Dr Venkman

whats funny about going to the pub ? Why don't you try it.

madras' and fredbobs posts above are worthy of answering btw, if ne5 or parky would like to do that i'd be genuinely interested to read

funnily enough this will be exactly what i'll be doing next season if joe kinnear's our manager. regarding the OP, 'you've seen uglier football' just makes me want to smack him in the mouth. its hardly the point.

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are. Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced. I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him. the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn. you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there. absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are. ah, now. I was one of the few people on here who urged caution when loads of posters were urging the club to "splash the cash" after every defeat, and to back Souness, because they said he would get it right just like Alex Ferguson did at ManU. Probably the same people who are now condemning this approach for what it caused. But I don't do hindsight, thats for others, so are denying u-turns and double standarsds. Fact is, whatever the circumstance, you don't succeed in football without spending. I don't want the club to behave like the charltons of this world and - having the 17th biggest turnover [courtesy of the last regime, and down from 14th since Ashley came in, a downturn which will continue and will drop significantly if nothing is done to arrest it] I think it is not the course we should be taking either. 17th biggest turnover. i wonder how many of those numbered 1 to 16 run at a loss even with those turnovers ? For the 10 millionth time half the PL are in debt and most struggle to cover player wages. FACT. isnt there a difference though between being able to manage debt and being very restricted by it? genuine question btw, i dont claim to have anything more than common knowledge of finance.

there's a world of difference between responsible spending and reckless spending, and where they get you when things dont turn out like you hoped they would.

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are. Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced. I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him. the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn. Whatever you call it, it worked very well for at least ten years and if shepherd hadn’t fucked up replacing SBR it would probably be still working now. If he’d got a decent manager in at the right time the £50m Souness wasted would have probably seen us knocking on the door of the top four again. The revenue generated by being a moderately successful club would probably have covered a very large chunk of the debt Ashley inherited. Shepherd’s faith in Souness was misguided, his overall strategy wasn’t. no point in even bothering with that speculative load

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are. Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced. I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him. the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn. you scorned the champions league qualifications ? Spending big is the only way to get there. absolutely not. but the champions league qualifications were a result of the big spending, had it been big spending that was manageable then there'd be no need for scorn, but it wasnt manageable, it was reckless. and thats why we are where we are.

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least try to make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, a few others, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. well, this is now 4 days later, and it would appear nobody ie those who continue to say that I'm wrong and they are right, has replied to what was a genuine question. Even you know why nobody answers you, right? As I've said before (and you've said you don't care), you'd get a lot more respect if you took time to answer questions rather than being the smug, intolerant, self righteous old man you've become. silly comments like that only show me that its pointless debating anything with you. The reason why they haven't answered it, is because if he had backed his manager, they would be jumping up and down and not giving a toss about this debt that they are so outraged about, and they know it. that's a moot point though. for whatever reason keegan left, and so we're adapting to it and everyone's deciding which parts of whats going on they can come to terms with and understand. i personally can understand a cut back in spending at this point, whereas i cannot understand the handing of a long term contract to kinnear. in the same way that i was unhappy with shepherds time as chairman and i'm also unhappy with ashleys time as owner so far. its not always one way or the other you know, there are many grey areas, how have you got through life so far not realising this? I've always said they made mistakes. But they backed their managers, which is how they bounced back from "mediocrity" and got back up the league again. Ashley won't do it mate, with his current approach, he just won't, thats what I have against him, and I'm convinced he doesn't really "want" to. He wants the revenue, without the expenditure, probably hoping for a sale. But he's going to get a shock, if he believed we would get 50,000 supporters no matter what. but by backing their managers the debt snow balled and thats how we got into the position we find ourselves in today, and i'm not even going into warehouse renting or paying themselves fortunes, it was spending but it was reckless spending and greed. you can try and justify it all you want but the fact remains that we are where we are and the people you praise (sometimes rightly) were directly responsible for the approach that got us here, and no matter how many time you say it the fact that they are no longer in charge is not in any way being 'held accountable'. they took A LOT of money out of the club in their time on charge and when leaving, thats not being held accountable, thats cutting and running. as far as ashleys approach goes, given the state of the finances and the limited information available to me, i can accept it, for now. you obviously cant and thats just where we have to agree to disagree.

so why are they defending and backing Ashley ? Don't say they aren't, because they are. Thing is Dave, the point I made a few years ago on numerous occasions "replacing the current directors with someone of similar calibre will be more difficult than people think" still stands, but they still defend Ashley. They should realise now that their unhappiness with the last regime was badly misplaced. I find it particularly sad that people are scorning the approach which gave them all those european qualifications, champions league run, stadium expansion, and the top quality footballers we signed that got us there in the first place, in favour of financial prudency when the same situation applied when Bobby Robson was manager and they were happy enough with what followed later through backing him. the key word here is approach. the approach was of spend now worry later, which has gotten us into a mess. so given that the finances are in such a mess, thanks to the old board, why is it surprising that people are scorning it? its completely deserving of scorn.

