OzzieMandias

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. No ****, that's not the point he's making though is it? No, it's just the reason why his "point" is idiotic. He was referring to the mistakes Ashley made after appointing Keegan. Whereas you are 'praising Ashley for appointing Keegan....? Sorry, I'm not actually sure what the **** your on about. I haven't been for the last few days actually other than you think Keegan is a knob. I'm not praising Ashley for appointing Keegan. It was perhaps his most stupid decision.

True, although "dealt with" doesn't necessarily mean cleared. There's a common misconception that debt is a bad thing - its not - gearing/borrowing is how businesses become successful. Certainly hasn't done Man Utd any harm. Trick is to get good terms so that the interest payments are comfortably met, and run the business properly so that you are not incurring further borrowing to meet the interest payments i.e. £40m overdraft facilities. Yes, which is why I said "dealt with" and not "cleared". It's precisely his inability to "deal with" the finances that is holding up Moat buying the club. There's a common misconception that further borrowing will be easy for any future owner to acquire. Oh, and Man U are in debt because of a leveraged buy-out. They did not finance their success by borrowing.

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. No ****, that's not the point he's making though is it? No, it's just the reason why his "point" is idiotic.

It could be even worse, Dave.

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.

We'd be completely up shit street by now if the debts hadn't been dealt with. It's seriously deluded to think otherwise.

You're most likely a WUM but i shall humour you. Could we have some names please ? Are you implying that Keegan is the best manager there is? I would guess not, so I'm assuming that you're implying that he's the best available to us. If so then how do you know that? None of us know who'd be available to us, not even the club at this stage I'd expect, so all that the people who are wanting Keegan back are doing is pre-empting the result of that process, why? The answer can only be that they're letting their sentiment towards Keegan make them unwilling to consider anyone else. That's not a good idea in my view and it's been one of the major factors in NUFC being in it's present state of turmoil. Shepherd allowed sentiment to influence his decisions and ended up buying players we couldn't afford, bringing in both players and managers based upon reputation rather than benefit to the team, trying for instant success rather than building something on solid foundations for the future, and that left the club in a perilous financial state when it didn't work. Ashley let sentiment influence his decisions and bought the club without finding out the true financial position of the club and then make the same mistake as Shepherd by appointing a manager to appease the fans when he wasn't in a position to give that manager what he wanted without considering the consequences of not doing so. Far too often crucial decisions have been made based upon sentiment rather than rational thought at this club and look where it's left us. Now is the time for that to end. So basically what I want is for there to actually be a process to deciding the next manager and I want that process to result in us employing the best manager available to us at that time. At this point no-one can know who that is, we don't even know our options, let alone who amongst those options is going to be the best for the club. So, anyone who is certain about it at this stage is making a bit mistake and I only hope that whoever it is that will end up being responsible for making that decision doesn't think they know the answer already. For the record, if after that process has run its course the decision is made that either Alan Shearer or Kevin Keegan is the best man for the job then fine, I'll be happy with that. I have to say that I doubt that either of them is the best available to us, but as with everyone else that's an opinion made without even knowing who the candidates are, let alone being qualified to decide between them. I also doubt that Keegan's even a candidate as I don't think he'd want to come back here after all this. Basically what I'm saying is that I want a professionally run club from now on and you don't have a professionally run club if you make decisions as important as who the manager should be by saying: "This bloke's the only man for the job" without even considering who's available. Good post.

Awesome. Oh well. So much for the theory that it doesn't matter Moat has no money.

I see, he's "pathetic" because he's a Newcastle supporter but not a Keegan supporter? You want small-minded, look in the mirror. How am I small minded? He's not a Newcastle supporter no, not if he's willing to give up on the club if Keegan came back. I think he dislikes seeing the whole club in thrall to one has-been figure, and despairs of the sentimentality that goes with the KK infatuation. We'll never get back to a situation like the early '90s, and our obsession with it is holding us back. Just look at the last season, for christ's sake.

You forgot to mention 'Keegan proved to be right.' He won the case for compensation. It's not about "right". I still wish he'd swallowed his pride and battled on instead of walking away. you havent even bothered to read it have you? I read the whole thing about five minutes after it was first posted.

I see, he's "pathetic" because he's a Newcastle supporter but not a Keegan supporter? You want small-minded, look in the mirror.

You forgot to mention 'Keegan proved to be right.' He won the case for compensation. It's not about "right". I still wish he'd swallowed his pride and battled on instead of walking away.

Eh? There's a massive fucking section about how it wasn't made clear to Keegan that he wouldn't be in charge of signings. That's the basis of the entire outcome, that Keegan took the job in good faith and was repeatedly misled. Not only that, the club were deliberately lying to the fans (that includes you, I think) and not telling Keegan the 'real' position. If it wasn't clear -- and it clearly wasn't -- he should have acted on his misgivings and said no before all this bollocks started. That's what I wish he'd done. As for being lied to, when have we not been? Freddie was hardly the paragon of Truth and Honesty. KK's told a few porkies in his time, too. It hardly changes anyone's opinion of Ashley, does it? We know he's crap.

