Kitman

Auckland. Not Bishop A, the one in NZ

Not really boycoutt innit. relegation innit. complete shambles innit. again and again, innit. Of course that's happened every year since the year dot. Only it hasn't, has it? Still it's better copy to make sweeping generalisations about a club and its history on the basis of what happened to Ashley over a few days, on the back of what happened with one of the club's biggest heroes to many. Innit. scapegoat + kneejerk = results. only it doesnt, does it? Pretty irrelevant to the point in question, namely the massive generalisation regarding the supporters behaviour to 'every owner, every Board' in the article. Are you talking about something different now?

I am no fan of the Shepherds/Halls at all. But aren't you judging their managerial appointments with hindsight? Of course. Only a prize moron would try to determine whether a manager had been a success or a failure without examining their record in the job. If Gullit, Souness, Roeder and Allardyce -- four out of five of Shepherd's managers -- were such great appointments, how come not one of them lasted more than a season and a half? Dalglish wasn't Shepherd's appointment, but sacking him two games into the season right after he'd spent £15 million on players was another example of dumb decision-making by our former chairman -- something that could be seen even without the benefit of hindsight. Isn't that using hindsight again? We were talking about hiring not sacking, at least I was. I've already said I didn't rate Roeder and Souness. I didn't want Allardyce but I could see the point of it. Gullitt was flavour of the month when he joined us, having won the FA Cup at Chelsea iirc. I take your point that they mostly turned out shite, but I only really expected it in the case of Roeder and Souness, I don't know about everybody else. Most appointments are a gamble though, don't you think?

The mulling mullet?

Not really boycoutt innit. relegation innit. complete shambles innit. again and again, innit. Of course that's happened every year since the year dot. Only it hasn't, has it? Still it's better copy to make sweeping generalisations about a club and its history on the basis of what happened to Ashley over a few days, on the back of what happened with one of the club's biggest heroes to many. Innit.

I am no fan of the Shepherds/Halls at all. But aren't you judging their managerial appointments with hindsight? Personally I was anti 2 appointments - Souness and Roeder. I didn't want Souness on the basis he was a proven club wrecker. I thought Roeder was out of his depth and a cop out. Of all of those Souness was the worst mistake of all given the quality of the squad and our standing in the game at the time. I was kind of anti Allardyce - I'd always hated the way Bolton played under him - but I could see the point of bringing him in and I didn't think we could get better at the time. The others like Dalglish and Gullitt seemed OK at the time, their pedigree was good. Of course they didn't turn out great in the long run (I wouldn't say they were total failures, mind) but I don't remember everyone predicting disaster at the time.

Who said that?

Aye, as a mechanism for supplying instant success it has proved sadly deficient. As a mechanism for supplying almost instant relegation though, it's proving worryingly efficient. Any relegation type form (and it certainly was recently) is more down to a lack of leadership (manager walkout) and a woefully under strength team due to injuries and suspensions, and not as you attempt to imply due to any structure or plan. But I'm sure you really knew that anyway. Injuries and suspensions are part and parcel of football and no excuse. The team is woefully under strength imo because the squad is woefully under strength. What use is having a 'structure' if you don't sign the players you need? I don't know whose fault that is and I don't really care, it's where we've ended up that galls me. If that where the 'plan' leads us, then the plan's shite as far as I'm concerned.

Aye, as a mechanism for supplying instant success it has proved sadly deficient. As a mechanism for supplying almost instant relegation though, it's proving worryingly efficient.

Not really

He makes it sound like there's a new owner every year, each one hounded out by an angry mob waving pitchforks and burning torches. How long were the Shepherds/Halls in charge? Best part of 20 years? I got the sense people were actually quite apathetic and demoralised until Keegan came along, and fairly supportive of Ashley until Keegan quit.

Apart from it being a bit boring and self important?

Aye, as a mechanism for supplying instant success it has proved sadly deficient. My idea of success in the current context is not being second from bottom. Did this long term 'plan' include relegation in the first year, while we wait for all these hot shot kids to come good?

For me the structure hasn't delivered, doesn't matter whose fault it was. Leading everything else aside, we needed far more players than we signed, & it's a pretty damning indictment of the set up if the reason for that was they couldn't agree on who to sign. Personally I'm not convinced significant funds were ever available to buy without selling first but that's speculation on my part. But why do we need a little transfer committee to buy/sell players.....don't we just need a decent manager? Wasn't the flaw with Shepherd/Hall in their poor choice of managers after Sir Bobby, not the lack of a transfer committee with Dennis Wise sitting on top of the pyramid like a malevolent hobgoblin? I think this structure business is a bit of a smokescreen really....it can't be such a good structure when you're nearly bottom of the table, the *ahem * coach has walked off in a huff, the squad is seriously thin and injury hit and plan B consists of Joe fecking Kinnear and Stephen fecking Carr.

we're above spurs................which i'm sure everyone would have settled for at the start of the season Good point Our structured plan is better than theirs

Just out of interest, can anyone explain what this 'structured plan' actually consisted of? Bringing in a DoF & transfers team - benefit to 1st team two internationals and a few makeweights? Signing a load of bairns for the academy - could turn out great in a few years, could be rubbish Selling a load of players and trimming the wage bill Not spending a lot in net terms on the first team in the process Errrrrr, is that it? Have I missed something? The effect of this 'structured plan' is that we lost the manager (not getting into whose fault that was) and coaches with no replacements lined up. We also have a very thin squad in a club with a poor injury record, to the point we were talking about re-employing Carr. What's the 'plan' actually achieved for the 1st team squad right now?

He's nothing like a cancer on the club. What a ridiculous comment I'd prefer to move on from Keegan now. But given the total and utter mess we're in, for which the current Board is largely responsible, I'm not sure we'll find anyone decent who's prepared to take the job on. Not convinced Keegan would want the job anymore either, unless it's entirely on his terms.

Who do you think you're drawing in the uefa cup? How many league points you got? What position are you? How much you spent this summer? 2, 20th, We've spent £5 mill net. Dont really think you're in a position to say much tbh. Why do you post on here? Why don't you ask all the other non-NUFC fans that as well? Because I have more pressing issues at the moment. I can't see the point in posting on another teams forum, seems like a total waste of time to me. And with a name like "KingDawson" how can I take him seriously? If he called himself DawsonKing would you find it more acceptable? I assume King & Dawson were Spurs' centre back pairing when he started posting on here?

So what if we're being managed by Steptoe & Son and we're going to get relegated? We've got a f***ing great set up, that's all that matters

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42048000/jpg/_42048296_extras1.jpg "500m? Are you havin' a laugh? He's havin' a laugh!"

If we get in Venables it shows the extent of the directors' desperation. Venables is the 'go to guy' for clubs in danger of relegation. And we're only a handful of matches into the season

I don't think it's a company so much as a consortium. I expect some Nigerians may be very wealthy indeed, it's a country rich in resources especially oil. Unfortunately it also has a history of endemic corruption and civil war. That said, they could collectively be considerably richer than Ashley and who knows, might even know a thing or two about football. Personally I'm trying to keep an open mind since it appears that Ashley either doesn't have a lot of disposable income as far as we're concerned or doesn't want to spend it....so money wise they may actually be much better than Ashley. Unfortunately we can't choose who he sells to so it's pot luck.

The sound of a barrel bottom being scraped. I think we've lifted up the barrel and are chipping away at the soil underneath

Let's not talk about Steve Bruce

http://www.televisionheaven.co.uk/boys1.jpg i can do that, gizza job! only a matter of time... Boys from the black & white stuff? I'll get me coat