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least try to make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, a few others, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. well, this is now 4 days later, and it would appear nobody ie those who continue to say that I'm wrong and they are right, has replied to what was a genuine question. Even you know why nobody answers you, right? As I've said before (and you've said you don't care), you'd get a lot more respect if you took time to answer questions rather than being the smug, intolerant, self righteous old man you've become. silly comments like that only show me that its pointless debating anything with you. The reason why they haven't answered it, is because if he had backed his manager, they would be jumping up and down and not giving a toss about this debt that they are so outraged about, and they know it. that's a moot point though. for whatever reason keegan left, and so we're adapting to it and everyone's deciding which parts of whats going on they can come to terms with and understand. i personally can understand a cut back in spending at this point, whereas i cannot understand the handing of a long term contract to kinnear. in the same way that i was unhappy with shepherds time as chairman and i'm also unhappy with ashleys time as owner so far. its not always one way or the other you know, there are many grey areas, how have you got through life so far not realising this?

apart from insisting that he work under a director of football, which is more than likely the most important 'demand' and sees us offering long term contracts to dross like kinnear

Guff? Why is that then? Because there is no supposition and no character assinations of actual Newcastle United Legends? Im quite surprised you havent bored everyone with a personal attack on Shay Given to complete your holy trinity. This article is spot on, there is a massive distrust of this regime, people are apathetic and plenty simply wont put up with it.

i must say resorting to 'well other clubs can do it, so we must be able to' seems a bit, well, like he hasnt really thought it through

