OzzieMandias

No.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2009/nov/12/newcastle-united-rangers-football-ideals

If all fans chip in a tenner each, it'll only take ten million of us to buy the club!

I'd ban white socks and yellow away strips.

Any alternative bid that was made would be a rival bid of course it would. However how that was perceived and dealt with would depend on the bid. If for instance Moat reappeared then, as far as Im concerned I cant see how that would change our plans as we know our model is better for the club. if however some massive businessman came in and said "Ill buy the club and give the supporters 50% for free" then obviously that would need to be viewed differently. It would still need to be assessed to see exactly what was involved. How? I don't want to put words into Peasepud's mouth, but reading between his lines upthread he seems to be implying that Moat's plan would have meant that the cost of purchasing the club would be met out of the club's future income. The club would basically be acquiring more debt as the result of the change of ownership. Wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

It's a bit like the way, in communist societies, people had to display flags and banners in their shops and places of business saying "Workers of the world unite" or whatever was that week's slogan, or the way people in dictatorships have to have an official portrait of their Glorious Leader. If you don't conform, you attract opprobrium. In some societies this would be from the police; in the UK it's from the Daily Mail and its fuckwit readers.

The banner merely demonstrated that some of our fans are morons. But everyone knew that already.

And as for "multicultural Brazil": http://aad.english.ucsb.edu/docs/muello1.html

Apart from the fact that you're almost certainly wrong – no black club managers in Brazil? Prove it – what the fuck is this supposed to prove? They're even racist in Brazil so it's OK to be racist in the UK? Them nig-nogs is too stupid to be managers? Try engaging your brain before posting. Ridiculous post. So what do YOU think is proved by there having been no black Brazilian manager? What relevance does it have to the situation of black club managers in Britain? What, in short, is Merlin on about?

Apart from the fact that you're almost certainly wrong no black club managers in Brazil? Prove it what the fuck is this supposed to prove? They're even racist in Brazil so it's OK to be racist in the UK? Them nig-nogs is too stupid to be managers? Try engaging your brain before posting. He didn't say there were no black club managers in Brazil. Also, it seems to read pretty obviously that he's saying had there been a top class black manager in Brazil they'd have appointed him. The point is that there haven't been any black managers coming through that are good enough. Whether you agree with that point is a different matter, you've completely misrepresented his post though. Well, the discussion was about club managers here, so if he's not saying that there are none in Brazil then his "argument" is extra irrelevant. There might be loads, no? No, the debate's about managers. I'm sure there are a fair few in Brazil, but merlin's point, to my understanding, was that not one of them has been good enough to be elevated to national coach status and if they'd been good enough they would have been. To disagree with that is fine, but to paint him as a racist is pretty poor form. So, there have been no black managers of the Brazilian national team. I ask again, what is that supposed to prove? I have suggested two possible interpretations of Merlin's post. Perhaps he can tell us himself exactly what he was saying that was different.

Apart from the fact that you're almost certainly wrong no black club managers in Brazil? Prove it what the fuck is this supposed to prove? They're even racist in Brazil so it's OK to be racist in the UK? Them nig-nogs is too stupid to be managers? Try engaging your brain before posting. He didn't say there were no black club managers in Brazil. Also, it seems to read pretty obviously that he's saying had there been a top class black manager in Brazil they'd have appointed him. The point is that there haven't been any black managers coming through that are good enough. Whether you agree with that point is a different matter, you've completely misrepresented his post though. Well, the discussion was about club managers here, so if he's not saying that there are none in Brazil then his "argument" is extra irrelevant. There might be loads, no?

Apart from the fact that you're almost certainly wrong – no black club managers in Brazil? Prove it – what the fuck is this supposed to prove? They're even racist in Brazil so it's OK to be racist in the UK? Them nig-nogs is too stupid to be managers? Try engaging your brain before posting.

Fixed.

