dcmk

As far as I'm concerned all of those were scored by a different player. So we have a striker who scores just under 50% in a s**** side and he's finished as a player? Not good enough for anywhere else, not even Newcastle. He doesnt play well for us for the simple fact he relies on service. Jonas, Butt, Nolan, R Taylor, Duff cant move the ball quick enough, beat their man, pull of a slick passing move, cant play an intelligent pass. Also the fact we aint had a target man pretty much the whole season. His first 10 in 16 don't count either. Again, different player. So that leaves us with 17 goals in 52 matches, which is just about around Afonso Alves territory. Oh, and he's on 100k a week.

Swap him for any of Arshavin, Adebayor or van Persie without question. They create and score chances, be more important to the team.

27 shots on goal this year 14 goals.. idiot.

Whole career suggests so. Daft idea huh?

As far as I'm concerned all of those were scored by a different player. So we have a striker who scores just under 50% in a shite side and he's finished as a player? Not good enough for anywhere else, not even Newcastle. He doesnt play well for us for the simple fact he relies on service. Jonas, Butt, Nolan, R Taylor, Duff cant move the ball quick enough, beat their man, pull of a slick passing move, cant play an intelligent pass. Also the fact we aint had a target man pretty much the whole season.

Liverpool 216 (118) Real Madrid 35 (13) Newcastle United 68 (27) England 89 (40) Not bad that. For a weak arse, midget, striker who isnt both footed.

Erm no he is in my opinion, his record throughout his carear has been. He is a striker plays on coinfidence and service, a concept i dont think you understand. If you look at how much chances Arsenal create, they are super wasteful he is more clinical then all of them - look at his carear goals/games ratio. It's a fact. When Arsenal cross the ball through 6 yard box, most of the Arsenal players are on the edge of the area if you have ever seen them play, Owen would be right there. Arsenal are without this player. Can't believe you put Diaby, Vela and Bendtner in that list btw shocking, Vela has had about 2 good games, Diaby is DCM and Bendtner has been shocking most games.

I meant big Chris Samba from Blackburn!

An unbelievable statement! Eduardo is everything Owen was and more. Adebayor, Van Persie, Carlos Vela and even Bendtner are far more useful. The likes of Arshavin, Nasri and even Diaby can play as second strikers also. Unless they are looking for a boot cleaner Owen need not apply. Arsenal create chances left, right and center. How many times have ALL the players you have listed tried to walk into into the net and either draw or not even score at all! Owen would be a great addition, imo more clinical than all those strikers, certainly more intelligent. A crap side, and a forward who relies on service isnt going to make him look good. A good side + confidence and his ability in front of goal, great match-up for him. Jeeeeeeeeeeeesus Lord please have mercy on this man for the blasphemy he has spoketh! Owen more clinical than who? What football do you watch? Are you seriously joking? Owen whose shots generate less power than a newborn's would? Owen who cannot shoot from outside the box? Owen who cannot shoot with his left foot? Who can no longer go past anyone? Who can no longer finish one on one with the goalie? Owen is now a midget striker who occassionally scores headers from 5 yards or less or tap ins from 5 yards from less. 95% of his goals come this way. Outside of these he does absolutely nothing else in general play. How dare you compare this player to Eduardo, Adebayor, Van Persie, Arshavin, Vela etc. How dare you man! I am flabbergasted. Been a one in two game striker for his whole career. International career too, moved to foreign country, hardly any opportunities still excelled. His general play when not trying to play off the last man is very good, amongst the best in the squad. If you argue he isnt intelligent and not clinical (despite whole carear saying otherwise) your a fool. Your the guy who said we BLATANTLY had 2/3 players signed on last day. So.. As for Owen being one footed - wtf does that even mean, you seen Torres on his weaker foot?

If we had this thread at start of season i would of had N'Zogbia and Given to that list. At present this list is spot on imo though.

he is the definition of light-weight, been saying that all season. he needs strong runners (barton maybe?) alongside him otherwise his head drops. i actually thought he was excellent after he came on in the first half, but abysmal in the second. He has just returned from injury to be fair.

Samba

An unbelievable statement! Eduardo is everything Owen was and more. Adebayor, Van Persie, Carlos Vela and even Bendtner are far more useful. The likes of Arshavin, Nasri and even Diaby can play as second strikers also. Unless they are looking for a boot cleaner Owen need not apply. Arsenal create chances left, right and center. How many times have ALL the players you have listed tried to walk into into the net and either draw or not even score at all! Owen would be a great addition, imo more clinical than all those strikers, certainly more intelligent. A crap side, and a forward who relies on service isnt going to make him look good. A good side + confidence and his ability in front of goal, great match-up for him.

He's been playing injured and you guys are comparing him to last year. Pretty unfair. He has almost everything pace, power, good leap, youth on his side, can even hold up the ball .. granted he doesn't have a brain but that makes him unpredictable.

If we injure Gerrard, Alonso, Torres we might get something only way we can do this ..Smith has to start.

