fredbob

How would people of felt if Keegan did go out and sign these players ignoring the clubs emphasis on youth?

Persoanlly, as crazy as it sounds, id hate it if he signed those players. I cant help but feel that this leek is legitimate becasue i feel the names mentioned were too specific, sort of a deny it if you dare sort of statement....

It leads me to pose the question, would keegan be the best appointment if he did have a pot full of money?

Interesting - so far, apart from Poyet im happy with who shown reasonable interest. Would be a bit of a traversty if they appointed Poyet over Terim, Zico or Deschamps....

This appointment would kill me to be honest -  obviously he'd appear to fit seamlessly into the new set and at the end of the day, that is the most important thing.

However, i personally long for a 'manager' who will excite and i'll say it, appease the fans, it's twice as imporotant now as it was in January to appease us and with that they need to bring in a manager who has already shown at least a modicum of talent and good footballing philosiphy.

I dont doubt Poyets ability - as an assitant, but as a manager i've got nothing to see that could appease me, im not even sure what type of personalityhe has.

No thanks.

yes.

The only time in premiership history we've looked abroad for a manager was SBR. Theres a reason not many top clubs have british managers - becasue they're usually s***.

 

Plenty of British managers have managed top clubs, alot more than Brazilians have.

managed as oppose to manage.

The only time in premiership history we've looked abroad for a manager was SBR. Theres a reason not many top clubs have british managers - becasue they're usually shit.

Kets try something different for once. I could happily get behind a team coached by Zico.

Would be an absolute disaster imo.

 

Based on?

 

Never managed in the PL for a start. This isn't the time for an exotic coach, the rest of this season will become backs to the wall stuff very quickly. He won;t know what to do. IMO the time to expriment with a coach like Zico is when everything else is in place and that certainly isn't the case with us.

Werent you willing Klinsmann to come here after SA got sacked? Whats change guv'nor?

This DoF and lack of say on transfers is a massive red herring if you ask me, IN MY OPINION if keegans list was suitable and fitted in with the clubs policy we wouldnt be having the problems we face now.  I think it's perfectly viable that a high profile manager would come into this job and have full say on transfers providing they fitted in with the clubs policy, and i can imagine that a current manager would be able to provide a selection of players who would fit in with the policy having been in the game without break.

You forget that we have no transfer budget, and that our most valuable player will be leaving for free next summer.

True, although to be fair, im just pointing out that this inevitable interference from the DoF is a bit of a red herring. Its like a lot of logic on this board at times, one things happened before so it WILL happen again.

I can see a good manager being our next appointment - hopefull keegan. 

Doubt Sven would come so soon after joining Mexico.

 

Could he do both?

 

I seem to remember Hiddink managing a club while being the boss of Australia.

 

If Walt Disney was still alive, he could be DOF and his No 1 Protege, Mickey Mouse would be the bus - I mean, Coach....Oh Wait - we HAVE a small, garrulous person on the staff already...!

 

People like Hiddink , despite being foreign, wouldn't even look at the NUFC set-up ; Sven would if he was stuffed for a job, but only because the money would be handy, so where does that leave your DOF theory?

 

NOBODY of any stature will want this job if they don't have absolute power over who comes in & who goes out...

This DoF and lack of say on transfers is a massive red herring if you ask me, IN MY OPINION if keegans list was suitable and fitted in with the clubs policy we wouldnt be having the problems we face now.  I think it's perfectly viable that a high profile manager would come into this job and have full say on transfers providing they fitted in with the clubs policy, and i can imagine that a current manager would be able to provide a selection of players who would fit in with the policy having been in the game without break.

Would be a good appointment and possibly even a step up from Keagan but sadly some (majority) of our fans would prefer Curbishley or Gid forbid O'Leeaary purely on the basis that they've never heard of Terim before

 

Name me one, just one Newcastle fan who would take either Curbishley or O'Leary over Terim.

I have no particular reason to want Terim myself, but at least he is not on my 'not in a million years' list.

Sniffer? He wouldnt want a brown one.

To be honest - my view of the new set  is starting to change a little bit - not because i believe its x's fault of y's fault but i think they have done the cardinal sin and forced a manager out who was doing well for this club in particular.

Having being witness to so many poor appointments and therefore many shitty seasons with no hope, i can honestly say that from the outset this set up looked excellent - and to a degree i still do, however, the club cant be excused from a basic lack of communication and a bit of foresight, i dont believe the main issue here is x undermining y or y  falling out with z or whatever, i feel that the suitabliltiy of the targets lead the club to have to undrmine Keegan, i think they may of thought it could of been a PR disaster if it was leaked that they had to tell him to change his list having spoken openily about him having free reign.

They put themselves in between a rock and hard place.

By creating 2 seperate lists the club put a definitive fracture in one of the most volatile and sensitive areas of football club management, it was pointed out at the time that this was a very dangerous policy and and it appears that it became too dangerous - and for this lack of (in my opinioon) lackof foresight the club should really be lambasted for this. I can see 2 or 3 ways in which this could of been sorted or at least helped:

The club could of communicated the issue better with Keegan and told him the lists werent suitable, risked the short term aggro for the long term gain.

The club could of made Keegan create his list more closely with Wise etc.

The club could of given the 2 people 2 seperate budgets, Keegan witha larger one obviously. (However still doent guratuee that Keegans targets would be suitable)

EDIT: yep ya right,

Isnt Terim the manager that Wenger said he rated the most highly in Europe? Sounds like a good endorsement to me.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/newcastle/article4692140.ece

NEWCASTLE UNITED lost patience with Kevin Keegan because they told him to manage the team in the style of Arsène Wenger and he wanted to do the job like Jose Mourinho. With the credit crunch looming, Keegan was given a £12m transfer budget in the summer, but produced a wish list that would have cost more than 10 times as much. His nominated transfer targets were David Beckham, Frank Lampard, Ronaldinho and Thierry Henry.