Yep. Hence my fear, as expressed above, about yo-yodom. On the other hand, Shearer could turn out to a managerial genius who will turn poor players into world beaters, while Moat's "local knowledge" will conjure transfer cash out of thin air. This is based on absolutely no knowledge of the deal but I don't believe Moat (or anyone else for that matter) wouldn't hope and believe we will be promoted this season. Therefore for him to come in with little or nothing to spend on the squad in the summer would be absolutely bonkers. He simply MUST have figured into his plans for the club to invest in overhauling the playing staff this summer. There are no ifs or buts about it; the squad wasn't good enough to stay up and it's now weaker. I imagine he's got his plan together based on £100m to buy and £25-50m to spend. If he gets the club for less than the £100m and that means the manager has more to play with then that's even better. Well, we all thought that because Ashley had appointed Keegan he simply MUST be getting ready to blow a wad on sexy transfers. Hardly the same situation is it? Say Moat has barely managed to scrape together £100m of other people's money and plans to spend fuck all on the squad, what exactly would be his purpose of buying the club? So he can be the hero getting rid of Ashley, just like Ashley was getting rid of Shepherd? That won't last long if the club are relegated again. So he can make a quick buck? Again, see Ashley - particularly his repeated failed attempts at selling it. If he's coming into this without realising the playing staff needs serious investment in the summer (and budgeting for it accordingly) then he's thicker than I could ever imagine. Ironically enough considering you keep slating him for it, being a fan of the club should only help him in this regard. I'm not slating him for being a fan of the club. I'm questioning the moronic idea that this is the most important qualification and outweighs things such as money. And who exactly has suggested that? Care to respond to my other points? No, too busy. As he has no other qualifications (eg money, experience running a football club) his "local knowledge" (brought up on here again and again) is the only qualification on offer.

I probably ought to save this thread.

Yep. Hence my fear, as expressed above, about yo-yodom. On the other hand, Shearer could turn out to a managerial genius who will turn poor players into world beaters, while Moat's "local knowledge" will conjure transfer cash out of thin air. This is based on absolutely no knowledge of the deal but I don't believe Moat (or anyone else for that matter) wouldn't hope and believe we will be promoted this season. Therefore for him to come in with little or nothing to spend on the squad in the summer would be absolutely bonkers. He simply MUST have figured into his plans for the club to invest in overhauling the playing staff this summer. There are no ifs or buts about it; the squad wasn't good enough to stay up and it's now weaker. I imagine he's got his plan together based on £100m to buy and £25-50m to spend. If he gets the club for less than the £100m and that means the manager has more to play with then that's even better. Well, we all thought that because Ashley had appointed Keegan he simply MUST be getting ready to blow a wad on sexy transfers. Hardly the same situation is it? Say Moat has barely managed to scrape together £100m of other people's money and plans to spend fuck all on the squad, what exactly would be his purpose of buying the club? So he can be the hero getting rid of Ashley, just like Ashley was getting rid of Shepherd? That won't last long if the club are relegated again. So he can make a quick buck? Again, see Ashley - particularly his repeated failed attempts at selling it. If he's coming into this without realising the playing staff needs serious investment in the summer (and budgeting for it accordingly) then he's thicker than I could ever imagine. Ironically enough considering you keep slating him for it, being a fan of the club should only help him in this regard. I'm not slating him for being a fan of the club. I'm questioning the moronic idea that this is the most important qualification and outweighs things such as money.

Yep. Hence my fear, as expressed above, about yo-yodom. On the other hand, Shearer could turn out to a managerial genius who will turn poor players into world beaters, while Moat's "local knowledge" will conjure transfer cash out of thin air. This is based on absolutely no knowledge of the deal but I don't believe Moat (or anyone else for that matter) wouldn't hope and believe we will be promoted this season. Therefore for him to come in with little or nothing to spend on the squad in the summer would be absolutely bonkers. He simply MUST have figured into his plans for the club to invest in overhauling the playing staff this summer. There are no ifs or buts about it; the squad wasn't good enough to stay up and it's now weaker. I imagine he's got his plan together based on £100m to buy and £25-50m to spend. If he gets the club for less than the £100m and that means the manager has more to play with then that's even better. Well, we all thought that because Ashley had appointed Keegan he simply MUST be getting ready to blow a wad on sexy transfers.

They were probably saying the same at Leeds and Sheffield Wednesday.

