TRon

why? What has he ever doine to prove that? He was assistant at a couple of lower league clubs and now is assistant again at an underachieving premierleague team. No thanks. I said smart choice which means you have to disengage the hatred to understand. Not possible? Ok.

Poyet is widely regarded as an up and coming coach. He would dovetail with Wise and Jiminez no problem, and it makes sense to have everyone singing from the same page. Unless we get someone buying out Ashley, this is the direction we are going in.

I think Poyet would be a smart choice.

I am pretty confident he would do a very good job but will he be given a chance given his association with the Axis of Evil, Wise and Jiminez?

Ashley being the thick-skinned bugger he is, will also not want to be run out of toon. I can imagine, if the offer isn't right he'll want to finish what he started. There's already talk coming from his sources of a 5 year plan (yet another one).

Assuming Keegan is treated properly, then I can't see why he would have a "tantrum" (or stick to his principles) I can't see any owner wanting to be wary of his P's and Q's to stay on the right side of an employee. For Keegan to be happy, he will want a big transfer war chest. A new owner might reason that most manager's will have some success with a big transfer budget, why take on Keegan?

I don't think we'll be appointing a new manager while there's a possibility of a buy out of the club by Ambani. If he's due to take over, he'll want his own manager.

Assuming this take over happens, I can't see any way in the world that Ambani will ask Keegan to come back. Anyone who takes on a local legend will be hamstrung in his decision making for fear of the backlash if KK throws a tantrum.

He'll sell for the right price, but it won't be a fire sale, so any investor will have to stump up.

He won't be brought back by Ashley under any circumstances. More importantly, any new buyer of the club will have learned that it can be very expensive to hire a local hero. What we need now is a local hero who can buy and fund the club. Any volunteers?

Based on? Never managed in the PL for a start. This isn't the time for an exotic coach, the rest of this season will become backs to the wall stuff very quickly. He won;t know what to do. IMO the time to expriment with a coach like Zico is when everything else is in place and that certainly isn't the case with us. In your opinion the season's over already.

Why is that fella? Corporate finance, top level professional sport, marketing - professionals don't always get things right, but you'd back them to do so more often than inexperienced amateurs. Also, the way you approach decisions when you're on the inside and your job and livelihood depends on it is a bit different from how you see things from the luxury of an outside position. The club can't be run by a bunch of Monday morning quarterbacks. To turn it round, I'd be interested to know why people think we'd generate more income and produce better decisions with a fans' collective. The amaeturs own the club Bobby they don't run it. Off you go then Parky. It's all yours.

You'll be up Keegan's? I'm not going to slag him off if that's what you mean. I didn't mean anything different to what you did, whatever that was.

Zico would be a Brazilian version of Keegan. Not sure how useful that would be to us seeing this isn't Brazil.

You'll be up Keegan's?

Does anybody have any idea what Keegan's list was then if not Lampard, Beckham, Henry etc? As far as I can tell: Schweinsteiger: turned us down Warnock: Blackburn refused to sell Guthrie: deal done.

What do they mean by gross incompetence and mismanagement? Arguing with Keegan?

I would actually have been pleased to have had him replace Milner, but no way is he a striker and we still needed one. It was just one step backwards and one step forwards in terms of overall strength. I don't remember Keegan pushing too hard for a striker though. His priority was a left back, then a midfielder and after that a striker maybe. He might not have got what HE wanted, but the club definitely needed a striker and an attacking midfielder in most people's view.

The striker Keegan wanted was Schweinsteiger who turned the move down. We then bought Xisco who Keegan probably wasn't even aware existed, without his approval. This was wrong, but in a way it was right. Keegan wanted to hold onto Smith because his knowledge of Xisco was non-existent. Wise & co needed to act fast to get a striker in and rightly thought Smith was a no-hoper. The rest is history (or whoever's version you believe).

Because the PR and statements they put out have been very poor. The first statement they put out was several hours after the inital rumours broke, and didn't answer what everyone wanted to know - whether Keegan had gone. They then waited another two days to respond further, answering what everyone wanted to know in the first place - that Keegan wasn't sacked, and hadn't resigned, so effectively was still at the club. Then, after KK's resignation and statement of reason (manger should be allowed ot manage, etc) they issued what can only be dscribed as a very unprofessional, almost childish response, with their list of 'facts' - a list of facts that contradict quotes direct from Ashley, Wise, et al in the previous weeks/months. KK isn't blameless in this, but the Board have acted quite poorly, and would do well to remember what they have said in articles/interviews previously, before stating 'facts'. Quite laughable that people are pointing to magazine interviews to "prove" the board were lying over how much say KK had over transfers. Obviously they were going to support their manager in public, even if they couldn't seriously follow up some of his more ambitious targets. Try reading between the lines ffs. Are you a solicitor? I can almost hear Ashley et al beating a path to your door now. C,mon Big TRon, me old mate, find us a defence; yeah, that's right, guv, we were protecting 'im, we were doing wot was best for 'im and the club, of course, the club, that came first, yeah, well, that and Kevin. I'd have offered my services to King Kev but he's got some low life Legal Aid solicitor.