 

Tony Jimenez, Newcastle’s vice-president overseeing recruitment, instead proposed Samir Nasri, before he joined Arsenal, Sebastian Schweinsteiger of Bayern Munich, and Espanyol’s Valmir Valdo. The last straw, which led Keegan to walk out, is said to have been the sale of James Milner to Aston Villa, which the manager sanctioned on the basis that Schweinsteiger, who starred for Germany at Euro 2008, would be signed as a replacement. Newcastle agreed a deal with Bayern, only for the midfielder to turn down the move. The Sunday Times can reveal that neither Keegan nor Dennis Wise, the executive director with whom he fell out, were the original choices for their respective jobs. Club owner Mike Ashley wanted Harry Redknapp as manager and Terry Venables as his eminence gris, but both rebuffed him.

 

Anxious to set the record straight over the reasons behind Keegan’s departure, the club issued a statement yesterday refuting many of the claims made on his behalf. The most crucial of the points it makes is that Keegan accepted the job last January in the full knowledge he would have to report to a director of football and to the board. The statement insists that Keegan had specific duties relating to training, coaching, selection and motivation of the team and that he was allowed to carry them out without interference from any board member. It continues: “It is a fact that Newcastle is a business and operates, like all businesses, with financial constraints . . . and those constraints inform its transfer dealings. The structure at [the] club is clear and has been from January 16, 2008.”

 

A boardroom source told The Sunday Times last night: “Kevin says a manager should have the right to manage, and nobody would disagree with that, but not to manage regardless. In any business, people have to manage within the constraints and budgets applied by their company. Kevin couldn’t, or wouldn’t, do that.

 

“Right from the start, at his interview for the job, it was made perfectly clear the way the club wanted the job done. There was not going to be a Chelsea scenario, with Newcastle paying big money and massive wages for established stars. The club was going to be run like Arsenal, and the emphasis would be on scouring the world for the best emerging young talent, like Arsène Wenger has done with Cesc Fabregas and Emmanuel Adebayor. We talked of building the club up over three to five years. Kevin took the job on those terms.”

 

Against that background, the directors were gobsmacked when Keegan came up with the names of Beckham, Ronaldinho, Lampard and Henry. “It was so bizarre,” our source said, “that I wondered if he was doing it on purpose, to try to get sacked. There was no getting through to him. What he wanted would have cost the club £200m in transfer fees and wages, and he had been told that he had around £12m to spend. We have been looking for a centre-half. Kevin’s suggestions were Jonathan Woodgate, Sami Hyy-pia and Richard Dunne. Where’s the residual value in them?

 

“On the Milner issue, the truth is that Kevin sat in on a meeting where the sale was discussed. Kevin r e c k o n e d J a m e s w a s w o r t h £7m-£8m, and the plan was to use that cash to buy Schweinsteiger. Jimenez did the negotiations with Villa and managed to agree a fee of £12m. Everyone thought it was too good to turn down, so the deal was done. Unfortunately, Schweinsteiger then said he wouldn’t come.”

 

The board reject suggestions from the Keegan camp that they tried to sell Michael Owen behind the manager’s back. Our source said: “We definitely didn’t try to sell Michael and didn’t speak to any club about him. On the contrary, we have made him a very good offer to stay. It is an extended and improved contract, the richest ever offered to any Newcastle player. He has sent a letter back, saying he appreciates the offer, and talks are ongoing.”

 

Newcastle on the attack last night as Keegan row hots up

 

Anxious to set the record straight over Kevin Keegan’s departure on Thursday, Newcastle issued a statement late last night refuting many of the claims made on his behalf. Attempting to counter ‘inaccurate reporting of factual matters and inaccurate allegations’, the statement says:

 

It is a fact that Kevin Keegan, on appointment on January 16, 2008, agreed to report to a director of football and to the board. He worked within that structure until his resignation. As manager, [he] had specific duties in that he was responsible for the training, coaching, selection and motivation of the team. He was allowed to manage his specific duties without any interference from any board member

 

It is a fact that Kevin Keegan agreed only to deal with the media [about] matters relating to the team and not to communicate about the acquisition or disposal of players

 

It is a fact that Newcastle United Football Club is a business and operates, like all businesses, with financial constraints [that] inform its transfer dealings. The board have a responsibility to ensure that the club is able to meet its commitments, which include the wages and the transfer fees for players

Interesting article in the Times, backs up my theory of the unsuitable targets list - however the alledged transfer budget is truly astounding. Would be absolutley disagreaceful if that is true.

EDIT: sorry if posted somewhere else.

Darth

 

I seem to recall in an interview somewhere recently that Ashley advised that there was still 27 million pounds still to pay off from the spendthrift days of the previous administration.

 

If correct, this will also have an effect on the value of the club, if a new buyer decides to make an offer acceptable to him.

 

Macca, serious question, are you aware that nearly every club, and certainly every top 4 club has debts of hundreds of millions? It is partly why they are where they are in the league table. Anybody who thinks a club can seriously challenge for the title without debts or huge external investment is living is cloud cuckook land? I believe you have said elsewhere you would rather support a mediocre NUFC that balances the books well than a NUFC that spends more than its incomings in order to put a realistic challenge in to challenge the top clubs? Whilst I accept that position, I don't think many people will agree with you, and I also believe that you are missing a point: with all the billionaires looking to get in on the action the value of Premiership clubs is now less related to its incomings than ever; it's all about the profile of the club and whether it is perceived as being big and successful. When Ashley took over the general consensus was that in order to make money in this sort of venture you need to invest first (accrueing debts if you will). If Ashley hasn't grasped this concept he is well at risk of being in for a shock, especially if this running the club like a business lark will result in us relegated a few years down the line as the likes of QPR will invest heavily to take over the Premiership places left by clubs that will have failed to react to the changes quickly enough. It's a rat race now, and you need to race along to be in with a chance of winning, whether you like it or not..

