fredbob

I cant believe this argument is actually still going on!

Isnt this entirely down to the trajectory and speed of the ball as to which is harder to hit?

Or am i missing something on the account that I play football regulary at a standard level?

I reckon Ashley's gonna announce he's no longer selling up (because noone will buy) and Kinnear will get the job full time. There'll be hell on

I think so too, if he doesnt sell up then thats fine for me, if he appoints Kinnear then I'll go spare.

They need to look up the word "representative".

 

I think the results of the above poll and the fact that only 50 people bothered to turn up to their big meeting means they are anything but representative of Newcastle fans. 

It's arrogance beyond belief.

God forbid that they would ever be given any real power.

 

I don't think its looks too good on you either to criticise a group of people who are trying to do something for the greater good that they believe in, when you can't be arsed yourself to do anything, whether going with them or opposing them.

 

 

I oppose them.

And I'm offended that a few dozen publicity seekers claim to be "representative" of Newcastle fans, as it seems are the majority of supporters.

 

Do they claim to representative of all supporters ?

Do you understand that if the press label people as such - also as per Frank Gilmour and the NUISA - then its not that simple to stop them ?

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but if not for movements in the past similar to this, we could still be stuck in the old 2nd division and experienced a past decade and a half like that of the likes of Sheffield Wednesday, which is pretty much how it was.

And THAT'S my opinion, backed up with history and the record books. Still, if you're happy with that, its your prerogative. If they even play a small part in helping change owners then good luck to them. Whether the new owners will be good ones, thats the 64 dollar question that nobody knows.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To be fair they kind of do.

http://www.newcastle-united-supporters-club.co.uk/statement-1909.php

"It was agreed the prime role of the supporters club was to represent the interests of and provide a voice for the fans of Newcastle United."

This is kind of my gripe with them as well - that and the fact that they've signed the execution order for Ashley with zero hard evidence or understadning of what actually occured. If they had evidence, or did know what went on, then id be less critical of them.

To peasepud and other NUSC reps,

 

the fact you guys are admitting that some of the problems are to do with the fact that this organisation is only 6 weeks old just confirms you are perhaps running before you can walk. Maybe you should disengage from making public statements until you are in a position to present a better front?

 

Agreed which is why other than todays letter you havent seen anything for a fortnight or so and shouldnt for a while unless we are asked to comment on an event.

Did the letter portray the feelings of the majority of those who turned up and if not why was it released?

I just think its worrying that its seems from your replies that theres not great cohesion within the group and what is being released is actually the views of a vocal minority which shows litle regard to the rest of the group and shows that the organisation is just being used as a propaganda vehicle for a select few to publically air there contorted views.

Better.

 

Now that's the sort of thing the suporters club should be doing, trying to liaise with the management team and relaying info back to its members. Only then can constructive decisions be made on how to go forward.

 

Of course it is also Ashleys perogrative to tell them where to go, if he has made any interested party sign a confidentiality document then it is almost certain that he will be bound be the same clauses.

It's written alot better but I still dont agree with that sentiment, the focal point is that they want to arrange a meeting to discuss the sale of nufc - but they have no right to be part of those talks, they're runnign before they can even walk. In my opinion the letter should be trying to open up an agenda free dialogue between the seperate parties and it should be done privately.

After they've got a decent dialogue going with the club they should then be going for the jugular - they need to create a good rapport between the club and the NUSC and let the public know that this is the case. For me the letter just strikes me as being written by some locals who want agood nosey and dont really have any productive input or puropse. the letter certainly doesnt portray any purpose to these talks anyway.

NUSC seeks meeting with Ashley over future of NUFC.

 

Newcastle United Supporters Club,

PO Box 621,

Newcastle upon Tyne,

NE5 9AD

30th October 2008.

 

Ref: Request for Update on the sale and future intentions towards Newcastle United FC

 

The Newcastle United Supporters Club (NUSC) is a newly constituted representative body. It has an established constitution and growing membership and is the only such representative organisation for Newcastle United supporters.

