2sheds

I just thought I'd quote my first post in this thread - reply number 79 That sounds like the shepherd story here - only without the trophies and the consistent top 6 finishes. ********sits back and awaits the inevitable response of ' pre 1992 s*** board/4th best finishes over last 10 years/skyboy with an axe to grind etc etc etc'******************* Just call me Nostradamus

Less of the tag teaming chuckle brothers you know my policy on answering both of you in the same thread.

Quote where I stated what my chelsea supporting friend did or did not say about Bates I refuse to read any more of your reply past your first ill conceived assumption. nevertheless, you are saying that it is Shepherds fault that Newcastle Uniteds players didn't perform in 2 Cup Finals, against double winning teams, as against Bates, who's players beat inferior opposition, are you not ? mackems.gif No I'm not I haven't mentioned our 2 cup final appearences - you have. Well, well well, who's the little liar now then mackems.gif You are - as I have proven. If you want to prove the same for me simply quote where I have mentioned them I'm not so sad that I can be bothered looking, I've better things to do with my time. Tell you what though, you can clarify if the point you are making is that Chelsea won 2 cups that nobody gave a toss about compared to us, or a couple of meaningful trophies in which case explain how the chairman is responsible for how players perform in a major Cup Final. Its totally up to you. Others will decide on the merits of chairman being responsible for players not performing in a Cup Final, or otherwise. You are most definitely the person who has mentioned both of these points to me, if you deny it then you are without doubt a liar. You were in a posting frenzy replying almost instantly right up to the point where I asked you to prove I mentioned the 2 fa cup finals we lost - the timestamps on your posts prove this. You return 2 hours later claiming 'you can't be bothered to look' Thats believable You then repeat the same assertion you cannot prove You are now up to question number 457869457634 you have asked me yet haven't answered my original point - and you expect a reply? :nay: Clown

To me? To you Bye

Quote where I stated what my chelsea supporting friend did or did not say about Bates I refuse to read any more of your reply past your first ill conceived assumption. nevertheless, you are saying that it is Shepherds fault that Newcastle Uniteds players didn't perform in 2 Cup Finals, against double winning teams, as against Bates, who's players beat inferior opposition, are you not ? mackems.gif No I'm not I haven't mentioned our 2 cup final appearences - you have. Well, well well, who's the little liar now then mackems.gif You are - as I have proven. If you want to prove the same for me simply quote where I have mentioned them

Quote where I stated what my chelsea supporting friend did or did not say about Bates I refuse to read any more of your reply past your first ill conceived assumption. nevertheless, you are saying that it is Shepherds fault that Newcastle Uniteds players didn't perform in 2 Cup Finals, against double winning teams, as against Bates, who's players beat inferior opposition, are you not ? mackems.gif No I'm not I haven't mentioned our 2 cup final appearences - you have. STOP WITH THE ILL CONCEIVED ASSUMPTIONS

Quote where I stated what my chelsea supporting friend did or did not say about Bates I refuse to read any more of your reply past your first ill conceived assumption.

Do you see how you can save yourself from asking stupid questions by simply reading the post you are replying to? You asked me 4 questions 2 of which you now admit were silly on reflection. As for the rest - the games I went to at Stamford Bridge in the 80s were the ones we played in and I have been back a few times since. And yes I know some chelsea fans - I've worked with one for 25 years does that help?

WRONG. YOU may be discussing who you'd prefer, I'm merely pointing out (for the umpteenth time) that Bates saw more trophies going to Chelsea than freddie did for us See above you do not know what I'm thinking as you have demonstrated. I refer you to post 285 where in response to a similar pile of crap from you I said: Do you have learning difficulties? Why do you keep mentioning the mackems? Once again this is about us and chelsea On the same occasions you were? I'd need a clue like the date I did go to a couple of games at stamford bridge in the 80s and it was a right hovel - whats your point? If you answered my original point about who saw the most success come to their club with or without a cash injection you might find me a bit more responsive. More of the legendary mind reading I see. So, have you any experience of Chelsea during the era's of bates and Harding ? Did you go to Stamford Bridge ? Do you know any Chelsea supporters, past and present ? Did you support Newcastle United pre-1992, if so, how often ? The answer to your question is highlighted in purple. You really do have learning difficulties don't you?

