quayside

Not saying you're wrong but I need educating on this and am willing to learn. At first glance it looks like he bought some canny players with money and on a budget made available to him by the owners, overall did the club eventually sell those players at a profit? And whilst he was manager they won the FA Cup. He's no angel by any means but what did he do wrong at Pompey? Portsmouth probably made a profit on transfer dealings under Redknapp tbf. The problem is the wage bill he tends to leave clubs saddled with. At West Ham & Pompey he would offer whatever daft money he could get away with to get players to sign up. As you point out, the board have the ultimate say but at the end of the day people like Redknapp aren't daft. They know what a reasonable budget is for a club like Pompey but just bury their heads in the sand and splash money about like it's going out of fashion regardless. The manager of a club should have more responsibility than that imo. I know we've missed out on players the manager really wanted because Moyes wouldn't go above the wage he thought the player was worth. I think O'Neil is the same. Fair comment on the wages. Although the owner/board ultimately has to sign off the deals the manager does and so they have to carry the can on that, and with the way things turned out I suppose you could say they did. Portsmouth are one of the few clubs that makes us look stable. From what I can gather until recently I don't think anyone knew who even owned the club. I do think Arry did exceptionally well in the transfer market for Pompey though. If you look at 4 players like Diarra, Glen Johnson, Defoe and Distin I reckon Portsmouth made more than £40 million profit on that lot, and they were all in the squad at the same time. Off the top of my head I can't even come up with any list of players we've sold profitably over the last 10 years that adds up to £40 millon.

Not saying you're wrong but I need educating on this and am willing to learn. At first glance it looks like he bought some canny players with money and on a budget made available to him by the owners, overall did the club eventually sell those players at a profit? And whilst he was manager they won the FA Cup. He's no angel by any means but what did he do wrong at Pompey?

As I recall it the game Parker was pulling out of tackles he was carrying an injury and shouldn't have been playing - it was one of our legendary injury epidemics and we had no one else to play in central midfield at the time.

We won four of the next five league games? Er - I was referring to the fact that we lost away to Peterborough in the next round, with several of our youngsters on the pitch. So it got us nowhere. And we had to take Harewood on loan to replace Shola. ...who for example scored a brace at the weekend? Stop being so negative man. I am far from negative. In my opinion Ameobi would have done more for us than Harewood has in the games he's been involved in. My point is simple. I am concerned that, at some point, we will hit a brick wall in the league and have a poor run. This might be down to injuries or poor form but I don't rule out Ashley pulling something out of the bag in January that sets us back - he's got form in that area. We will not create any waves in the FA Cup. I want to see us promoted, and racking up as many points as possible in the league whilst the going is good. Games like Plymouth away in the cup should not be a priority imo.

We won four of the next five league games? Er - I was referring to the fact that we lost away to Peterborough in the next round, with several of our youngsters on the pitch. So it got us nowhere. And we had to take Harewood on loan to replace Shola.

It's a bollox match. We should just forget it and play our youngsters. The last time we tried to win a cup match (Huddersfield Carling Cup) Shola broke his foot and Jonas did a hamstring getting a 4-3 win - and where did that get us?

And what do you propose to do about that? Lets see if Lennon, Young, Arteta, Malouda etc want to have a go with us. Just because we can't get Lennon or Young means I should be happy with Jonas? Name a replacement you would be happy with. I can't name one off the top of my head. But my point stands, it doesn't mean that I should b happy with him. What do you expect me to say? Oh well argued, my mind is suddenly changed. There is no player out there that we can get that is better than Jonas. He's suddenly good. Yey, close the thread... Well argued....... Look at the posts leading up to this. The point was not how good he is - it is that we have greater problems and right now we will not replace him with someone better.

And what do you propose to do about that? Lets see if Lennon, Young, Arteta, Malouda etc want to have a go with us. Just because we can't get Lennon or Young means I should be happy with Jonas? Name a replacement you would be happy with. I can't name one off the top of my head. But my point stands, it doesn't mean that I should b happy with him. Well argued.......

And what do you propose to do about that? Lets see if Lennon, Young, Arteta, Malouda etc want to have a go with us. Just because we can't get Lennon or Young means I should be happy with Jonas? Name a replacement you would be happy with.

And what do you propose to do about that? Lets see if Lennon, Young, Arteta, Malouda etc want to have a go with us.

Yes - agree with every word of that.

I'm just thinking of the players we have had in the left back position in recent years and crying tbh. Babayaro Steven Taylor Ramage Elliott Huntington Carr Duff Edgar Simpson (I think once this season?) I've probably left at least one out. IMO Enrique is light years better in the left back position than any of that lot, and I wouldn't trust any scouting system the club could put in place to come up with someone better.

Jose Enrigue is gold dust imo. Left back is a specialist position and there aren't too many around. We haven't had anyone near his class play there since Olly Bernard's first stint. Its a rare credit to Fat Sam for this.

has a cock like a coke can Source?

Oranges and Apples. If you buy a share in something and don't agree with its direction you should be able to pull out of whatever you've bought into. I don't pay for the right to vote in a General Election so have to take the decision on the chin. Similarly the support for NUFC won't go away because I disagree with the owners direction - otherwise I wouldn't be supporting Ashleys regime at present. Wishing to sell a share in the club because I don't agree with a decision shouldn't be the end of my options, and if I wish to sell then there should be something in place to allow it - whether this is on an open market or back into the club should be the only thing open for debate I don't know if this will be addressed by the NUST scheme but I can't really see how it can be properly. So if anyone is considering investing but one of their criteria is that they want a liquid investment then the advice has to be don't touch this. On the other hand if they're happy to stick their money in so as to feel they've got a voice and own a part of the club they support then have a look.

