merlin

i dont think the global recession has had that much effect on our position.....except ashley couldn't find a buyer And that HASN'T affected our position ? What if a new owner had installed a really good manager and bought some decent players in Jan ? Also, wait until you see the take-up of season tickets next season before you claim that the Recession hasn't had an effect on NUFC...you may get a nasty surprise .

They have got to be taking the piss. Can't believe I'm saying this but, after reading that pukey drivvel I think I preferred it when they just hurled insults and sang "sack the board" Are we going to have a "join hands for Keegan" moment ? That would certainly enhance the protest experience. Damned if they do.... How will you contribute to raising the desire to speak in a unified voice? By coming on here and arguing with the naysaying divvies. I'm afraid you've drifted a bit "off message" here. Please internalise the core message "unity is strength" and adjust your hemline accordingly. So there's nothing whatsoever they can do that you'll approve of? Why not do what the Magpie Group did to oust McKeag? Find an investor who will challenge Ashley like the Magpie Group championed John Hall? That way the NUSC would not just be carping hopelessly but actually providing an alternative solkution. the 2 major points with this one, is that nobody else is on the horizon yet to do what Sir John did, and Malcolm Dix, and also that the situation is nowhere near as dire as the one under McKeag, Westwood - yet - whatever anyone who wasn't there may say to the contrary. This is why I have posted a few times that the NUSC need to get a profile figure on board to get them publicity, is GOOD publicity, because there is no doubt that their motives are spot on. To add to this, the problem about getting hold of a so-called 'White Knight' to challenge Ashley is that the situation is TOTALYY different from when the Magpie Group challenged McKeag;- 1.Ashley is FAR richer than McKeag was, and it was relatively inexpensive for Sir John to outmatch him financially ; today, we would need a rich Arab to outmatch Ashley comfortably 2.The club's shares are ALL owned by Ashley - during the last takeover we at the Magpie Group were able to buy shares from other shareholders(including Board members)and so weaken McKeag's grip - eventually, there was a stalemate which ended when the club was on the point of going bust.. 3.The financial outlook worldwide is dire and people who MIGHT have bought the club are not in the running anymore It will be VERY difficult to find anyone willing to challenge Ashley for ownership unless they are prepared to pay BIG money for the club, and Ashley is willing to sell, so unless there is a sudden change of heart by Ashley, the status quo will remain for the foreseeable future, and the only means of protest available to fans which can hurt the owners is a boycott - something I cannot see right now, but there is no doubt that disillusion is setting in with many fans..

Aye, the plan is great in theory but for it to work the football side needs to be as meticulous as the financial planning. The appointment of the right manager is key and who the club go for will tell us a lot about Ashley's plans and whether they match up with the big talk. Spot on, I liked what Ricky Sbragia was saying about signing players: http://www.shieldsgazette.com/safc/Sunderland-eye-top-young-keeper.4987413.jp I don't know how many times I've heard Newcastle managers say the player has to be right for this club, then end up getting sacked because they bought bad players. Hopefullt Ricky Sbragia will follow their example. They probably meant ' the player has to have an agent who gives me a backhander from the deal'.....!

Suddick was a really talented lad but a bit lazy/in-and-out ; on his day, a world beater, but he was a bit like Stan Bowles at QPR ; never cracked it with a big club.. He was a local lad(Chester-Le-St, I believe), and Joe Harvey had to sacrifice him in 1966 because the club was in danger of relegation and needed all-round strengthening. We got Big John McNamee, Dave Elliott and one other player with the money, and they tightened the side enough to keep us up.. Suddick returned to haunt us with Blackpool in the 70s(as so many former players have..!)when he was instrumental in helping them to knock us out of the Cup. At 64, its sad that he is suffering this awful illness, and I wish him well.

After we lost the title in 1996, Terry Mac said he thought the club was cursed...many others have said so, including, reputedly, a Native Canadian who visited whilst on a Police exchange visit..something about a 'dark and evil presence'....perhaps he meant members of the Board..!!

I don't think the Villa fans would complain about parting with the 12m either...OR MON..! It was NOT a brilliant deal for NUFC because the money was not properly re-invested in the side..having said that, MON is getting far more out of Milner than NUFC ever did, simply because he is a better manager than NUFC have had(with the POSSIBLE exception of KK, but MON has won things as a manager and KK has not - promotions excepted).

