Taylor Swift

Both people i'm in other leagues with. I haven't. I am extremely tempted to do it for the next gameweek with a few clubs having two fixtures. My original plan was to keep it until the last gameweek of the season so I can hopefully confirm my title by basically picking players playing at home but aaaaah, the temptation!!

I'm still ahead of you though

Has anyone used their wildcard yet?

Dave, how the hell did you fit in Drogba and Rooney? And how come so many of your players are playing tonight? Prudent planning?!?!

Fucking Fabregas is rested for tonight's game. Though I'm extremely happy Kanu isn't playing for once, the lucky tit keeps ruining my charge towards the title (I'm ahead but only by 10 pts in a 20 team league because this tit keeps scoring!). For tonight only, I'm a Stevie G fan.

LMAO at Arsenal and Whinger after all the whinging he's done this past week in regards to awards and them annoying stuff. Concentrate on your own team, oldie.

Same here mate.

Funny then that you should choose to believe everything that GW Bush talks about.

When Roeder first came in, our defence improved significantly as well. So I'm doubtful that it is actually Pearson's impact that has changed us. Roeder supposedly came in and the first thing he did was try to sort out the defence, which he did to a point. Then what happened? At the start of this season, we were shit again, what happened over the summer to Roeder's ability to teach his defenders how to defend? Sure we played against some average teams during the run-in but our defence wasn't making the mental mistakes it still is making.

Inappropriate? Childish? That's rich, given what I'm replying to. I'd say it sounds like you're one of those who takes the view something they don't agree with is "inappropriate". A common trait on this forum, it must be said. What do you want me to say in response to the kids question that is totally unrelated to football? I couldn't give a toss about any warehouse, I couldn't give a toss about what Fred has said in a brothel. I don't care that Geordie women are dogs and whatever it is he said about Shearer. I couldn't give a toss about dividends as long as money is made available to the manager to strengthen the team, which is what this Board has consistently done and which may not happen under another Board. You can believe the opposite if you like. That's my answer to the question. Perhaps you and your chum can now answer some of mine? Like why do you think it's guaranteed another Board will appoint the right manager, will provide as much funding for players, etc etc. They're all there in the thread but have been *childishly* ignored so far. How can you not care about a chairman giving our own money to his other family business when we are paying for it to be spent on the team? In response to your question - those that have taken over at other clubs haven't done badly have they? Fact is, only good businessmen can afford to take control of a Premiership club, and that can only be a good thing for the football club. Therefore, any replacement coming in is bound to be better. Going to have disagree vehemently with the last part of your paragraph. Any replacement that comes in is NOT bound to be better. If they know nothing about football (like Shepherd), then they'd be no better than him and probably worse because at least Shepherd tried to please the fans (seen by some of his reactionary moves) while the new bloke wouldn't have a clue what to do. And as of a year ago, many people (on this board as well) were saying that Shepherd was a good businessman and at least runs the financial side of the club well and that's why some of them were willing to stick it out with him in the hope that we get lucky with a manager. How times have changed eh?

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself? "I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect. Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine. Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares. When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it." Source: Dead long link Err, aye? Aye aye bluewink.gif HTL in the familiar position of being owned. You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about. As usual, I'll abuse you and offer nothing to the debate bluebigrazz.gif An internet tough guy, you appear in the thread posting personal abuse. Well done. Your contribution is as always, a joy and informative to read. Thanks. My pleasure mate.

If he does turn out to be as good as Given, we'd be one fucking lucky team.

No problem mate.

When people invest in stocks and shares it's a risk investment. They expect to get a higher rate of return on their money than sticking it in the bank where it would be safe. A football club is not like other businesses which can easily expand and diversify therefore the oportunity for share price growth is more limited. (Unless you want us to open a chain of hotels, casinos or supermarkets which would eventually become far more profitable than a football club and make the NUFC part of the business irrelevant). The dividends given out are at or below the rate of inflation (% of the club value). The losses you refer to are directly due to the amount spent on transfer fees and wages in a period where we have made extraordinary expenditure in transfer fees due to the need to replace our main striker with a quality replacement and then to repair the team after the wastefulness and incompetence of the previous manager, and also having to cover for incredible bad luck with injuries to Owen. This is also in a year when we were not in European competition, sot the profits were hit there. When losses are made it is because money is being reinvested back into the business. If a company acquires a smaller business it will affect its profits and may even make a loss for the financial year. As a shareholder would you expect to not receive a dividend because of this extraordinary expenditure? So relating back to the original question, the board obviously does back its managers. Too much for your liking it would seem. Perhaps you would be happier if the board gave less money to the manager for transfers, say only £5m a year on average instead of £10m? That’s £50m over 10 years. You seem to think that the amount of transfer money spent doesn’t affect team performance, so the income would be the same and the profits would be healthy. The board could give even bigger dividends and you’d be happy because the club was making a profit. NOONE believes the board are currently sinking their own money from outside the business into the club, and anyone who says others think this are being incredibly condescending towards their fellow supporters to say that they do. It's not extraordinary expenditure, it's normal expenditure ie. transfers. Another fool who believes the club has to spend money on players such as Owen and the rest, rather than settle for a team full of Faye's and other average players at relatively small fees. When did I say we have to spend money on the Owens to succeed? I said we HAVE to spend money to succeed. Don't know where you got the Owen part from. At least next time try reading other people's posts before responding, it'll help your posts to have some sort of relevance to the thread and not just be pure bollocks like it usually is.