nowt to say then ? Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton. on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him. When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ? It's a lottery getting a good manager? No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill. is it now ? We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson. Or Everton replace Moyes .......... Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory. Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual. you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp. were you happy with the kinnear appointment ? hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ? (conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works) i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ? often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in. silly. Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back. Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved. Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ? BORING ! we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007. defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ? i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences. nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left. you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment. Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result. As I've said before. Then you should be happy that your season ticket money is going towards paying the bills he racked up in the process. The alternative is of course, only supporting the club when they are winning, as you did when the Halls and Shepherd took over [if you even did that] Was that the Hall/Shepherd era where we were nearly relegated from the 1st division? Or the Hall/Shepherd era where we were finishing 13th in the league despite the big spending? nah, the Hall/Shepherd who took over a club days from bankruptcy, getting 15000 gates and couldn't be sold for 1.25m quid, that became a club filling a 52000 all seater stadium, playing in the champions league, qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs, and was valued at anything between 100m and 200m quid. I am sorry you feel the need to scorn the big spending that did all of that, what a shame you would have preferred solvency and 2nd division obscurity instead of beating Barcelona and playing in the San Siro. You really are one blinkered old man aren't you. Who said I didn't appreciate the wonderful football we have experienced, but you paint the Hall/Shepherd days with such rose-tinted spectacles. You fail to see what it has cost this club to get these things. You know I wouldn't prefer to be in the 2nd division, but a happy medium of the club not being whored out to pay for the fabulous football we saw would have been nice, do you not think? As for the £100-£200 million quid. Are you happy that Sir John Hall and Fred Shepherd pocketed over £180 million between them when this club was sold, especially since Sir John Hall stood on the steps of St James when he first bought the club and stated he wasn't in it for the money! YEAH RIGHT! oh dear. Resorting to insults. How old are you ? I'm not old you daft bugger, and I'm in good health too. If you don't want to listen to others who have seen things [without meaning to sound patronising] then you really do have a serious problem, and are talking like a naive teenager. I don't believe you saw the mediocrity of the 1970's and 1980's if you think the souness, Roeder and Allardyce league positions were mediocre league positions. Sorry like, but I don't. I believed you at first but your own comments have gave me the impression I now have. I have no idea what makes you think I am happy with money going out of the club. All I have said is that the Halls and Shepherd are by far the best owners we have had in 50 years, in fact, the ONLY good owners in that time. To that extent, they deserved something, for the job they did and the initial risks they took, taking over the club in the state it was in. And don't compare the state of the club in 1991 to now, because believe me, it was miles apart. but we're in the same league position now as we were when shepherd left, so its not the league positions you care about? but how much money we spend? seems weird. I don't ever remember us being in such a relegation scrap under Shepherd's tenure though. point taken, but remember we're always only one or two results away from being out of it (just as much as the opposite is true i understand). but to criticise ashley on current league position while stating that the souness roeder allardyce finishes were not mediocre is hypocritical, whereas to criticise ashley on financial grounds is at best naive and at worst a blatant agenda. I really don't know how many times this has to be said. A board that backs their manager and shows ambition will always be better than one who choose not to. i agree, however i feel thats