sicsfingeredmong

Shepherd's lack of financial clout in terms of not being able to buy the Halls out in one single hit. The Halls - ie Cameron Hall PTY - have been in the financial s*** for about 7 years now and they needed to get out, quickly and for the best possible price. They weren't prepared to wait for Shepherd who was buying tiny amounts of shares, at intervals that were few and far between. There's alot of hot fart gas being spouted off recently, both from Ashley's camp and SJH.

 

This is fart gas too. At the point where SJH sold out, Shepherd could no longer go on buying tiny amounts of shares. If he increased his holding, he would have had to offer for the lot. He obviously didn't have the finance to do so.

And do you think the Halls were prepared to wait around to early 2008 for the Shepherd to further increase his stakeholding? ie. closer to the buyout 30% mark. Shepherd was only purchasing shares in conjuction with the dividends he was receiving, and he was still 1-2% shy of hitting the the above mentioned 30% mark. So for the amount of and at the rate he was purchasing shares it probably would've taken a couple of years, or even more, to hit the target.

Follow his share-buying trend/activity over the past few years - i'm sure there are reliable rescources on the net - and don't let your unrelenting hatred of Shepherd cloud over fact before posting baseless shite.

Billionaires become billionaires because they're good with money and they know how to make it turn into more money**.

 

I think that the assumption that a billionaire owner is going to pour huge amounts into a club is a dodgy one - they're not altruistic, they're in it for a reason, they think they can have a bit of fun and make some money. Much more fun that running a chain of sports shops or a credit card company. Has Ashley bought Newcastle because he used to stand on the Gallowgate as a kid? No. Did Lerner buy Villa because he remembered the 82 EC winning team? No. Abramovich bought Chelsea partly as a life insurance policy, an entirely different agenda to the other PL billionaires.

 

Expectations are now linked to the Abramovich factor, in that although we all know there will never be another spender on his level, we all like to think our owners will want their spending to "look" impressive by comparison and will thus spend money with a diminished regard to its value. This is, in my opinion, naive.

 

I'm not saying that having a billionaire owner is nothing to be pleased with, it is, I'm saying it will be interesting to see how they act over the coming years, and that the assumption that just because they've got s*** loads of cash they're going to spaff it on players every year is a dodgy one.

 

** or they inherit it, obv.

 

EDIT incidentally, the whole focus on 'how much will we spend' is wrong from the start. It matters *who* you buy with it. How much would Jagielka, Smith, Richardson, and Harewood cost in total? Not far off 20m? How much do Spurs want for Defoe? 18m? That's a lot of money but I'd be equally as f***** off with my club if it spent its money like that as I would if it spent no money at all.

I completely agree, and it's the most realistic assessment i've read here as far as offering some sort of look at a future - re: transfer market spending - for Newcastle United under Ashley.

On a billionaire scale Ambramovich is in a totally different league as opposed to smaller scale tycoons like Lerner and Ashley who are reportedly worth 5 billion or less. Although Lerner inherited his wealth, Ashley unlike Roman A didn't just stumble on a massive oil reserve and subsequently sell his oil interests to a national government. In effect Ambramovich has struck it rich twice and with his 10-15b estimated worth could fund his plaything's - ie. Chelsea - summer spending sprees with the interest alone.

It's interesting that you brought up the varying agendas pertaining to these billionare owners. It's a relevant point. Ambramovich's spending power alone, and with it Chelsea's muscle in the transfer market, is just about unrivalled if 'player pulling power' was solely based on a club's capacity to fork out wages. But the crux of the argument and should credit should go to Ambramovich here  because unlike Lerner - and perhaps Ashley will fall into the same category as Villa's boss - he has seemingly embraced the club itself. How many games will Ashley attend as compared to Roman's attendance rate since the Russian took power of the Londoners? It remains to be seen doesn't it.

This lack of connection with the club itself, coupled with Ashley's relatively small scale net worth when stacked alongside Roman's fortune, has made me extremely sceptical of the stuff coming out lately ie. Toffee papers reporting "50mill annual transfer kittys over 5 seasons" and Mort saying stuff like "Ashley wants to make a big splash in the transfer market... and soon".