 

As this is the crux of your argument ill address this point. Would i be mistaken to think that these clubs were pretty stable and successful before they acquired thse massive debts? Chelsea are "in debt" to Roman, Man U have been left with Glaziers debt, Liverpool with H+G and Arsenal have the stadium debt having all been reasonably successful  for many years now.

 

Nufc on the other hand have a fair bit of debt topped off with huge wages without the same level of success OR stability, its hardly a fair comparison in my eyes.

 

Its as though that if Ashley hadnt paid off the debt and in fact added to it, as well as the "roll royce" wages you'd be happier and appeased irrespective of the future of the club.

 

To me what spurs and arsenal have done is what we should be doing, improving the quality of the squad whilst splashing out on big signings but still keeping financially stable, as well as bloodeing younger hungrier players.

 

 

 

You don't seem to be aware of the extent of the situation at all. Here's some reading material for you:

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/columnists/davidbond/2294763/Credit-crunch-could-hurt-Premier-League-clubs.html

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/2301797/Deloitte-football-finance-review-Club-by-club-Premier-League-analysis.html

 

As I expect there is every chance you will not be arsed to do some investigation into this issue as it doesn't tie in with what you want to believe allow me to make it easier to digest from you by putting a few quotes here:

 

total borrowings in the League had rocketed from £674 million in 2005 to £1.6 billion in 2006

=> does that make a 70m debt for Newcastle United in 2007 so extraordinary?

 

 

Leading the way are Manchester United, whose owners, the Glazer family, refinanced borrowings of £660 million in 2006 to help pay for the club in their £800 million takeover in May 2005. According to figures released in January, United's pretax profits for the 12 months to June 30, 2007, were £42.28 million, only slightly more than their £42 million interest payments.

 

At Liverpool, the controversial refinancing by estranged American owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett has left the club and parent company, Kop Football Holdings, with £350 million of debt and annual interest payments of £30 million.

 

Arsenal announced last month that their net debt had increased to £307 million for the six months to the end of November 2007. Much of that is accounted for by a £260 million bond which was taken out to pay for the move from Highbury to the Emirates Stadium.

 

At the end of the 2006/07 season Chelsea had a net borrowing of £620 million, with a personal loan of £90 million from Roman Abramovich in that season alone

 

 

Regarding Aston Villa:

The club also recorded £63 million of debt in the summer of 2007.

 

Regarding Man City:

they are £103 million in debt.

 

West Ham have £142 million of debt

 

Boro were £85 million in debt at the end of the 2006/07 season

 

Regarding Fulham:

as of summer 2007 were £182 million in debt

 

I'm sure after seeing those figures you will agree that Newcastle United was not exactly in a unique debt situation here when compared to their (business) competitors? All in all it's all well saying it will all end up dramatically for those clubs involved and billionaires are cheating when they "buy" their way to titles, but ironically you could just as well claim the top clubs have so far "borrowed" their way to titles and trophies; care to explain to me how that is any less cheating than depending on external investment flat out?

That does seem pretty emphatic so i'd struggle to argue that too muc BUT for one point, the top4 clubs were acruing debt not in the same way that nufc had (having debt plied onto them AFTER being successful), and there revenue stream will be much higher than ours is, secondly does our turnover/expenditure ratio match the other clubs you mention - basically what im saying is that without a benefactor - were we in a financial position to be able to sustain and even add to those debts with our turnover/expenditure ration being so high (80%) without sponsporship money whiich had already been spent?

If not, then there only seems to be 2/3 options available for the club 1) reduce wages to a more sustainable level, 2)change the transfer policy to the benefit of the club, (i.e bring them in younger and cheaper, with lower wages and but the quality to become stars and also be a financial asset should they want to be sold and finally 3) clear the debts in one go.

Thats exactly what this board looked to do -are you telling me that Ashley should HAVE to foot the bill or do you think that the club should maybe of bloated its debts even more to appease short term thinkers like you?

I think Deschamps would be fine here, wlaked out due to board interference but i think if he supplied and up to date decent list which fit into the clubs policy then he'd be fine.  Would be a progressive appointment if you ask me, however the majority of the fans wont take to him.

Then again i could be wrong.

Darth

 

I seem to recall in an interview somewhere recently that Ashley advised that there was still 27 million pounds still to pay off from the spendthrift days of the previous administration.

 

If correct, this will also have an effect on the value of the club, if a new buyer decides to make an offer acceptable to him.

 

Macca, serious question, are you aware that nearly every club, and certainly every top 4 club has debts of hundreds of millions? It is partly why they are where they are in the league table. Anybody who thinks a club can seriously challenge for the title without debts or huge external investment is living is cloud cuckook land? I believe you have said elsewhere you would rather support a mediocre NUFC that balances the books well than a NUFC that spends more than its incomings in order to put a realistic challenge in to challenge the top clubs? Whilst I accept that position, I don't think many people will agree with you, and I also believe that you are missing a point: with all the billionaires looking to get in on the action the value of Premiership clubs is now less related to its incomings than ever; it's all about the profile of the club and whether it is perceived as being big and successful. When Ashley took over the general consensus was that in order to make money in this sort of venture you need to invest first (accrueing debts if you will). If Ashley hasn't grasped this concept he is well at risk of being in for a shock, especially if this running the club like a business lark will result in us relegated a few years down the line as the likes of QPR will invest heavily to take over the Premiership places left by clubs that will have failed to react to the changes quickly enough. It's a rat race now, and you need to race along to be in with a chance of winning, whether you like it or not..

