fredbob

Kind of missed my point, I havent once said that that backing the manager finacially and with time hasnt provided success or isnt fundamental for success. I happen to think that succes is acquired by sticking with a good manager, and success is augmented by backing them financially. There is a subtlety to what im saying which differs from what you are implying. Im tryin to say that gettin the right man for the job and sticking by him is actually more important than the financial backing, however by this i am not implying that financial backing isnt an important aspect, it hugely important, but NOT as important as continutiy of a manager. As has been proven by the current situation we find ourselves in. However, club which have done well in recent years with there limited resources include, Everton, Bolton, Charlton, Blackburn. All clubs which have had steady managers. Hence why i believe sticking with the manager is the more important aspect. Clubs like Liverpool, Arsenal and Man U, have stuck by there manager, even during difficulttimes, but have applied there resources as well in order to sustain the success that they are achieving now. Newcastle, have changed managers and have used there resources quite badly, and in my opinion are struggling because of this approach. all clubs who improved almost straight away. stability doesnt bring success as much as success brings stability Thats arguable. Everton had a few bad season after very succeful seasons, but the club backed moyes through the difficult periods, not sacked him like we did with SBR. Although thats diverting alittle bit, the point i was making is that these have all achieved relative levels of success with a consistent manager all absent of any decent resources. everton improved straight away i think then nearly got relegated the year after...but they could say moyes had improved their club originally to fall back on....i'm struggling to think of many who've came in and took their club backwards (thinking of the teams souness and roeder had to put out at times i think thats fair)over 6 months and stayed to prove anything. Again, im not tryin to advocate any particular appointment, if you read any of my earlier posts i dont mention Souness or Roeder as people we should stick by, im just trying to make a genrelaised point that if we get a competent manager we should stick by him. Also tryin to say that gettin the right man and sticking by him is more important than the financial backing of a manager, which is important but just not as. The clubs ive mentioned are all beneficiaries of this approach. i agree with the sentiment,just not sure allardyce is the man. (now thats how to disagree in a non-spiteful manner.........mick,NE5 take note!) It could go either way, but i wont be one of the ones who says we should sack him. I just have an inkling that he could besuccessful.

Kind of missed my point, I havent once said that that backing the manager finacially and with time hasnt provided success or isnt fundamental for success. I happen to think that succes is acquired by sticking with a good manager, and success is augmented by backing them financially. There is a subtlety to what im saying which differs from what you are implying. Im tryin to say that gettin the right man for the job and sticking by him is actually more important than the financial backing, however by this i am not implying that financial backing isnt an important aspect, it hugely important, but NOT as important as continutiy of a manager. As has been proven by the current situation we find ourselves in. However, club which have done well in recent years with there limited resources include, Everton, Bolton, Charlton, Blackburn. All clubs which have had steady managers. Hence why i believe sticking with the manager is the more important aspect. Clubs like Liverpool, Arsenal and Man U, have stuck by there manager, even during difficulttimes, but have applied there resources as well in order to sustain the success that they are achieving now. Newcastle, have changed managers and have used there resources quite badly, and in my opinion are struggling because of this approach. all clubs who improved almost straight away. stability doesnt bring success as much as success brings stability Thats arguable. Everton had a few bad season after very succeful seasons, but the club backed moyes through the difficult periods, not sacked him like we did with SBR. Although thats diverting alittle bit, the point i was making is that these have all achieved relative levels of success with a consistent manager all absent of any decent resources. everton improved straight away i think then nearly got relegated the year after...but they could say moyes had improved their club originally to fall back on....i'm struggling to think of many who've came in and took their club backwards (thinking of the teams souness and roeder had to put out at times i think thats fair)over 6 months and stayed to prove anything. Again, im not tryin to advocate any particular appointment, if you read any of my earlier posts i dont mention Souness or Roeder as people we should stick by, im just trying to make a genrelaised point that if we get a competent manager we should stick by him. Also tryin to say that gettin the right man and sticking by him is more important than the financial backing of a manager, which is important but just not as. The clubs ive mentioned are all beneficiaries of this approach.

There have been other clubs in the past which have done well albeit in less pressurized times with limited resources, teams like Derby and even Sunderland and Wimbledon. I didnt restart this debate by disputing the appointments, i was disputing a claim that the decline occured at the appointment of Souness, i believe that the sacking of SBR was when the decline occured but that got rebutted for some reason. Then it got dragged all over the plave NE5/HTL style. Iwas just tryin to argue the importance of sticking by the manager, not advocating the backing of a manager who would put the future of the club at risk. I think Charlton and Bolton are actually decent examples, granted Bolton play decent wages, but had they the resources to compete at nufc levels financially then they could of augmented there already overachieved achievements.The same can be said with Charlton, considering the size and level of resources the lcub had, it did well to not only stay the the PL but sustain a decent level of success. Both clubs had long serving managers. Which in my opinion proves the diminshed importance of financial backing.