IMO there's alot of hot air being blown around at the moment, especially from this Mort character. He's making all the right noises - just as Lerner's team did ie. stuff like "understanding the area/the club culture, and with it the need to attain on-field succes" - but until Ashley's team back it up with substance that's all it remains.... cheap talk.

Sir John Hall can go on about how Ashley's team was the 'right team to hand NUFC's future over to', and that's why he finally offloaded his familie's collective shareholding but imo it's down to this hedge/pension fund - ie. the subject of the earlier & ill-fated takeover - not offering what Ashley was able to and Shepherd's lack of financial clout in terms of not being able to buy the Halls out in one single hit. The Halls - ie Cameron Hall PTY - have been in the financial s*** for about 7 years now and they needed to get out, quickly and for the best possible price. They weren't prepared to wait for Shepherd who was buying tiny amounts of shares, at intervals that were few and far between. There's alot of hot fart gas being spouted off recently, both from Ashley's camp and SJH.

As for the future itself - ie. transfer market spending - and this is my take on the matter, i don't think we're in a much better off position as compared to the position we would've found ourselves in had Polygon got their hands on the club.

to clarify,  are you saying that it wasn't Shepherd who appointed Allardyce ?

 

No, not at all.  I am however sayig that sucess in future is not necessarily down to only Shepherd, as this time he is not doing the appointing, and then the follow up backing and sacking on his own.  The previous two managerial reigns are all his however, he can take full credit for those if you like.

 

of course, along with the first time in over 50 years that NUFC had finished in the top 5 for 3 consecutive seasons with Bobby Robson as manager, but don't try to change history if it doesn't suit you

 

If Ashley doesn't back his managers any more than the Halls and Shepherd did, and we are successful, what does that tell you ?

 

FWIW, I have wanted Allardyce since Bobby Robson left, and so I think he will be successful whoever the chairman and owner is. Obviously if Ashley throws money at the club, he has a better chance, but I wouldn't bank on that, you shouldn't expect him to.

 

I wasn't even addressing you, I was pointing out no-one should expect you to concede we're better off without Shepherd's total control because every feasible scenario can reflect favourably on Shepherd in your world.

 

I have never thought Shepherd was in total control, and have said so on numerous occasions.

Likewise. He was mostly a mouthpiece, or the public face of the Halls' behind-the-scenes policies with Douglas Hall being a vastly underestimated boardroom powerplayer - at least from many a supporters' standpoint - in recent years.

it will, but at the same time it we wont have to rely on it

 

journeyman weren't the target for most of Shepherd's reign and the same applies for Ashley......... i hope

It has nothing to with the type of players Ashley wants to sign whether they be 'future stars' or 'experienced journeymen'. The board applies a budget and the manager works within the confines of that budget. Names are put forward by the manager, the board backs the manager's judgement/the team building priorities whatever that may be, and those targets are secured within the the limits of that budget.

We chased big-names, especially recently & this contradicts Shithead's comments this week, in the last couple of years because Souness needed franchise-type players - ie. match-winners/Owen - after ripping up any sort of semblance of team building during his reign.

Ashley's net worth is comparable to Randy Lerner's, in that he's a low-ball billionare compared to Roman. I'm a expecting a similar outlay, and Sam is going to have to wheel & deal.

 

I´d hardly call $4 billion low-ball, nor is it really comparable to Lerners personal fortune of $1.6 billion tbh.

Do you see both sub-five billion net worth owners splashing the cash - and Lerner/Villa hasn't exactly set the transfer market alight over the course of consecutive transfer windows - after putting up a considerable outlay to secure their respective club ownerships?..... and football clubs don't offer a quick return on such investments.

I don't. Allardyce's ability to secure tried & tested journeymen will come in handy

Ashley's net worth is comparable to Randy Lerner's, in that he's a low-ball billionare compared to Roman. I'm a expecting a similar outlay, and Sam is going to have to wheel & deal.

On his day, Parker is one of the best central midfielders this country has to offer.

 

I'll never forget how good he was against Fulham at home last year.