I would think the liquidity would be the same as any private company .i.e. not very. If you don't like what the company is doing you can try and sell your shares, but it's down to you to find a buyer as there won't be a ready made market.

I think once the protest songs have died down and hard headed figures take over this is a very sobering thought. There is a serious deficit in the club's operating budget and frankly we did well to retain the number of players we did post relegation when many clubs would have had to shed almost all high earners. Whatever anyone says about the FCB it does seem the operating deficit is being made up by himself at present and circa £20M p.a. would not be too far wide of the mark. Any new owners (the NUST or other) will have to factor this in and without a wealthy benefactor it could be quite painful. Indeed - but if the whole thing is put together by professionals (and the understanding is that it is) then that issue will be dealt with in a detailed business plan. People won't invest unless the plan hangs together, especially the wealthier "business savvy" types.

No offence here but you're trying to find fault with this and using the lack of in depth information on day 1 to beat us with. As I said earlier, weve issued the important information to let people see what is involved and what sort of figures we're talking about. Nobody is asking anyone to part with cash at this stage all we've asked for is the name, email and Date of Birth of those that are interested, you dont even have to commit that much at this stage. In return we've stated that we'll send additional information out to those interested so they can see whats what. No doubt we'll be putting that info into the public domain as well but frankly coming across with the whole "this is meant to be a new era of openness and accountability" is a bit crap tbh. We're the only people talking because its day 1, lets see what happens in days 2, 3, 4....14...30..etc before ripping us apart eh? Why don't you publish the 'additional information' now? What is it that's so secret? Give the man a chance. They've got to put together a business plan for this that will persuade people to part with proper money and commit pensions, that takes time. And whats the rush anyway - Ashley isn't going to piss away the club's cash resources in January is he?

Know what you mean, guess everyones keeping their powder dry til the full details are released. True. Also I don't think too many people want to diss any attempt to do something positive, even if it might ultimately come to nothing.

Surely this is part of the job of the chairman of the club not the job of NUST ? The salaries would therefore come out of the clubs budget as it does now ? I'm sure it will be and I'm sure they would, but it doesn't answer the questions I asked. I'm sure they will be able to answer, you can hardly commence a multi million pound takeover without plans for what happens should the takeover succeed. i agree, like I said seems strange to ask for cash without a business plan. Just not sure we're asking the questions at the correct place. Would be good if NUST could get someone to answer all these questions on all the different sites. Well purely out of interest I've registered for this. I've not been asked for any money yet and have absolutely no intention of paying over anything unless I do see a workable business plan. I am sceptical that NUST can launch a robust and viable plan and am pretty certain that attempting to do any sort of deal with Ashley would be a complete nightmare. But I applaud the initiative and will follow it closely.

I Looking at the name, the most obvious conclusion is that it's been done to piss people off. There'll be other motives, but that was definitely one of them. Ashley flew in with his helicopter like the big boss, handed Hughton a contract, took the club off the market and gave the stadium a comedy name which has left fans up and down the country laughing at us again. He wants to prove he's in charge. Who's going to argue with him? Llambias? Hughton? Just to eliminate any doubt in your mind, I will remind you of our stadium's new name: Sports Direct @ St James Park Stadium. It's clearly a pisstake man, look at it. They have even tagged 'stadium' on the end of 'park' just to emphasize the name change. Ask fans of other clubs what they think and they will tell you it's clearly a pisstake, that's half the reason they're finding it so funny. absolutely. Ashley seems to have this siege mentality in whatever he does, ie 'parking the tanks on the lawn' of his opponents or calling his shareholders 'crybabies' or the dubai shenanigans or offering unqualified outsiders like Llambias, Hughton & Kinnear contracts. He does things his own way and revels in causing a controversy. I don't buy the line that he's ran the club into the ground out of spite - that makes no sense. And i genuinely think he wants to sell the naming rights to make some money. But the temporary naming, a move which gives the club absolutely no benefit whatsoever, is clearly a two fingers up at detractors. I think those that think it's a pisstake are crediting Ashley with too much intelligence. His track record at the club proves beyond all doubt that he's intellectually out of his depth in anything other than the "pile them high, sell them cheap and lie about the rest" mentality that is behind his success at Sports Direct. I do agree with your point about him always doing things his own way, but he has shown relentlessly that he is too thick to twig when he's in danger of dropping a bollock or indeed when he's already dropped one. There's a sort of neanderthal stubborness about him.

Nicky Butt to score the winner in a very ugly away win somewhere. Edit - my bad, thought it only referred to someone who hasn't scored this season

There's some wishful thinking on here. I'll respect Hughton if he doesn't put Butt and Smith together in central midfield - but I'll also be be surprised. Guthrie to get a runout when we've bored everyone rigid.

Saw that Arsenal was a new ground not a renaming - so its a bit different tbh. Didn't know White Hart Lane had a change of name Edit: it must be referring to Spurs proposed new ground I guess.

I'm actually quite positive about our finances if we go up. Wage bill will be around 35M which is respectable. Yes but the squad costing us around £35 million is nowhere near good enough for the Premiership. Nobody is arguing that. Its a lot better base than £70m wagebill for players who arent good enough though isnt it? It is. But, starting from where we will be next summer, whether a squad that can compete in the Premiership can be assembled by the current regime for a wage bill of £35 million has to be questionable. There is an absence of real quality in the squad and real quality costs money.