over simplifying the issue somewhat, dont you? in light of the clubs current financial status? You mean seeing 2 of our best players, one of whom has been a fabric of the club and couldn't wait to get away, and our captain to follow soon, is over-simplifying ? I don't think so. In fact, its frightening. no thats not what i mean because thats not what i said. i dont really think thats relevant to backing the manager? as it opens a whole load of other issues regarding whether jfk wanted given and n'zogbia to stay, what the club did to keep them etc, so lets not side track. i agree with you that boards should back their managers financially, but given the clubs finances at present, how should the board be providing more than they currently are? I'm not sure either, but maybe Shay Given could shed some light on it ? As well as Keegan and Owen ? Don't you find their actions tell you something ? i reckon they'd tell you they left cos the club aint going to be challenging anytime soon (and i would say it it was down to the financial mess we are in) you would say we should have kept on borrowing to keep these players ,cross your fingers and hope we find success before the banks say "no" or "err can we have our money back please" I understand what you and the others are saying. You wish we hadnt' played in the Champions League rather than aim for a relegation and solvency, and you think every club except us is successful, always appoint the right man, and make profits at the same time oh we know that trick,the one where you try to make out someone said something they didn't. what i am saying (and you well know it) is that after dropping out the champs league you can gamble a bit to get back in,but if you fail and you keep on gambling and failing.....you end up like all other gamblers who fail. still awaiting your answer by the way of where the money would come from year on year when making losses year on year and do you understand that you can't keep borrowing for ever. Simple difference is, I don't believe Ashley has a clue about football, or how to succeed, nor the desire to do what it takes even if this belief is incorrect. Whereas I have no doubt whatsoever that the Halls and Shepherd would have re-grouped and had another go, and probably had some success too. do you feel you can draw a fair comparison at this point? given that ashley has only had the club for a small fraction of time compared to the last lot? the challenges he faces are different to the ones they faced when taking over, wouldnt you say? Aye, Ashley is in a far better position. In some ways and in other ways not. The club is in far superior position now than it was in the early 90's. It's true that there are loads of things that are better about the club and the situation it finds itself in now than in the early 90s: Bigger, better SJP; better league position; better squad; higher profile; larger crowds; more TV money; more revenue full-stop; improved training facilities; and so-on. However there are a number of things about the club and the current situation that are worse: Bigger debt; higher supporter expectations (therefore increased demand for success, less patience, etc); huge wage bill; players are much more powerful when it comes to contracts, etc meaning it is harder to get rid of players you don't want and bring in players you do; hugely inflated transfer fees and player wages; bigger, stronger opposition, some with money's-no-object budgets; much less room for improvement, especially relative improvement compared to other Premiership clubs; the global "Credit Crunch"; a somewhat tarnished reputation; less obvious ways of improving things, and so-on. So, I don't think it's true that Ashley's in a far better position, some things are better, others are worse, which is easier or more difficult is hard to judge, the problems are different, but there are still problems. not a single thing is worse than in 1991. Nothing. Would you like offer some evidence or arguments to refute the points I made then? Because without that your statement has no validity. you've listed all the improvements yourself ! What else is there ? You can't call expectations and the other things you have listed as "worse" when they are all by-products of the huge improvements and comparative success ? The only thing I would pick out is "tarnished repuation", but to be honest, even that is nowhere near the appalling standing the club had in 1991. I asked you about the problems not the improvements, so will you address the ones I've highlighted below, please: the debt must be an issue, i fail to see how it cant be

i'll be there

Strikes me as he hasn't been able to put enough money into the squad during the window (for whatever reason) and he's doing his utmost to support the staff in gestures like this. He needs to keep it up, and the odd interview to let everyone know his plans or hopes wouldn't go amiss either. and a decent managerial appointment..

