Dr Venkman

our hopes are now placed on oba's low but broad shoulders

its time for nile

we're selling our best keeper, our best defender is out for ages, our best midfielder is out for ages, our best striker is out for ages. i'm really worried now

what an absolute fucking disaster

he would of always had failed with that type of football at any decent sized club By appointing such a manager FS without actually saying as such basically admitted we needed to put an end to the wild transfer ways, high wages and any behind the scenes meddling by board directors. which is why we brought in smith barton, viduka and geremi on massive wages? Smith, Barton and Geremi came after FS didn't they? Viduka on big wages is natural as he was a free transfer. Not that Big Sam would have anything to do with the wages anyway, that's down to agents, chairmen and accountants. i was getting at the point that you seemed to suggest that with allardyce came a drop in wages we paid to players. are you suggesting that if shepherd had been there we would have brought in WORSE players than those four? No, that's you using some flawed logic of yours. I don't know who would have arrived, maybe the very same players we did end up buying on the very same wages, or maybe not. 'By appointing such a manager FS without actually saying as such basically admitted we needed to put an end to the wild transfer ways, high wages' if you're going to get your handbag out and call my logic flawed then please explain what exactly i was supposed to take from that, if it isnt that Allardyce would sign players on lower wages than we were used to?

he would of always had failed with that type of football at any decent sized club By appointing such a manager FS without actually saying as such basically admitted we needed to put an end to the wild transfer ways, high wages and any behind the scenes meddling by board directors. which is why we brought in smith barton, viduka and geremi on massive wages? Smith, Barton and Geremi came after FS didn't they? Viduka on big wages is natural as he was a free transfer. Not that Big Sam would have anything to do with the wages anyway, that's down to agents, chairmen and accountants. i was getting at the point that you seemed to suggest that with allardyce came a drop in wages we paid to players. are you suggesting that if shepherd had been there we would have brought in WORSE players than those four?

i love it when people attribute all the different views on the forum to the same mind in order to criticise

he would of always had failed with that type of football at any decent sized club By appointing such a manager FS without actually saying as such basically admitted we needed to put an end to the wild transfer ways, high wages and any behind the scenes meddling by board directors. which is why we brought in smith barton, viduka and geremi on massive wages?

I think I agree with that and I think he will do a good job at Blackburn, for them, like Bolton. You were pleased when we appointed him too. Do you think we should have kept him? mandiarse is your man (or girl). debate really doesnt get any better than this

