AyeDubbleYoo

I quite like Tiger Tiger, always have a good time when I go.

sums up the lop sided view of too many people. I don't have a defence for all of us lop sided people, all I can say is that (like it or not) a football club is a business. Just as money coming in from merchandise doesn't have to be spent on making new merchandise (i.e. it could be spent on staff/players/stadium), money brought in from player sales doesn't automatically have to go straight back on players. You'd have thought it would be when there's no cover whatsoever in several positions though, no? Well possibly, and I see what you mean, but it would all still need to be done within the wider context of the club's financial situation.

I understand that, you're completely correct. All I'm saying is that the fact you point out means that people with other views are unlikely to join. (Thanks for the patronising dig though Parky!)

sums up the lop sided view of too many people. I don't have a defence for all of us lop sided people, all I can say is that (like it or not) a football club is a business. Just as money coming in from merchandise doesn't have to be spent on making new merchandise (i.e. it could be spent on staff/players/stadium), money brought in from player sales doesn't automatically have to go straight back on players.

Completely agree. If there were a significant number of people who attended the meetings and made their feelings known then their position wouldn't be a minority would it. NUSC have gone with what most attendees feel; I can't see how on earth they can be criticised for that. I don't get that, at all. So they shouldn't be criticised by outsiders? If people are bothered enough by the NUSC, and feel that their voice might hold some weight and could influence things (perhaps along with similar minds), then yes if they can logistically get to a meeting or whatever then they perhaps should. I didn't say they shouldn't be criticised at all. I'm saying I can't understand how they can be criticised for going with what the vast majority of the people who turn(ed) up think. 40% of people on this poll reckon they are totally opposed to the NUSC's views. Do you believe that the NUSC would ignore 40% of a 500-strong crowd? Would they fuck. That's completely true Dave, but it's also part of the problem. The reason that the NUSC don't have those 40% is because they started out (and are still suffering the reputation) as an Ashley-out protest group and most people who hold another view would see joining as pointless. We can argue for ever on the rights and wrongs of that but I think it's the current reality.

Not exclusively!

The lack of signings under Bobby when we only got Bowyer was criminal as well. We could have really made a world-class team then, but I guess we had already overspent on flops.

I'm back home at the weekend, might go to this one. I'm feeling a bit more confident we won't get murdered for some reason. Still tempted to whack Jo in my fantasy football team like.

Supermac is a nob.

Graham Fenton

I know this is nothing to do with the original thread, but I can't see how anyone can argue with selling Milner for £12m. Classic case of a player seeming better now he plays for another club. It was a brilliant deal IMO, and it's stupid to say the money was never spent - it all goes onto the balance sheet at the end of the day.

I know what you're saying, but they can't get rid of everyone, we need some players!

Useful player when fit and hungry (), but too injury-prone and expensive. No complaints here if he's shown the door.

And to keep up the "NUFC fans are mongs" sentiments in the papers/on the tv - wouldn't want to let those get away. Can you link me to the most recent example of that please? You can't be serious.

Clever thinking ! Surely if you were looking for an England No. 2 you would want someone who's used to playing every week, not someone who is a specialist at sitting on the bench?! His point was that someone that's playing every week isn't used to being called on at the last minute, and so doesn't perform. Harper would be used to that and would be more able to play at his best on short notice. But they're used to playing, so they'll be able to play!

Clever thinking ! Surely if you were looking for an England No. 2 you would want someone who's used to playing every week, not someone who is a specialist at sitting on the bench?!

So is it easy to add quality players to a squad in January then? And is it possible to add them in the numbers people are talking about? How many players would have made you happy? I'm not 100% happy with what we achieved in the last window, but it's too easy to dismiss this point without proper consideration.

If we stay up it looks like it's going to be by a handful of points, or even goal difference. I'd hardly say that was good judgement, especially considering a blind person could tell you we needed investment. Same question to you btw; do you think (should we stay up) that significant investment in the first team will be made this summer? Not on the scale of previous owners, no. But at the same time I wouldn't be surprised to see 4-5 players come in, of the quality/price of Jonas/Colo/Bassong etc. To me one of the things Ashley shouldn't be criticised for is his transfer policy. This January wasn't great but I think that may have been a combination of market conditions, economic situation, the fact it's January, injuries, and panic. I know it sounds like an excuse, but everyone knows Jan is a hard time to make real squad improvements... no matter how badly they are needed.

So if we stay up he got lucky, not judged the situation correctly? And if we go down he made a mistake, not got unlucky? Seems a bit unfair to me like.

FFS, not another thread on the same thing.

He thought we'd finish above Arsenal last season when we had Allardyce. and you thought Ashley - or anybody - would be better than the Halls and Shepherd. Don't see why that's a stupid point of view, I certainly thought Ashley would be a great owner, as did many people. It doesn't seem to be ridiculed now everyone is saying anything would be better than Ashley, even though they haven't got any idea who it might be. Considering only 4 clubs qualified for europe more than we did under the Halls and Shepherd, automatically assuming "anyone" - or Ashley - would be better, is a stupid point of view. I know we had some success on the pitch, everyone accepts that... it's impossible to argue against. Don't want to start another massive argument about the merits of each board, but my opinion is that by the end of the Shepherd regime they had become a laughing stock and a disaster for the club, and I had every right to expect Ashley to be a better owner. Edit: By the way, if you can only judge a board over a period of 10+ years then how come Ashley is due so much stick from you already? rubbish. I've told you why Ashley is getting stick from me, because I don't think he knows what he is doing and because I don't think he cares enough about the club to want genuine success on the pitch. Fair enough, but what I'm saying is... how can you know that in such a short time? If you're saying Shepherd shouldn't be judged on the last couple of years, but on the whole of his reign, then surely Ashley must be given the same chance before he can be compared?

Players always look better when you don't have to watch them every week. See James Milner...

I see what you mean GM, and for a lot of players I agree. Just think Oba has been a good egg so far.

Maidenhead Utd is £9, outrageous. But they are called 'the magpies' and have quality black & white scarves on sale.