TRon

I'm sure he'd show up for charity. Plus the appeal thing will be over by then. I'm not sure he would although I'd like to think he'd be big enough.

Guthrie would be a massive improvement over Butt. Nolan's not the quickest and having Butt alongside him in midfield makes him look worse than he is. With someone relatively mobile in the middle, Nolan would probably look more effective as well.

Because for Liverpool fans it's no big deal.

The investor needs to have enough money to buy out the previous owner for that to happen like it did then. Our previous owner for example took his swag and is now trying to buy some piddling club in Spain for £10million. In the same way we need a considerably richer investor than the current owner to come in and there aren't that many about. i dont agree that we need a richer owner, just one who is more likely to release funds. that person or even consortium can have less personal wealth than ashley like lerner at villa or the irish who used to own sunderland. personally i dont think we should be concentrating on pushing ashley out as he has shown he doesnt want to leave and there's nothing we can do to change that. keep the pressure on for the next few years by all means but we have to try and effect change within the club rather than an unrealistic change in ownership. i was just countering ozzie's childish notion that by protesting we turn away potential investors. i dont think it has any real effect either way, tho an underperforming club with precedent and potential for greater income is probably more likely to have investors alerted. I guess the "grown-up" view is that a potential sugar daddy will look at all the protests and boycotts and unfocussed hatred directed towards someone who has so far put about £130 million into the club on top of the purchase price, and think "Yeah, I'll have some of that." How do you think Ashley views the £248M he's spent on the club so far? probably a mistake in hindsight.

It's not a boycott. It's a rally. A rally for what ? NUSC So if there are people there chanting for Ashley to leave they are not there for NUSC is that what your saying ? Serious question. I'm not saying anything like that. Many people want Ashley to go and many don't. Many are NUSC members and many aren't. The two things aren't mutually exclusive, so I'm sure you will get some of those chants. But then you get those chants away from NUSC organised rallys too. I've chanted it myself in the stadium without a committee telling me it was ok. But in an organised rally stuff surely has to be organised therefore the leaflets should be all join NUSC, banners saying the same and people in charge of what happens. Thats the whole point of an organised committee and an organised rally. What I predict will happen is you will have an overruling over people chanting for Ashley to go and for cockneys this and that and that is my whole problem with the current set up of NUSC. It appears from the outside to be a solely anti Ashley protest group. I'm sorry but that is how it looks and how it sounds from their meetings. The NUSC can't prohibit members of the public from voicing their own opinions in a public place though. They've taken the precaution of organising their rally away from the stadium so in the event that it does turn into an anti-Ashley gathering it doesn't affect those who disagree, or the players on the pitch. I think 90% of fans are anti-ashley, so on the whole I'd think the NUSC are. But i think they are (for the most part) taking level headed action that doesn't have a negative impact on the team. Even though I do think a couple of their statements have been heavy handed. Poll on this forum shows only 20 percent think the NUSC represent their views. Do you reckon 70 percent of people on here are even more "anti-Ashley" than they are? This forum is VERY pro-Ashley. Or at least too forgiving (in my opinion) of his string of mistakes. I think it stems from previously being the most voiciferously anti-Shepherd forum and lots of posters still clinging onto the hope that the "anyone but Shepherd" view will be proved right...or at least not wanting to admit to NE5 he might have been on to something. But then, as I've said, Pro-NUSC <> Anti-Ashley. So that poll is unrelated to my estimate. Irrespective of people agreeing with the actions, aims or motives of the NUSC, I think at least 90% of fans would say they aren't happy with the direction of the club in the last 2 years. Well I was a critic of Shepherd and I stand by that because I believe a lot of our current problems are down to his reckless mistakes in the past. Even back then I would never have joined a rally protesting his running of the club that's the difference.

I think we'll get something out of this, if only a point. Ryan should play RB for me, with Duff and Jonas wide. Oba and Lovenkrands will be interesting but I'm not sure it will work. I wouldn't be surprised to see Shola starting tbh.

Very sensible comments.