Supporters of the club are naturally extremely concerned regarding the current uncertainty and instability related to the intended sale of Newcastle United and extremely perturbed at media reports regarding the intentions towards. Further, we have great anxieties regarding the intentions of the clubs executive management in the forthcoming January transfer window and our prospects for maintaining our status as a Premier League club.

 

The purpose of this letter is to request a meeting with the clubs owner, Mike Ashley and the Managing Director, Derek Llambias as well as Keith Harris (Seymour Pierce) to seek an update regarding the progress regards the sale of Newcastle United FC. We are not seeking access to confidential commercially sensitive information but believe as a representative body for supporters we are entitled to a dialogue with the people who are currently pivotal to the future of the club we have all supported for many years.

 

We are proposing that three members of the NUSC Committee meet with Messrs Ashley, Llambias and Harris at the earliest convenience and would urge you to appreciate the concerns supporters, or your paying customers, have regards the strategic direction of Newcastle United going forward. In that sense we would ask that this meeting take place as soon as possible.

 

We do not believe it unreasonable to request that this meeting take place in Newcastle, though if necessary will travel to London or anywhere else in the UK if this is more agreeable to you. We would urge you to find a suitable date before the end of November 2008.

 

Please be assured details regarding any meetings arrangements will be treated in the strictest confidence and will not be disclosed to any media sources without your express consent. However, we will communicate the broad content with supporters following any meeting, which you will understand is part of our representative function.

 

 

I look forward to your speedy reply.

 

 

 

Malcolm Shiels, Chair, Newcastle United Supporters Club (NUSC)

[email protected]

07505122178

 

 

Roughly translated as "Please let us talk to you so we can find out when your fucking off"

I get the felling that Ashley may be gearing towards taking us off the market, unfortunately though i also get the feeling that Kinnear will be put in charge and if thats the case I will 100% lose faith in them.

Retained possession. That's funny.

Hence why i put it in ' '. Its difficult to portray sarcasm in writing.

Martins has got 21 goals in 58 league appearances for us. I think that's a good record all things considered, not forgetting he spent large spells of last season on the wing. Some of the partner's he's had n'all. Sibierski, Dyer and Duff in his first season yet he still managed to score 17 in all competitions.

Its strange becasue for all of his flaws, he still has an admirable goal record in very difficult circumstances. I dont think there are too many strikers out there of his stlye who could get a similar goal record with what we've been doing for the past 3 years.

It shows how limited kinnear is in his vision of the game that he can take martins off and leave ameobi on. As WBA pushed up there were opportunities for a player with pace on the counter which were wasted with ameobi.

The flip side to that is that if he took off Ameobi, who else could of 'retained possession' in the opposition half? Id hazard a guess at saying that Kinnear sees Xisco as a pacey striker and not a ball retainer....

Its pretty simple really. The aim for NUSC should be to act in the best interests of the supporters of the club as a whole, same as the directors of a company have to. Not a small group with a blinkered agenda. Not having "change" as an aspect of its motto.

 

This should involve:

 

1. Helping to give a positive image of the fans as a whole, and the points made by above about doing good things in the community, letter to Sunderland fans family who lost life etc. are good steps in the right direction. You would expect a body like NUSC to be vocal about ensuring better ticket allocation, season ticket payment methods, opportunities for elderly/disabled fans etc.

 

2. Trying to guage the views of fans as a whole so they have some idea of the opinion of fans who can't attend the meetings, or who don't pay the membership fee, so they can direct their efforts accordingly. Surely a free to register internet poll or something can guage the views of fans better than 50 people at a meeting?

 

3. Ultimately engaging with discussions with whoever the club owners are to work together in the best interests of the club.