He also thinks I'm ozzie. He also thinks I'm on about abramovic's cash He appears to have the same learning difficulties as you do.

To save bandwidth NE5 (and to save you making 1/2 a dozen posts arguing against what you imagine I'm thinking) here is my reply to post 291 WRONG. YOU may be discussing who you'd prefer, I'm merely pointing out (for the umpteenth time) that Bates saw more trophies going to Chelsea than freddie did for us See above you do not know what I'm thinking as you have demonstrated. I refer you to post 285 where in response to a similar pile of crap from you I said: Do you have learning difficulties? Why do you keep mentioning the mackems? Once again this is about us and chelsea On the same occasions you were? I'd need a clue like the date I did go to a couple of games at stamford bridge in the 80s and it was a right hovel - whats your point? If you answered my original point about who saw the most success come to their club with or without a cash injection you might find me a bit more responsive. More of the legendary mind reading I see.

Sicsfingeredmong FFS why don't you read the post you are replying to? I'm talking about Hardings cash he invested in 1994 not Abramovic's in 2003 And we were not that financially secure when Ashley bought us. In fact Bates and Shepherd left strikingly similar levels of debt A quote worthy of using as a signature there Apart from winning the FA cup twice, the League cup once, the cup winners cup, the super cup and the charity shield your answer is 100% correct BTW FWIW I am not Ozzie

I'll answer NE5 tomorrow - if I need to. He appears to be managing this debate all by himself by knowing exactly what I'm thinking and putting me right on the errors of my 'stance' as he sees it

Sicsfingeredmong Qualifying for the CL twice, based on table position, and with that receiving the CL-related 'financial benefits' and the 'player pulling power in the transfer market'. Then the answer is yes. Anybody can fluke a Cup win, especially the FA Cup in any given year. Lets leave aside the fact we haven't been able to 'fluke' the FA Cup for 50 years We are specifically talking about chelsea after Harding joined the board. The given year for the FA Cup would be 1997 - 3 years after his cash injection. Chelsea won the cup in 1997 and the following season completed a successful european campaign to win not only the cup winners cup but also the european super cup after beating real madrid in the final And you would swap all that for 3 top 5 finishes? Apparently it was the fault of the manager who was starved of funds for his last 18 months . You know the one who got you the successive top 5 finishes in the first place - the ones you'd prefer to collecting trophies at wembley or winning cups in europe. It could never be the fault of an inept chairman who was unable to raise funds for the transfer market until he'd sacked the said manager responsible for the 3 top 5 finishes for the first time in 50 years and appointed a complete dickhead from a lower placed league club in his place.