Agree about Robson, but he wanted Barca to pay him off, he must have known that Van Gaal was going to get his job... As for other pivotal moments, I give you Cantona scoring at SJP in March 96 - had we won that game(after missing at load of chances)we would have won the Prem and been a totally different club, instead of what we are now, a club that a Wigan fan thinks is not worthy of Steve Bruce because he is destined. quote, for ' far greater things than Newcastle United'...this from a fan of a club that were playing Darlo and Hartlepool not many moons ago...

If Llambias is telling the truth about Kinnear being able to decide on who he gets then the same should be expected for any new manager. That's quite a big 'IF' - the words 'vow', chastity' and 'Cher' come to mind....!

So add a minimum of £50m on top of the 'crippling financial problems' (their words), is that what you're really saying you want him to do? I wanted him to invest the 50m into making sure the ream was not involved in a relegation battle - Oh, wait - that would have meant allowing the manager to manage.... If you'd had said that he could (and should) have freed up an extra 5-10 mil during the Jan window to get those one or two player that we will need if we get anymore injuries then i'd have agreed with you as that should be manageable in a debt sense and not a mad gamble. Throwing a minimum or 50m here and now is just crazy talk. Normally I would agree - but do you think it was wisely spent on gambling on the shares of a company that went down ? He lost THE LOT(100m), so 50 spent on players would have been a far better investment(in fact, 50m spent on booze would have been a better investment..!!). What a skewed way of looking at things, £50m would of been better wasted on the club....only it wouldnt of been wasted - or would it?? Incidentally the gamble took place before Ashley was badly affected by the recession...the other thing is that people are still failing to realise that spending big money would of added the clubs financial woes in terms of wages, supposing we add to the wage bill and fork out £50m in transfer fees, then what happens the next season - would the fans accept a curtial of spending? How do we look to invest next year? Do we sell those on inflated wages? Where is the next lot of money coming from? Howto we get to the next level without relying on Ashleys millions? The only way to do this is ensure that the players we do get represent absolute value for money whilst not spending on large wages. It seems to me that some people will excuse Ashley anything - once again, I have to say that you have your opinion, I have mine and I disagree with what he did, whether it was before the recession or not ; as I remember, it was early last year and by then, anyone with half a brain knew what was coming ; I certainly did, and pulled out most of our Superannuation before the big falls on the markets. Ashley has far more dosh than I have and is supposed to be a successful businessman so he should have seen it coming. In any case, he had taken over a supposed top rank football club and he had a responsibility to back it..... But surely clearing the £90 million debt and subsidising the club to £20 million a year is backing the club. Every supporter in the country wants their Chairman to spend more money, but you have to keep some perspective. Ashley is the first owner who has actually put his own money into the club. The previous regime was taking it out. Yes, I know that and I do appreciate what he did about the debt - that still doesn't excuse the position in which we find ourselves ; I know there is a multiple of reasons, but wasting 100m when SOME of it could have been used to ensure the club stayed in the Prem is very bad business...

So add a minimum of £50m on top of the 'crippling financial problems' (their words), is that what you're really saying you want him to do? I wanted him to invest the 50m into making sure the ream was not involved in a relegation battle - Oh, wait - that would have meant allowing the manager to manage.... If you'd had said that he could (and should) have freed up an extra 5-10 mil during the Jan window to get those one or two player that we will need if we get anymore injuries then i'd have agreed with you as that should be manageable in a debt sense and not a mad gamble. Throwing a minimum or 50m here and now is just crazy talk. Normally I would agree - but do you think it was wisely spent on gambling on the shares of a company that went down ? He lost THE LOT(100m), so 50 spent on players would have been a far better investment(in fact, 50m spent on booze would have been a better investment..!!). What a skewed way of looking at things, £50m would of been better wasted on the club....only it wouldnt of been wasted - or would it?? Incidentally the gamble took place before Ashley was badly affected by the recession...the other thing is that people are still failing to realise that spending big money would of added the clubs financial woes in terms of wages, supposing we add to the wage bill and fork out £50m in transfer fees, then what happens the next season - would the fans accept a curtial of spending? How do we look to invest next year? Do we sell those on inflated wages? Where is the next lot of money coming from? Howto we get to the next level without relying on Ashleys millions? The only way to do this is ensure that the players we do get represent absolute value for money whilst not spending on large wages. It seems to me that some people will excuse Ashley anything - once again, I have to say that you have your opinion, I have mine and I disagree with what he did, whether it was before the recession or not ; as I remember, it was early last year and by then, anyone with half a brain knew what was coming ; I certainly did, and pulled out most of our Superannuation before the big falls on the markets. Ashley has far more dosh than I have and is supposed to be a successful businessman so he should have seen it coming. In any case, he had taken over a supposed top rank football club and he had a responsibility to back it.....

