Exiled in Texas

I think you mean station [emoji6] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The scruffy bamps who are fewmin for SAFC to sack Grayson and bring in a new guy, need to first figure out what player will they sell to pay for the new contract. There is apparently no money available that isn’t marked for current expenses or debt repayment. So if SAFC is to take on another new contract for a new manager then who can be sold to raise funds to pay for it? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Amazing ..... hemorrhaging money, racked with debt, their financial situation tipped upside down by the loss of PL money and someone thinks that it was a bad idea to have contractual wage cuts in the championship because .... the players are now unhappy and unmotivated. https://www.readytogo.net/smb/threads/which-baboon-thought-it-was-a-good-idea-to-impose-a-40-pay-cut.1399107/ I hope its someone from here winding them up, as he cannot be that stupid in real life

I understand that, and it would be great if it worked that way. I just hate seeing the referee run off to the sideline to watch a replay on his own TV, or watching the referee stand there with his finger in his ear talking to the VAR without having the transparency of the discussion on what they are looking for or what they see. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I like VAR when it’s done rugby union style - which means the referee discussing the issue in public with the Video Referee (of course Rugby referees are already mic’d up) with the replays shown on the big screen at the stadium for the referee to watch. Tell us what the referee is looking to check on, what rules are being considered, and what they see (or don’t see). I hate how VAR is done offline and not in public view Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, the referee is considered part of the field in terms of the ball hitting the referee - no play won't be stopped if the ball it's the referee. Technically players could try to play a 1-2 off the referee but the referee should not be so close to the ball that he couldn't get out of the way. Most referee consider it a failure on their part of the get hit but the ball and cannot jump/move out of the way. And any player who intentionally ploughs through a referee instead of going round is likely to be on his way to sitting in the parking lot as soon as the refereee is back on his feet. You can't push/plough through an opposing player, and you can't do that to a referee either [emoji6] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It has been mentioned. In the press today and in this thread. Intends to buy another football club according to an aide. Yes, I saw that... but I don't think that would be any reason to sell by Christmas. I saw that news as something he would do in the future, but not something that has a timetable that would require urgency with the sale of Newcastle.

There is another side to Ashley's sellup, that hasn't been mentioned yet. What is Ashley's plan for the money he will earn from the sale of NUFC. If he already has a new investment/new purchase lined up, then there will be a level of urgency from that side to release the money for the new venture. Is there another retailer that he wants to buy on the cheap? Of course he may not have any immediate plans in which case no urgency (and a waste of time writing this).

Where do I sign up? The line on the left?

Townsend - you should have looked a little further ahead. You dumbass!

Yeah!!! [emoji3] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What? Five images in, and still no Father Ted kicking Bishop Brennan up the arse {Edit - That should be Father BeníTed}

Too good to let that pass without acknowledgement

I saw that too.... and its so ironic that he doesn't see how much the same statement mirrors their situation The mags Mackems are too thick to recognise all the good work he's done. All they can think about is spend spend spend to reclaim their rightful place back in the Champions League Ship

That's the issue though..... Ashley was ok with relegation as long as the finances were kept in balance, as he was playing the long game of financial stability. They don't have the discipline to stay with the plan and get stronger. Its sack the manager as we need a quick boost (and screw the financial cost). This time last season, they should have started planning for their Championship season with Moyes as part of a three year plan, but they let it get so toxic that he wouldn't stick around. Same is happening with Grayson. He will be hounded out, and the cycle will repeat.