Kind of missed my point, I havent once said that that backing the manager finacially and with time hasnt provided success or isnt fundamental for success. I happen to think that succes is acquired by sticking with a good manager, and success is augmented by backing them financially. There is a subtlety to what im saying which differs from what you are implying. Im tryin to say that gettin the right man for the job and sticking by him is actually more important than the financial backing, however by this i am not implying that financial backing isnt an important aspect, it hugely important, but NOT as important as continutiy of a manager. As has been proven by the current situation we find ourselves in. However, club which have done well in recent years with there limited resources include, Everton, Bolton, Charlton, Blackburn. All clubs which have had steady managers. Hence why i believe sticking with the manager is the more important aspect. Clubs like Liverpool, Arsenal and Man U, have stuck by there manager, even during difficulttimes, but have applied there resources as well in order to sustain the success that they are achieving now. Newcastle, have changed managers and have used there resources quite badly, and in my opinion are struggling because of this approach. all clubs who improved almost straight away. stability doesnt bring success as much as success brings stability Thats arguable. Everton had a few bad season after very succeful seasons, but the club backed moyes through the difficult periods, not sacked him like we did with SBR. Although thats diverting alittle bit, the point i was making is that these have all achieved relative levels of success with a consistent manager all absent of any decent resources.

Kind of missed my point, I havent once said that that backing the manager finacially and with time hasnt provided success or isnt fundamental for success. I happen to think that succes is acquired by sticking with a good manager, and success is augmented by backing them financially. There is a subtlety to what im saying which differs from what you are implying. I think both are importnat aspects, however if you were to ask me which would provide the most long term success, then i would say that sticking with the manager would be the best approach. Im tryin to say that gettin the right man for the job and sticking by him is actually more important than the financial backing, however by this i am not implying that financial backing isnt an important aspect, it hugely important, but NOT as important as continutiy of a manager. As has been proven by the current situation we find ourselves in. However, club which have done well in recent years with there limited resources include, Everton, Bolton, Charlton, Blackburn. All clubs which have had steady managers. Hence why i believe sticking with the manager is the more important aspect. Clubs like Liverpool, Arsenal and Man U, have stuck by there manager, even during difficulttimes, but have applied there resources as well in order to sustain the success that they are achieving now. Newcastle, have changed managers and have used there resources quite badly, and in my opinion are struggling because of this approach.

clipped because its getting too long ..... I'm cherry picking nothing. Sticking with a manager DOES NOT lead to automatic success. This is why I asked you if you think we should have stuck with Dalglish ? Yes or no ? It appears by your criteria that you think we should have done. If your answer is no, then you are then saying that the board was right to sack him, and you accept that you have to sack the manager if you think it is right to do so and therefore destroying your entire point. I would not swap Evertons last decade for ours by the way. I would guess that not too many people other than you would suggest that they would do this. The way to success is to appoint the right manager and back him with the resources. These are essential. Backing the manager is a decision made by the board, it is not automatic, you appear not to understand this and this is what people like me keep trying to explain. If you are too young to remember the directors through the 60's, 70's and 80's, then look at how the mackems have been run by Bob Murray. It is the same. Finally, if appointing the "right" man was so easy, then everybody would do it, and I'lll leave you to think about this absurd notion in your own time. Dear me.... I never said it does lead to automatic success, but i think it will lead to better long term success. Which is far far more important. Sticking with Dlaglish?? Its a moot point, why can you not see that? We will never know, he brought a lot of good players to the team. How can i definitevely answer 'yes' after only one season. I've only ever seen 2 long term managers at nufc and they achieved the best success. Where has the financial backing of the manager been integral to any of my arguments? It's been an aspect of my arguments but hasnt been the key to my arguments. Of course backing the manager isnt guareteed. I've never disputed that. Not sure what you're trying to get at there.

You stick with the RIGHT manager and you back him. This is obvious and nobody is saying otherwise as far as I can tell. 1. It's not easy to appoint the RIGHT manager. 2. It's not automatic that a Board will financially back the manager. 3. When you know you have the wrong man, or the current man can take you no further, you SACK him. The first 2 points are what many people on here very much don't want to acknowledge as being true. I couldnt agree more with you. I also acknowledge that appointing the right man is a difficult, and i have never attacked the board in general, but rather the era of which Shepard was in charge, because in my opinion this is when the decline started. My original argument was that i thought that the decline occured at the sackig of SBR who i acknowledge hadnt had the best of seasons footballing wise but had still achieved a notable finish to the season. He was a victim of his age and the result against Partizan Belgrade the saem season, coupled with missing the CL spot to Liverpool. My point is that when perspective and common sense was required the most, the board failed to deliver a sensible decision and sacked the second best manager in their "ownership" of the club. The future of the club wasnt assesed when making this decision and we are paying the price for it right now. I never brought up the names of Dalglish and Gullit because they werent part of my arguments. That was brought up by NE5. In retort to my "keep the right" manager line. No idea why.