As this is the crux of your argument ill address this point. Would i be mistaken to think that these clubs were pretty stable and successful before they acquired thse massive debts? Chelsea are "in debt" to Roman, Man U have been left with Glaziers debt, Liverpool with H+G and Arsenal have the stadium debt having all been reasonably successful  for many years now.

Nufc on the other hand have a fair bit of debt topped off with huge wages without the same level of success OR stability, its hardly a fair comparison in my eyes.

Its as though that if Ashley hadnt paid off the debt and in fact added to it, as well as the "roll royce" wages you'd be happier and appeased irrespective of the future of the club.

To me what spurs and arsenal have done is what we should be doing, improving the quality of the squad whilst splashing out on big signings but still keeping financially stable, as well as bloodeing younger hungrier players.

What reasons were there for not hiring them at that point?

 

To me, reading 'between the lines', i see 3 major issues - the pre determined direction of the club - Spurs/Arsenal model which look for future gems and  the continental set up, i see keegans list and i see wise's list.

 

Now the set up and direction has been discussed and agreed with, we're all fine there, now we get to the lists, again, reading between the lines i see names like Dunne and Riise being bandied around on keegans list - older, no sell on value, no long term value, high wages, keegan doesnt have the knowledge of good young up and comers becasue he;s been out the game for so long - no one will of been rinign him up in those 3 years saying "keep an eye out for this lad etc etc" , i doubt he had a decent grasp of the wuropean games either. Wise et al DO, and they stuck to the clubs direction signing young players as well as players who arent on high wages and do have a decent sell on value (whihc is indicative of their value to the club), now here we hit the fork road - do we look to go after all keegans unsuitable targets or go after the ones that do fit in with the proviso?

 

I know, and i think you know that the club should be going the direction that the owner wanted it to.

 

the only direction the  club should be going is the tried, tested and proven method of  the last 100 years

 

Which is quite simply that the highest placed clubs are that because they buy the best players.

 

So less of the "system" bollocks and attempting to defend a bunch of amateurs.

 

The manager runs the club. He picks his staff and scouting systems. He picks who to sell and who to buy. And his board back him as much as possible, which in the case of NUFC is a damn sight more than poxy little clubs that have to incorporate "business plans" and financial limits simply because they are poxy little clubs that need to do it because they are poxly little clubs. Whatever people who say they supported the club when they tried to adopt such a policy.........as knackerjacks and idiots like mick says to the contrary............  mackems.gif

 

End of story

 

 

 

 

 

your idea of "the best players" seems to be those that cost the most money, at least from what i've seen so far.

 

I think ashley may have regretted keegans appointment quite quickly. its clear now that both parties had different visions of how to take newcastle forward, and it must have become apparent very quickly that keegan didn not share ashley's vision. the best thing he could have done may have been to sack him in the summer, although we've seenwhat areaction that will have brought out from the fans.

 

however, if you have a manager, he must have full control over everything, ashley hired him, and if he couldn't fire him then his only other option should have been to back him. instead he tried to get his way without sacking keegan and ended up with this joke of a system that was unfair on keegan and the club. this was inevitable.

 

thats what i think anyway. what i will say is that if you have a manager that is unsackable, like keegan then there is always a risk something like this could happen, although ashley should have thought much more carefully about keegans appointemnt and not assumed he would come around to his way of thinking.

 

 

 

i dont think we could have attracted any better players than jonas, and colo, i think we've done brilliantly to get both of them, and i hope to god we dont lose them.

This is a pretty good post - but for me the final say has to be with the owner and if he wants to implement a different system - surely thats his perogative. the sticking point for me are the respective lists and i think that was the sticking point for the board and keegan too.

What reasons were there for not hiring them at that point?

 

To me, reading 'between the lines', i see 3 major issues - the pre determined direction of the club - Spurs/Arsenal model which look for future gems and  the continental set up, i see keegans list and i see wise's list.

 

Now the set up and direction has been discussed and agreed with, we're all fine there, now we get to the lists, again, reading between the lines i see names like Dunne and Riise being bandied around on keegans list - older, no sell on value, no long term value, high wages, keegan doesnt have the knowledge of good young up and comers becasue he;s been out the game for so long - no one will of been rinign him up in those 3 years saying "keep an eye out for this lad etc etc" , i doubt he had a decent grasp of the wuropean games either. Wise et al DO, and they stuck to the clubs direction signing young players as well as players who arent on high wages and do have a decent sell on value (whihc is indicative of their value to the club), now here we hit the fork road - do we look to go after all keegans unsuitable targets or go after the ones that do fit in with the proviso?

 

I know, and i think you know that the club should be going the direction that the owner wanted it to.

 

the only direction the  club should be going is the tried, tested and proven method of  the last 100 years

 

Which is quite simply that the highest placed clubs are that because they buy the best players.

 

So less of the "system" bollocks and attempting to defend a bunch of amateurs.

 

The manager runs the club. He picks his staff and scouting systems. He picks who to sell and who to buy. And his board back him as much as possible, which in the case of NUFC is a damn sight more than poxy little clubs that have to incorporate "business plans" and financial limits simply because they are poxy little clubs that need to do it because they are poxly little clubs. Whatever people who say they supported the club when they tried to adopt such a policy.........as knackerjacks and idiots like mick says to the contrary............  mackems.gif

 

End of story

 

 

Again, you're missing the point though, the point being that Ashley wanted to change the system and structure of the club, the rest about proven method is a moot point really.

In an ideal world, id of liked to of seen Keegan get a fat wedge and free reign to do whatever he wanted - but having exhausted that system in the past i can understand why Ashley wanted to change the system, im not defending him whatsoever, nor am i attacking Keegan, but from my perspective i see the transfer targets as being the main issue here which undermined the whole system.