Facts are facts - NOBODY wished this on Joe Kinnear, but its happened - the club needs to stay in the Prem and every action should be taken to ensure this... Whether he was the best man for the job has been questioned by many, myself included, but it doesn't mean we want him dead... i'm not gonna apologise for fuck all, has been a total joke and he needs to be moved on from the position of NUFC manager, his ill health doesn't change my opinion one iota do i have any ill will toward him, no...but i hope he never darkens the doors of SJP in a managerial capacity fingers crossed though joe precisely, sentiments other wise are from people who infact cannot seperate football from 'real life' while criticising others for not being able to do so. do i want joe kinnear to have a full recovery regardless of footballing matters? of course i do because thats a human issue. do i want him to be our manager? do i fuck, because he's hopeless.

true, also I dread what would happen if the players hear there was a protest somewhere outside the ground.. that would undoubtedly f*** up their psyche in an instant .. next thing you know Nicky Butt and Damien Duff will stop caring.. and Blefuscu, I respect your reasons and all, but judging by your last message, obviously NUSC's members are all brain-dead, and will undoubtedly enjoy being represented by chavs on tv. Fair enough, that's a possibility, but you should consider the possibility that the people who go to the protest/rally/whatever are actually people like you - poor sods who love the club. Only difference is they choose to 'voice' their opinion, instead of concentrating on their bevvies, like the true supporters should do.. what is their opinion? apologies if this has already been covered but i've been trying to get an answer all day on what this rally is actually for? You've wasted your day then, because I'm sure you know the answer.. people are unhappy, you know i'm sure i dont know the answer, thats why i've been asking, i'm not a mentalist. when i said what is it for i meant what are they hoping to achieve?

true, also I dread what would happen if the players hear there was a protest somewhere outside the ground.. that would undoubtedly fuck up their psyche in an instant .. next thing you know Nicky Butt and Damien Duff will stop caring.. and Blefuscu, I respect your reasons and all, but judging by your last message, obviously NUSC's members are all brain-dead, and will undoubtedly enjoy being represented by chavs on tv. Fair enough, that's a possibility, but you should consider the possibility that the people who go to the protest/rally/whatever are actually people like you - poor sods who love the club. Only difference is they choose to 'voice' their opinion, instead of concentrating on their bevvies, like the true supporters should do.. what is their opinion? apologies if this has already been covered but i've been trying to get an answer all day on what this rally is actually for?

I might even eat my pie caveman style and ensure it is visible around the corners of my mouth up to the sides of my cheeks NUSC Not Understanding the Supporting Concept i might get a pint,pour it out,then get another. 'keep the change mate make sure mike gets it'

This is exactly my question to NE5, and he will not answer it except to say Ashley is a clueless knobjockey etcetera etcetera Looks like you're right. Oh well. He won't answer because he can't answer it. Just keep on harping back to the 70's and 80's and the glory champions league nights which none of us have the slightest clue about. eeerrr.....exactly. Now, toonlass. I know I said this yesterday, but rather than get accused by somebody of "derailing the thread" when I didn't, I'll at least make it debateable now that its gone in this direction. Genuine question. You have yourself, Colos short and curlies [sorry if thats not quite right mate I still think of you as Scott parkers 60's haircut], madras, whatthefunk, taking the side of outright prudency in one corner. In the other, you have me, UV, Spence [maybe], johnnypd, and one or two others in the other, and Dave sort of in the middle but wavering over to "our" side because he's very bothered by the current position and other things. We were all very pleased when Keegan walked through the door, weren't we ? [apart from one or two like ozzie and Baggio who have expressed their opinions of him ie quitter and all of that bollocks, IMO]. Why were you pleased. Was it because you envisaged the club spending some money to back him and getting back into europe and better ? If that were still the case, what would you now be saying ? Also - if Ashley had kept Given, and spent say 20m quid not just to get away from the foot of the table, but with a concrete desire to improve the fortunes of the club, which also improve the financial position if these new players are successful [which is the key]. What would you be saying ? Would you be pleased, or would you be saying that we shouldn't be doing this because of the debts ? I'm going out now, I don't give a toss about the snow. I don't want to derail, but hopefully there will be some good honest replies. madras's prudency ?...MADRAS'S PRUDENCY ? (in a brian blessed type voice) i have no problem with taking on debt and taking a risk.............they done it and failed which leads me to............. i think they ran up more debt than was sustainable (or at least more than it was safe to add to). answer the darn question. as a couple of others have alredy pointed out it seems that he has answered it in his own way, but its not ok for ashley to be undertaking a period of modest re-building because he's just starting out and has no track record we can judge his intentions on, whereas the previous owners did, so it would have been ok for them to do it.

