OzzieMandias

Interview with Keane: http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2057636,00.html

As Herodotus said: "No man can step into the same river twice, for it is no longer the same river, and he is no longer the same man."

You can't turn the clock back. Keegan's different now, the situation of the club is different, football's different.

Well, Martins Edwards was caught in a scrape or two and it didn't stop manure winning a cup or two. And as I say, while Shepherd obviously has zero respect for the supporters and the people of Newcastle, and will happily bad-mouth them to anyone that he thinks might give him some more cash, this is not the main reason why he is taking the club steadily backwards. I don't think any self respecting supporter of Newcastle United would e-mail a lundon journo who writes articles making it plain that he doesn't like NUFC or geordies, to dish the dirt on the club. Of course not. But he certainly might help arrange for Newcastle supporters to have a reply in the press after Shepherd had once again slagged off those supporters. of course its right up his street to find someone prepared to dish the dirt on the club, especially one of its own "supporters". That would make us a bit of a laughing stock. I mean you BTW. The "dirt" being that the Hitzfeld campaign was an honest effort to get the club to appoint a decent manager and not, as Shepherd dissed it, a "betting scam"? I'll make no apologies for campaigning against Shepherd. It's the few remaining idiots who support him that are doing the most damage to the club.

Well, Martins Edwards was caught in a scrape or two and it didn't stop manure winning a cup or two. And as I say, while Shepherd obviously has zero respect for the supporters and the people of Newcastle, and will happily bad-mouth them to anyone that he thinks might give him some more cash, this is not the main reason why he is taking the club steadily backwards. I don't think any self respecting supporter of Newcastle United would e-mail a lundon journo who writes articles making it plain that he doesn't like NUFC or geordies, to dish the dirt on the club. Of course not. But he certainly might help arrange for Newcastle supporters to have a reply in the press after Shepherd had once again slagged off those supporters.

Well, Martins Edwards was caught in a scrape or two and it didn't stop manure winning a cup or two. But as you say, this is is not the main issue Were you upset at being called a mug Ozzie ? Does the truth hurt ? Because, tbh, I can understand how all the Keegan bandwagon jumpers would feel at having spent all that money jumping on the bandwagon thinking they were going to win trophies, then realise it was all for nothing and they had a chairman they didn't like - unlike the previous ones ......... mackems.gif Make your mind up. Only a moron could consider someone to be both a "Keegan bandwagon jumper" and a "mackem wind-up merchant".

Well, Martins Edwards was caught in a scrape or two and it didn't stop manure winning a cup or two. And as I say, while Shepherd obviously has zero respect for the supporters and the people of Newcastle, and will happily bad-mouth them to anyone that he thinks might give him some more cash, this is not the main reason why he is taking the club steadily backwards.

Don't confuse him with facts.

Aye, its not often that we have any sort of initiative when our fullbacks are kicking the ball straight out of play half the time or producing shiite passes. Ala Ramage, Huntington, Carr, right footed shiite defenders who have had to play an entire season at left back between them. And as said before, youve been PROVED wrong. 5mill on Duff has done fuck all for us, whether its creativity, goals, or keeping the ball. 5mill on defenders, on the other hand, could well have seen us higher up the league. Eg Sorin, Sol Campbell, etc. But anyway, youre full of shiite, so dont let any sort of common sense stop your pro-Shepherd crusade. Odd, but I don;t see me starting too many threads about Shepherd, pro-board or otherwise. But keep on making things up. All I do is point out the FACT that only 4 clubs have qualified for europe more than us over a decade, which is far from being shite. Nor is buying major international players and filling a 50,000 stadium with people happy to witness "mediocrity". I have not been proved wrong on anything. Other than not having the foresight to see that Duff would not play the way he did at Blackburn and to a lesser extent at Chelsea, bearing in mind he was at a club of expensive superstars * and as such didn't get a run in the team. Did you predict this BTW ? Would you mind telling us the 6 lottery numbers this saturday that is AFTER you have told me who exactly are all these "trophy" players we have a Newcastle [as you claimed it not me] and then tell us who you think we would have been better off buying instead [again, your claim not mine] but carry on creating an agenda and slating the club for attempting to be successful if you like. Whatever the limitations of one or two of our defenders, the point is that our front players have limitations too, and when they do receive an accurate ball, lose possession far too easily. This has been obvious all season. We have played too many games where we have been outplayed, a better defender will not solve this. The best defenders struggle if they are under constant pressure, and there is a lack of good players in front of them to make space to receive a ball out from the back. Games are bossed in midfield. * trophy players bump. for tmonkey [and anyone else who shares the view he has] Serious question. I would really like to know, just who exactly these "trophy" players are, that they criticise the club for buying, and why anyone thinks we have any chance of catching Chelsea and manu if we don't buy players that they themselves would like to have ? Such as Butt, Parker and Duff?

We are discussing Shepherd's failings as a chairman. While these of course include characterising supporters as mugs and describing Geordie women as dogs, that is not the main issue here.

Please stop confusing me with Freddie Shepherd and Dougie Hall.

NE5 can, though, as according to him the previous board is the same as the current one.