That midfield looks alright, i think Zog could do a good job in the centre, similar to Dyer and will track back and defend. Just like the Speed.Dyer partenership/

Unfortunately he's probably right. We in here are only a small % of toon fans, and the uneducated majority would love to see Shearer back, and would even be their first choice. Loads of people you speak to hold that opinion, its crazy. i don't know any that think that....quite a lot who think he'll be the next manager though. The thing that i dont understand is that if you ask alot of fans who they want if they could have anyone, alot of them would go for world class managers with proven records, yet the same fans would be reasonably happy if Shearer was installed, without any credible reasoning except that ts been done in the past, it may happen here.

How about a sweepstake on what his next injury will be? I predict a bruised phalange.

I'll eagerly await the "big four" apart from Chelsea and most of the rest of the teams in the league going into administration then. Strange how all these people who are slating having ambiton are unable to see this is how the top 4 became the top 4, and our relative success in our recent past has also came as a result of the same thing. Do they really think you can be successful unless you try to compete at the top levels ? Quite amazing. Do you not think that it acould also be due to the fact they made astute appointments and didnt sack them as regularly as they changed their pants.? Well, are you saying we should have stuck with Dalglish ? Or Gullit, and not therefore appointed Bobby Robson when we did ? Been here before mate, the appointments arent what im scrutinizing, the 2 major responsiblities of the board are the appointment of the right manager adn the backing of the manager, for years, like the top 4 we have backied the manager, but when it comes to appointing and sticking by the right manager, we've failed miserably, and it kinda shows in the urrent gulf of class between us and the top 4. Im saying that the rotation of managers is the reason why we're behind the top4. Are you now ? The top 4 have kept the manager because they were in the top 4 wouldn't you say ....... Why is the 5th most qualified club for europe over a decade = s**** managers all the time ? Are Everton behind the top 4 because they have rotated their managers ? Moyes has been there longer than Chelsea and Liverpools current managers ....... And, do you therefore think we should have kept Dalglish and Gullit ? I tell you something, which is categoricaly correct. We can keep any manager you care to name at this club for 20 years if you like, but if the board don't match the ambition of the boards at the top 4 clubs, we will never join them. (your first point)Ok, but we were in the top 5 the last time we changed our manager. (your second point) 5th most qualified club in over a decade is such a misleading stat, stop using it. I've already said why its a misleading stat and cant be bothered to explain it all again. Nothing seems to go in with you. And they say ignorance is bliss... (your third point) No, Everton arent behind jut becasue they rotated there managers, they are behind because they dont have the same financial resources as we do. Care to explain how they were one of the biggest supported clubs in the country, won a couple of league titles, FA Cups and a european trophy while we were in the 2nd division then, and below them for decades, including pinching the only manager we had who put together a team that finished in the top 5 in 40 years ? Then tell us who reversed that trend ? Don't bother saying its a misleading statistic, because it isn't. Answer it, if you can, and if you don't, I'll put it down to you not having a clue. We will see. I don't agree it would be down to sticking with a manager for 6 years though, and our crowd wouldn't put up with 6 years of the dross - for the most part - Everton have watched either, they are up in arms at watching a fraction of that. some people would say Allardyce is an astute appointment, in fact they do. Come back when you understand where the boards role becomes the responsibility of the manager, and his players. As you don't appear to have answered, do you think we should have stuck with Dalglish ? Do you think we should have stuck with Gullit ? Do you think we should have stuck with Souness ? Do you think we should stick with Allardyce ? By your reckoning, we should have stuck with Dalglish, and by now, we would automatically be winning the league. An absurd theory. Guess this is gonna be one of those moments where i say i dont understand. I dont understand. I dont understand quite how that is relevant to the current situation with Everton and Moyes, and Newcastle with SBR,Souness, Roeder and Allardyce. My point is about the continuity of the management being key to success EVEN without proper backing. I dont understand why the achievements of the old board are quite relevant to the point i am making. What has the history of the club got to do with my theory that sticking with the manager has been the key to Evertons recent success. My point, is that appointing and sticking with the right manager is just as important if not more important than bacaking them financially. There are a number of clubs who have proved that to be the case. My point is that if you get the right manager and stick by him, you will atttain more level of success then if you appoint the wrong managers but back everyone unscrupiuosly. My point isnt that we will break into the top 4 with a consistent manager without backing. For me the success of other club with lower budgets than ours proves to show that financial power and backing isnt the SINGLE most important aspect of running a successful club, but rather the key to augmenting our success. How anaybody cant see that the top5 Euro qual is a misleading fact is beyond me. If you will please answer me this, Team 'A' qualifies for Europe 6 times in 10 seasons. Team 'B' finishes in the top 10, 4 times out of 10 seasons. Which team was the most successful? Now if you cant answer one of those definitevely then you cant use in as conclusive proof of success. Simple. If YOU dont answer that question, then you will lose alot of credibilty in my eyes. I happen to think you are an excellent fountain of knowledge but your application of knowledge is horrendous. I was against Allardyce to be honest, in fact i remeber arguing with you a while back about which appointment was the best. (i think) however i will stand by him, like i have for every single appointment bar Souness and Roeder. i happen to think that Allardyce has all the credentials to bring us into a successfuly era to be honest. Do i think we should of stuck with Dalglish? Dont you think its something of a moot point considering we will never no if it was a correct decision or not. I do think we should stick with Allardyce yes, because if in 4 years time he puts us into a comfortable position where there is significant improvemtn then it will be worhtwhile becasue of the good it does for the clubs morale and reputation. Lol, errr what? Fancy pointing out where i said that?? Credibility shrinking faster than i thought. Oh dear. By your reckoning if we throw money at the problem we will break into the top 4. What is your measure of success for the board? After they estabilished us in the premiership and made us title contenders what do you think there objectives for the future was? Do you think they delievered on those objectives? Unless you see that the most important objectives for any institution are the ones your are actively trying to achieve you will never see the point that everyone os putting across. If you fail to achieve those objectives, you cant fall back onto the achievemnts of the past as a decent explanation for the current failures. Simple innit!! Aplologies for the big post, but if you would humour me please and answer all the questions for me instead of cherry picking any flaws that would be greatly appreciated.