nowt to say then ? Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton. on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him. When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ? It's a lottery getting a good manager? No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill. is it now ? We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson. Or Everton replace Moyes .......... Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory. Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual. you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp. were you happy with the kinnear appointment ? hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ? (conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works) i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ? often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in. silly. Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back. Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved. Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ? BORING ! we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007. defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ? i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences. nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left. you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment. Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result. As I've said before. Then you should be happy that your season ticket money is going towards paying the bills he racked up in the process. The alternative is of course, only supporting the club when they are winning, as you did when the Halls and Shepherd took over [if you even did that] Was that the Hall/Shepherd era where we were nearly relegated from the 1st division? Or the Hall/Shepherd era where we were finishing 13th in the league despite the big spending? nah, the Hall/Shepherd who took over a club days from bankruptcy, getting 15000 gates and couldn't be sold for 1.25m quid, that became a club filling a 52000 all seater stadium, playing in the champions league, qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs, and was valued at anything between 100m and 200m quid. I am sorry you feel the need to scorn the big spending that did all of that, what a shame you would have preferred solvency and 2nd division obscurity instead of beating Barcelona and playing in the San Siro. You really are one blinkered old man aren't you. Who said I didn't appreciate the wonderful football we have experienced, but you paint the Hall/Shepherd days with such rose-tinted spectacles. You fail to see what it has cost this club to get these things. You know I wouldn't prefer to be in the 2nd division, but a happy medium of the club not being whored out to pay for the fabulous football we saw would have been nice, do you not think? As for the £100-£200 million quid. Are you happy that Sir John Hall and Fred Shepherd pocketed over £180 million between them when this club was sold, especially since Sir John Hall stood on the steps of St James when he first bought the club and stated he wasn't in it for the money! YEAH RIGHT! oh dear. Resorting to insults. How old are you ? I'm not old you daft bugger, and I'm in good health too. If you don't want to listen to others who have seen things [without meaning to sound patronising] then you really do have a serious problem, and are talking like a naive teenager. I don't believe you saw the mediocrity of the 1970's and 1980's if you think the souness, Roeder and Allardyce league positions were mediocre league positions. Sorry like, but I don't. I believed you at first but your own comments have gave me the impression I now have. I have no idea what makes you think I am happy with money going out of the club. All I have said is that the Halls and Shepherd are by far the best owners we have had in 50 years, in fact, the ONLY good owners in that time. To that extent, they deserved something, for the job they did and the initial risks they took, taking over the club in the state it was in. And don't compare the state of the club in 1991 to now, because believe me, it was miles apart. but we're in the same league position now as we were when shepherd left, so its not the league positions you care about? but how much money we spend? seems weird. I don't ever remember us being in such a relegation scrap under Shepherd's tenure though. point taken, but remember we're always only one or two results away from being out of it (just as much as the opposite is true i understand). but to criticise ashley on current league position while stating that the souness roeder allardyce finishes were not mediocre is hypocritical, whereas to criticise ashley on financial grounds is at best naive and at worst a blatant agenda. I really don't know how many times this has to be said. A board that backs their manager and shows ambition will always be better than one who choose not to. i agree, however i feel thats over simplifying the issue somewhat, dont you? in light of the clubs current financial status? You mean seeing 2 of our best players, one of whom has been a fabric of the club and couldn't wait to get away, and our captain to follow soon, is over-simplifying ? I don't think so. In fact, its frightening. no thats not what i mean because thats not what i said. i dont really think thats relevant to backing the manager? as it opens a whole load of other issues regarding whether jfk wanted given and n'zogbia to stay, what the club did to keep them etc, so lets not side track. i agree with you that boards should back their managers financially, but given the clubs finances at present, how should the board be providing more than they currently are? I'm not sure either, but maybe Shay Given could shed some light on it ? As well as Keegan and Owen ? Don't you find their actions tell you something ? i reckon they'd tell you they left cos the club aint going to be challenging anytime soon (and i would say it it was down to the financial mess we are in) you would say we should have kept on borrowing to keep these players ,cross your fingers and hope we find success before the banks say "no" or "err can we have our money back please" I understand what you and the others are saying. You wish we hadnt' played in the Champions League rather than aim for a relegation and solvency, and you think every club except us is successful, always appoint the right man, and make profits at the same time oh we know that trick,the one where you try to make out someone said something they didn't. what i am saying (and you well know it) is that after dropping out the champs league you can gamble a bit to get back in,but if you fail and you keep on gambling and failing.....you end up like all other gamblers who fail. still awaiting your answer by the way of where the money would come from year on year when making losses year on year and do you understand that you can't keep borrowing for ever. Simple difference is, I don't believe Ashley has a clue about football, or how to succeed, nor the desire to do what it takes even if this belief is incorrect. Whereas I have no doubt whatsoever that the Halls and Shepherd would have re-grouped and had another go, and probably had some success too. do you feel you can draw a fair comparison at this point? given that ashley has only had the club for a small fraction of time compared to the last lot? the challenges he faces are different to the ones they faced when taking over, wouldnt you say? Aye, Ashley is in a far better position. why's that then?