 

 

One day a season 

............. or when inclement weather & the accompanying pitch conditions takes ball-playing midfielders back a peg or two, reducing the gulf which exists between a Gerrard and a Parker football ability-wise ie. hosting Liverpool recently. Those type of matchday conditions are a significant leveller.

I hope as a defender that he's better individually, as compared to the Czech Republic's collective rearguard display at the World Cup. Their rearguard, as a unit, cost them a spot in the Final 16.

80 grand? Tell him to f*** off.

 

if he's fit and playing to his potential he's worth that

 

So many more appropriate/better options.

In the 'ball-playing centrehalf' department.......... the Portugese bloke/stopper from Deportivo.

Unless the two contracts are renegotiated, which would mean a vote of confidence from both players, then we can wave goodbye to both of them this transfer window:

Owen: Undoubted world class and at 9 million a snip!!

Martins: First season in prem and scores 17 goals playing for a s**** team, imagine what he could do in a good team!!

Couldn't agree more, hence Wenger's interest. 17 goals in a team which lacked a transition passing game for two thirds of the season - ie. with Parker being the dominant/negative factor in the team's midfield engineroom - is a tidy return. The sort of team pattern of play needed to compliment Martins' attributes.... those being his pace and shooting power with both feet.

We caught a glimpse of Martins' EPL potential during the six week period when Butt ran the show in the middle of the park, the only period of the season when the necessary counterattacking pattern of play came into effect. I like him as a footballer.

Submitting to player/agents' demands, in the form of these minimum release fee or 'escape clauses', is indicative of how far our stock had fallen in the transfer market during and in the wake of Souness' reign where European Football is no longer a guaranteed but vital commodity in terms of being a bargaining tool used to attract established blue-chip players in the form of Owen, and the best of the up & coming crop ala Martins.

Souness' damage inflicted upon the club wasn't just limited to onfield performances & and of course losing our best players for next to nothing. These contract deals relating to Owen and Martins' contracts are reflective of this collateral off-field damage.

Gullit offers his opinion on Shearer = vindictive.

Shearer offers his opinion - ie. having a snipe like Gullit - on Bellamy = a round of applause & pats on the back allround.

Athletic who can respond to a winger/forward's pace off-the-mark or sudden change of direction off either foot, and can take the ball forward ie. somebody who can actually sideline-to-sideline stretch the opposition forwards' defensive zone. He's a far cry from what we have at the club already.

Some of the stick Parker gets is unbelievable imo. Quite happy for him to go for £7million though. Butt is a better DM and the money could be better spent elsewhere.

 

I think over his time at the club there have been more posts on this forum claiming how great he is and that is what is unbelievable.

 

There was a time not too long ago when those who thought Parker was crap and said so were in a very small minority on here. It seems he's been sussed now by the majority. It took a long time but that's ok, just as long as this heap of talentless s**** buggers off.

I was having a dig at the sheep. I think you called him right before most, along with Crumpy, although the criticism was ott. He's a canny player but nothing special imo. I think a move suits all parties.

In fairness though i called it very early in the peace - ie. at the time of his signing - and when the vast majority were salivating over his 'gutsy defensive hacker-esque' performances under Clueless, when utilized as a sideline-to-sideline protector of the back 4, i also claimed that this particular role upset our formational balance across the midfield line.

The club's two most significant departures of the last two years in back-to-front order , for the better.

*The potential departure of Parker, and for a profit if reports are to be believed.

*.... and that of the useless shitehead who in one of his many crimes of incompetancy committed against the club convinced the board to shell out an over-the-odds 6.5m + 50k plus a week wage package in order to secure the player in question when Everton were striving to nab Parker's services.

Allardyce has a tough ask of trying to convince him to stay, given that Owen's minders most likely leaked the 9m Europan non-qualification clause to the press..... why would a club leak a story with an underlying consequence of a 6m loss. I think his agent/minders were lying when they stated they weren't the 'leak'.

This is the same Michael Owen who was on the phone to his agent trying to salvage a last minute move to Liverpool on the way Shepherd's residence before siogning.