I'll eagerly await the "big four" apart from Chelsea and most of the rest of the teams in the league going into administration then. Strange how all these people who are slating having ambiton are unable to see this is how the top 4 became the top 4, and our relative success in our recent past has also came as a result of the same thing. Do they really think you can be successful unless you try to compete at the top levels ? Quite amazing. Do you not think that it acould also be due to the fact they made astute appointments and didnt sack them as regularly as they changed their pants.? Well, are you saying we should have stuck with Dalglish ? Or Gullit, and not therefore appointed Bobby Robson when we did ? Been here before mate, the appointments arent what im scrutinizing, the 2 major responsiblities of the board are the appointment of the right manager adn the backing of the manager, for years, like the top 4 we have backied the manager, but when it comes to appointing and sticking by the right manager, we've failed miserably, and it kinda shows in the urrent gulf of class between us and the top 4. Im saying that the rotation of managers is the reason why we're behind the top4. Are you now ? The top 4 have kept the manager because they were in the top 4 wouldn't you say ....... Why is the 5th most qualified club for europe over a decade = s**** managers all the time ? Are Everton behind the top 4 because they have rotated their managers ? Moyes has been there longer than Chelsea and Liverpools current managers ....... And, do you therefore think we should have kept Dalglish and Gullit ? I tell you something, which is categoricaly correct. We can keep any manager you care to name at this club for 20 years if you like, but if the board don't match the ambition of the boards at the top 4 clubs, we will never join them. (your first point)Ok, but we were in the top 5 the last time we changed our manager. (your second point) 5th most qualified club in over a decade is such a misleading stat, stop using it. I've already said why its a misleading stat and cant be bothered to explain it all again. Nothing seems to go in with you. And they say ignorance is bliss... (your third point) No, Everton arent behind jut becasue they rotated there managers, they are behind because they dont have the same financial resources as we do. However its interesting you brought Everton up because they are the only team to break the top 4 since the top 4 became so dominant. All with a steady manager. So that kinda goes to prove my point. That despite having limited resources with a consistent manger they were able to break the top 4. Again to reiterate my point - i believe that an astute appointment needs to be stuck by, not sacked when the "cracks" seem to be appearing. Where do you think everton would be today if they sacked Moyes when he finished 11th having finished 4th the previous season? Why was SBR sacked after finishing 5th? Did they make an astute apointment to justify the decision? (your 4th point) Something of a moot point. As i believed at the time that Dalglish was a good appointment, but who is to saythat he wouldnt of been a success. The fact that he destryoed a title challengin squad was too much, so i'd agree with the sacking. It was justifiable. (your final point) I tell you something, which is categoricaly correct. We can keep changing managers for the next 20 years if you like, and if the board match the financial ambitions the top 4 clubs, we still wont join them. We've tried the "back as many managers as possible" routine, now i suggest we start backing the right man for the job and not sack him after the first apparent "decline" under his leadership. a la SBR. Well if we look at the 10 years that Shepard was in charge. Ie the past decade you look mention. you'll see that Euro qualification was merited by league finishing [(direct qualification) (ie true measure of teams performnace)] only 3 times, all under SBR. In those 10 years we finished in the top 10 only 4 times. Incedently how can you use a stat like '3, top 5 consecutive finshes in 50 years' as a major point for the success of the club historically, then say it was the correct decision to sack the manager who achieved the success. A little contradicotry if you ask me. Now if you ask me, FA cup final runners up adn Intertoto qualification dont exactly measure the success of the board at a club this size. (Bare in mind the top5 highest league finihses you use) Honestly Mr Sheperd, i dont have an agenda, just fan who's saying it how he sees it. So are you saying that they back all there managers and see which ones are the most successful and stick through thick and thin, just like they did with Houllier to an obvious point, just like they have done with Wenger despite barely qualifying for CL, and just like they did with Fergie when he went a couple of season winning Jack and spunking a load of money up the wall in the process. Ha ha, i was gonna say the same thing, but thought you'd retort by saying it was plainly obviousl he was destroying the side, and that i must of had my head in the clouds etc etc. If I could use hindsight, I would have won the lottery last Saturday. I completely 100% agree with you there. So was SBR the wrong guy? Why had the confidence gone in them so quickly? Measured against unrealistic expectations? Hindsight exactly applicable in the case of either of them becasue they both only had one season. Who's to say. Altohugh i beleive the sacking of Gullit was correct, becasue he destryed the moral o that side.