So add a minimum of £50m on top of the 'crippling financial problems' (their words), is that what you're really saying you want him to do? I wanted him to invest the 50m into making sure the ream was not involved in a relegation battle - Oh, wait - that would have meant allowing the manager to manage.... If you'd had said that he could (and should) have freed up an extra 5-10 mil during the Jan window to get those one or two player that we will need if we get anymore injuries then i'd have agreed with you as that should be manageable in a debt sense and not a mad gamble. Throwing a minimum or 50m here and now is just crazy talk. Normally I would agree - but do you think it was wisely spent on gambling on the shares of a company that went down ? He lost THE LOT(100m), so 50 spent on players would have been a far better investment(in fact, 50m spent on booze would have been a better investment..!!).

You make a very good point about Gordon Lee - people slag him for selling Macdonald but he wanted to replace him with Trevor Francis and the board wouldn't cough up the extra that Brum wanted..he eventually signed for Cloughie at Forest... Lee moulded us into a very competitive side in his first season(75/76)and we reached the LC Final and the FA Cup Qtr final ; we beat Everton 5-0 abd it should have been 7, Coventry 5-0 in 5th round replay, Champs Derby 4-3 in the final minute, and Spurs 3-2 on aggr over 2 LC semi-finals..both Macdonald and Gowling scored plenty of goals(I think both exceeded 20)and Mickey Burns also got about 15...only the centre of defence let us down, with that clown Keeley as CH.. Lee still had Newcastle in 5th place when Everton approached him the following January, but the board's lack of ambition decided him to leave..we still managed to qualify for the UEFA Cup.

It was in a pre-season match at Anfield after Beardsley had just signed for us from Everton - he didn't play again for about 7 weeks. Never liked Ruddock and wouldn't be surprised if there was some intent....

So add a minimum of £50m on top of the 'crippling financial problems' (their words), is that what you're really saying you want him to do? I wanted him to invest the 50m into making sure the ream was not involved in a relegation battle - Oh, wait - that would have meant allowing the manager to manage....

The neutrals might have loved it, but to me it was a disaster - a game we should have won. Once Tino put us 3-2 up with that stunning, bent shot around Grobbelaar, we should have been capable of shutting up shop and taking the sting out of them ; we may even have caught them again on the break late in the game.. Defence entirely to blame, with bad marking for Collymore at far post, and on Fowler for their 3rd from corner(Elliott lost him..) - we lost our shape and the weaknesses in the side exposed. Had we won that match, I am sure Man U would have died..Fergie later admitted that he was willing Liverpool on, and I quote ' Us Red teams have always been better than the rest and I wanted them to do us a favour'.... probably the best example of 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend' that I've ever heard, because usually, Man U & Liverpool hate each other. The sight of us winning such a game at Anfield would have changed football - because we lost, people began to see us as continual blowers, and so it has remained. Incidentally, Cole & Shearer shouldn't really take part, as neither were playing for us then.

SJH wanted Bobby Robson when Keegan left but Doug Hall and Fat Fred persuaded him Dalglish was the better choice. He's not about to tell the Chairman who to appoint after resigning the duty himself. That and SBR turning us down. Dalglish had a thankless task rebuilding the academy and reserves, balls up the first team mind! I agree - it was AFTER SBR turned the club down that KD was appointed.. Dalglish DID have a tough job because as you say, he had to restart the Reserves & Juniors as well as having to operate on a tighter budget than KK because the club had become a PLC in 97. I thought some of his buys were great value ; Given , Solano and Hammann for 3 and if he had not been fired - far too soon into the 98/99 season - I reckon he would have done a decent job.

Sir John took NO active part in the day-to-day running of the club after he left as stand-in Chairman in 1998. He DID tell the board to get their act together over their delay in appointing SBR in 99, but after that it was entirely up to FS & DH. No blame can be attached to him for signing Souness or anyone after him.

The article tells it like it is - once again, some people just don't like facing the truth. The Echo are quite right - if Ashley didn't check into the club's financial position properly, he has no-one to blame but himself ; a novice could have worked out that there must be massive debts because;- 1. We hadn't been the the CL for 4 years - 5 if you include the proper stages, so there was none of the large income that results from that 2. We had been wasting money on horrendous signings such as Boumsong, and sacking managers who needed compensation pay-outs 3.We had paid well over the odds for Owen 4.We had players on ridiculous salaries who patently DIDN'T deserve them 5. There was a large debt still owing on the ground development Even discounting all of this, Ashley apparently still had 100m to gamble on the shares of a bust Building Society...as I said yesterday, even half of this could have put the team in a better position... As most people are beginning to realise, the DOF system they have put in place is not, and WILL NOT, work.Its jobs for the boys...