Big Sam has shown that he handle volatile/temperamental types, while getting the best out of them on the pitch. Diouf is the notable example in this regard. For this reason, and if the pricetag is a couple of million or so, Barton is worth a gamble. We need some penetration into the box, from midfield that is, and Barton fits the bill.

I'd have Diouf as well, provided the price was right. As a utility forward he is imo an upgrade over Dyer.

 

Another player from the bent tins department.

 

ie. Volatile & is in possession of an ego to compliment his firebrand temperament, and therfore needs a manager who can effectively handle/man-manage him.

I seem to remember you wanting the club to get rid of Bellamy - ie. our then best player - while singing a similar tune.

in what way?

 

Being a tosser or not is in the end inconsequential - on-field productivity/performance is what counts.

Re: Parker's mid-season injury.

During the aforementioned period Butt asserted his authority as the team's anchor in midfield, when he wasn't hampered by Parker's neigbouring presence alongside. This same period saw a brief rebirth of the transitional passing game, which resulted in a phase of consistent productivity in the attacking 1/3. We looked a fluent 2-3 goal team in the process.

At the time i predicted something along the lines of : "A Butt-led midfield would result in us finishing top 6" and "A Parker-led midfield would lead us into a relegation scrap down the stretch"

A five point finish ahead of the bottom 3 in the end. We were fortunate in that we already had the runs on the board thanks to the already mentioned mid-season period, because either side of Parker's injury we resembled a relegation side in terms of pattern play and the formline reflected this.

No f****** way.

 

Bellamy is nowhere near as good as Owen plus he's a total tosser.

 

Irrelevant.

Missing a couple of key facts in my opinion:

 

Martins was linked up with Shola when he joined, who knows the city's Nigerian contingent.

 

Also, there was a period when Speed had left that senior French/African Amady Faye had taken Zoggy under his wing. So there have been periods when there have been players to llok after theyoungsters, but youare right in saying that it is not too great at the moment.

 

The scenario you've painted out, re- Shola and Faye, revolves around just one figure providing a comparable level of support to lets say the support network at Arsenal for example where they recruit youngsters in clusters based on age & nationality.The danger with this is that once that single 'support figure' leaves, and Shola & Faye's respective futures are/were never set in concrete, an N'Zogbia is naturally going to be isolated.

Sell Parker/remove the transitional passing game's major roadblock.

Recruit two fullbacks who can attack from deep, get to the bylines and cut the ball back into the box. Owen's a master when it comes dropping off his marker's shoulder & finding space in the box. Martins has also displayed a propensity when it comes to dropping back into space within the penalty box.

Recruit a 'ball-playing' centre-halve ie.somebody who at times - ie. when our midfield is being pressed aggressively/under the pump - can take the ball out to the defensive edge of the centre circle, setting up the play in the process. Ball-carrying, or running fullbacks will stretch the opposition forwards' zone defensive. The fullbacks open things up the type of centrehalf i speak of.

Demolish the current football front-office - conditioning, fitness etc.

there's also a tactic of recruiting in pairs in order to help new arrivals settle, though i think this can cause more problems than it solves when the two players simply become insular. we even got in that Turkish bloke on a trial basis for the period that Emre was going through a tough time. that's a bit amatuerish but there's no suprise that Roeder would go down that route - he himself was brought to Lazio for a short time to help Gazza settle in Rome. Wham got Tevez and Mascherano, while villa also got Kachloul and Hadji at around the same time. those didn't seem to work out, Tevez only shone once Mascherano had left the club and he was given a chance to open up and shine.

Hence 'cluster recruiting' seems to be quell the problems you've mentioned in this area ie. Arsenal raiding Holland's U'21 ranks recently, and their continual unearthing of players from the French/African quarter..

there's solano too, who has helped out spanish speaking players in the past and is a mature head serious about his football. i think he is a bit more of a private and intense character, whereas speed was more open and laidback.

Fair point, and without underestimating Solano's attitude & influence, hence the reason why some clubs like those mentioned tend to recruit such players in clusters because there are differing character types - as you've pointed out re: Solano & Speed - who in accordance to their personalty traits will naturally adopt a leadership role to varying degrees.