I'll eagerly await the "big four" apart from Chelsea and most of the rest of the teams in the league going into administration then. Strange how all these people who are slating having ambiton are unable to see this is how the top 4 became the top 4, and our relative success in our recent past has also came as a result of the same thing. Do they really think you can be successful unless you try to compete at the top levels ? Quite amazing. Do you not think that it acould also be due to the fact they made astute appointments and didnt sack them as regularly as they changed their pants.? Well, are you saying we should have stuck with Dalglish ? Or Gullit, and not therefore appointed Bobby Robson when we did ? Been here before mate, the appointments arent what im scrutinizing, the 2 major responsiblities of the board are the appointment of the right manager adn the backing of the manager, for years, like the top 4 we have backied the manager, but when it comes to appointing and sticking by the right manager, we've failed miserably, and it kinda shows in the urrent gulf of class between us and the top 4. Im saying that the rotation of managers is the reason why we're behind the top4. Are you now ? The top 4 have kept the manager because they were in the top 4 wouldn't you say ....... Why is the 5th most qualified club for europe over a decade = s**** managers all the time ? Are Everton behind the top 4 because they have rotated their managers ? Moyes has been there longer than Chelsea and Liverpools current managers ....... And, do you therefore think we should have kept Dalglish and Gullit ? I tell you something, which is categoricaly correct. We can keep any manager you care to name at this club for 20 years if you like, but if the board don't match the ambition of the boards at the top 4 clubs, we will never join them. (your first point)Ok, but we were in the top 5 the last time we changed our manager. (your second point) 5th most qualified club in over a decade is such a misleading stat, stop using it. I've already said why its a misleading stat and cant be bothered to explain it all again. Nothing seems to go in with you. And they say ignorance is bliss... (your third point) No, Everton arent behind jut becasue they rotated there managers, they are behind because they dont have the same financial resources as we do. However its interesting you brought Everton up because they are the only team to break the top 4 since the top 4 became so dominant. All with a steady manager. So that kinda goes to prove my point. That despite having limited resources with a consistent manger they were able to break the top 4. Again to reiterate my point - i believe that an astute appointment needs to be stuck by, not sacked when the "cracks" seem to be appearing. Where do you think everton would be today if they sacked Moyes when he finished 11th having finished 4th the previous season? Why was SBR sacked after finishing 5th? Did they make an astute apointment to justify the decision? (your 4th point) Something of a moot point. As i believed at the time that Dalglish was a good appointment, but who is to saythat he wouldnt of been a success. The fact that he destryoed a title challengin squad was too much, so i'd agree with the sacking. It was justifiable. (your final point) I tell you something, which is categoricaly correct. We can keep changing managers for the next 20 years if you like, and if the board match the financial ambitions the top 4 clubs, we still wont join them. We've tried the "back as many managers as possible" routine, now i suggest we start backing the right man for the job and not sack him after the first apparent "decline" under his leadership. a la SBR.