 

My problem with NUSC at the moment is that they don't seem to have a grasp on point 2 - the opinions are limited to those of the founding members I think, or the limited few who turn up to the meetings. There is no effort to guage the opinion of fans as a whole. Its all very well saying that if you don't agree, turn up to a meeting and voice an opinion, but in practice how many normal fans would be prepared to turn up in the Irish Club whilst 50 other fans are discussing how best to hurt Ashley (financially), and say "Hold on a second lads, can we just chat about whether this is really a good idea this whole I hate Mike thing?"

 

My second problem is with point 3. How can a group which has its stated aim as "change" and ousting Mike Ashley act in the best interests of supporters or indeed the club as a whole? What if the best thing for the club at any given time would be for Mike Ashley to remain in charge? What if the only interested buyer wishes to saddle the club with massive debt to finance the acquisition? What if the new owners aren't actually planning to put their own cash into the club? Those who snorted at Ashley's £20m a year pledge will be aware that Gillett/Hicks/Glaziers have not put in a penny of their own cash into the operating costs of the club.

 

I'm not saying the NUSC has to be pro-Ashley by any means, but to adopt such a blinkered approach to their agenda is damaging for both the club and the supporters.

 

 

 

Sums my feelings up perfectly, point 1 should of been nailed with there very first public statement.

 

Good post.

 

its good, but what the NUSC need is some high profile people on their side, to publicly raise the stakes and the newsworthiness of it all, like Malcolm Dix did.

 

 

Persoanlly i think they need to get there direction and organisation sorted out before they look for high profile backers. As it stands with whats been said and released so far, no one with an ounce of credibilty will go near them, which is unfortunate because the general idea has massive potential.

Its pretty simple really. The aim for NUSC should be to act in the best interests of the supporters of the club as a whole, same as the directors of a company have to. Not a small group with a blinkered agenda. Not having "change" as an aspect of its motto.

 

This should involve:

 

1. Helping to give a positive image of the fans as a whole, and the points made by above about doing good things in the community, letter to Sunderland fans family who lost life etc. are good steps in the right direction. You would expect a body like NUSC to be vocal about ensuring better ticket allocation, season ticket payment methods, opportunities for elderly/disabled fans etc.

 

2. Trying to guage the views of fans as a whole so they have some idea of the opinion of fans who can't attend the meetings, or who don't pay the membership fee, so they can direct their efforts accordingly. Surely a free to register internet poll or something can guage the views of fans better than 50 people at a meeting?

 

3. Ultimately engaging with discussions with whoever the club owners are to work together in the best interests of the club.

 

My problem with NUSC at the moment is that they don't seem to have a grasp on point 2 - the opinions are limited to those of the founding members I think, or the limited few who turn up to the meetings. There is no effort to guage the opinion of fans as a whole. Its all very well saying that if you don't agree, turn up to a meeting and voice an opinion, but in practice how many normal fans would be prepared to turn up in the Irish Club whilst 50 other fans are discussing how best to hurt Ashley (financially), and say "Hold on a second lads, can we just chat about whether this is really a good idea this whole I hate Mike thing?"

 

My second problem is with point 3. How can a group which has its stated aim as "change" and ousting Mike Ashley act in the best interests of supporters or indeed the club as a whole? What if the best thing for the club at any given time would be for Mike Ashley to remain in charge? What if the only interested buyer wishes to saddle the club with massive debt to finance the acquisition? What if the new owners aren't actually planning to put their own cash into the club? Those who snorted at Ashley's £20m a year pledge will be aware that Gillett/Hicks/Glaziers have not put in a penny of their own cash into the operating costs of the club.

 

I'm not saying the NUSC has to be pro-Ashley by any means, but to adopt such a blinkered approach to their agenda is damaging for both the club and the supporters.

 

 

Sums my feelings up perfectly, point 1 should of been nailed with there very first public statement.

Good post.

hmmmm

 

usual culprits appear to be reluctant to try and prove me wrong, as usual.

 

 

 

about what?

 

have you read the thread - ie the last page ?

 

 

 

To be honest, i have no idea why i even bothered replying.

 

Move along, nothing to see here.