haha, class, i think i'll go earlier than normal and buy an extra pint aswell. or we could have a collection round monument for ashley?

nowt to say then ? Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton. on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him. When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ? It's a lottery getting a good manager? No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill. is it now ? We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson. Or Everton replace Moyes .......... Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory. Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual. you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp. were you happy with the kinnear appointment ? hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ? (conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works) i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ? often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in. silly. Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back. Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved. Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ? BORING ! we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007. defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ? i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences. nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left. you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment. Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result. As I've said before. Then you should be happy that your season ticket money is going towards paying the bills he racked up in the process. The alternative is of course, only supporting the club when they are winning, as you did when the Halls and Shepherd took over [if you even did that] Was that the Hall/Shepherd era where we were nearly relegated from the 1st division? Or the Hall/Shepherd era where we were finishing 13th in the league despite the big spending? nah, the Hall/Shepherd who took over a club days from bankruptcy, getting 15000 gates and couldn't be sold for 1.25m quid, that became a club filling a 52000 all seater stadium, playing in the champions league, qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs, and was valued at anything between 100m and 200m quid. I am sorry you feel the need to scorn the big spending that did all of that, what a shame you would have preferred solvency and 2nd division obscurity instead of beating Barcelona and playing in the San Siro. You really are one blinkered old man aren't you. Who said I didn't appreciate the wonderful football we have experienced, but you paint the Hall/Shepherd days with such rose-tinted spectacles. You fail to see what it has cost this club to get these things. You know I wouldn't prefer to be in the 2nd division, but a happy medium of the club not being whored out to pay for the fabulous football we saw would have been nice, do you not think? As for the £100-£200 million quid. Are you happy that Sir John Hall and Fred Shepherd pocketed over £180 million between them when this club was sold, especially since Sir John Hall stood on the steps of St James when he first bought the club and stated he wasn't in it for the money! YEAH RIGHT! oh dear. Resorting to insults. How old are you ? I'm not old you daft bugger, and I'm in good health too. If you don't want to listen to others who have seen things [without meaning to sound patronising] then you really do have a serious problem, and are talking like a naive teenager. I don't believe you saw the mediocrity of the 1970's and 1980's if you think the souness, Roeder and Allardyce league positions were mediocre league positions. Sorry like, but I don't. I believed you at first but your own comments have gave me the impression I now have. I have no idea what makes you think I am happy with money going out of the club. All I have said is that the Halls and Shepherd are by far the best owners we have had in 50 years, in fact, the ONLY good owners in that time. To that extent, they deserved something, for the job they did and the initial risks they took, taking over the club in the state it was in. And don't compare the state of the club in 1991 to now, because believe me, it was miles apart. but we're in the same league position now as we were when shepherd left, so its not the league positions you care about? but how much money we spend? seems weird. I don't ever remember us being in such a relegation scrap under Shepherd's tenure though. point taken, but remember we're always only one or two results away from being out of it (just as much as the opposite is true i understand). but to criticise ashley on current league position while stating that the souness roeder allardyce finishes were not mediocre is hypocritical, whereas to criticise ashley on financial grounds is at best naive and at worst a blatant agenda. I really don't know how many times this has to be said. A board that backs their manager and shows ambition will always be better than one who choose not to. i agree, however i feel thats over simplifying the issue somewhat, dont you? in light of the clubs current financial status? You mean seeing 2 of our best players, one of whom has been a fabric of the club and couldn't wait to get away, and our captain to follow soon, is over-simplifying ? I don't think so. In fact, its frightening. no thats not what i mean because thats not what i said. i dont really think thats relevant to backing the manager? as it opens a whole load of other issues regarding whether jfk wanted given and n'zogbia to stay, what the club did to keep them etc, so lets not side track. i agree with you that boards should back their managers financially, but given the clubs finances at present, how should the board be providing more than they currently are? I'm not sure either, but maybe Shay Given could shed some light on it ? As well as Keegan and Owen ? Don't you find their actions tell you something ? i reckon they'd tell you they left cos the club aint going to be challenging anytime soon (and i would say it it was down to the financial mess we are in) you would say we should have kept on borrowing to keep these players ,cross your fingers and hope we find success before the banks say "no" or "err can we have our money back please" I understand what you and the others are saying. You wish we hadnt' played in the Champions League rather than aim for a relegation and solvency, and you think every club except us is successful, always appoint the right man, and make profits at the same time oh we know that trick,the one where you try to make out someone said something they didn't. what i am saying (and you well know it) is that after dropping out the champs league you can gamble a bit to get back in,but if you fail and you keep on gambling and failing.....you end up like all other gamblers who fail. still awaiting your answer by the way of where the money would come from year on year when making losses year on year and do you understand that you can't keep borrowing for ever. Simple difference is, I don't believe Ashley has a clue about football, or how to succeed, nor the desire to do what it takes even if this belief is incorrect. Whereas I have no doubt whatsoever that the Halls and Shepherd would have re-grouped and had another go, and probably had some success too. do you feel you can draw a fair comparison at this point? given that ashley has only had the club for a small fraction of time compared to the last lot? the challenges he faces are different to the ones they faced when taking over, wouldnt you say?