The investor needs to have enough money to buy out the previous owner for that to happen like it did then. Our previous owner for example took his swag and is now trying to buy some piddling club in Spain for £10million. In the same way we need a considerably richer investor than the current owner to come in and there aren't that many about. i dont agree that we need a richer owner, just one who is more likely to release funds. that person or even consortium can have less personal wealth than ashley like lerner at villa or the irish who used to own sunderland. personally i dont think we should be concentrating on pushing ashley out as he has shown he doesnt want to leave and there's nothing we can do to change that. keep the pressure on for the next few years by all means but we have to try and effect change within the club rather than an unrealistic change in ownership. i was just countering ozzie's childish notion that by protesting we turn away potential investors. i dont think it has any real effect either way, tho an underperforming club with precedent and potential for greater income is probably more likely to have investors alerted. I agree that investors (if they can be found) who can provide funds for team strengthening would be a good way forward. I don't think the NUSC approach will help in bringing any of those investors forward, and I think they are doing more harm than good.

Strikes me as he hasn't been able to put enough money into the squad during the window (for whatever reason) and he's doing his utmost to support the staff in gestures like this. He needs to keep it up, and the odd interview to let everyone know his plans or hopes wouldn't go amiss either. and a decent managerial appointment.. Very true. All the financial housekeeping in the world won't excuse rank bad decision making. Getting the next appointment right is pivotal for Ashley to regain some trust.

The investor needs to have enough money to buy out the previous owner for that to happen like it did then. Our previous owner for example took his swag and is now trying to buy some piddling club in Spain for £10million. In the same way we need a considerably richer investor than the current owner to come in and there aren't that many about.

Strikes me as he hasn't been able to put enough money into the squad during the window (for whatever reason) and he's doing his utmost to support the staff in gestures like this. He needs to keep it up, and the odd interview to let everyone know his plans or hopes wouldn't go amiss either.

Whatever you think of Ashley - and I think it's clear like quite a few chairmen he doesn't know much about football at this level - it's far better for us to see him at the ground at matches and maintaining a presence at the club.

There was mate. I was in it and it had thousands of members, I've still got the lapel badge. You may remember the Magpie pub/club if you've been going to the match for a few years ? I'd join another one if it had credibility and actually did what it said on the tin (key words Newcastle United - Support ?) and didn't advocate boycotts which has to be the opposite of "support". No this is not a supporters club, this is a parochial political movement who want Ashley out and hi-jacked the term "supporters club" for their own purposes. It would raise their credibility if they actually said who or what they actually want to replace the men they so despise, but typically they are full of protest but never come up with any realistic alternatives. Remember the late 80's early 90's when chants of "sack the board" were popular, along with sit down protests? They ushered in a new era of success under John Hall. I understand the key difference you refer to, in that Sir John Hall had publicised his interest in taking full control at that time. But what comes first, the chicken or the egg? I think constant pressure should be put on an underperforming owner whether there's a saviour in the wings or not, or you're inviting them to continue ruining the club. An air of discontent among the fans also alerts such investors of an opportunity to come into a club as the good guys, unlike the Glazers and Hicks of the world who come in as bad guys. How do you know the new owners will be any better? Doesn't it occur to you that if they didn't want to pay the going rate for the club when it was for sale, they aren't going to have enough money to do things much differently to Ashley even if they did somehow get the finance together?

Good to see that Ashley is sticking to his word and trying to shore up morale at the club. I also think that getting unhappy players out of the door and enthusiastic footballers like Lovenkrands in will lift the squad. It will be tough but I think we will be ok this season.

I do believe they have a 5 year plan, it's clearly based on developing youngsters which they have done from day one and to their credit have continued to do even when it's gone tits up. They invested a fair amount of money in the first window when Allardyce (appointed by Freddie) was manager and now we ars struggling to shift a lot of dead weight from his mistakes in the transfer market. Once these leeches are off the books I expect the money will be re-invested in players who give more value for their wages. The main problem we have with this regime is the apparent lack of football knowledge of those making the major decisions. Not that it was much better under Shepherd. I don't think we've had the right vision at the top since SJH was chairman.

Stick to the ludicrously over-priced Walkers crisps if you are unsure, it's the safest bet.

I don't have any problem with this rally/protest, anyone who agrees should join and good luck to them. In the same way the club doesn't need to respond or acknowledge this fringe group especially considering they are still advocating boycotting club products.

binnsy, you already told us what the aims of the NUSC are yesterday: No's 2 and 4 are so ludicrously out of sync with the the supposed idea of working with the club it's hard to take this organisation seriously.