I believe that Keegan (having been out of the game for 3 years) created a list which was a little out of date and categorically didnt fit in with the sysytem (bare in mind that this is the system the club wanted to implement from the outset and keegan agreed to it), with so may unsuitable targets it put the club under a little pressure.

If Keegan had thought up of a more current and suitable list do you think the club would of undermined him so much? Do you think keegans knowledge of players round england and europe was damaged a little from the absence of the game?

What reasons were there for not hiring them at that point?

To me, reading 'between the lines', i see 3 major issues - the pre determined direction of the club - Spurs/Arsenal model which look for future gems and  the continental set up, i see keegans list and i see wise's list.

Now the set up and direction has been discussed and agreed with, we're all fine there, now we get to the lists, again, reading between the lines i see names like Dunne and Riise being bandied around on keegans list - older, no sell on value, no long term value, high wages, keegan doesnt have the knowledge of good young up and comers becasue he;s been out the game for so long - no one will of been rinign him up in those 3 years saying "keep an eye out for this lad etc etc" , i doubt he had a decent grasp of the wuropean games either. Wise et al DO, and they stuck to the clubs direction signing young players as well as players who arent on high wages and do have a decent sell on value (whihc is indicative of their value to the club), now here we hit the fork road - do we look to go after all keegans unsuitable targets or go after the ones that do fit in with the proviso?

I know, and i think you know that the club should be going the direction that the owner wanted it to.

From www.newcastlebanter.co.uk

Keegan and Ashley: Triumph and Betrayal

By Neil Farrington on Sep 4, 08 10:58 PM in

SO farewell then, Kevin Keegan - and congratulations.

Congratulations not only on leaving Tyneside - surely, for the last time - with your integrity intact.

No, congratulations on achieving arguably - hopefully - the greatest triumph of your career at Newcastle United simply by walking away from St James's Park . . .

And so exposing the businessmen - businessmen? - who purport to run the club (and so serve the most deserving fans in football) as the witless, conniving, mostly absent fools they are.

Cowards too, even if my strong belief that none of them will show their face any time soon in the city they have so callously betrayed is mistaken.

For even those few Geordies who felt no emotional pull towards Keegan; even outsiders who habitually gawp at St James's like rubberneckers passing a car crash; cannot deny that the conduct of Newcastle's so-called hierarchy this week - not to mention recent months - has been disgraceful.

For two-and-a-half days, Mike Ashley and his goons left a city which lives and breathes football gasping in a vacuum of rumour, speculation and fear.

Then they cast that proud town into misery with a pitiless cruelty that bodes worse still for United in the months ahead.

Apparently, that's simply the way Mr Ashley does business; the way he got to be the man he is . . . a sad, wannabe football fan and social adolescent (necking a pint in one, indeed).

Well,, I am pretty sure he has just made one of the worst business decisions of his life.

Having sown an ill wind, he must now reap the whirlwind.

Sure, he will have little trouble persuading the outsiders whose fascination with the Newcastle circus grows ever more morbid to switch their attention to the question of Keegan's successor.

Why, with more false promises, he might even tempt a credible character - from abroad, most probably - to take the job, Dennis Wise and all.

But I reckon Ashley's hopes of making a tidy profit from his ruinous flirtation with football followed Keegan out the door.

And even he should know that Newcastle itself will never forget the events of September 2008, or his part in them.

And will never forgive.

If Ashley acknowledges that fact - and his loyalty to Wise and co above Keegan suggests a detachment from reality - his backside may drop so fast and far in the next few days that he bails out of football to the first bidder.

Shame on him that he has left a city praying for such small mercies.

 

 

 

To the point and a fair appraisal. Ashley Out.

 

If Alex is right, its got f*** all to do with Ashley, its all about Wise.

 

This is just more of the same mindless tripe that has been flying around for the last few days. This evil system which has supposedly caused all the trouble is the same one that Keegan bought into when he agreed to join the club, and the same one that seems to have done a good job of strengthening the team over the summer. Now because Keegan throws a hissy fit, everyone decides that things were no good all along.

 

I don't think it's occurred to many that it might well be Ashley who's the one that's acted with integrity here. Keegan was trying to use his standing with the fans to force him to sack Wise. In many ways that would have been the easy option for Ashley - that would have kept the peace. But he decided that Wise was doing the job that he'd been asked to do, and there was no justification for sacking him. Regardless of whether you think the DOF system is the right one, at least Ashley was prepared to stick to his beliefs and not make Wise a sacrificial lamb, no matter what the outside pressure was.

 

Good post - i just dont see the logic that people are forming there opinions from. The way i see it is that Keegans targets didnt fit in with the direction the club wanted to go - what were they supposed to do? Break that fundamental pricipal of the club in order to appease the messiah or stick to there guns?

 

The picture i see in my mind is Ashley sitting lonely in his mansion whilst Keegan has his credit card like a spoilt wife. 

 

 

Why hire him then?

Is that a genuine question?

From www.newcastlebanter.co.uk

Keegan and Ashley: Triumph and Betrayal

By Neil Farrington on Sep 4, 08 10:58 PM in

SO farewell then, Kevin Keegan - and congratulations.

Congratulations not only on leaving Tyneside - surely, for the last time - with your integrity intact.

No, congratulations on achieving arguably - hopefully - the greatest triumph of your career at Newcastle United simply by walking away from St James's Park . . .

And so exposing the businessmen - businessmen? - who purport to run the club (and so serve the most deserving fans in football) as the witless, conniving, mostly absent fools they are.

Cowards too, even if my strong belief that none of them will show their face any time soon in the city they have so callously betrayed is mistaken.

