Mick

It went down hill when you brought up the "why Waddle, Beardsley, Gazza, Robson, Lee and Cox all left the club." question yet again. It's off topic and the bickering it eventually leads to just spoils a good thread. Actually, the well written and considered posts (whether agreed with or not) ended with this one..... http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php/topic,32099.msg613950.html#msg613950 looking back, that seems correct, but Baggio - and others - don't seem to want to confirm it Brotherly love. :roll:

:roll: You are totally clueless when it comes to commenting about what major shareholders do, you just have no idea how a boardroom is run and you prove that with your crazy ramblings. bluebiggrin.gif

I really look forward to your thought provoking posts, I think I might print that one out and see if it'll help send me to sleep later, it's doing it now so it should work. bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif

bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif bluesleep.gif I know what you "said," I can read, try it sometime.

well, we know its the best you can do At least I didn't post something that was made up of 9 words, 5 of which were from the post of the person I was replying to. 9 and 5, what a coincidence, it's the number of times Ellis and Villa finished above Newcastle while they were both chairman, care to comment on that?

Shame you can't read and evaded questions when I offered to go looking for past posts which addressed the above. says the "long term supporter" who still hasn't answered the question that started this thread What a surprise, yet again you can't read, you set yourself up every time.

Your comment in your first paragraph is laughable, nobody can guarantee success and that's true. Souness and Roeder were almost guaranteed to deliver failure and most people could see that, including you with Souness. That case for the defence of Shepherd is a load of bollocks, we're not talking about Shepherd bringing in good managers, we're talking about him bringing in serial failures, people with a track-record which mirrored the failure that he's presided over. Not one of those managers you've mentioned were as bad as our last two managers, at least not before they were appointed so your point is totally rubbish as you are using a few in isolation when we do it for fun. You then go on about the spending of both our last two managers, Souness is the person who brought George Weah's cousin over on the strength of a telephone conversation, not only that, he watched him in training and still played him. What track-record has Roeder got when it comes to spending money? Your comments about the Hall's and Shepherd are about as meaningful as the rest of your post, fact less. It's already been mentioned this week that the Hall's play little part in the running of our club, I'm sure you even quoted Sir Bobby from his book saying that he'd hardly seen Douglas in 5 years. That's hardly the profile of somebody who is making all of the decisions is it? I'll try and educate you for the last time on this point but you must know that shares mean nothing away from the AGM, don't you? Shares only count at the Annual General Meeting; during board meetings it's one man one vote except for the chairman who has the casting vote in the case of a tie, which makes Shepherd the most powerful man in the board-room. You either can’t take things in or you chose not to, which one is it? quite amazing that a long term supporter like you, still can't tell us why Waddle, Beardsley, Gazza, Robson, Lee and Cox all left the club. Its obvious the different club that exists now in comparison to then is something you can't bear witness to. Quite amazing how someone who says they do figures, or business, or whatever, STILL thinks the major shareholders in the football club aren't involved with and probably have the ultimate say in the big decisions. :lol: But then again, you fail to see anything else other than what you blindly want to, so I'm not surprised. Is that the best you can do? bluebiggrin.gif

Shame you can't read and evaded questions when I offered to go looking for past posts which addressed the above.

Would you trust Shepherd with the clubs finances if it was a closed shop and he could take anything he wanted without being answerable to anybody? I wouldn't, he takes enough when he's accountable so I would expect a lot more to leave the club if it could be done on the quiet. Blind and unfounded speculation Nothing other than expected. Undoubtedly a cut and paste job. The amount he takes is not speculation, it's well published. What he might take if not being monitored is speculation, based on what he's done.

Your comment in your first paragraph is laughable, nobody can guarantee success and that's true. Souness and Roeder were almost guaranteed to deliver failure and most people could see that, including you with Souness. That case for the defence of Shepherd is a load of bollocks, we're not talking about Shepherd bringing in good managers, we're talking about him bringing in serial failures, people with a track-record which mirrored the failure that he's presided over. Not one of those managers you've mentioned were as bad as our last two managers, at least not before they were appointed so your point is totally rubbish as you are using a few in isolation when we do it for fun. You then go on about the spending of both our last two managers, Souness is the person who brought George Weah's cousin over on the strength of a telephone conversation, not only that, he watched him in training and still played him. What track-record has Roeder got when it comes to spending money? Your comments about the Hall's and Shepherd are about as meaningful as the rest of your post, fact less. It's already been mentioned this week that the Hall's play little part in the running of our club, I'm sure you even quoted Sir Bobby from his book saying that he'd hardly seen Douglas in 5 years. That's hardly the profile of somebody who is making all of the decisions is it? I'll try and educate you for the last time on this point but you must know that shares mean nothing away from the AGM, don't you? Shares only count at the Annual General Meeting; during board meetings it's one man one vote except for the chairman who has the casting vote in the case of a tie, which makes Shepherd the most powerful man in the board-room. You either can’t take things in or you chose not to, which one is it?