It's not going to have an adverse effect on the team. Jesus wept, what the f*** is wrong with you lot? As the poster above you has said they're going to urge people to do exactly what you want and get behind the team, the only difference is NUSC may be capable of creating some form of atmosphere by bringing a few people together pre-match and getting them in the mood. We'll agree to disagree then. Irrespective of their motive, this is not the way it will be reflected in the media and will no doubt be jumped upon by the usual retards who turn up at St James' and get on Sky Sports News (no not David Craig). You must agree that there is a proportion of non-match going toon fans who are more likely to attend this rally and turn it to their own agenda? I'm talking about the boycoutt brigade. Is this not potentially providing a forum to turn what could by all means be an idea to 'rally' some support into an anti-regime event? Here underlies my entire point for avoiding these kind of events until the close season or safety-secured point. There is a mass amount of ill feeling around Tyneside, we all know that, and this could potentially provide a forum for it all to raise its head, and THAT would be extremely detrimental. The media coverage of NUSC so far has been overwhelmingly positive, as I pointed out earlier in the thread. I can't echo your worries about it being hijacked by charvas either as I don't think they're organised enough to turn it into an 'anti-regime event'. Obviously you'll get the odd scratter who is going to go way too far but the majority of Newcastle United fans are level headed blokes who wont suddenly flip the minute Ashley's name as mentioned. NUSC have every right to protest. It's being done well away from the ground and it wont have any negative effect on the performance of the players and I can't see why any right minded person would think otherwise. Using the logic of some on here then all fans should be barred from fraternising with each other pre-game if they're going to talk about the sorry state this club is in because that's clearly a breading ground for ill feeling that could reveal itself when Shola inevitably misplaces a pass. Do people off here go to the pub with their mates before a match, plaster on a shit eating grin and talk about what a good job Kinnear, Llambias and Ashley are doing and how we're only a few good results away from Europe for fear that a negative comment is going to lose us a game? Didn't you say just earlier it was a rally and NOT a protest? Yeah ok. No, that was Binnsy. Ok I see you haven't caught up with the updated PC NUSC. My bad.

Obviously not. I'm not convinced by Ashley & co yet but I have no interest in protesting rallying whatever it's about.

It's not going to have an adverse effect on the team. Jesus wept, what the f*** is wrong with you lot? As the poster above you has said they're going to urge people to do exactly what you want and get behind the team, the only difference is NUSC may be capable of creating some form of atmosphere by bringing a few people together pre-match and getting them in the mood. We'll agree to disagree then. Irrespective of their motive, this is not the way it will be reflected in the media and will no doubt be jumped upon by the usual retards who turn up at St James' and get on Sky Sports News (no not David Craig). You must agree that there is a proportion of non-match going toon fans who are more likely to attend this rally and turn it to their own agenda? I'm talking about the boycoutt brigade. Is this not potentially providing a forum to turn what could by all means be an idea to 'rally' some support into an anti-regime event? Here underlies my entire point for avoiding these kind of events until the close season or safety-secured point. There is a mass amount of ill feeling around Tyneside, we all know that, and this could potentially provide a forum for it all to raise its head, and THAT would be extremely detrimental. The media coverage of NUSC so far has been overwhelmingly positive, as I pointed out earlier in the thread. I can't echo your worries about it being hijacked by charvas either as I don't think they're organised enough to turn it into an 'anti-regime event'. Obviously you'll get the odd scratter who is going to go way too far but the majority of Newcastle United fans are level headed blokes who wont suddenly flip the minute Ashley's name as mentioned. NUSC have every right to protest. It's being done well away from the ground and it wont have any negative effect on the performance of the players and I can't see why any right minded person would think otherwise. Using the logic of some on here then all fans should be barred from fraternising with each other pre-game if they're going to talk about the sorry state this club is in because that's clearly a breading ground for ill feeling that could reveal itself when Shola inevitably misplaces a pass. Do people off here go to the pub with their mates before a match, plaster on a shit eating grin and talk about what a good job Kinnear, Llambias and Ashley are doing and how we're only a few good results away from Europe for fear that a negative comment is going to lose us a game? Didn't you say just earlier it was a rally and NOT a protest? Yeah ok.