Don't bother quoting parts of it then, to back up your statement. A manager refuses to use YouTube, a manager who was told he has the final say and didn't, a manager who didn't give up hope of coming back to the club - until NUFC statement saying he will not have final say if he were to return... ..soft in the head aye. Or else desperate for the cash, of course.

Who's beaten? Not me. Keegan won today. Hurrah for "principles". The club lost. Ashley and Llambias revealed as utter incompetents. And here we are in the Championship with a divided fanbase.

Not supporting a club because of a single person. That is pretty small minded. Irony-tastic.

The main feeling I got from reading the PDF was that KK must be soft in the head to have taken the job in the first place.

I definitely would not want Keegan back. No, no, a thousand times no. My brother is going so far as to say he'll stop supporting the club if Keegan comes back again. I wouldn't go that far but our fixation on this one burnt-out former hero makes us look like a very small club indeed.

I am sure UV will reply properly but didnt he say "net" spend. Yet you didnt take the outgoings into account You are correct. I wonder, then, why UV bothered to put in the outgoing figure? Or omitted the money for Shearer. Presumably because the outgoing figure was what those players were sold for after KK had left, gives a decent demonstration of the fact the money was sensibly invested and not just being spunked up the wall for the sake of it with no hope of return (i.e. it was hardly spending in the Chelsea or Man City vein). The Shearer money distorts it somewhat and was spent shortly before he left, but even if you count it a total of £40m net in 5 years is hardly outrageous. No, it's hardly outrageous, though of course UV is talking about a period of only 4 years. Perhaps you or UV can provide us with a list of all the clubs who spent more in that period. Keegan was there for 5 years in total though wasn't he? The time period is clearly going to be longer if you add on the time between Batty signing and KK leaving so it would be 5 years if you're to go on and count Shearer's signing. I couldn't give a fuck what other clubs spent, nor do I have the faintest idea. Although as has been pointed out the money 'remained' in the squad and was ultimately recooped and more if you look past Keegan's tenure, I'd wager there aren't many transfer records that could stand up to that. The figures for other clubs are relevant if what you're trying to do is claim that Keegan didn't spend big or that our spending-power at the time wasn't a huge part of what we achieved in that time, which seemed to be the point UV, in his usual cack-handed fashion, was struggling to make. You can also consider how much the same players would cost in today's market. But without any of that, the figures are pretty much meaningless. Including Shearer it's something like a £40 million net spend. And this was before the days of CL cash and super-rich sugar-daddies.

Has it really been forever already?

I am sure UV will reply properly but didnt he say "net" spend. Yet you didnt take the outgoings into account You are correct. I wonder, then, why UV bothered to put in the outgoing figure? Or omitted the money for Shearer. Presumably because the outgoing figure was what those players were sold for after KK had left, gives a decent demonstration of the fact the money was sensibly invested and not just being spunked up the wall for the sake of it with no hope of return (i.e. it was hardly spending in the Chelsea or Man City vein). The Shearer money distorts it somewhat and was spent shortly before he left, but even if you count it a total of £40m net in 5 years is hardly outrageous. No, it's hardly outrageous, though of course UV is talking about a period of only 4 years. Perhaps you or UV can provide us with a list of all the clubs who spent more in that period.

Another club that had "ambition" – and owners that fucked off before the bills came rolling in.

I am sure UV will reply properly but didnt he say "net" spend. Yet you didnt take the outgoings into account You are correct. I wonder, then, why UV bothered to put in the outgoing figure? Or omitted the money for Shearer.

On this occasion, it wasn't me who started it. I like the convuluted logic, but there's also a serious point there. I don't think the Halls or Shepherd were consulted about Keegan's return, because Ashley and co had fallen out with the old regime over what they felt were hidden loan repayment clauses which ought to have been brought to their attention. They made the appointment largely on the basis of the kind of heroic account which the likes of Caulkin is putting forward. They'd have got a more complete picture if they'd talked to people with inside knowledge. The bit of history that got repeated as a result was the walkout and the flaky temperament. The other element in past success that wasn't taken on board was the role of the heavy financial backing that was given to Keegan for new players. We'll never know whether this, that or the other manager would have done better or worse with the same support, but it was a factor. Every time the momentum stalled, Keegan was able to go out and buy more players. When the money ran out, he decided it was time to go. Coincidence? You decide. I stand to be corrected on my figures (fees from nufc.com), but by my reckoning to get from a relegation facing Div2 side to 2nd in the league, we spent £25m net over 4 years (up to and including Batty). We subsequently sold players Keegan bought during that time for a total of £25.6m. I guess arithmetic just isn't your strong point. From the figures given on nufc.com. I make the total spent £43.9 million. Didn't bother to tot up the outgoings.