To be fair to Bruce, he's developed as a manager so it's not only people lowering expectations. Some truth in this Mick - I WOULD be much happier with Bruce than most of the alternatives, but ONLY if he came with the assurance that he decides transfer policy etc ; that HAS to be the right of every decent manager.

i wished you'd used a different colour....anyway,here goes. point 1).....ie quietly supporting the team etc....what i meant was if we were top 6 no-one would be complaining about lack of communication etc. 2) we know what needs to be done ?----do we ? outside of appointing a better manager than kinnear few will agree will on anything apart from disliking wise and Llambias on a personal level without actually knowing what they do. 3) the bit about keeping an appointment with the arabs.................the ashley side of the story is that they already had a meeting and were offered a derisiory price. turned it down and went on the hoy. i have no reason to believe one story or the other..........do you know different ? Do you know that its NOT the way things happened - why would they say it if it wasn't true ? If can't mak their chances of getting the club on the cheap any better..?In any case, as someone who has been in business for themselves, I know that I NEVER broke an appointment, nor did I expect others to do so with me. As to point 2, yes, many of us DO know what needs to be done because its hardly rocket science - you appoint a DECENT MANAGER, agree a BUDGET with him, and provide him with a decent SCOUTING NETWORK to find future players...he then vets them and decides if they are HIS kind of player before signing them...you do NOT try to undermine him by appointing some guy who wasn't half the player that the manager was, or has nowhere near the managerial experience, over his head as so-called DOF ; NOR do you appoint someone who ran a Casino previously as your Chairman, esp if he has the charisma of a sideboard.... Had ANY of these things been done correctly, we would probably not have been in the dire position in which the club finds itself......and these points are just for starters. a) i don't know but we have two conflicting stories with no evidence,therefore until i get evidence i'll believe neither. b) i've said about kinnear aswell. as for the budget..how do you know they didn't. as for undermining keegan i'll await the court case to see if he was playing power games aswell (he has form) c) we still don't know what the relationship between wise and keegan was. d) appointing a casino boss as chairman.....why not ? take a look at most prem clubs chairmen and see if they are through and through football men ? ashley and his team have made massive mistakes. kinnear long term being the biggest. You are obviously happy with the status quo and the Board - I am NOT... You have your view, I have mine and we'll NEVER agree..I hope, for your sake, you are right, because, assuming you are younger, you are going to have to live with the actions of Ashley & Co for a lot longer than I am ...! typical response of the anti-ashley brigade. i'm not happy but i'm not blaming either. a) they took over from a shitty position. b) i'm not happy about kinnears appointment either c) i haven't got a clue about the remit of wise or Llambias so can't really make a judgement. i can't be right or wrong as what i've said all along is people are jumping in and making conclusions based on sod all and i'm not prepared to do that. if somebody does well i'll praise (i did with fred and hall) if somebody does poorly i'll criticise (as before unfortunatly). the biggest mistake they've made is kinnear. i could understand bringing him in for 6 weeks or so till the club was sold but oncde it became clear there was no sale he should've been thanked and replaced. in my view that was bigger than keegan leaving. ...'typical response of the anti-Ashley brigade..' In fact it is THIS type of response that indicates that you have lost the argument ; WHERE did I say I was anti-Ashley ? I said I disagreed with the Board and I do. In fact, I was very PLEASED when Ashley took the club over because I thought he would run it in a better way than Shepherd - has he done that ? In my opinion, NO ; he has appointed people who have PROVED to be just as bad if not worse...ask most fans about Llambias as Chairman, or Wise as DOF , OR the fact that Ashley swanned off to the USA when the KK problem blew up instead of sorting it out.... I am NOT in favour of unchecked spending on players or signing trophy-type players to keep the masses happy, but I most definitely AM in favour of people being allowed to do the job they were asked to do, and again, in MY OPINION , KK was NOT allowed to do the job.. I have no special brief for KK because I know he has a short fuse and can be hasty, BUT - in this case he was right and both Fergie & Wenger agreed with him. This incident is at the root of all the club's current problems - you can pass over it if you want, but making trite comments about the 'anti-Ashley brigade' will not alter the facts... 'By their actions shall you judge them', and Ashley wasted 100m on a gamble with Bradford & Bingley - money which could have been used to strengthen the side ; even if HALF of it had been available, everyone, including you, would have been jumping for joy....