Would you trust Shepherd with the clubs finances if it was a closed shop and he could take anything he wanted without being answerable to anybody? I wouldn't, he takes enough when he's accountable so I would expect a lot more to leave the club if it could be done on the quiet.

A Keegan bandwagon jumper is someone who went before during and after Keegan. why do people force these cut and paste posts .... it would be far easier if they learned to read. A KK bandwagon jumper is someone who was for years not interested in supporting the club, because they were shit and going nowhere. Then suddenly when they thought something was going to happen, jumped on the bandwagon. There were thousands of them, roughly anything up to 30,000 in fact. Now they are unhappy because they jumped on the bandwagon expecting to win things, so now are calling the very board who attracted them back, because the trophies they expected didn't materialise and so they consider it all to be a wasted effort. But still tell people they "have always supported the club", even though they know they are lying. They are easy to spot. They think the club before this period always had big crowds, bought top players and didn't sell them instead, don't know much about the club during these years and so generally don't understand the leap forward the club has made since. Like you. Like me Is that straight from the voices in your head again or have you been listening to your secret brother again?

That is very true. We know how good/bad all of our players are though at our best, so just think of it that way. I'd say Given, Harper, Taylor, Solano, Parker, Duff, N'Zogbia and Owen would definitely get in the squad. Maybe Emre. No point even counting Dyer. As for the team i think Given, Parker and Solano. Maybe Taylor. I don't know about you lot but if i had the choice between Shearer, Sir Les and Owen, it would be Shearer and Sir Les every time. Solano can't even get in our team now so why would he get in KK's team? I would think that Keegan would have spotted the class that only Solano brings to our team at the minute, the class that Solano has always shown while at the club. The fact that Roeder can't see it is more down to Roeder than Nobby.

He's bluffing, just like he was when he said he appointed the fans choice after Souness.

The points I can see us getting come from a draw against Portsmouth, and we should beat Reading and Watford at home We should of beat Charlton and Sheff Utd but only managed 1 point, I'd be surprised if we managed to pick up 7 points from those 3 games. I'd expect that Martins will be back and will offer us an outlet up front, if not then we're screwed.

Excellent, we're overdue a good one then.

The points I can see us getting come from a draw against Portsmouth, and we should beat Reading and Watford at home, apart from those games I can't see us getting much more unless we step up our performances by at least a 100%. Can anybody see points coming from other games?

I can see us going into the January transfer window with 16 points, if that's the case then it's more likely to be sell, sell sell.

I'm not surprised they are thinking about putting the op' off for another week after seeing shola make such a difference yesterday.

Hey HTL, you are such a strong supporter of the Fat Controller, it could be you next ! You would have to move from Leeds though....... :winking: I thought it was Birmingham.

I thought your assurances were like the rest of your opinions, based on crap.

Its clear you really don't know what you are talking about and you have just fabricated the 'I know only one manager... nonsense up yourself... oh I can assure you it is true. But I don't give a flying fcuk if you don't believe me Go on then, assure us. How can you assure us?

That was mentioned in the pub while watching the game. bluebiggrin.gif

You are correct. If thats the case, can either of you indicate the inacuracies in the review ?? I thought it may be of interest given that there is alot of unfounded supposition printed in the forum regarding Shepherds tenure at the club, what he takes from the club and the landmarks of his reign. Perhaps the forum is more inclined to value posts talking about flies and dogshit these days like one of the a previous posters.... The irony is that the poster who mentioned flies and dogshit was straight in.

1% of the club changed hands on Wednesday so somebody is making a move on the club, at least it looks that way, unless soembody just knows something and is looking to make a profit from the shares, something that only the Halls and Shepherd have done to date. I'm sure if it was Shepherd then he'd have had to make an announcement as that 1% would have taken him over the limit where he would have to make a bid, again, at least that's the way I see it.