Because the PR and statements they put out have been very poor. The first statement they put out was several hours after the inital rumours broke, and didn't answer what everyone wanted to know - whether Keegan had gone. They then waited another two days to respond further, answering what everyone wanted to know in the first place - that Keegan wasn't sacked, and hadn't resigned, so effectively was still at the club. Then, after KK's resignation and statement of reason (manger should be allowed ot manage, etc) they issued what can only be dscribed as a very unprofessional, almost childish response, with their list of 'facts' - a list of facts that contradict quotes direct from Ashley, Wise, et al in the previous weeks/months. KK isn't blameless in this, but the Board have acted quite poorly, and would do well to remember what they have said in articles/interviews previously, before stating 'facts'. Quite laughable that people are pointing to magazine interviews to "prove" the board were lying over how much say KK had over transfers. Obviously they were going to support their manager in public, even if they couldn't seriously follow up some of his more ambitious targets. Try reading between the lines ffs. if you want to talk about "saying the right thing", how about responding to what I asked you and baggio earlier ? what was that? post nr 5236 Not really sure what you are expexcting me to respond to there. If you want my take on the whole situation, it's that neither side is blameless. As for defending Ashley, seeing their point of view wrt signing players within their means and of a certain age bracket doesn't mean I think the sun shines out of his arse. It probably shines out of Keegan's tbh. Ok. It's about Smith, and the comments you and Baggio made. Its a shame Baggio has taken an immature stance to it. But basically, there are 2 possible answers. One is that Keegan actually does, or did, want to keep Smith. Maybe he thinks he can do more, maybe he remembers the player he was at Leeds. A combination of both. The 2nd and only other possible alternative, is that yes he wanted rid of Smith but knew he wasn't going to get a replacement without spending more bucks than they were prepared to hand over. Or had to sell first of course. So, if anybody was saying the right thing, it was Keegan. Lying to say the right thing to big up Smith [as any good manager would do] and also to protect his employers. As usual its Keegan putting the good of the club first. They bought in a striker anyway, against Keegan's wishes. Is Keegan justified in feeling angry? Yes. Were they right to buy the striker in any case? Yes. It's not a case of black and white good v evil. I think most people already know this but are intent on polarising round their chosen side.

Bassong and Charlie - either/or

Can't we talk about the actual football for a change?

Because the PR and statements they put out have been very poor. The first statement they put out was several hours after the inital rumours broke, and didn't answer what everyone wanted to know - whether Keegan had gone. They then waited another two days to respond further, answering what everyone wanted to know in the first place - that Keegan wasn't sacked, and hadn't resigned, so effectively was still at the club. Then, after KK's resignation and statement of reason (manger should be allowed ot manage, etc) they issued what can only be dscribed as a very unprofessional, almost childish response, with their list of 'facts' - a list of facts that contradict quotes direct from Ashley, Wise, et al in the previous weeks/months. KK isn't blameless in this, but the Board have acted quite poorly, and would do well to remember what they have said in articles/interviews previously, before stating 'facts'. Quite laughable that people are pointing to magazine interviews to "prove" the board were lying over how much say KK had over transfers. Obviously they were going to support their manager in public, even if they couldn't seriously follow up some of his more ambitious targets. Try reading between the lines ffs. if you want to talk about "saying the right thing", how about responding to what I asked you and baggio earlier ? what was that? post nr 5236 Not really sure what you are expexcting me to respond to there. If you want my take on the whole situation, it's that neither side is blameless. As for defending Ashley, seeing their point of view wrt signing players within their means and of a certain age bracket doesn't mean I think the sun shines out of his arse. It probably shines out of Keegan's tbh.

Because the PR and statements they put out have been very poor. The first statement they put out was several hours after the inital rumours broke, and didn't answer what everyone wanted to know - whether Keegan had gone. They then waited another two days to respond further, answering what everyone wanted to know in the first place - that Keegan wasn't sacked, and hadn't resigned, so effectively was still at the club. Then, after KK's resignation and statement of reason (manger should be allowed ot manage, etc) they issued what can only be dscribed as a very unprofessional, almost childish response, with their list of 'facts' - a list of facts that contradict quotes direct from Ashley, Wise, et al in the previous weeks/months. KK isn't blameless in this, but the Board have acted quite poorly, and would do well to remember what they have said in articles/interviews previously, before stating 'facts'. Quite laughable that people are pointing to magazine interviews to "prove" the board were lying over how much say KK had over transfers. Obviously they were going to support their manager in public, even if they couldn't seriously follow up some of his more ambitious targets. Try reading between the lines ffs. if you want to talk about "saying the right thing", how about responding to what I asked you and baggio earlier ? what was that?