For even those few Geordies who felt no emotional pull towards Keegan; even outsiders who habitually gawp at St James's like rubberneckers passing a car crash; cannot deny that the conduct of Newcastle's so-called hierarchy this week - not to mention recent months - has been disgraceful.

For two-and-a-half days, Mike Ashley and his goons left a city which lives and breathes football gasping in a vacuum of rumour, speculation and fear.

Then they cast that proud town into misery with a pitiless cruelty that bodes worse still for United in the months ahead.

Apparently, that's simply the way Mr Ashley does business; the way he got to be the man he is . . . a sad, wannabe football fan and social adolescent (necking a pint in one, indeed).

Well,, I am pretty sure he has just made one of the worst business decisions of his life.

Having sown an ill wind, he must now reap the whirlwind.

Sure, he will have little trouble persuading the outsiders whose fascination with the Newcastle circus grows ever more morbid to switch their attention to the question of Keegan's successor.

Why, with more false promises, he might even tempt a credible character - from abroad, most probably - to take the job, Dennis Wise and all.

But I reckon Ashley's hopes of making a tidy profit from his ruinous flirtation with football followed Keegan out the door.

And even he should know that Newcastle itself will never forget the events of September 2008, or his part in them.

And will never forgive.

If Ashley acknowledges that fact - and his loyalty to Wise and co above Keegan suggests a detachment from reality - his backside may drop so fast and far in the next few days that he bails out of football to the first bidder.

Shame on him that he has left a city praying for such small mercies.

 

 

 

To the point and a fair appraisal. Ashley Out.

 

If Alex is right, its got f*** all to do with Ashley, its all about Wise.

 

This is just more of the same mindless tripe that has been flying around for the last few days. This evil system which has supposedly caused all the trouble is the same one that Keegan bought into when he agreed to join the club, and the same one that seems to have done a good job of strengthening the team over the summer. Now because Keegan throws a hissy fit, everyone decides that things were no good all along.

 

I don't think it's occurred to many that it might well be Ashley who's the one that's acted with integrity here. Keegan was trying to use his standing with the fans to force him to sack Wise. In many ways that would have been the easy option for Ashley - that would have kept the peace. But he decided that Wise was doing the job that he'd been asked to do, and there was no justification for sacking him. Regardless of whether you think the DOF system is the right one, at least Ashley was prepared to stick to his beliefs and not make Wise a sacrificial lamb, no matter what the outside pressure was.

Good post - i just dont see the logic that people are forming there opinions from. The way i see it is that Keegans targets didnt fit in with the direction the club wanted to go - what were they supposed to do? Break that fundamental pricipal of the club in order to appease the messiah or stick to there guns?

The picture i see in my mind is Ashley sitting lonely in his mansion whilst Keegan has his credit card like a spoilt wife. 

Who was it that was saying that Wise et al had presented him with player after player and he'd rejected them all out of hand? Sure someone said something along those lines.

 

**Conspiracy theory alert**

 

If for a moment you contemplate that being true and you combine it with the infamous list - I know, but my natural tendency to simply dismiss anything in the papers has been dealt a blow over the last few days - then you're left with a situation where the club was given the choice of:

 

Give Keegan what he wants and go after the big names, who would cost big, big money with little chance of ever getting any of it back, thereby going against the stated aim of the club's transfer policy. Not to mention that some of them are probably fading stars anyway and many of them would never consider coming here in the first place. If this was the chosen path, then there would be a serious risk of ending up with no-one coming in at all and if some did they would be unlikely to represent value for money. However you'd probably know what you were buying as the players would have proven track records.

 

Go against Keegan's wishes and bring in who "the club" thinks will benefit the team, namely young up-and-coming players from abroad for less money and on lower wages. If this was the chosen path, then there are risks too, firstly and most importantly that you run the risk of seriously pissing Keegan off, but also that you are taking a bit of a gamble that the players you buy will settle and be successful in the Premiership, as we know that's not always guaranteed. However if they did turn out to be a success then we have a bargain on our hands a la Jonas and we can't lose even if he decides he's outgrown us and moves on because we make a packet on the deal.

 

 

It seems to me that we started the window using option 2, hence Jonas, Bassong, Collo, Guthrie and all the youngsters, but then something happened and everything seemed to grind to a halt, before we grabbed a couple of late deals on deadline day. What was the hold up? Why did things seem to stall in the middle?

 

Perhaps, and this is entirely speculation, that was the point where Keegan really laid it on the line that he wasn't happy that no-one from his list was being brought in and started to reject anyone put before him that wasn't on it. This might explain the numerous players that we were linked with where nothing seemed to happen in the end and the seeming lack of action until deadline day.

 

It seems to me that if this was true then at least some effort was made to get the players Keegan wanted, hence his comments and positive reaction to the Milner sale, etc, but for whatever reason that didn't pay off, probably for one of the reasons listed above. Maybe that's wrong and they just spent a few weeks arguing amongst themselves rather than getting on with bringing players in, but I think that the gap in the middle shows that at least some consideration was given to Keegan's list. If they really didn't care about what he thought then they'd have just carried on bringing in the players they wanted and I reckon we'd have ended up with a good few additional signings to what we had. I don't for a second believe that it was anyone's intention to not sign a number of players this summer, almost certainly everyone wanted to end up with a bigger and what they thought was a better squad than what we've got.

 

So as the deadline started to loom and the impasse remained, due to the recruitment guys either being unable (due to them simply not being for sale or not wanting to come here), or unwilling to spend the kind of money required, to bring in the players on Keegan's list, I think that they may have just thought, "f*** him we need to get someone in, otherwise we're screwed" and signed Xisco and Nacho whether Keegan liked it or not.

