OzzieMandias

Born, bred etc in Newcastle. Currently reside in Berlin.

Aye, there's a realistic scenario: SUPPORTERS: Do exactly what we want and we'll let you stand with the away fans again. ASHLEY: OK, sounds great! I'll start begging Kevin to return right away. How much of my own money do you want me to cough up each season?

That would depend on Ashley's own response to not being able to sell the club I suppose. Will he withdraw the up for sale sign altogether or would he try again in the near future? If he can't, I personally feel he has to replace Wise and co to restore some form of confidence in the management of the club, appoint a full-time manager and give that manager full control. That's what I'd hope for because Ashley himself nor Wise and co can remain in active control or management of the club otherwise the lads would be playing to a half empty stadium and for Ashley the chance of recouping his money would be an even longer shot. You're still putting it all on Ashley. I'm trying, God help me, to get a sensible discussion going about what WE should do.

He could sell it for less than its value to an unscrupulous buyer? As i've said before, if you're interested, you dont wait for a firesale. Yeah, he could do that, in which case my question would be irrelevant.

Even if it IS "all Ashley's fault", the assertion does not help us even one tiny little bit with the question: What attitude should a group representing the best interests of supporters take if Ashley can not sell the club?

I already got the message, and acknowledged as much. No need to shout.

Fair enough. The best thing about banging your head against the wall is how good it feels when you stop.

So are you trying to say that 80% of Shepherd's managerial appointments were NOT miserable failures? Or have you finally decided to accept historical facts but are now blaming these dismal decisions on somebody else?

You ought to stop making assumptions about what other people think. You're really not very good at it. Why not try engaging with what people actually say? You might even end up having a sensible conversation one of these days.

if Shepherde's appointments were so successful, he but you agreed with him on at least 3 occasions ? I wouldn't necessarily call qualifying for europe more than eveybody but 4 teams "so unsuccessful". Do you think that Ashley is doing better ? If you are of the opinion that Gullit, Souness and Roeder were successful appointments, then you must think Shepherd was a complete idiot to sack them all.

Four out of five of Shepherd's appointments were so unsuccessful that they had to be replaced after a season or so. That's what rational beings call a "fact". Here, this may help: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fact

no response again then mackems.gif You drivel on and on about me "dishing the dirt" and then expect me to take the remainder of these same sorry posts seriously? Get a grip, man. so you aren't going to email this journo in protest of the current owner and the current goings on then ? Nor confirm that you agreed with Shepherds decision with regard to at least 3 of those managerial appointments ? Get a grip man. Drivel is drivel and repeating it over and over just makes you look like a mong. you agreed with 3 of Shepherds appointments then ? One of these days you'll wake up and realise that whatever you think I think about any of Shepherd's appointments makes precisely fuck all difference to whether those appointments were successes or not. Or maybe I'm being too optimistic. You can't teach an old dullard new tricks.

Likely level of investment is then the only variable. Would you (generally) support them if they adopted a similar strategy of finding young talent and a focus on the academy? Generally, yeah. It would depend on the manager appointed, as well as on the calibre of the talent-seekers and academy staff, and such a strategy needs to be balanced with a bit more investment in the first team and accepted by a supporter base who would need to be patient. But without some kind of fairy godmother in the picture, I think Ashley had a point. It's the only way forward.

It's unlikely to be an international pie manufacturer, anyway.

Likely level of investment is then the only variable. Actually that's not true. Experience in running a similar business will also count.

Likely level of investment is then the only variable.

If they have the interests of the club at heart then they do everything ih their power to arrange a meeting with Ashley and try to map out a way forward that involves Ashley investing into the club again. I know its difficult to take anything coming out of the club at face value, but if he is truthful in only selling the club as he can no longer enjoy going to the matches then with compromise on everyones part this can be resolved. Of course that doesn't fit with ensuring he leaves at all costs, but if a buyer isn't found (i'd even go as far as to say if one is not found by next Friday) then this is the only way forward imo I agree completely.

If Ashley can't find a buyer, then definitely yes. Otherwise it does kind of depend on who the buyer is. But the chances of us being bought by some wedged-up billionaire eager to splash hundreds of millions on star players are looking, in my opinion, decidedly slim. So probably yes again. And looking slimmer by the day given the utter mayhem on the financial markets and the imminent global recession. Which is what prompted my question upthread. What does the NUSC do now? An Ashley who's stuck with a club he no longer wants plus continued agitation and protest looks like a sure recipe for further disaster -- a club that can not move forward but is also becoming increasingly unattractive to such buyers as are still out there when the recessionary dust begins to settle.

If Ashley can't find a buyer, then definitely yes. Otherwise it does kind of depend on who the buyer is. But the chances of us being bought by some wedged-up billionaire eager to splash hundreds of millions on star players are looking, in my opinion, decidedly slim. So probably yes again.

If the boycotts continue they will continue. Well, it's hard to argue with that.

I'd feel surprised.

Well I don't know until it has been put to a vote by the panel. Which at the moment is the worrying aspect because the last couple of statements are not speaking for most people at all and seem to be a bit too distanced from what everyone else is thinking. Until these things get sorted out the organisation is going to have major problems and rightly-so. It's not the organisation we should be worrying about, though, but the future of the club. Whether they do it democratically or not, they'll still have to take and attitude towards this new situation: a disenchanted owner who can't sell, and will no longer invest. Continued protests and boycotts will only damage the club even further, in my opinion, yet the NUSC has tied the "Cockney Mafia Out" colours so firmly to its mast that I can't see how they're going to be able to back down and compromise. So what do you think they should do?

Why don't you just have a go at answering the question? What attitude should the NUSC take if Ashley can't find a buyer for the club?

I'm not sure. I'm too busy boycotting pies to think of anything else. Try walking and chewing gum at the same time. It's tricky but with a little practice you may get the hang of it.

Difficult question, eh?