Yep. Hence my fear, as expressed above, about yo-yodom. On the other hand, Shearer could turn out to a managerial genius who will turn poor players into world beaters, while Moat's "local knowledge" will conjure transfer cash out of thin air.

I think this is true. I worry that without significant investment the best we can hope to be is a yo-yo club. I'd feel more comfortable if I knew a few more positive things about Moat and his vision/plan for the club other than that he's had a struggle to get the overdraft guaranteed and will appoint his mate Alan Shearer. Newcastle bring in far more money then the majority of Premiership clubs, so how can you then come to the conclusion that the best we can hope for is to be a yoyo club without extra cash? Why do you think all those clubs that bring in much less money then us aren't yoyo clubs? This is complacency. We got ourselves into a lot of financial trouble in the Premiership under Shepherd and Hall once the flotation money ran out. What's going to be different this time? I'm not saying it can't be done, but Moat has yet to offer anything to convince me that he's the one who can do it. Right now he's just the non-Ashley, like Ashley was the non-Shepherd. A negative rather than a positive. What's he got that will get us there, apart from Shearer's mobile number? so the option is stay under ashley? a regime without any credibility whatsoever? even freddie had more credibility at his worst than ashley has now. As it stands its damn difficult for him to be any worse. Whats needed is stability and dignity to bring decency back to all levels of the football club not just with Hughton and the players So in what ways is Moat equipped to provide stability and dignity to bring decency back to all levels of the football club?

I think this is true. I worry that without significant investment the best we can hope to be is a yo-yo club. I'd feel more comfortable if I knew a few more positive things about Moat and his vision/plan for the club other than that he's had a struggle to get the overdraft guaranteed and will appoint his mate Alan Shearer. Newcastle bring in far more money then the majority of Premiership clubs, so how can you then come to the conclusion that the best we can hope for is to be a yoyo club without extra cash? Why do you think all those clubs that bring in much less money then us aren't yoyo clubs? This is complacency. We got ourselves into a lot of financial trouble in the Premiership under Shepherd and Hall once the flotation money ran out. What's going to be different this time? I'm not saying it can't be done, but Moat has yet to offer anything to convince me that he's the one who can do it. Right now he's just the non-Ashley, like Ashley was the non-Shepherd. A negative rather than a positive. What's he got that will get us there, apart from Shearer's mobile number?

I think this is true. I worry that without significant investment the best we can hope to be is a yo-yo club. I'd feel more comfortable if I knew a few more positive things about Moat and his vision/plan for the club other than that he's had a struggle to get the overdraft guaranteed and will appoint his mate Alan Shearer.

Sorry to have to point out something so painfully obvious, but if it wasn't for Ashley we wouldn't have had Keegan as a manager in the first place. Or second place. as a rebuttal this reply really makes no sense. brummiemag is correct to say that, were it not for Ashley acting like an arrogant arsehole, we'd still have keegan. Saying that he appointed him in the first place is not really relevant, as he wasn't acting like "an arrogant arsehole" when he did that. Brummie's contention is with that particular behaviour, not Ashley appointing KK in the first place. The fact that he appointed a good manager is a positive, but the negatives in acting as Ashley did after the appointment not only invalidate those positives but actually outweigh them to a much greater degree. It's like saying X had a good idea but when he put the idea into practice X messed it up terribly. Arguing that he had the good idea in the first place in no way excuses messing it up in practice. You're wrong. Appointing Keegan was dumb. All that has happened afterwards was simply the playing out of the consequences of that initial bad decision.

Sorry to have to point out something so painfully obvious, but if it wasn't for Ashley we wouldn't have had Keegan as a manager in the first place. Or second place. Do you think Ashley acted reasonably after appointing Keegan? You dont think Ashley has set the club back by a decade or more? Are you still an Ashley supporter after all that has happened? Sorry, but I'm not one of these dewy-eyed my-hero-right-or-wrong types. I don't "support" anyone the way that you support Keegan. Ashley's done some good things -- stabilising the debt, trying to get the wage bill under control -- and some really stupid things -- not investing in the first team, appointing Keegan.

Perhaps he has failed to explain to Barclay's the importance of his "local knowledge".