I'd be more curious to know which clubs run at a loss WITH debt. Half the PL?? How many have owners who guarantee the debt? Just saying you can't have your cake and eat it. Buying and selling players, hiring managers is a lottery. Look at the state Spurs are in and Liverpool will be in if they don't qual CL this season. Thats the point, Liverpool will be in pretty much the same place as we are in now if they dont quaify. If that were to happen, they would go 2 ways, they will gamble like we did and pump more money in (if possilbe) or they'll sell players, id hazard a guess and say they'd sell. What happened in 2004 to us, will be pretty much the saem situation that Liverpool would be in should they fail to qualify. The decisoin to appoint Souness is the key to this whole arguement, the decision toback him heavily compunds that decison as it backfired spectacularly. If a manager with merit was appointed and the gamble was the same, you'd still get your morons ciriticisng the appoinment and backing but the sensible ones will see the merits of the decison. their current manager will certainly demand they buy, and their supporters would back him up Providing he's hasnt been sacked for not qualifying... he's been on the brink for the last 2 years for not winning the league, and I'm sure you'll take notice of that. I dont think him not winning the league has anything to do with him "being on the brink", you're probably right about the fans wanting them to gamble - still wouldnt make the decision a correct one. What do you think the fans would do if they sacked Rafa for failing to qualifiy then replaced him with Souness? I haven't got a clue, maybe they will try replacing him with Roy Evans ? You havent got a clue? I think you do but you dont want to admit it sonny, jimbob. Well, yes, but the real question is if they will suffer the disgrace of "going backwards", or if they have a divine right to stay where they are forever. Do you think any scousers would then trace their demise down to signing Torres, Keane, Kuyt and Masherano, and say it shouldn't have been done ? I dont see anyone saying the demise was down to signing Robert, Bellamy or Shearer, I see the majority of the people saying it was down to appointing Souness, backing him with so much money compunded that decision. you can't criticise the decision, and the buys and sales he made, when you agreed with it all and backed it all right up the end. Not saying you did, I don't know if you did or not [did you say the other day that you did ?] but plenty of people DID, such as mandiarse for one. The bigger picture being that they didn't purposely appoint a manager they knew would fuck up, he was THEIR choice, and they backed their choice. Shame soopa Mike didn't back his own appointment in the same way ? Oops, I forgot. You agreed with soopa mike that we shouldn't spend ie waste, any money, didn't you. You mean to say you cant support a decision even though you disagree with it? Thats eseentially what you're saying, I didnt agree with the decision to sack SBR but i supported the decision becasue as a fan thats what i do. I disagreed with the appointments of Roeder, Souness and even remember arguing with you amongst others about the appointment of Allardyce but at the end of the day i supported each and every appointment. Your're right, i have no intention of trying to prove that Shepherd et al decidied to purposely appoint a bad manager, all i can do is highlight the dmetrimental affect it had on the club, which is what im doing. Someone has to be accountable for the decision to appointmnet a bad manager. so you don't see that a numpty who says something like "souness is doing the right thing getting rid of the cancer like Alex ferguson did", or "mike ashley is doing the right thing by appointing a DOF (to undermine the manager)" and agreeing with these decisions, is different to saying you think it is a mistake but you hope it works out because you support the club ? Of course you have the hindsight queens like mandiarse who has agreed with at least 3 of the last boards appointments on this very message board (and probably 4 but he's too modest to admit it), and their actions while they were the manager, but now denies it Actually i do see your point, if they supported the decsion and agreed with the decision then they should be in no posiiton to cirticise that decision, thats a fair point. if you rely on very basic reasoning, if however you see the benefit of evaluting evidence you can criticise absolutely anything at all. i've already said this but what the hell....shepherd agreed with his decision didnt he? does that mean that he cant now be self critical as that would go against NE5's golden rule?

me too my questions.. 1) Have you already started the search for our next manager? 2) If not, why not? 3) Do you think Joe Kinnear is the right man for the NUFC managers job? 4) If so, given his shocking record, why?

where has the money from all the other clubs came from ie apart from Chelsea and Man City ? My earlier question/point was exactly the same question. The point others are making seems to be that they would be happy to stop competing and support a solvent club that spends years not attempting to make a challenge ? And my view of that is personally, I wouldn't want that because I've seen it, and the real effects of it, and also those that think they want it, wouldn't like it at all if they got it, just like now they don't like Ashley now the automatic improvement they expected with "any" new owner hasn't happened(although getting them to admit it is like pulling teeth) Completely ignored my question and yet again put a set of words in mine and others' mouths. Good stuff, cheers. its never, ever worth it mate

the internet, where men are men and women are police officers

now i have a non footballing reason to dislike you

the longer this goes on the more i think we'll get a good bit of money/exchange for him, at least thats one positive way of looking at it

positive news i think, no complaints

the only family in the world ........ You couldn't make it up if you tried. Any stick will do. i'm embarrased for you, any defence will do Not defending anything, I'm embarrassed for you lot given the current state of the club since the change of ownership was made, because at the end of the day, this and other comments he has made, and SJH too, are all totally and completely irrelevant to what happens on a football pitch and how the club is run by its owners. i'm ignoring everthing past the first part because its irrelevant to what i posted. explain how you posting 'the only family in the world......' in a response to a post that accused shepherd of nepotism is not you leaping to his defence at the first opportunity. again, its this sort of thing that shows your agenda as the one true voice in defense of shepherd, and it undermines any shred of subjectivity that you might have shown towards him in the past. you just cant help shooting yourself in the foot, hence the embarassment. basically, its as I posted. Any stick whatsover to beat the fat bastard with. I don't expect its escaped your notice the state we are now in, despite having new owners, that the majority of people wanted, on the basis that "anybody but Shepherd would do better", having been told by myself and one or two others that backing managers and showing ambition wasn't an automatic thing, but a matter of choice. We now have an owner who has chosen not to back his managers and show ambition, and the whole point is still lost on you and others. Personalities have nothing to do with this, and I have to feel sorry for people with such mind boggling lack of perception and judgement. Amazing beyond belief. do you want to talk about what i posted? about you defending shepherd on a charge of nepotism? or do you want to talk about mike ashley?