 

basically, 3 people (mick, tron and ozzie mandiarse] have been dumped on their arse by me. They know it, and thats why they have disappeared

 

But that is pretty par for the course.

 

 

hmmmm

 

usual culprits appear to be reluctant to try and prove me wrong, as usual.

 

 

 

about what?

 

have you read the thread - ie the last page ?

 

 

To be honest, i have no idea why i even bothered replying.

Move along, nothing to see here.

hmmmm

 

usual culprits appear to be reluctant to try and prove me wrong, as usual.

 

 

about what?

OK. I'd still suggest he has been mis-represented. The article should have stated that it was his own personal view, and not the view of the SC overall. Poor journalism and also pretty poor that some folk seem keen to poke holes in anything they can, to devalue the SC.

He has a responsilibty to be careful with his words, like anyone else who represents an organisation at a high level. Surely?

A massive red herring, give over man.

Worth a try.

The point stands though, Wise was emplyed as a memebr of the board to give a footballing perspective - would it not make sense to report to him as part of the board and dual role to recommend players - i still see nothing solid in that statement to suggest that Keegan and we had been definitively lied to.  The fact that he was undermined on the last day of the season suggests to me that he DID have final say on transfers, the Zayette trial would back that up. Recommended by Wise, declined by Keegan. Skeljbred the same too.....

I hope the twats that "Protested" realise how stupid thyeve made the club look.

 

The club was already made to look stupid by making the manager's position untenable when there was no need to do so.

 

The people who appointed the manager were made to look stupid by the manager inability to stick to a criterai set by the club...anyone can play this game.

 

The bottom line is that if he scrapped th structure and backed the manager then we'd be in the exact same situation as we would should another owner come in, the only difference being is that we wont waste so much time unsettling the squad and manager with these drawn out talks.So it'd make sense to accpet him and let him get on with it if it were the case.

 

A criteria that was set by the club? Was this the same criteria whereby things appeared to change as we went along.

 

"It is a fact that Kevin Keegan, on appointment on 16th January 2008, agreed to report to a Director of Football and the the Board.

 

It is a fact that Kevin Keegan had specific duties in that he was responsible for the training, coaching, selection and motivation of the team.

 

It is a fact that Kevin Keegan agreed only to deal with the media in relation to Club matters relatiing to  the Team and not to communicate with the media in relation to the acquisition and disposal of players"

NUFC official statement - September 6, 2008

 

"I'm here to help Kevin, bringing young players through and also recommend certain players to him. He'll say yes and no, he has the final word, no-one else. Everything that happens will be run past him. I'm not going to bring players in behind his back - I'm not into that."

Dennis Wise, via BBC Sport website - February 1, 2008

Ok, i was more talking about the transfer policy. However, wasnt Keegan lying as well then? And also the bit ive bolded only became an issue on the last day of the window, what forced him to do that?

I still dont say how reporting to the Director of Football contradicts the idea that Keegan had full say on trasfers? Is it impossible to have full say on transfer yet have to report to a Director of Football who was also a member of the board?

Massive red herring that is.

seems people are starting to sus Taylor out, so why the f*** is he anywhere near the team

 

Becasue its near impossible for a british manager to drop the england U21 captain for that reason alone.

 

 

Kinnear isn't British, wahey!

 

it's daft though, if they have a backbone it wouldn't mean f*** all to them

I always thought this - why is it that fans have this ability to be able to pick out crap players but the managers always seem to stick with them, through thick and thin.

I hope the twats that "Protested" realise how stupid thyeve made the club look.

 

The club was already made to look stupid by making the manager's position untenable when there was no need to do so.

The people who appointed the manager were made to look stupid by the manager inability to stick to a criterai set by the club...anyone can play this game.

The bottom line is that if he scrapped th structure and backed the manager then we'd be in the exact same situation as we would should another owner come in, the only difference being is that we wont waste so much time unsettling the squad and manager with these drawn out talks.So it'd make sense to accpet him and let him get on with it if it were the case.

seems people are starting to sus Taylor out, so why the f*** is he anywhere near the team

Becasue its near impossible for a british manager to drop the england U21 captain for that reason alone.