If you don’t shoot you can’t score - Johan Cruyff was it not malcolm macdonald that said that ? and the truth is that they didn't shoot every time, they took what they thought was the best option. i'd still love to know where this money was going to come from ? i've covered the debts of others and shown that some clubs,because of the financial position they are in are better able to accumulate and carry debt,so just saying borrow more is,at best naive, at worst,stupid. i'm open to any sensible ideas. I’d imagine quite a few people have said it over the years. The money could have come from a number of places. A share issue for example. However I think the Barclay’s would have been the most likely place. They have a vested interest in seeing the club prosper and would probably have provided a bit more funding, probably on certain conditions. As I understand it they had already insisted on board representation in exchange for a loan extension a year or two before Ashley took over. a share issue ? possible but with what happened with the previous shares....unlikely. barclays........they might have gave us a loan to keep us going (what has the shortfall been the last few years ?) but unlikely they'd have given more to "invest" when we can't come close to making ends meet as it is. (agreed barclays have a vested interest to in us doing well but they also have similar interests in lots of other companies they aren't backing right now in better financial positions) Right not, but it was different two years ago. We’ll never know what position we’d be in now if Hall and Shepherd still owned the club, there’s just no way of knowing. However we do know the club wouldn’t have had to find £45m to pay off the redevelopment loan in one go if they’d stayed, which would surely have eased the financial pressure. IMO Hall & Shepherd did a lot more good than bad. Establishing NUFC in the PL and building a stadium worthy of the support for a debt of £70m is pretty good going. They understood the club. They knew if they provided a decent team 50,000 would fill the ground. Ashley was banking on 50,000 turning up to watch total crap. Criticism of the previous owners may be valid but trying to pin the current disaster on them is way off the mark. 2 years ago was after the wages ratio started getting taking off. ask yourself, mounting debts,dodgy business plan (re outgoings in particular wages),poor on the field performance. in my opinion the banks would help keep the club going (day to day financing) but wouldn't stump up for major investment. can't actually think of a decent reason why they would.How about, if NUFC got relegated the banks would probably never get any of their money back? Didn’t Ashley extend the club’s overdraft by £10m recently? that goes for every club in relegation trouble. should the banks pay for all of them to buy more players to help them avoid relegation ? what about all those clubs who have gone under ? why didn't the banks bail them out to avoid losing their money ? more of a question is why ashley didn't spend some of his money to protect his investment as he stands to lose more than the banks would have ? if ashley did extend the overdraft it was as likely to be as a way of paying the day to day costs. How many of those clubs can guarantee 50,000 every week if the home team is half decent? This debate is one that will never be resolved, as both sides are right. There can be no doubt Shepherd faced difficulties on the money front, but no evidence that can prove the club was up s*** creek without a paddle. There’s also no doubt the club made significant progress under Hall/Shepherd. When SJH took over he made his objectives clear. NUFC should be one of the foremost clubs in the first division, playing in one of the best stadia in the country, and should make a successful return to European football. He delivered all three, and when he left we were only three decent players away from getting back into Europe. SJH had vision. Ashley doesn’t. With people chosing to cancel their season tickets because they are "boycoutting" Ashley how do you see a way forward. I am not saying that everyone who cancels their season ticket is in that position, but every single season ticket holder who has chosen to cancel because of Ashley is causing the financial ruin of Newcastle United. There are day to day bills to pay, which we are struggling to already. By cancelling Direct Debits and season tickets fans are adding to that problem. I have no problem with anyone stopping buying products from Sports Direct (as that is not directly linked to Newcastle United), but cannot support the boycotting of our own club. Unless you want to see Newcastle United go down the pan that is. Money is not a finite thing, Newcastle United under Shepherd, Hall or Ashley could not keep remortgaging to keep itself going despite what people think. Again this doesn't absolve Ashley from his mistakes but the foundations of the problem had already been laid by Shepherd and Hall. You said earlier you would gladly see fans walk away from the club, canceling their season tickets and play in a half empty stadium with true supporters. Now you say it would add to them problems...

You hope Colo gets a chance? until Shearer came wasn't he our most played player? Put a decent midfield in front him instead of the shower of s*** we have at the moment he may just show us the talent that he has. Does Bassong no harm

You hope Colo gets a chance? until Shearer came wasn't he our most played player?

and why is this? with that attitude you arent even supporting the club. I beg to differ, I go, I chant, I sing. I pay my money for my season ticket. I go to the away games. I think that classes me as a supporter. There are too many people in St James' Park who sit on their arses, moaning, whinging, leaving early, disappearing for 10 minutes either side of half time to drink at the bar. The football just gets in the way of their drinking session. Good riddence to them I say. I just wish it would bring down the ticket prices so that people who really wanted to go and support their team could afford it, but that isn't going to happen. I meant that you don't support the clubs aim of getting as much season tickets as possible. If i said i hope Sunderland next year have 20,000 less season tickets than this season, i would be saying it as i want them to fail, have less financial security, re-think transfer plans. But hearing a Newcastle fan say they don't want 40% of their own crowd - is just damaging to the clubs aim, despite your issues with them they are helping the club. I dont understand why you will rather see them disappear. Every club has moaning fans they paid their money they are entitled to moan, leave early.

and why is this? with that attitude you arent even supporting the club.