You ask for communication and when you get it this is your response? Your attitude is probably shared by 99% of the NUSC members though, which is why I don't think the club should give them the time of day. All this talk of wanting to work with the owners is weasel word bollocks.

We've paid off all our debt, but we've still got loads of debt with more to come. Our wage bill is too high, but Ashley has increased the wage bill. We need investment, but Ashley turns down offers of investment from local businessmen. It's cheaper to pay a DOF to bring in players than let the manager do it, but the DOF is paid 150% more than the manager. For all the tales of woe, they don't actually seem to be that worried about it or doing much to sort it. Is that true? Don't think I've seen it before. According to Mike Ashley it is... http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-evening-chronicle/2008/08/08/mike-ashley-exclusive-chronicle-interview-72703-21492315/ But he's been known to talk bollocks....which is exactly ther point. And where does he turn down offers of investment, exactly? The context of that quote was him announcing that he was looking for investors! "I'd tell them we'd look at it at the end of the season as there was no rush" Exactly. No refusal there at all. When you asked that tart out and she said "some other time" that was a knock back mate. I know you don't like to think so, but it was. Feeble. "There are some great people who come to our matches who sit in the corporate areas, and wouldn?t it be great to have local backing for what we are doing? ?Some of them would talk to me last season and say, ?Mike, is there an opportunity for us to come into the club again because we were shareholders in the plc previously??. Either they've invested since or he's knocked them back or he was making it up at the time. Which is it? Whatever it is, it's clearly not a refusal. In fact, it seems more like an invitation. He's inventing imaginary questions for himself in an attempt to attract people to the club? That reminds me of someone... So now you're saying it's lie. So it's still not a refusal. I'm asking you what it is. I still call it a refusal....if it happened. Do you believe anyone asked the question? Why would Ashley make up a story about looking for partners to invest in the club if he didn't want to do it? I have no doubt he was looking for investment. But he claims he's had former shareholders offering to invest. If he has, why has he not taken them up on it? If he hasn't, why's he telling porky pies? Something to do with the timeline and current financial climate? What was the situation when he was looking for investors? Before the financial meltdown there were probably people who were wiling to invest, afterwards probably a lot less. I'm sure if there were people queuing up to invest but had been knocked back we'd have heard about it by now.

We've paid off all our debt, but we've still got loads of debt with more to come. Our wage bill is too high, but Ashley has increased the wage bill. We need investment, but Ashley turns down offers of investment from local businessmen. It's cheaper to pay a DOF to bring in players than let the manager do it, but the DOF is paid 150% more than the manager. For all the tales of woe, they don't actually seem to be that worried about it or doing much to sort it. Is that true? Don't think I've seen it before. According to Mike Ashley it is... http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-evening-chronicle/2008/08/08/mike-ashley-exclusive-chronicle-interview-72703-21492315/ But he's been known to talk bollocks....which is exactly ther point. And where does he turn down offers of investment, exactly? The context of that quote was him announcing that he was looking for investors! "I'd tell them we'd look at it at the end of the season as there was no rush" Exactly. No refusal there at all. When you asked that tart out and she said "some other time" that was a knock back mate. I know you don't like to think so, but it was. Feeble. "There are some great people who come to our matches who sit in the corporate areas, and wouldn?t it be great to have local backing for what we are doing? ?Some of them would talk to me last season and say, ?Mike, is there an opportunity for us to come into the club again because we were shareholders in the plc previously??. Either they've invested since or he's knocked them back or he was making it up at the time. Which is it? Whatever it is, it's clearly not a refusal. In fact, it seems more like an invitation. He's inventing imaginary questions for himself in an attempt to attract people to the club? That reminds me of someone... So now you're saying it's lie. So it's still not a refusal. I'm asking you what it is. I still call it a refusal....if it happened. Do you believe anyone asked the question? Why would Ashley make up a story about looking for partners to invest in the club if he didn't want to do it?

I'm happy to go with the consenus on the street if they can run the club better I'm the first to admit. Joe Bloggs from down the pub has my vote as next chairman.