like me were talking nonsense when we said Ashley was turning the club into a 2nd rate selling club again, and heading for relegation through selling players and looking for cheap replacements. When exactly do you think we will match the european qualifications that we have seen for the last 15 years, under Ashleys strategy ? stretch the question further and ask if fred would have matched the european qualifications we've seen for the last 15years ? would he have just spent the banks money to try and emulate it ? Lets go back to the appointment of Allardyce, and the point made by HTT, when he said that it was thought to be a good appointment at the time of someone waiting for a big job, coupled with the fact that his track record suggested he could build a pretty good side with little money. Whether he could make the top 4 is arguable, and we won't now know, but it suggested that the Halls and Shepherd were aware of this need, in the short term. I'm pretty sure that their ultimate ambitions would have remained as high as they always were, which are much higher than Ashleys, and I'm also pretty sure that at the current moment in time, they wouldn't be sitting back and watching the team heading for relegation and try to reverse it. Mind, the amount of u-turns by people who urged them to keep spending, and backed Souness in his spending spree, but now say how wrong it was, is quite amazing. i'd reckon ashleys ambition was to do aswell as possible without running up massive debt.........your way sees everton of having a lack of ambition, a lack that sees them regularly finish well clear off ambitious freds outfit. Everton are just the team doing the best for the moment of a whole load of clubs that don't have the big ambition that they should. Thats all, nothing more and nothing less. If you are saying you would swap their last decade for ours, then I wouldn't agree, and if you are saying what they have done in the past decade is good enough for you, then thats up to you. It;s this mistaken idea that you and others have that everybody else has done things better than us, and the grass is always greener. despite results to the contrary which is pretty daft like. You thought the grass was greener when the Halls and Shepherd ran the club and now they have gone, we are sinking like a stone. Has Shay Given gone yet ? All we need is Ashleys mouthpiece to come out again and say its "good business", and I'm sure a lot of gullible people will swallow it whole. i'd swap their last 5 years for ours. as for sinking like a stone i'll claim you are LYING if you think it's only since fred left. Either lying or he's very, very stupid.

He's just on the defensive because most people on here are beginning to twig what a right old mess the old regime left the club in.

Tbf Ozzie, he's already answered that question elsewhere Yeah? What was his answer, then? Let's face it, only a prize-winning moron would answer anything but "No, Shepherd didn't have a cat in hell's chance of getting us back into the Champions League!" But somehow I can't see NE5 conceding such an obvious truth. The very thought of it has him burbling dumb irrelevancies about villages and manager of the year awards.