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2: I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem. You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything. How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet. You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game. Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot. Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen' Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't. EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. Which says something and its quite easy to guess what. Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you. Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote: And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively? oh dear. The bit of your post I have highlighted is pretty pathetic for 3 reasons. 1 Saying (incorrectly) that 'well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. ' is a moronic point to raise as exactly the same could be said about Chelsea and Bates. 2 Your second sentence says that you were wrong in the first one and is therefore invalid 3 (My personal favourite amongst the latest line of s**** from you) - to say 'Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.' is idiotic when you consider its a comparison of what happened AFTER the cash injections. You have just dismissed the FA Cup (twice), the league cup (again), the cup winners cup and the super cup What a clown you are I don't think so. I just can't be arsed with you. As HTL has said, the stupidest comments I ever see, are from people like you who think the chairman of a football club is the person who decides where the cash is spent. Its even more stupid than someone saying that qualifying for the Champions league, qualifying for europe more than any club bar 4, and NUFC achieving 3 top 5 league finishes for the first time in 50 years is "failure". The fact that you don't understand this, tells its own story. As you are so insistent on blaming a chairman for the club not winning the FA Cup, perhaps in your wisdom you could tell us precisely why it is anyone else's fault other than the players for not turning up in 2 FA Cup Finals ? Only an utter clown would make such an absurd insinuation Your tying yourself in knots here with your bull NE5 If you can't be arsed with me - why do you quote and reply to my posts - then ask further questions? Do you really think finishing in the top 5 for three years in succession is better than winning the FA Cup or a European trophy or two? like I said, why don't you explain how you blame boards of directors and chairman for players not performing in 2 FA Cup finals ? You're the one going on about it, not me ? From where I'm sitting, neither Shepherd or Bates actually played in any of their clubs FA Cup Finals. mackems.gif You could also explain how all these clubs with better boards and chairmen than us never got to any Finals either, if you fancy it ? BTW, I'm not really asking you, I don't care if you reply or not, in fact I know you won't because you know you can't and its amusing making you look like the fool you are. I'm only talking about two clubs - us and Chelsea. Chelsea won more silverware under Bates than we won under Freddie. You are the only person who can't admit this (apart from your leg humper HTL) why not talk about us and say, the mackems ? You were talking about the zenith data systems or whatever it was called, and I correctly said that nobody was bothered about it, so you moved on to the FA Cup. Your silly jibe in brackets betrays the fact that you know you are losing BTW, and have no answer to my comments about blaming chairman for the lack of performance of players, which simply doesn't stand up. I wouldn't have Bates in preference to Shepherd, that is the subject of the thread, and you ain't gonna change my mind, especially on the back of the fact that it is clear you don't really have much depth to your level of football knowledge and understanding. Fancy blaming a Chairman for players not winning an FA Cup Final mackems.gif Priceless mackems.gif Fancy mentioning the mackems when its been clearly stated we are discussing two clubs - us and chelsea. Fancy mentioning the cups before Harding joined chelsea's board when this particular discussion is what happened AFTER the cash injection he brought Fancy having to have this pointed out to you several times yet you still can't get it.

HTL blerk http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=45654.msg1027763#msg1027763 Standard policy

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2: I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem. You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything. How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet. You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game. Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot. Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen' Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't. EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. Which says something and its quite easy to guess what. Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you. Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote: And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively? oh dear. The bit of your post I have highlighted is pretty pathetic for 3 reasons. 1 Saying (incorrectly) that 'well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. ' is a moronic point to raise as exactly the same could be said about Chelsea and Bates. 2 Your second sentence says that you were wrong in the first one and is therefore invalid 3 (My personal favourite amongst the latest line of s**** from you) - to say 'Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.' is idiotic when you consider its a comparison of what happened AFTER the cash injections. You have just dismissed the FA Cup (twice), the league cup (again), the cup winners cup and the super cup What a clown you are I don't think so. I just can't be arsed with you. As HTL has said, the stupidest comments I ever see, are from people like you who think the chairman of a football club is the person who decides where the cash is spent. Its even more stupid than someone saying that qualifying for the Champions league, qualifying for europe more than any club bar 4, and NUFC achieving 3 top 5 league finishes for the first time in 50 years is "failure". The fact that you don't understand this, tells its own story. As you are so insistent on blaming a chairman for the club not winning the FA Cup, perhaps in your wisdom you could tell us precisely why it is anyone else's fault other than the players for not turning up in 2 FA Cup Finals ? Only an utter clown would make such an absurd insinuation Your tying yourself in knots here with your bull NE5 If you can't be arsed with me - why do you quote and reply to my posts - then ask further questions? Do you really think finishing in the top 5 for three years in succession is better than winning the FA Cup or a European trophy or two? like I said, why don't you explain how you blame boards of directors and chairman for players not performing in 2 FA Cup finals ? You're the one going on about it, not me ? From where I'm sitting, neither Shepherd or Bates actually played in any of their clubs FA Cup Finals. mackems.gif You could also explain how all these clubs with better boards and chairmen than us never got to any Finals either, if you fancy it ? BTW, I'm not really asking you, I don't care if you reply or not, in fact I know you won't because you know you can't and its amusing making you look like the fool you are. I'm only talking about two clubs - us and Chelsea. Chelsea won more silverware under Bates than we won under Freddie. You are the only person who can't admit this (apart from your leg humper HTL)

