Parky

I think Ashley and Co perhaps had good intentions in the beginning, but ultimately only paid lip service to this philosophy and weren't stringent enough with the setup as regard to objectives and also lines of communication with the manager. Ashley imo is right to the extent that this whole operation takes time, but if you don't fill the positions with competent people that demand respect and have serious experience then the project starts to go off course.

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE. The goal of a football organisation is primarily to be successful on the pitch, this takes precedence over all other activities. Once all management fully understand this, other activities and proposals fall into place. The DOF should be someone who has a wide contact footprint and understands the nature of the game Europe wide, ideally also some coaching or management experience in Europe. He would ideally be a senior figure who complements seniority and experience with good instinct. His core objective is to develop the footballing side in harness with the manager and be the managers main confidante in the boardroom. His role should encompass overseeing the transfer strategy by having a team of scouts and consultants under his guidance. They should be briefed on the 'mix' of players targeted by him and the manager for any given window. He should have one chief scout per top tier European league and a 'spotter' in every serious league in the world. Regular briefings should take place including the manager at monthly meetings to collect data and give direction. Mishandling this appointment (DOF) seriously undermines any delusions about being like Arsenal. Discuss.

I have a feeling we might get a tonking. They'll have that new manager vibe about them and we're still in chaos.

Nobody knows who, but I think MA will do a runner in Jan.

YOu have to ask yourself why he's being loaned out. I remember when Anelka was loaned out to Liverpool at some point. So what;s your point? How old was he then?

Which is fair enough. The problem comes when you're escalating debt and nowhere near competing. Take it up with him.

His defence is you have to be in debt to compete and all the top clubs are.

YOu have to ask yourself why he's being loaned out.

Wasn't some of them like Sol on 80k at Pompey? Also isn't that why we gave up on Diarra when he went there cause the offerred huge wedge?

Because I have no reason not to. If a bunch of angry mongs circlejerking on a message board, repeating their conspiracy theories and posting a bunch of bullshit is enough to sway you then so be it. But the facts and situation is hardly as black and white as some on this board would have you believe. Not basing my opinion on internet bullshit. The single worst factor for me was him not personally coming back to sort out this whole mess. Just sent totally the wrong message out to me What's your views on Keegan's use of lawyers and the LMA to sort out this whole mess? He should sue Ashley into the ground. Hmm, I wonder if he will. He should. And if he doesn't? What if the club sue him? They seem to be more up for it than he does, why'd you think that might be? I guess that's why MA called another meeting with KK....He's shitting it.

I know mate and I am as guilty as the next man for siding with Keegan. I cant help it. I know he has failings but he has earned my favouritism. This thread is about Ashley and what he has done to make us trust him. That one act for me, made me feel really let down. This is the owner that goes to the matches with "King Kev" on his back. It looks like he decided to turn his back on him when the club was going through the biggest load of shit I have known for a long time. Do you think he's that evil that he'd have worn that shirt if he'd been deliberately trying to undermine Keegan from the start like some people seem to think? He wore the shirt as a cheap ruse to win people over. Transparent.

it wouldn't bother me if he did providing he had the backing and didn't lead us into an unsustainable style of running the club and didn't appoint s*** managers time after time. In other words, it bothers you. no. i just wouldn't want him making the same mistakes as last time. Debts paid off. He takes the club back. I think we all underestimated FFS.

Because I have no reason not to. If a bunch of angry mongs circlejerking on a message board, repeating their conspiracy theories and posting a bunch of bullshit is enough to sway you then so be it. But the facts and situation is hardly as black and white as some on this board would have you believe. Not basing my opinion on internet bullshit. The single worst factor for me was him not personally coming back to sort out this whole mess. Just sent totally the wrong message out to me What's your views on Keegan's use of lawyers and the LMA to sort out this whole mess? He should sue Ashley into the ground. Hmm, I wonder if he will. He should.