For 30 seconds I liked us becoming the #1 premier league team in Turkey - preseason on the Bosporus

They are solvent enough under Short to meet their immediate payments, so there is no reason for Short to put the club to go into Administration and lose all his money. However, their revenue flows don't allow for much beyond immediate running costs, and debt payments (According to the retired accountant GrumpyOldMan on RTG who has been deep into their finances). The biggest threat is the external loan that is held by SBC. When that comes due in 2019, if they cannot pay it, then they are truly f****d. But I think their entire financial position is aimed at creating enough cashflow to pay off that loan. They will have to reduce player costs in line with their new revenue streams, including the reduced Parachute payment for next year and the final one in 2019, but they may still stay afloat... but at the new operating model of Championship/League 1 finances/players. RTG all think that Short should just sell up for pennies on the dollar, and dump the club on the sidewalk for someone else to pick up and run. I just don't see that happening, unless Short is convinced that they will continue to hemorrhage cash even under the most austere financial conditions. And in which case, who would take on such a toxic business. I actually think that they will settle into bottom of the championship or even League One under their new financial conditions, and stay there until the external debts are paid. Only then, and it might be 3-4-5 years, will they be able to invest in playing staff.

New Owners/Billions... it's not a question of how much they have.... but their intentions and disciplines for financing the club. (I won't call it investing as that term implies that there would be a pay back for the original stake, and most fans use the term "investment" in place of the true term "pissing the money into a big pit of nothing"). Fans shouldn't expect that owners should invest/spend money for the sole purpose of personal enjoyment of their personal club playing having nice players, climbing the table or winning games. The Abramavich days of personal spending by a rich guy as a plaything are gone. Fans should expect that their clubs would be financially viable, and that money generated by the club would be spent in the club.

If the ball was kicked out of play before the foul was committed, then it would be a goal kick. And just a card (color TBD). You can only give a freekick when a foul is committed when the ball is in play. Out of play, and it's just a card.

Interesting views on here and RTG about this news, and in many ways polar opposites. Some RTG suggestions even proposed that Ashley should sell Newcastle and buy Sunderland, or that they wish that Short would buy Newcastle. These comments made me think about how each owner is perceived by each club and what they have done from a business perspective. (Yes, we know that Short buying Newcastle was intended to assume that Short would have the same effect on Newcastle finances as he did on Sunderland). But actually, might the crazy scenario of the owners swapping clubs actually give the other club what it needs? This board sees Ashley as someone who has taken the club backwards, in its ability to compete in the premier league, and he is hated by fans. RTG look at Ashley and see that he has put the club on a firm financial footing making NUFC financially self-sufficient. A few comments that they would like him to be their owner. Whereas, RTG see Short as the guy who destroyed Sunderland by chasing PL rainbows and building insurmountable levels of debt, while we might look at Short as the type of owner that would invest/spend money where there a good possibility of a return on that investment. I think he has been a good owner for them, but has been misled and let down by his board, managers and players. (His mistake, is not cutting off the money flow earlier) So what if…. What if Ashley did sell Newcastle, and buy Sunderland. Ashely would immediately put them on a financial plan to stability, and he would take a relegation (or two) to ensure that they are financially viable. Never going to reach for the moon in terms of league placement but would invest enough to get into the Premier League and would be happy with lower-mid Prem League position. And while Shorts failing has not been about the money spent (because he has spent and spent), but what it was spent on and by who. With Short’s willingness to invest, wouldn’t he love to have the recruitment plan and manager from Newcastle that’s able to spend on the right players and have a positive cash flow? Not that I want this to happen or believe that it would happen, but there is a certain symmetry that each club might just have what the other club needs.

Best thing to do would be to shift players, when they struggle again to shift high earners f***ing around not putting the effort in then other avenues will be explored. Who wants to buy their players? It's like them saying that Short should get out of their club.... you need a buyer before you can sell.

The irony is that the Mackematics geniuses over at RTG are convinced that with the Pickford sale and the relegation induced wages cuts, that they are already reducing their debts by huge chunks. Their resident retired accountant GrumpyOldMan keeps having to bring the voice of reason that they are still in Shit Creek financially.

When I first saw that I thought it was so light as it was during warm ups..... then I saw the scoreboard and realised that was during the game. OMG. That's both tragic and tremendous at the same time