You would have said the same about the SJP expansion 5 years ago And? 5 years ago no one could have predicted that we would be in the freefall that we were at the end of Fred's time. That's stunning, don't you think? 10 years ago I don't think many predicted that we'd be in financial trouble and our future would be looking seemingly bleak. That's the main thing I've been trying to say so far, though god knows I've tried my best to sound as confusing as possible. ??? And in 5 years time Wenger may have let and Arsenal may be struggling to get 8th place in the Premier league. You've said exactly what I was getting at, the Emirates looks sound now, SJP look sound 5 years ago Aye, the MANAGER makes a massive difference, which is where we went wrong with the appointment of Souness, obviously. .....or even the sacking of SBR? didn't hear too many voices against it at the time. Never mind, after today, do you hope the club continue carrying on putting the books first, standby for more real mediocrity or worse. I thought when the Halls and Shepherd left, all this mediocrity would come to an end. I reckon we need a few of these quality trophy players to get up the league a bit, don't you I've always been unhappy with the sacking of SBR. I dont know what agenda you have me trying to push but you have the wrong man, i wasnt for Shepard during his reign as chairmen, although i supported most of his decisions. I am not one of these people who think the new board are magically sorting out all the problems, but i am extremely encouraged by what has already occured with the new board, but i feel obliged to respond to some absolute stupendous critism of the new board which is borderline idiotic. considering that we are 5 months into their ownership. Whehther you turn out to be correct or wrong is irrelevant to me but to sit there and criticise something so quickly with absolutley NOTHING solid to back it up except for some loose misinterpretation is mind boggling to me. Idiotic. A simple FACT, dear boy, is that Sir Bobby Robson's team was booed for only finishing 5th, this epitomised the feeling of a lot of fans at that time. I would presume those who booed the team that day were the same people - like booboo - who laugh at the team when they aren't performing well. I'm not saying that you were one of those, because I don't know, but what I do know is if you ignore this comment, you are ignoring history. So don't start laying the blame at the feet of the board, they acted in what was thought was the decision to be made at the time. Most fans backed it - even those who didn't shamefully boo - the only problem was the replacement. What a shame we didn't find the next Arsene Wenger though during the last decade eh, how incompetent can you get And turned out to be wrong, hence my point about the mistake occuring at the sacking of SBR and not the appointment of Souness. oh dear. You still don't get it. Clearly..... if you make a decision, no matter how good the intentions and merits of the decision, if it transpires to be a bad decision then you take responsibilty for that decision. I'm saying that the sacking of SBR is where we went wrong, not the appointment of Souness. I think SBR was a victim of what happened against Partizan Belgrade at the beginning of the season, that and his age. Im saying that the majority of fans who thought it was right to sack him, were wrong. Yes i saw the season, and the football wasnt as good as the precedining seasons, but despite this we still finished 5th. That speaks volumes to me. You aren't saying the decision to sack him was wrong at all, you are saying his replacement was a tosser, and I wouldn't disagree with you on that score. Although many people said we should back him, and backed his sales and changes. Again the operative phrase is "at the time". Hindsight is easy. If we had sacked him and replaced him with Arsene Wenger, I doubt you would have said then that sacking him was a "mistake". I hope you can see the difference. BTW, I'm beginning to think you may be thompers but without the swearing Let me put this clearer to you, i am saying the decision to sack SBR was wrong. Full Stop. I am saying the replacement dfied any logic, and was a reactive appointement as oppsed to a bold proactive appointments. If Wenger was appointed, i'd still say the decision was a bad one, purely because of the fact that SBR didnt deserve to be sacked. Id of been happy with the appoitment of Wenger, so please dont misinterpret that, but these are 2 completely different situations. Im scrtunizing the decison of sacking SBR. Which as ORIGINALLY stated in ym very origninal post was where we went wrong and not the appointment of Souness. Man,

Thats how i see it as well, thank god there's someone who' seeing the same limp wristed retorts as me. Thats pretty much what they're saying! Do you know NE5s' link with the old board Dave? Is Ne5 freddy sheperd? He got pretty touchy when i spelt his name wrong. Not seen so much denial since the OJ simpson trial.

It's got nothing to do with re-writing history, my comments are based on facts. Robson had two bad starts before he was sacked and he'd managed to turn things around, who is to say that he couldn't have done it again? FACT ... is what all 4 of us have tried to tell you. The vast majority of people sensed we needed a change, including the board. And the players - and BR - were soundly given the bird for only finishing 5th. Take it or leave it, but don't re-write history and say they weren't, because they were. Crikey, "only finishing 5th" Let me tell you young man, if you were around pre 1992 when we had really shit boards only finishing 5th wouldnt be part of your vocabulary. You should of seen of league finishings in the previous 30 years.

I'll eagerly await the "big four" apart from Chelsea and most of the rest of the teams in the league going into administration then. Strange how all these people who are slating having ambiton are unable to see this is how the top 4 became the top 4, and our relative success in our recent past has also came as a result of the same thing. Do they really think you can be successful unless you try to compete at the top levels ? Quite amazing. Do you not think that it acould also be due to the fact they made astute appointments and didnt sack them as regularly as they changed their pants.? Well, are you saying we should have stuck with Dalglish ? Or Gullit, and not therefore appointed Bobby Robson when we did ? Been here before mate, the appointments arent what im scrutinizing, the 2 major responsiblities of the board are the appointment of the right manager adn the backing of the manager, for years, like the top 4 we have backied the manager, but when it comes to appointing and sticking by the right manager, we've failed miserably, and it kinda shows in the urrent gulf of class between us and the top 4. Im saying that the rotation of managers is the reason why we're behind the top4.