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself? "I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect. Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine. Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares. When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it." Source: Dead long link Err, aye? Aye aye bluewink.gif HTL in the familiar position of being owned. You're obviously too intelligent for me, mate. I haven't a clue what you're babbling about. As usual bluebigrazz.gif

Maybe this load of shite came from Shepherd himself? "I can only do my best here with the tools I've got, which in my opinion are more than enough to get this football club into Europe every season and something we now expect. Yes, there are always going to be setbacks. But if there is somebody out there who can do better than me and who would be willing to invest millions into the club, then fine. Every penny I have had from this club I have reinvested back into the club. I have never sold a single share since I came to the club and the money I have had has been reinvested in the way of buying shares. When people say that I have taken money out of the club, all I have done is to put the money back in by buying shares. Nobody can accuse me of taking money out of this football club and not reinvesting it." Source: http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/newcastleunited/news/tm_headline=freddy-shepherd--q-a---part-2%26method=full%26objectid=15508740%26page=2%26siteid=50081-name_page.html Err, aye? Aye aye bluewink.gif HTL in the familiar position of being owned.

Stevie in admitting he fancies a scouser shocker!

When people invest in stocks and shares it's a risk investment. They expect to get a higher rate of return on their money than sticking it in the bank where it would be safe. A football club is not like other businesses which can easily expand and diversify therefore the oportunity for share price growth is more limited. (Unless you want us to open a chain of hotels, casinos or supermarkets which would eventually become far more profitable than a football club and make the NUFC part of the business irrelevant). The dividends given out are at or below the rate of inflation (% of the club value). The losses you refer to are directly due to the amount spent on transfer fees and wages in a period where we have made extraordinary expenditure in transfer fees due to the need to replace our main striker with a quality replacement and then to repair the team after the wastefulness and incompetence of the previous manager, and also having to cover for incredible bad luck with injuries to Owen. This is also in a year when we were not in European competition, sot the profits were hit there. When losses are made it is because money is being reinvested back into the business. If a company acquires a smaller business it will affect its profits and may even make a loss for the financial year. As a shareholder would you expect to not receive a dividend because of this extraordinary expenditure? So relating back to the original question, the board obviously does back its managers. Too much for your liking it would seem. Perhaps you would be happier if the board gave less money to the manager for transfers, say only £5m a year on average instead of £10m? That’s £50m over 10 years. You seem to think that the amount of transfer money spent doesn’t affect team performance, so the income would be the same and the profits would be healthy. The board could give even bigger dividends and you’d be happy because the club was making a profit. NOONE believes the board are currently sinking their own money from outside the business into the club, and anyone who says others think this are being incredibly condescending towards their fellow supporters to say that they do. It's not extraordinary expenditure, it's normal expenditure ie. transfers.

glad to have you back, even if it's just for a couple of posts

Pardon me for not having an indepth knowledge of Swedish football but Alexander who??

Until we actually play some decent opposition with Nobby at right back, I wouldn't be so quick to judge him. Sure, he's definitely better than Carr and his performances over the past couple of games at RB have been surprisingly exceptional, but until he's played against the likes of Robben and Ronaldo and has had a consistent run in the team at that position, we shouldn't be too quick to overhype his impact. Our standards for defending have certainly been lowered having seen the likes of Carr and Ramage play there so don't be too quick to judge.

The scarves look amazing. We better keep it up.