Yeah agreed but we wouldnt be tying up deals now, when so much is uncertain. That was the point i was making, made a hash of the first sentence

I am speculating but i dont think our stadium is going to sell out next year, there would be cheap tickets available match day imo. Surely, that would piss off ST holders no end.

The last thing we would be doing now is looking at players tbh. We dont know who is managing the club in Summer, which division we are in, or players wanting to leave/taken. tbh

I take it you mean me, because I disagree with you ? Who is right and who is wrong then ? doh To me, the trolls are those who still defend Ashley and are still convinced the Halls and Shepherd were s****, surely the penny ought to have dropped by now. Anyway, tell you what mate, ignore me and I won't reply to you ? Do you just deliberatly ignore people and read what you want to read? I can't see anyone defending Ashley. You like to set this arguement up as Ashley v Shepherd, when it isnt that. Critisism of Shepherd is not automatically support for Ashley. If being a good chairman was as easy as spending the clubs money and borrowing to back your manager who is in charge purely because of luck, then most people would be able to do it. Theres alot more to it than that. You know this but you're too far along the line now to admit it. People say I'm a troll, just because I disagree with them, right ? If people now accept that Ashley has been s****, and worse than the Halls and Shepherd, why not say so instead of continuing to attack the Halls and Shepherd for giving us our best league positions in 50 years, achieved because they backed their managers . If Ashley had backed Keegan, he would still be here and I have no doubt at all we would be pushing for a place in europe. Instead, he has gone and we are in the s***, because he didn't back his manager. Get some perspective. I don't want to patronise, but this is really so simple. Ive actually said that Shepherd was better than Ashley, even in Shepherds last few terrible years, but that doesnt get away from the fact he had lost the plot post 2004. they made a terrible appointment in Souness [which again, numerous people backed to succeed, and spend the money that he did], but it doesn't change the fact that their basic idea of how success is gained was correct. The basic idea in my opinion is appointing a good manager to spend that money. Whereas you think managerial success is down to luck. Liverpool ended up with Benitez, Villa with O'Neill, and we got Souness and Roeder. That isnt luck in my opinion. Well, it isn't you or me who chooses the managers. What do you think of Chelsea appointing Grant and Scolari and sacking them both after short periods ? Unlucky ? And what do you think of all the clubs who haven't qualified for europe as often as we did ? Unlucky ? Get real mate. Get some perspective. I'm not taking the piss, this is perspective. Nobody appoints winning managers all the time, its impossible, and I bet that when Wenger and Ferguson leave their respective clubs, mistakes will be made at those clubs too. Grant did ok and it was a mistake to sack him. Scolari wasnt really suited to the English game. They corrected their mistake quicker than we did with Souness and have managed to salvage their season. The sacking of Grant and the appointment of Scolari was a mistake though. It wasnt a mistake that set them back as much as Souness did us though. What about those clubs? Post 2004 weve only qualified for Europe once when we finished 7th. Im not critisising Shepherd record previous to that. I KEEP on telling you that. I am being real. Souness and Roeder were shocking appointments, not bad, shocking for a club of where we were. Nearly everybody could see that when they were appointed. It wasnt luck and took us from a team who were attempting to qualify for the Champions League to a team who were firmly in the bottom half of the table. The appointments were as bad as nearly anyone has made in the Prem. Sammy Lee and Chris Hutchings appart maybe. Shepherd had lost the plot at this stage. You are telling me that Roeder didnt deserve an extended contract after going on an unbelievable run?? Have a think to yourself, if Shepherd did bring in someone different, after Roeder did all that, in the summer, new guy - big name but fails. Our fans looking in hindsight (again wonderful thing) would criticize Shepherd for not sticking with Roeder - as he did have very, very good results. He deserved his chance. He brought European football and his buys weren't bad. Not a too bad appointment, Souness was the one that really damaged us.

see my previous post to jj7. Quite amazing what you lot who are intent on defending Ashley to give ammunition to your desire to demean what the Halls and Shepherd did will stoop to.........still, I can't even pm you can I and discuss it off board, because you've blocked me for disagreeing with you Who is defending Ashley? You know, and ignore my thoughts on Ashley purely because I think that Shepherd and Hall had already started us on this journey before they sold up. Therefore as I do not agree 100% with you I must be an Ashley sympathiser despite what I say. The part in bold is irrelevent tbh. NE5 point is quite simple imo, i dont think it needs that much discussion as it does. He argues good chairmen back the managers which they appoint, this backing in the past has got us to Europe. It is not a fool proof way to get there but it does make him a good chairmen. The appointment of managers is never guaranteed success. NE5 admits himself that Souness, Allardyce didnt work. They were appointed for the right reasons though, and it was never in Shepherds mind that it would be counter constructive. We were in debt but most clubs are, especially the successful ones. No one knows the state of the finances really, he didnt sell up because was running out of options in fact he fought against the sale by Ashley. Thats a brief summary i have no idea, why that generates so much discussion on this board. you have no idea, really? If you look on every thread over 5 pages pretty sure this discussion is brought up. Its way OTT