You would have said the same about the SJP expansion 5 years ago And? 5 years ago no one could have predicted that we would be in the freefall that we were at the end of Fred's time. That's stunning, don't you think? 10 years ago I don't think many predicted that we'd be in financial trouble and our future would be looking seemingly bleak. That's the main thing I've been trying to say so far, though god knows I've tried my best to sound as confusing as possible. ??? And in 5 years time Wenger may have let and Arsenal may be struggling to get 8th place in the Premier league. You've said exactly what I was getting at, the Emirates looks sound now, SJP look sound 5 years ago Aye, the MANAGER makes a massive difference, which is where we went wrong with the appointment of Souness, obviously. .....or even the sacking of SBR? didn't hear too many voices against it at the time. Never mind, after today, do you hope the club continue carrying on putting the books first, standby for more real mediocrity or worse. I thought when the Halls and Shepherd left, all this mediocrity would come to an end. I reckon we need a few of these quality trophy players to get up the league a bit, don't you I've always been unhappy with the sacking of SBR. I dont know what agenda you have me trying to push but you have the wrong man, i wasnt for Shepard during his reign as chairmen, although i supported most of his decisions. I am not one of these people who think the new board are magically sorting out all the problems, but i am extremely encouraged by what has already occured with the new board, but i feel obliged to respond to some absolute stupendous critism of the new board which is borderline idiotic. considering that we are 5 months into their ownership. Whehther you turn out to be correct or wrong is irrelevant to me but to sit there and criticise something so quickly with absolutley NOTHING solid to back it up except for some loose misinterpretation is mind boggling to me. Idiotic. A simple FACT, dear boy, is that Sir Bobby Robson's team was booed for only finishing 5th, this epitomised the feeling of a lot of fans at that time. I would presume those who booed the team that day were the same people - like booboo - who laugh at the team when they aren't performing well. I'm not saying that you were one of those, because I don't know, but what I do know is if you ignore this comment, you are ignoring history. So don't start laying the blame at the feet of the board, they acted in what was thought was the decision to be made at the time. Most fans backed it - even those who didn't shamefully boo - the only problem was the replacement. What a shame we didn't find the next Arsene Wenger though during the last decade eh, how incompetent can you get And turned out to be wrong, hence my point about the mistake occuring at the sacking of SBR and not the appointment of Souness. oh dear. You still don't get it. Clearly..... if you make a decision, no matter how good the intentions and merits of the decision, if it transpires to be a bad decision then you take responsibilty for that decision. I'm saying that the sacking of SBR is where we went wrong, not the appointment of Souness. I think SBR was a victim of what happened against Partizan Belgrade at the beginning of the season, that and his age. Im saying that the majority of fans who thought it was right to sack him, were wrong. Yes i saw the season, and the football wasnt as good as the precedining seasons, but despite this we still finished 5th. That speaks volumes to me.

You would have said the same about the SJP expansion 5 years ago And? 5 years ago no one could have predicted that we would be in the freefall that we were at the end of Fred's time. That's stunning, don't you think? 10 years ago I don't think many predicted that we'd be in financial trouble and our future would be looking seemingly bleak. That's the main thing I've been trying to say so far, though god knows I've tried my best to sound as confusing as possible. ??? And in 5 years time Wenger may have let and Arsenal may be struggling to get 8th place in the Premier league. You've said exactly what I was getting at, the Emirates looks sound now, SJP look sound 5 years ago Aye, the MANAGER makes a massive difference, which is where we went wrong with the appointment of Souness, obviously. .....or even the sacking of SBR? didn't hear too many voices against it at the time. Never mind, after today, do you hope the club continue carrying on putting the books first, standby for more real mediocrity or worse. I thought when the Halls and Shepherd left, all this mediocrity would come to an end. I reckon we need a few of these quality trophy players to get up the league a bit, don't you I've always been unhappy with the sacking of SBR. I dont know what agenda you have me trying to push but you have the wrong man, i wasnt for Shepard during his reign as chairmen, although i supported most of his decisions. I am not one of these people who think the new board are magically sorting out all the problems, but i am extremely encouraged by what has already occured with the new board, but i feel obliged to respond to some absolute stupendous critism of the new board which is borderline idiotic. considering that we are 5 months into their ownership. Whehther you turn out to be correct or wrong is irrelevant to me but to sit there and criticise something so quickly with absolutley NOTHING solid to back it up except for some loose misinterpretation is mind boggling to me. Idiotic. A simple FACT, dear boy, is that Sir Bobby Robson's team was booed for only finishing 5th, this epitomised the feeling of a lot of fans at that time. I would presume those who booed the team that day were the same people - like booboo - who laugh at the team when they aren't performing well. I'm not saying that you were one of those, because I don't know, but what I do know is if you ignore this comment, you are ignoring history. So don't start laying the blame at the feet of the board, they acted in what was thought was the decision to be made at the time. Most fans backed it - even those who didn't shamefully boo - the only problem was the replacement. What a shame we didn't find the next Arsene Wenger though during the last decade eh, how incompetent can you get And turned out to be wrong, hence my point about the mistake occuring at the sacking of SBR and not the appointment of Souness.