 

 

You shouldn't boo any of your own players.  Regardless.

 

What if one of them f***ed you grandaughter?

 

I dont have any grand kids, so f*** away I say.

Technically brilliant, aesthetically not.

 

So it wasn't great to watch?

 

It wasnt aesthetically brilliant, no.

 

 

 

Not a thing of beauty?

 

Nope not in my opinion. "brilliant" being the operative word here, mind.

 

i wouldnt describe Nayims goal as a thing of beauty, nor Pedro Mendez strike against Man U as a thing of beauty, i wouldnt even describe Ronaldihno gaols against england as a thing of beauty, I'd put bentleys goal in with those.

 

Lampards goal agaisnt Hull was much better.

 

Do you play football regularly? Not a trick question, just interested to know, as I'd argue - from my experience of playing the game - that what Bentley did was more difficult than what Lampard did. The ball was rolling towards Lampard (always easier to make a good connection that way) and was begging for him to attempt what he did. I also thought the keeper might have had a better stab at getting to it. Fair play to Lampard though, it was still a great goal.

 

I do actually yes, thats why i said "technically brilliant, aesthetically not brilliant"  

 

But in my opinion Lampards was better, easy on the eye, delicate and precise with his wrong foot. Bentley had an element of hit and hope about it and it swerved like f*** in the air. Not the best looking goal.

 

 

 

 

I make a point, you resort to taking a pop with a smiley. Ho hum.

 

 

Easy now, to be fair to me, you were arguing a point i wasnt making. Just becasue a goal is arguably harder to do, doesnt make it the best.

 

Take Laurent Roberts wierd flick agaisnt Fulham (?) technically through the roof, aesthetically not - ergo not the best goal.

 

Now take Catonas chip agaisnt Scum (?) again, techincally no way near as difficult as what Robert did, but id argue was a better goal.

 

You see my point?

 

 

 

Perfectly. It's the patronising way you made it that I struggle to understand.

You were arguing a point i wasnt making.

Apologies anyway.

You shouldn't boo any of your own players.  Regardless.

What if one of them fucked you grandaughter?

Technically brilliant, aesthetically not.

 

So it wasn't great to watch?

 

It wasnt aesthetically brilliant, no.

 

 

 

Not a thing of beauty?

 

Nope not in my opinion. "brilliant" being the operative word here, mind.

 

i wouldnt describe Nayims goal as a thing of beauty, nor Pedro Mendez strike against Man U as a thing of beauty, i wouldnt even describe Ronaldihno gaols against england as a thing of beauty, I'd put bentleys goal in with those.

 

Lampards goal agaisnt Hull was much better.

 

Do you play football regularly? Not a trick question, just interested to know, as I'd argue - from my experience of playing the game - that what Bentley did was more difficult than what Lampard did. The ball was rolling towards Lampard (always easier to make a good connection that way) and was begging for him to attempt what he did. I also thought the keeper might have had a better stab at getting to it. Fair play to Lampard though, it was still a great goal.

 

I do actually yes, thats why i said "technically brilliant, aesthetically not brilliant"  

 

But in my opinion Lampards was better, easy on the eye, delicate and precise with his wrong foot. Bentley had an element of hit and hope about it and it swerved like f*** in the air. Not the best looking goal.

 

 

 

 

I make a point, you resort to taking a pop with a smiley. Ho hum.

 

Easy now, to be fair to me, you were arguing a point i wasnt making. Just becasue a goal is arguably harder to do, doesnt make it the best.

Take Laurent Roberts wierd flick agaisnt Fulham (?) technically through the roof, aesthetically not - ergo not the best goal.

Now take Catonas chip agaisnt Scum (?) again, techincally no way near as difficult as what Robert did, but id argue was a better goal.

You see my point?