And this probably explains why there wasn't much coverage in the Ronnie... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1998/06/25/ncup25.html http://archive.theargus.co.uk/1999/9/25/197200.html

Assuming Shepherd would have allowed him to do things his way and invested in the areas Wenger identified as important.

Comparing the appointments of Dalglish and Gullit with the appointment of Wenger is laughable. Dalglish and Gullit had proved that they could win trophies in England, were established names, and management style was to splash the cash on players good enough to bring success. They were ambitious, and they were a statement of intent. In contrast, although he had some success abroad, Wenger was greeted with 'Arsene Who?' headlines. He did not have the name to attract the world class players that Newcastle or Chelsea were signing at the time, and he wasn't even big enough to win his own players. There seemed to be no short term vision of ambition, no apparent intent to turn the corner. Instead, it was a long term decision to revolutionise the club from its roots. In the end, it was the move to change things long-term that was going to ensure a prolonged spell of success, whereas Newcastle, with their short term ambition, have stagnated and declined. We are still waiting for our revolution. And we wont realise our potential until our chairman puts it in place. Or, more likely, another chairman is put in our current chairman's place.

Or play in England's first match at the new Wembley stadium?

He's also got an incredible backstage set-up – state-of-the-art training centre, coaching personnel, dieticians and doctors, scouting network etc – which Arsenal have wisely spent big on to give Wenger the support structure that will bring the best out of HIM. We've always fallen down in this respect. Even Bolton are light years ahead of us on off-pitch, potential-maximising terms. Our two brief periods of touching the heights – under Keegan and Robson – were built solely on the pitch and left little foundation for their successors. We seem to spend everything for short-term effect. When Wenger speaks of the Toon's potential, he's talking, when you come right down to it, about money. Realising that potential depends on how that money is handled. With Shepherd in charge, potential is all that it will remain.

By all accounts Owen is an honourable man. Most players at his level, with his expectations, and with his lack of real connections to the club, would have been agitating for a move the minute it became apparent we weren't going to be in Europe next season. Not Owen, who by all accounts is a decent sort and feels he owes us, after we spent so much on his to see so little. But of course, there's always the chance that Shepherd will manage to fuck this up by souring what relationship we do have with the player. Having blown most of our transfer kitty on the player, with consequences we're still feeling today, what's the betting we end up having to sell him for a massive loss, without hardly having seen him play at all?

If fat fred cannot stop him... just get rid of him... i guess Yeah, lets get rid of our best player eh? I'm sure due to our status in the game we can attract someone better. Best player my arse... when it happen? The attitude towards Owen on this forum is beyond ridiculous. He had a very serious injury, it wasn't his fault. We all watched it happen. So he makes all the right noises during his injury comeback about how much he wants to be at the club (and gets mocked for it on here), he looks happy enough in training, and there is no real indication that he wants to leave. So why the hate? He gets paid lots of money? He wants to play for his country? Is this club so blatantly insecure that we can't have a world class player in the squad without questioning his motive for wanting to be here? This article is blantantly tabloid shit stirring, don't play along FFS. What he said.

I've only been to two England games in my life, but one of them was the 5-1 in Munich. That has to be it, for me.

If Eriksson was DoF I'm sure he'd want a better manager than Roeder in the dugout.

I don't really want anyone to win it.

Nah, I'm going out in a minute.

Not even losing just four matches in over five years? Qualifying for three tournaments in a row? Getting to the quarter-finals each time? Since the WC I've come to the conclusion that it's not so much SGE that was overrated, but the players (and not least by themselves). you honestly do just see it in numeric terms don't you? All four of those losses came against equivalent opposition. How many equivalent opposition wins did he achieve? TWO! when you can find me a Premiership team of a relative standard of San Marino, Azerbaijan or Lichtenstein, then you can come back to me Without checking I'm pretty sure you could use a narrow argument like that (i.e. results against so-called top 10 sides) to 'prove' SBR was an average or poor England manager. Not that I think Sven was great or anything. so why say it? The above details are FACTS I can check it if you want. I was using my knowledge/memory from football in the past. I appreciate you won't be able to relate to that Anyway, how are they facts? What definition of a 'top 10 side' are you using? how many do you have? ftr: 1 Argentina 2 Italy 3 Brazil 4 France 5 Germany 6 England 7 The Netherlands 8 Portugal 9 Czech Republic 10 Spain You see Vic, I can remember Robson not qualifying for Euro '84 in France and losing all 3 games in Euro '88 and going out against the first 'top 10 team' we played in the knockout stage of both the 1986 and 1990 World Cups. Not having a go at SBR or his managerial talent in any way. Just showing how applying selective criteria proves very little. yet you have no problem with the statement SGE only lost 4 matches in 5 years? interesting Why would anyone but you have a problem with a true, provable, factual statement? when it is used to imply he was somehow a great manager because he never lost. Seriously, where are your Premiership comparison clubs to the level of Azerbaijan? It was used to reply to this: "There was nothing in the way he handled the England side to make you think he knew what he was doing."

Ah - now this I agree with, I.T. - Alex is quite right. The ideas had grounding, but the materials he had to work with were dreadful. Well...pitiful, and shite actually..... where do you think the England side would finish in the Premiership? Higher with Eriksson managing them than they'd come with either Keegan or McLaren managing them.