I'll eagerly await the "big four" apart from Chelsea and most of the rest of the teams in the league going into administration then. Strange how all these people who are slating having ambiton are unable to see this is how the top 4 became the top 4, and our relative success in our recent past has also came as a result of the same thing. Do they really think you can be successful unless you try to compete at the top levels ? Quite amazing. Do you not think that it acould also be due to the fact they made astute appointments and didnt sack them as regularly as they changed their pants.?

I Agree with Both of the above (in bold), TBH! The over expectation by our fans is frankly hillarious. We were/are no where near Villa, Blackburn, Everton or Pompy. We are not a top 8 team anymore. We are a mid table team. We need time to build on that. Those expecting anything above 8th this season were dreaming. The club was murdered by two appointments and sackings. Changing again is a bad idea, its hardly brought us on so far.. you cant say that on here. we are a top 1 side and we arent performing as such. sack the manager and the rest. good post though. LETS SACK THE MANORGER SO HE KAN SELL EVERYONEZZ AND SIGN MORE s*** BECAUSE ITS ALL WE CAN REALISTICALLY ATTRACT YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH I'm not aiming this at anyone but isn't it clear? Where has sacking and resigning a new team got us? If done correctly, it can work wonders. Most of our Managerial decisions have been poor but John Hall made a decent one in sacking Ardiles and getting Keegan in. It can work if the club think about it properly. I really felt that JH could sense what KK would do and went for it. If certain people see that then i can see this thread going in a completely different direction pretty soon...

Today was a horrible performance, i dont have unrealisitc expectationsn but i want to see progression as a club, so far everything off the field seems good, but the on field performances have been pretty uninspirational. I still think we have a good squad and unfortunately think that the way we are playing is down to Allardyce. Im notsuggesting for one second we sack him etc, i happen think we should give everyone time providing they arent destrying the team. The team morale seems quite high so i dont think its a confidence issue, as we bounced back quite well recentely you'd expect any team to go on a run. Sad to say that there seems to be a bit of a Souness pattern occuring minus the injuries where we have a good run and a horribly bad one, all without any decent football. I always thought that this was gonna be a transistional season and my opinion hasnt changed. Stats about opposition dont interest me really, the quality of the 11 players representing our team are more important and if our team is better than yours then you should play to attack and use the extra skill and ability we pay for.

No. Why not? A man with a point to prove A man with premiership experience A man who took a team from mid table s**** to top 6 A man who is looking for a new challenge A man who will enjoy being able to sign his own players and build his own side. I think he'd be a great appointment. I think he'd be good but i dont see long term sustained success with him. The oppurtunity to appoint managers is something which will shape the entire club and id rather go great while we have the chance. I wouldnt exactly describe Jol as great, in the higher echelons of club management. Id see him as a fall back option though when we get knocked back by all the great ones.

I dont think any manager with a proven track record would want to come here. I think our record with managers preceded ourselves. Add SA name to that list of sacked managers.... We'd only get someone who has a screw loose or is very keen to manage in the premiership. My wild card would be Van Gaal.

You would have said the same about the SJP expansion 5 years ago And? 5 years ago no one could have predicted that we would be in the freefall that we were at the end of Fred's time. That's stunning, don't you think? 10 years ago I don't think many predicted that we'd be in financial trouble and our future would be looking seemingly bleak. That's the main thing I've been trying to say so far, though god knows I've tried my best to sound as confusing as possible. ??? And in 5 years time Wenger may have let and Arsenal may be struggling to get 8th place in the Premier league. You've said exactly what I was getting at, the Emirates looks sound now, SJP look sound 5 years ago Aye, the MANAGER makes a massive difference, which is where we went wrong with the appointment of Souness, obviously. .....or even the sacking of SBR? No. Yes. Cant understand why he was sacked and cant understand how after seeing all these years of hurt pre 1992 when "we were shit" you'd be happy to try and justify the sacking of a manager who's done extremly well for us, despite witnessing all these hard times. All said without even a hint of irony.