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2: I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem. You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything. How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet. You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game. Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot. Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen' Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't. EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. Which says something and its quite easy to guess what. Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you. Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote: And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively? oh dear. The bit of your post I have highlighted is pretty pathetic for 3 reasons. 1 Saying (incorrectly) that 'well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. ' is a moronic point to raise as exactly the same could be said about Chelsea and Bates. 2 Your second sentence says that you were wrong in the first one and is therefore invalid 3 (My personal favourite amongst the latest line of s**** from you) - to say 'Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.' is idiotic when you consider its a comparison of what happened AFTER the cash injections. You have just dismissed the FA Cup (twice), the league cup (again), the cup winners cup and the super cup What a clown you are I don't think so. I just can't be arsed with you. As HTL has said, the stupidest comments I ever see, are from people like you who think the chairman of a football club is the person who decides where the cash is spent. Its even more stupid than someone saying that qualifying for the Champions league, qualifying for europe more than any club bar 4, and NUFC achieving 3 top 5 league finishes for the first time in 50 years is "failure". The fact that you don't understand this, tells its own story. As you are so insistent on blaming a chairman for the club not winning the FA Cup, perhaps in your wisdom you could tell us precisely why it is anyone else's fault other than the players for not turning up in 2 FA Cup Finals ? Only an utter clown would make such an absurd insinuation Your tying yourself in knots here with your bull NE5 If you can't be arsed with me - why do you quote and reply to my posts - then ask further questions? Do you really think finishing in the top 5 for three years in succession is better than winning the FA Cup or a European trophy or two?

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2: I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem. You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything. How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet. You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game. Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot. Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen' Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't. EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. Which says something and its quite easy to guess what. Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you. Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote: And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively? oh dear. The bit of your post I have highlighted is pretty pathetic for 3 reasons. 1 Saying (incorrectly) that 'well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. ' is a moronic point to raise as exactly the same could be said about Chelsea and Bates. 2 Your second sentence says that you were wrong in the first one and is therefore invalid 3 (My personal favourite amongst the latest line of shite from you) - to say 'Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you.' is idiotic when you consider its a comparison of what happened AFTER the cash injections. You have just dismissed the FA Cup (twice), the league cup (again), the cup winners cup and the super cup What a clown you are

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2: I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem. You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything. How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet. You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game. Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot. Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen' Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't. EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium well, its a real shame you appear completely unaware of how much improved the club was left by the Halls and Shepherd in comparion to how they found it. Which says something and its quite easy to guess what. Also, how insignificant this cup was that you keep harping on about. Never mind, nobody is worried about it, or was, apart from you. Yes you made your feelings on the various trophies clear at the bottom of page 10 when you wrote: And thus dismissed the only piece of silverware fat fred brought home Now is there any chance of you addressing which chairman used their cash injection most effectively?

Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2: I'm sorry for you. I've tried to explain and show you that nobody took this cup you are harping on about seriously, but as you are so desperate to show anything that puts Shepherd in a bad light you wish to consider it important, thats your problem. You are clearly young, and know nothing, and won't even be told anything. How about comparing Shepherd and Hall to the 87 other chairmen who didn't qualify for europe as often as we did ? I'm not really surprised this hasn't sunk in yet. You're the sort of hypocrite who will congratulate Ashley when we win a game under Allardyce but criticise Shepherd for appointing him when we lose a game. Now bugger off. You're a pain in the neck, and boring to boot. Nice bit of waffle there NE5 but I don't believe this thread is about '87 other chairmen' Its about Bates and Shepherd and how Bates managed to achieve more success after a cash injection while Freddie didn't. EDIT PS I'm 42 - the last time anyone thought I was 'young' was in a different millennium

NE5 I'd rather bump this thread to be honest. Claiming Bates success at Chelsea is totally down to Hardings cash is very silly and helps show how inept Freddie was. IF Chelsea's success is due to the £25 million Harding injected into the club - why didn't fred match this level with the £25 million he got from Northern Rock? To quote yourself Yet they won loads of trophies with this cash while we didn't. How can this be? :sad2:

Kiss was it ? The coppers say resting a hand on someone's chest unbidden or uninvited is assault - I'd say hand across face is even more so. Thats right the coppers say that. And I've seen a few people lifted for 'assaulting a police officer' when all they have done is place a hand on the coppers arm. But thats the police. I have never seen an ordinary person arrested for assault under the same conditions. If thats your definition of assault all 22 players should have been arrested for the same crime.

Assault is not the word I'd use tbh

The TA? IS HTL the forums equivalent of Gareth Keenan?