Where are they all hiding, then? The trouble is that they DON'T..you have undoubtedly seen comments by people on this site claiming that they are not bothered which division we are in, they will still turn up to 'support the Lads..' !!

i wished you'd used a different colour....anyway,here goes. point 1).....ie quietly supporting the team etc....what i meant was if we were top 6 no-one would be complaining about lack of communication etc. 2) we know what needs to be done ?----do we ? outside of appointing a better manager than kinnear few will agree will on anything apart from disliking wise and Llambias on a personal level without actually knowing what they do. 3) the bit about keeping an appointment with the arabs.................the ashley side of the story is that they already had a meeting and were offered a derisiory price. turned it down and went on the hoy. i have no reason to believe one story or the other..........do you know different ? Do you know that its NOT the way things happened - why would they say it if it wasn't true ? If can't mak their chances of getting the club on the cheap any better..?In any case, as someone who has been in business for themselves, I know that I NEVER broke an appointment, nor did I expect others to do so with me. As to point 2, yes, many of us DO know what needs to be done because its hardly rocket science - you appoint a DECENT MANAGER, agree a BUDGET with him, and provide him with a decent SCOUTING NETWORK to find future players...he then vets them and decides if they are HIS kind of player before signing them...you do NOT try to undermine him by appointing some guy who wasn't half the player that the manager was, or has nowhere near the managerial experience, over his head as so-called DOF ; NOR do you appoint someone who ran a Casino previously as your Chairman, esp if he has the charisma of a sideboard.... Had ANY of these things been done correctly, we would probably not have been in the dire position in which the club finds itself......and these points are just for starters. a) i don't know but we have two conflicting stories with no evidence,therefore until i get evidence i'll believe neither. b) i've said about kinnear aswell. as for the budget..how do you know they didn't. as for undermining keegan i'll await the court case to see if he was playing power games aswell (he has form) c) we still don't know what the relationship between wise and keegan was. d) appointing a casino boss as chairman.....why not ? take a look at most prem clubs chairmen and see if they are through and through football men ? ashley and his team have made massive mistakes. kinnear long term being the biggest. You are obviously happy with the status quo and the Board - I am NOT... You have your view, I have mine and we'll NEVER agree..I hope, for your sake, you are right, because, assuming you are younger, you are going to have to live with the actions of Ashley & Co for a lot longer than I am ...!

Thinkers make good managers, none of these are really thinkers bar Platt for me. THIS is the crucial point - people like Venables and Graham were thinkers and had a bit of know-how ; most of the names on this list were just decent players who hadn't had to work hard to earn vast amounts of money from the game...if you take the likes of Fergie and MON into the equation, it looks different..I KNOW they aren't 'English', but maybe that says something about the English education system since the 70's....! In the 60s/70s, people like Clough, Harry Catterick and Bob Paisley were legendary managers...all as English as they come and all three from the NE...as was Bob Nicholson for Spurs, although he was a Scarborough lad.

i wished you'd used a different colour....anyway,here goes. point 1).....ie quietly supporting the team etc....what i meant was if we were top 6 no-one would be complaining about lack of communication etc. 2) we know what needs to be done ?----do we ? outside of appointing a better manager than kinnear few will agree will on anything apart from disliking wise and Llambias on a personal level without actually knowing what they do. 3) the bit about keeping an appointment with the arabs.................the ashley side of the story is that they already had a meeting and were offered a derisiory price. turned it down and went on the hoy. i have no reason to believe one story or the other..........do you know different ? Do you know that its NOT the way things happened - why would they say it if it wasn't true ? If can't mak their chances of getting the club on the cheap any better..?In any case, as someone who has been in business for themselves, I know that I NEVER broke an appointment, nor did I expect others to do so with me. As to point 2, yes, many of us DO know what needs to be done because its hardly rocket science - you appoint a DECENT MANAGER, agree a BUDGET with him, and provide him with a decent SCOUTING NETWORK to find future players...he then vets them and decides if they are HIS kind of player before signing them...you do NOT try to undermine him by appointing some guy who wasn't half the player that the manager was, or has nowhere near the managerial experience, over his head as so-called DOF ; NOR do you appoint someone who ran a Casino previously as your Chairman, esp if he has the charisma of a sideboard.... Had ANY of these things been done correctly, we would probably not have been in the dire position in which the club finds itself......and these points are just for starters.

Has anyone seen the Kylie Ad from 2002 on Youtube for Agent Provocateur....!! Even at MY advancing years, that gets the juices flowing.....!