I'll be honest i haven't seen alot of him, so i'll trust your judgement on him. However, if someone had told me that Shevchenko wasn't good enough for this league i would have laughed at them in the face. Your right that every transfer is a risk but it's all about minimalising that risk. For me they could probably get Ashton or Bent for 15m, thats 10m less than a foreign player who would represent higher risk. Should it come down to signing foreign players for that type of money talked about Adriano would be my choice. Adriano hasn't been on form for the past couple of years! What are you on about mate? He's shite, overrated and fat. He's a poor man's Ronaldo. Struggled for goals for Inter last year (13 in the league) and did you see his performances for Brazil in the WC? Utter shite. He's overrated and isn't worth more than 12m. FM isn't real life bluebigrazz.gif

Not embarrassed by his comments but doesn't mean to say I agree with them either. Both Newcastle and Spurs' attendances dived in their bleak years, both are currently getting near capacity attendances currently. I would be more embarrassed if I was a Blackburn or Boro fans who in the past couple of years have been playing Uefa cup football to half empty stadia in spite of concessionary ticket prices to attract a half decent team. That's embarrassing imho. How's it embarrassing? The UEFA Cup is shite, and boring, we're shite, have been for 3 years yet we've had two UEFA QF appearances, and one semi final appearance in that time. We're in the so called hardest group and we've pissed it. It's a joke cup for sides like Tottenham and Boro to get all giddy about, but we've fucked up so badly, we have no hope of CL football for a while. Hand on heart if we were rich enough to do without being in the UEFA Cup I'd be delighted if we weren't in it. It's a complete joke competition. In the UEFA Cup we've played about 40 odd games in 3 years, and lost two, us yes, only two. The fact is your smaller clubs your Tottenham's get all emotional about it as they never get in Europe anyway. What is embarrassing is a club taking only 400 to St James' Park for an FA Cup replay in 1999, and getting 17,000 in the Premiership one week against the likes of Villa and Wimbledon, and when a proper club plays you, there's 30 odd thousand at the Lane (4/12/93). The Uefa Cup a joke competition? Suppose Newcastle got fed up winning it? :roll: In the unlikely event that we win it, I will say exactly the same. It's been pure shite since 1997/1998 when they started ****ing on with letting second placed teams in the CL. We benefitted in 97/98 as it happens with CL football but so ****. When you've played in the UEFA Cup as much as we have, you will know, which is why I said the UEFA Cup is a tournament for nothing clubs like Spurs, Villa, Boro, Fulham to get all giddy about. We're 17th in the League, we end up in the group of death, and we win all our games with our reserves. You can kid yourselves all you like that beating the likes of Club Bruges is an achievement but it's not. Under-achievement for Newcastle in the UEFA Cup based on our turnover and transfer expenditure is not winning it. That sounds arrogant but it's true. Hand on heart of the sides in it right now, with the strongest XI's, only Sevilla are clearly a better side than us, which emphasises my point on what a true joke cup this is. Even Spurs are capable of the last 8 I feel which underlines all the above points. the champions league did have to change though,quite often the teams in the uefa cup were out performing the previous years chmaps in their domestic leagues.the uefa cup isn't a joke,it just isn't top quality. It's the biggest joke in football. Palermo, who are no where near the size of us, have never been in it in their history yet their chairman is on record as saying he'd be quite content if they get knocked out so they can concentrate on the league. When small clubs are showing this much contempt towards the competition, it just goes to show the people across Europe are sharing my sentiments. As for teams in the UEFA Cup out performing teams in the European Cup....so ****. It has always been the competition for the individual Champions of Europe, that's why it was initially called the European Champions Cup, which became the UEFA Champions League in 1992. It's never called the European Champions and 2nd, 3rd and 4th placed League. The reason all of Liverpool's, Madrid's, AFC Ajax, FC Bayern Munchen's successes were so special is, they not only proved they were the best side in their domestic competition but also against all the other Champions from the previous season. Say in 1985, when Everton won the league, (I'm not having a dig at Heysel here), but if that event hadn't of occured you think Liverpool should've been involved in the European Cup for the 85/86 season, because they were a better side? It's a joke argument. Rafa is right to point out in 2001 and 2004, the last 16 got a bit interesting, but that shit is few and far between. Look when we were in it after our 16 year absence it was class, we got on paper a tough Belgian side even though we pissed them, and in the SECOND ROUND end up against one of Spain's strongest sides, who eventually put us out on away goals, and if we'd won that we'd have had Parma, who were 2nd in Serie A, in the THIRD ROUND! That's the way it was always meant to be. Contrast that to our three opening opponents in 2004/2005, some suicide bombers from Palestine, Bnei Sakhnin, a side full of real life Borat Sagidyev's but with less talent, Tblisi and fuckin a side full of Greek waiters, Panionios, who ended up relegated!! Yet you can sit there and tell me the European format in it's present state is working??!?!?!!? Greed has killed it. It's been shite since 1999 on the whole, which also coiincided with the bigger nations have four CL sides instead of four. UEFA killed it, greed killed it, and to me anyone that says the CL should be for the best four sides in a country has no appreciation for how football was, and is a product of UEFA and Rupert Murdoch's greed. That's an incredibly fucking stupid, racist and ignorant comment. Undermines the rest of your post, which I thought was spot on.

Votes are in. Hopefully I get a vote this year