nowt to say then ? Just joking man, I'm pretty bored, we all know spending money improves your chances of doing well, but it's not a given, you need the right manager, the right scouts and the right amount of money but you can do well without spending massive amount if you have the right manager e.g. Moyes and Everton. on the other hand, if you are lucky enough to get a decent manager, and it IS a lottery, and don't back him, he'll be off. Like Moyes, unless Everton are taken over or it all suddenly goes tits up for him. When you say "do well", how well do YOU want to do ? It's a lottery getting a good manager? No it's a skill, not an easy one but it is definately a skill. is it now ? We'll see how easily Arsenal replace Wenger and ManU replace Ferguson. Or Everton replace Moyes .......... Even a "good manager" isn't necessarily the "right manager", which I suppose adds credence to NE5's "lottery" theory. Bit simplistic on the whole though, as usual. you mean "realistic", as usual. Which also, as usual, too many people fail to grasp. were you happy with the kinnear appointment ? hey getting a good manager is a lottery right,surely theres as much chance getting a s*** one to turn out good results as there is a good one turning out bad to your thinking or maybe you are piffling again in anattempt to detect any criticism from the your beloved fred ? (conversly it must work with players aswell...shevchenko,veron,woodgate at real,keane at liverpool......good players who didn't do it so surely it means it's pointless spending big as these players prove it works) i'll stop you in your tracks........."back your manager"............what with ? where was the money going to come from......at this point you mention the debt of others and as always i mention the debt of the top 4 is different to ours as they are making money aside from those with sugar daddies where as we have consistently made losses (not a good scenario when begging to the banks with few assets left to hock). look at the other clubs who,like us have lived beyond their means,they are all cutting right back and ask yourself what liverpools or arsenals spending would be like if they missed out on the champs league for 3 or 4 years ? often on here you have alluded to others having thir heads in the sand but it is clear the one one doing an ostrich is yourself in relation to the position fred left us in. silly. Especially when there are still people hell bent on defending Ashley to the bitter end, and I mean bitter end = relegation and with little chance of coming back. Pleased for you that you still appear to write off all those european qualifications and champions league appearances and the manner in which they were achieved. Still, nobody is "embarrassing us" any more, right ? BORING ! we've covered the euro qualifications to death as that has little to do with the position we were in spring 2007. defending ashley to the bitter end......like you defending fred ? i never mentioned being embarassed by fred's utterences. nice to see you keep your head in the sand re our position when fred left. you mentioned Shepherd, not me, with a silly childish comment. Yep, I will "defend" anybody who gave me the only 15 years out of 45 that tried to compete at the levels this club should always compete at, and thus gave me the best most consistent and highest league positions as a result. As I've said before. Then you should be happy that your season ticket money is going towards paying the bills he racked up in the process. The alternative is of course, only supporting the club when they are winning, as you did when the Halls and Shepherd took over [if you even did that] Was that the Hall/Shepherd era where we were nearly relegated from the 1st division? Or the Hall/Shepherd era where we were finishing 13th in the league despite the big spending? nah, the Hall/Shepherd who took over a club days from bankruptcy, getting 15000 gates and couldn't be sold for 1.25m quid, that became a club filling a 52000 all seater stadium, playing in the champions league, qualifying for europe more than anybody but 4 clubs, and was valued at anything between 100m and 200m quid. I am sorry you feel the need to scorn the big spending that did all of that, what a shame you would have preferred solvency and 2nd division obscurity instead of beating Barcelona and playing in the San Siro. You really are one blinkered old man aren't you. Who said I didn't appreciate the wonderful football we have experienced, but you paint the Hall/Shepherd days with such rose-tinted spectacles. You fail to see what it has cost this club to get these things. You know I wouldn't prefer to be in the 2nd division, but a happy medium of the club not being whored out to pay for the fabulous football we saw would have been nice, do you not think? As for the £100-£200 million quid. Are you happy that Sir John Hall and Fred Shepherd pocketed over £180 million between them when this club was sold, especially since Sir John Hall stood on the steps of St James when he first bought the club and stated he wasn't in it for the money! YEAH RIGHT! oh dear. Resorting to insults. How old are you ? I'm not old you daft bugger, and I'm in good health too. If you don't want to listen to others who have seen things [without meaning to sound patronising] then you really do have a serious problem, and are talking like a naive teenager. I don't believe you saw the mediocrity of the 1970's and 1980's if you think the souness, Roeder and Allardyce league positions were mediocre league positions. Sorry like, but I don't. I believed you at first but your own comments have gave me the impression I now have. I have no idea what makes you think I am happy with money going out of the club. All I have said is that the Halls and Shepherd are by far the best owners we have had in 50 years, in fact, the ONLY good owners in that time. To that extent, they deserved something, for the job they did and the initial risks they took, taking over the club in the state it was in. And don't compare the state of the club in 1991 to now, because believe me, it was miles apart. but we're in the same league position now as we were when shepherd left, so its not the league positions you care about? but how much money we spend? seems weird. I don't ever remember us being in such a relegation scrap under Shepherd's tenure though. point taken, but remember we're always only one or two results away from being out of it (just as much as the opposite is true i understand). but to criticise ashley on current league position while stating that the souness roeder allardyce finishes were not mediocre is hypocritical, whereas to criticise ashley on financial grounds is at best naive and at worst a blatant agenda. I really don't know how many times this has to be said. A board that backs their manager and shows ambition will always be better than one who choose not to. i agree, however i feel thats over simplifying the issue somewhat, dont you? in light of the clubs current financial status? You mean seeing 2 of our best players, one of whom has been a fabric of the club and couldn't wait to get away, and our captain to follow soon, is over-simplifying ? I don't think so. In fact, its frightening. no thats not what i mean because thats not what i said. i dont really think thats relevant to backing the manager? as it opens a whole load of other issues regarding whether jfk wanted given and n'zogbia to stay, what the club did to keep them etc, so lets not side track. i agree with you that boards should back their managers financially, but given the clubs finances at present, how should the board be providing more than they currently are? I'm not sure either, but maybe Shay Given could shed some light on it ? As well as Keegan and Owen ? Don't you find their actions tell you something ? i reckon they'd tell you they left cos the club aint going to be challenging anytime soon (and i would say it it was down to the financial mess we are in) you would say we should have kept on borrowing to keep these players ,cross your fingers and hope we find success before the banks say "no" or "err can we have our money back please" I understand what you and the others are saying. You wish we hadnt' played in the Champions League rather than aim for a relegation and solvency, and you think every club except us is successful, always appoint the right man, and make profits at the same time you must surely accept though that if mistakes are made and things dont go as planned, there MUST be a period of re-building?