 

I think Keegan might well have been playing brinkmanship with the club over signings, refusing to sanction anyone other than the players he had specifically identified, knowing that the deadline might force the club into caving in and breaking the bank to get someone like Henry, etc, the club was either unable or unwilling to do this and eventually called his bluff by bringing in the two deadline-day lads. Whether that was someone acting independently or it was all part of a cunning plan, I don't know, but I don't believe that there was ever a conspiracy to get rid of Keegan. I reckon a few people may not have given a s*** whether he quit or not, but I don't think the majority expected him to, certainly not Ashley, he wouldn't have said what he said and worn that shirt at Arsenal if he did.

 

Keegan is either a very stubborn or principled man depending upon your point of view, either way it amounts to the same thing and I think he forced the issue here until it reached breaking point and the club broke and brought in Xisco and Nacho without his express consent and he quit because of it. Where blame should be apportioned depends upon the answers to a few questions:

 

- Were Keegan's targets unrealistic or undesirable? (The three that have been quoted definitely fall into this category)

- Was there any effort to secure people on his list that weren't covered by the above?

- Was that effort sufficient?

- What was Keegan's response if it was? Was he realistic or was he intransigent?

 

 

I'd just like to remind you that this is assuming the two things stated at the beginning are correct and I'm not sure that they were. Also this isn't about what happened after Keegan stormed out as we've discussed that to death now and I'm bored of giving my opinion on it.

 

Whatdaya reckon?

Great post again. Was about to write a similar thing my self - to me the likes of Riise and Dunne (supposed keegan targets) represented a high risk strategy which didnt seem to fit in with the clubs percieved direction. I remember in January, Mort reiterating the point about hidden gems and looking at the arsenal model. It comes down to what people think is the most important thing for the club and who should have the most say on the direction of the club - should it be the owner who has the most say on the direction of the club or should it be the manager? Those of you who are pro keegan anti Ashley will belive that the manager should have most say - even if that compromises the direction that the owner of the clubs wants the club to go, which shouldnt be the case.

My personal opinion is that the owner should have the impetus on direction and it seems clear to me that this was the directio that the club wanted to go - it also seems clear to me that Keegans list may have been out of date, what should the club do?

I think people may be overplaying the whole idea that Wise et al are in charge of comings and goings, i personally believe that Keegans targets werent of the required standard possibly due to hium being away from the game for too long hence the reason that Wise's targets got persued more.

Maybe a current manager who has been in the game for a while who has a good idea of who he'd like to bring in which would fit in with the requirements of the club would allow this set up to work better?

I personally havent been sold on Rijkaard, despite winning the CL im STILL not convinced of his pedigree - it seemed to fall apart after Hnk Ten Cate left.  A young up and coming manager would be ideal having not seen one here ever - however as was the case last time round the fans wont be appeased by an up and coming manager but will only want a huge manager or a sentimental one.

Exactly. I don't think KK doesn't have any flaws, he has many and some of them are what make him great but when I see him on the touchline, even when N'Zogbia is at left back or when Damien Duff is allowed to be alive, I support him because no matter what, I always, always believe that he is doing what he feels is best for NUFC. He doesn't let personal stuff get in the way of what he feels is the best thing for the club, he doesn't pick certain players to prove a point and he doesn't let his headstrong attitude ever get in the way of the football club. I can't say that about any other manager I've seen at NUFC (even Sir Bobby, bless him).

 

He also happens to be a f***ing good manager who plays football the way it should be played.

 

If Arsenal forced Wenger out tomorrow, or Man Utd Fergie, their fans would be just as livid as we are. It's not a case of supporting KK, it's a case of wanting the best man for the job and for me that was KK. If he'd been doing a s*** job and had to go, fair enough, but to see him leave for non-footballing reasons, forced out by people who couldn't give a f*** about the club, leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.

 

Ironic that we spoke to Redknapp in January too, as you say Johnny. He also left Pompey because of that Croatian bloke in the background, now he's come back, gets to buy his own players and he's doing a far superior job to first time round. Funny that isn't it?

 

 

Fair bit fundamentally wrong with the bit in bold, Wenger and Fergie werent employed with a particular structure bandied in front of them, at pompey Redknapp had a DoF appointed over his head and he quit accordingly. The same definitely cant be said of keegan, he knew the direction, he knew the new structure and when the going got tough he backed out at the worst possible time, this whole thing in my opinion has come withihn the last few days starting with Milner, that to me suggests that he was tolerable of alot of what was happening previously, he was happy to admit that he didnt know about Guttirez but was pleased but when a few things didnt go his way in an extremely short period of time things quickly turned sour for him.

 

I just dont see the action that he's taken to be equaliative to the issues which have literally arisen within the last few days, starting with Milner.

 

Happy, with Colo and Guttirez and Guthrie and Bassong - recruitement apparently out of his hands at this point.

Unhappy with Milner going for extortionate price and us signing Xisco and Nacho - time to resign?

 

Just doesnt add up - HOWEVER id like to say that despite all this i DO believe theres a big elelemnt of repsoiblity whihc needs to be

attributed to Ashley and Co - together all 4/5 of them have f***ed this club royally for the forseeable future.

 

No, sorry, but you're wrong. The club have told us time and time again that KK has final say on any transfers. It is clearly obvious that was a lie and there's every chance KK was under exactly the same impression until this late stage of the window when things started getting tight.

 

The fact that the signings have looked good (so far) is irrelevant. There is a reason why the manager gets paid more than the chief scout. Spotting a good player from an Argentinian international (not that Jonas wasnt a good find) is much much easier than managing a Premier League club successfully.

Hold ya horses there...thats something that Keegan has reiterated himself. Not just the club as your implying. In fact, Keegan must of known it was a lie the second Jonas was signed - whats the deal then? He seemed happy to me then - even admitting that it wasnt him who signed him, he didnt need to say Milner was sold by him but he did....why? if your fundamental priciples are being undermined by the superiors?