i'm sure he's 'not defending anything'

Yes you daft twat, you couldn't build them for that much, the reason the price was so low is the amount of debt attached to the club. If you only include the assets & don't look at the liabilities when valuing something it's always going to look cheap. It's like talking about how much you could make out of selling your house but ignoring the mortgage you have to pay off with the proceeds. he says this sort of shit because the mongs believe it, a snippet of a conversation i over-heard yesterday.... 'have you seen the papers? they reckon the toon are in hundreds of millions of debt' 'eh? debt, how'd they manage that like?' 'i dunno, they reckon he's gonna run the club into the ground'

the only family in the world ........ You couldn't make it up if you tried. Any stick will do. i'm embarrased for you, any defence will do Not defending anything, I'm embarrassed for you lot given the current state of the club since the change of ownership was made, because at the end of the day, this and other comments he has made, and SJH too, are all totally and completely irrelevant to what happens on a football pitch and how the club is run by its owners. i'm ignoring everthing past the first part because its irrelevant to what i posted. explain how you posting 'the only family in the world......' in a response to a post that accused shepherd of nepotism is not you leaping to his defence at the first opportunity. again, its this sort of thing that shows your agenda as the one true voice in defense of shepherd, and it undermines any shred of subjectivity that you might have shown towards him in the past. you just cant help shooting yourself in the foot, hence the embarassment.

the only family in the world ........ You couldn't make it up if you tried. Any stick will do. i'm embarrased for you, any defence will do

How do you get the impression that they've not been honest about this!?! Everything they've said about the financial side of the club has been proved to be honest. They said that the club was in danger of going out of business when they took over. True. They said that the debts had been paid off. True. All that can be true and there can still be money available to the manager for transfers. Ashley can be prepared to provide the money himself if the manager identifies a player that fits with the club's strategy (Young, value for money both in terms of wages and transfer fee, future potential, etc), that player is available (ie his club is willing to sell), and they want to come here and the club can still be financially in the s*** at the moment. Unfortunately, that strategy is going to restrict the number of players available to us, especially within the confines of the ridiculous January transfer window - which surely needs to go, if FIFA/UEFA are serious about encouraging an element of financial realism in football - but that doesn't mean it's wrong. If we're needing to get in a few fire-fighters to see us through until the end of the season, then fine, but we should try and make them loan signings if they don't fit with the sensible, neigh essential, transfer strategy. The anger comes from people's desire for there to be a hero and a villain in all of this and their subsequent inability to see both sides of the story. People have simply refused to accept that Ashley has had legitimate reasons behind doing what he's done - whether you think he's made mistakes or not - preferring to see him as some kind of evil super-villain whose taken us over simply to destroy the club. That's simply f***ing ridiculous and it's about time reality bit for many people, hopefully this is the start of that. The debts haven’t been paid off they’ve been restructured. In fact NUFC owe more money now than they did when Ashley took over. Do you suggest he shouldn't have put the money in to save that being the case then? Idiot. I’m not suggesting anything. NUFC does owe more money now than it did when the new owner took over. I’m sorry if the facts intrude on your childishly naïve Ashley fantasy but it’s important to establish the facts. How do you suggest he paid them off without the company owing him money for doing it? Bump He could have invested £100m in his business, instead of lending it the money with an option to charge interest. If he’s as committed to club as he says why go for the loan option?

later is now, by the looks of it they got out before they had to balance anything

The offer was take it or leave it. Then he should have left it. Ashley chose to take on this responsibility and has to live with the consequences of buying an institution and a buisness. to be fair he's spoken of being responsible quite a few times. if he was left with such a shambles, forgetting who's fault it was or wasnt, does he have a choice but to try and steady the ship until we're back on a level footing from which he can put money in to push us up the league?

i'm just gonna go watch the reserves next season