Because I have no reason not to. If a bunch of angry mongs circlejerking on a message board, repeating their conspiracy theories and posting a bunch of bullshit is enough to sway you then so be it. But the facts and situation is hardly as black and white as some on this board would have you believe. Not basing my opinion on internet bullshit. The single worst factor for me was him not personally coming back to sort out this whole mess. Just sent totally the wrong message out to me What's your views on Keegan's use of lawyers and the LMA to sort out this whole mess? Keegan is bound to need some support in this whole mess so I have no issue with it. All the clubs statements will have been pub;ished after consultations with their lawyers. Unless I missed something, he has only said brief statements about why he left. But this isnt about Keegan. its about what Ashley has done to make people trust and believe inhim So one person's use of intermediaries is fine, but another's isn't? Not quite sure your going with this mate but at least we heard from Kevin's intermediaries when it broke. You dont think it required Mike Ashley's presence when it all kicked off ? Probably, but all I'm saying is it's unfair that one person is getting criticised for a whole load of things that the other person has done as well, but isn't. What is your quest Indi to become MOther Theresa before our very eyes?

He did, didn't he? He's been clinging to those fucking debts from day one. (forgive the pun).

He's realised too late what damage he's done.

Out by christmas hopefully.

Because I have no reason not to. If a bunch of angry mongs circlejerking on a message board, repeating their conspiracy theories and posting a bunch of bullshit is enough to sway you then so be it. But the facts and situation is hardly as black and white as some on this board would have you believe. Not basing my opinion on internet bullshit. The single worst factor for me was him not personally coming back to sort out this whole mess. Just sent totally the wrong message out to me What's your views on Keegan's use of lawyers and the LMA to sort out this whole mess? He should sue Ashley into the ground.

No.

I don't think there will be a problem finding a buyer. It's still pretty much an underdeveloped business with a lot of potential on the upside. As long as he doesn't ask a silly price. £240m-280m is about right.

The longer it goes the value of the business (he can sell at) drops.

it is an assumption but one that seems reasonable based on the facts. all the talk was about us going for Gomis, Keegan went to see him personally and concluded that he wasnt good enough. he also had Bassong in on trial and went for him, and had Zayatte in too, but chose not to pursue him. the earlier signings look like vetere doing the scouting, keegan filtering through his suggestions and getting those he likes, and jiminez sealing the deals. problems arose when the board started doing transfer business without his consent, both in and out - so really it's not that got that much to do with Vetere, the bloke who actually goes out and finds players. as it stands, its too early to judge the signings. Remember people were mightily impressed with Emre early on but for various reasons that was a move that didnt work out. Nacho has played for a few minutes so its ridiculously early to make judgements about him, Xisco was fairly poor but had some positive elements to his game - looks like he needs more time. Guthrie was shit and topped it off with a silly red. Coloccini was hit and miss, sometimes very good, others bullied by the hull attack. the fact we're only missing one of our signings and we still lost suggests we're far, far from the required quality and quantity we need. So it seems that things were going along quite well until a point, which begs the question: why did that change? Most people seem to assume that the board just started doing transfer dealings without Keegan's consent out of spite, deliberately to try and undermine him and force him out of the club. I'm yet to see a convincing argument as to why they would do that? There is an possible argument that they might have done that after Keegan stopped playing ball and started vetoing everyone they tried to bring in, possibly because his "list" wasn't happening for whatever reason. That's a theory based upon rumour and intrigue, just like all the rest of them, but at least it's believable, unlike many of the "Keegan is innocent, he has done no wrong and the board are entirely at fault" type tosh that's being spouted and swallowed by many people. Seems to me that things were working, something stopped them from continuing to work, with the deadline looming the club recognised the need for extra bodies and brought in a couple of players seemingly without Keegan's consent, he walked, the board tried to get him to reconsider and for whatever reason it didn't work. The crux of the matter is what stopped things working and caused the situation to explode into the farce that it has now become? I think that it's pretty obvious that everyone's made mistakes and behaved badly since that happened, but what caused it all to escalate in the first place? My guess is that it'll be both sides' fault and that the people who are heavily heavily pro-Keegan will get quite a rude awakening, that is if they ever do wake up. Perhaps you should wait till KK takes MA to court.

My guess is that, probably among many other niggling things, Keegan felt massively let down when after he'd been convinced/forced to sell Milner, and told the fans to judge him after the last day of the transfer windows, he got only a loan signing they hadn't even bothered telling him about and a very inexperienced striker, making him look a right cunt. That's not a reason as to why they would bring someone in behind his back though, is it. I reckon it's pretty safe to assume that both sides wanted more signings than we ended up with. Why do you think that didn't happen? We had made a number of signings, everyone including Keegan was saying that there was money to spend, even before we'd brought any in through sales, yet as you say, we ended up only adding a loan signing and an U-21 striker. Why did things stop working towards the end of the window? They don't want to spend too much.