Why is it that he's happy to have Jonas sign, no quitting even though he's been apprently lied to, but when Xisco and Nacho are signed, all of a sudden he';s having "players forced upon him"

Not quite adding up there, Wullie.

I know this is a s*** situation, I know everyone's upset and I know I'm likely to get a load of s*** for saying what I've got to say, but I'm going to say it anyway.

 

Do some of you support NUFC or KKFC? It seems that to a lot of people Keegan is way more important than the club, all those saying that their finished with the club, what the f*** are you on about!?! Perhaps Keegan could set up his own team and you could go and support them instead, seriously I know people are emotional at the moment but get a f***ing grip!!

 

I like Kevin Keegan, I think he's a great bloke and a decent manager, I think he gets his teams to play football the way it should be played and I'm grateful to him for turning things around for us and getting the club back on its feet. I've also got a huge amount of respect for him for his previous time at NUFC, both as manager and as a player, his arrival in the eighties coinciding with the start of my interest in the club.

 

But the Kevin Keegan I like exists in reality, he has faults and makes mistakes, I still like him. He's stubborn and forces a situation to the extent that it causes the club a huge amount of damage, I still like him. He says he cares about the fans and the club, but doesn't say anything for three days whilst all kinds of s*** is kicking off to the detriment of the club and the fans - although they don't seem to realise it - when a simple statement from him could have calmed the situation and protected the club from damage, I still like him.

 

The Kevin Keegan a lot of people seem to worship at the alter of is a myth, he is portrayed as someone who can do no wrong, who is totally selfless and devotes his existence to the furtherance of NUFC with no thought whatsoever to his own well being. He is a god and every word he utters is gospel - even when he contradicts what he said previously - but not only that he is a victim, he is weak and needs protection from the nasty cockneys who were out to get him from the start and are secretly trying to bring us down in the hope that it might benefit Spurs. Keegan is the lord and we will die, or rather kill on his behalf - even if the only thing that dies is the club we're supposed to love.

 

Now what's going to happen if it turns out that Keegan is not entirely blameless in all this?

 

Well, I'll still like him.

 

You on the other hand are left with a choice:

 

Have your illusion shattered, your idol fallen, your dreams dashed and kneejerk totally to the opposite, forever hating his guts and cursing his name.

 

or:

 

Deny reality, continue on with your delusion and pretend things aren't how they really are, shout and scream and bawl out anyone who disagrees with your faith.

 

Because I'm telling you now, no-one, not even Keegan is blameless in this. They've all played their role in this disaster, but only some of them have stuck around to try and sort it out.

 

NUFC's still here, you're supposed to be Newcastle supporters, are you going to support it, or what!?!

 

bit of a straw man argument as you seem to think people assume keegan has no flaws.

 

but that's wrong - the keegan that nufc fans love is the one that made the "i'd Love it if we beat them, love it" statement, the one we know is emotional and wears his heart on his sleeve. it is this passion and the desire to challenge things head on that has partly caused this situation. people arent denying that - they're just looking at it a  bit more deeply than you are and looking at what caused keegan to go head to head with llambias, rather than just focusing on the act of confrontation itself as if it existed in a vacuum  - without very real problems and underlying issues that, i presume, still exist at the club and will be probably be causing the new man the exact same problems 8 months down the line. similar problems have caused Curbishley to walk out at west ham, or Mourinho to leave Chelsea, or Redknapp to leave Southampton.

 

Exactly. I don't think KK doesn't have any flaws, he has many and some of them are what make him great but when I see him on the touchline, even when N'Zogbia is at left back or when Damien Duff is allowed to be alive, I support him because no matter what, I always, always believe that he is doing what he feels is best for NUFC. He doesn't let personal stuff get in the way of what he feels is the best thing for the club, he doesn't pick certain players to prove a point and he doesn't let his headstrong attitude ever get in the way of the football club. I can't say that about any other manager I've seen at NUFC (even Sir Bobby, bless him).

 

He also happens to be a f***ing good manager who plays football the way it should be played.

 

If Arsenal forced Wenger out tomorrow, or Man Utd Fergie, their fans would be just as livid as we are. It's not a case of supporting KK, it's a case of wanting the best man for the job and for me that was KK. If he'd been doing a s*** job and had to go, fair enough, but to see him leave for non-footballing reasons, forced out by people who couldn't give a f*** about the club, leaves a very bitter taste in my mouth.

 

Ironic that we spoke to Redknapp in January too, as you say Johnny. He also left Pompey because of that Croatian bloke in the background, now he's come back, gets to buy his own players and he's doing a far superior job to first time round. Funny that isn't it?

Fair bit fundamentally wrong with the bit in bold, Wenger and Fergie werent employed with a particular structure bandied in front of them, at pompey Redknapp had a DoF appointed over his head and he quit accordingly. The same definitely cant be said of keegan, he knew the direction, he knew the new structure and when the going got tough he backed out at the worst possible time, this whole thing in my opinion has come withihn the last few days starting with Milner, that to me suggests that he was tolerable of alot of what was happening previously, he was happy to admit that he didnt know about Guttirez but was pleased but when a few things didnt go his way in an extremely short period of time things quickly turned sour for him.

I just dont see the action that he's taken to be equaliative to the issues which have literally arisen within the last few days, starting with Milner.

Happy, with Colo and Guttirez and Guthrie and Bassong - recruitement apparently out of his hands at this point.

Unhappy with Milner going for extortionate price and us signing Xisco and Nacho - time to resign?

Just doesnt add up - HOWEVER id like to say that despite all this i DO believe theres a big elelemnt of repsoiblity whihc needs to be attributed to Ashley and Co - together all 4/5 of them have fucked this club royally for the forseeable future.