fredbob

Standard that thought aint it? If we turn down a club then the player in question get a payrise to compensate for the potential earning he may of had at the other club.

Can quite happily say that i wouldnt want him here, 3 things, he'd be on unjustified high wages, isnt "the right age" 27 nearly 28, and has done fuck all with his talent preferring to sit on his arse and collect his wedge than use his talent. I hate that in a player. No ambition whatsoever.

Keegan and ashley say they only wnt players here who are coming for the right reasons, even the most optimisitc of fans couldnt dsay he'd be here for the right reasons. Think we can safely forget about Arshavin - sorry.

Fair article. Wasnt there a thread that on here from someone who said something about this. If i rememebr correctly he said something about it before anyone else knew about it. Edit: http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=54987.0

A few months ago (before the new year incident) id of given it to Barton, would of been a hugely unpopular choice but i think it would of been a really really smart move in the sense that it was his to lose, think ti would of driven him as a player and a person. Beye stands out for me, leader of men, fanstatstic attitude, very popular and has massive experince and is in a good position to lead, i can see Butt getting it though, it's clear that he's respected aroubnd the place, and i think that Keegan genuinely loves him as a player and a person.

Gloomy geordie sky vs Flood-lit lisbon night?

Id say so, look spitting to be honest.

Out of three mentioned earlier, I'd say it was Djalo http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a249/johnson293/djalo1.jpg 100% him.

What exactly does that mean? And how many of these players are there about who dont play at the top top clubs? The way i see it, is that your wingers are far more creative than anyone else in the team, as long as they are effective, and they are reciving alot of psoession then they will create oppurtunites.

I think Baggio has a point to be honest, i dont buy this idea that we will all of a sudden become a creative force with the "missing link" persoannly id place ball possession and repossession much higher on the list than an attacking midfiderl who maybe occassionaly be able to spot the odd chance and through ball that another player with less attacking ability couldnt. Id place wingers on the same level of importance/if not more important than an attacking midfider as they are the ones that really create the chances. as long as we have central players who are able to consistently find the wingers and maybe occassionaly chip in the the odd goal i see no great importance for an attacking midfider.

Sounds about right then.

most people here don't know what chants you mean billy. They haven't been heard for a number of years. The thing is, it would appear some people rather foolishly would prefer us to stick with Ashley, but if this bloke took over and is interested in the football, he'd blow him - and everybody else - out of the water. Complete no brainer. Who's said they'd prefer Ashley over this geezer??

Not getting sucked in, but that actually a pretty positive story, although probably bollocks, im gonna put my neck on the line and say that there might be something in this. Dunno why.

Wrong. And this is the reason why you cannot see people's frustrations with the old board post SBR. The boards BASIC fundamental number 1 requirement is to appoint the RIGHT MAN. This is a good measure of your boards ambitions, the second fundamental requiremnt is to back that man. In that order So far the board has got the right man, and so far they seem to be willing to put money on the table, this is backed up by the bids for Modric for £16-18m which would of been our 1st/2nd biggest sgining in our history and the £9m for Collocini which would be the most we've ever spent on a defender and possibly one of the highest fees for a defender in the league. You dont seem to be able to back your drivel with any solid evidence aside from media splutterings and hearsay, embarressing really. the flaws in your argument, are : 1. History proves you wrong, see my factually based reply to dudeabides - in Lee's case it is backed up with the highest league position for nearly 20 years and wasn't equalled for another 18 years. Before you sound off about me not having anything to back up my point of view, read this, and try to understand it, if you can. 2. By that criteria, only 2 clubs - 3 if you count the league cup - appoint the "right man" per season. That means 17 or 18 premiership clubs have all appointed the "wrong man". A ludicrous angle to look at it. Quite amazing how many times you have to repeat things on here Ok, so well done, you got it half right, you mention 2 appointments which suggest the old old board did the FIRST bit right , IE the basic fundmental requirement, but they failed miserably on the second. Hence we failed with our ambition. By your logic, if we appointed one Graeme Souness and backed him with £50m that would make qualify you definition of the board excellent ambiton, an equally ludicrous idea, however im sayin that your order and priorites of board requirements is completely wrong, hence why you have such a contradictory point of view (See Liam Liam Liam O post ) equally im saying that appointing the right man but not backing is equally destructive for the club, which is what you are insinuating with the current board, the current board have definitevely made an extremely ambitious appointment - which you havent acknoledged and they have made some big moves in the market which havent been completely pulled off but extremely close which doesnt suggest a lack of ambition but suggest lack of pulling power due to the club being LEFT in dire straights.

Wrong. And this is the reason why you cannot see people's frustrations with the old board post SBR. The boards BASIC fundamental number 1 requirement is to appoint the RIGHT MAN. This is a good measure of your boards ambitions, the second fundamental requiremnt is to back that man. In that order So far the board has got the right man, and so far they seem to be willing to put money on the table, this is backed up by the bids for Modric for £16-18m which would of been our 1st/2nd biggest sgining in our history and the £9m for Collocini which would be the most we've ever spent on a defender and possibly one of the highest fees for a defender in the league. You dont seem to be able to back your drivel with any solid evidence aside from media splutterings and hearsay, embarressing really.

with the 3rd biggest crowd and support in the country, and 14th /15th turnover [something like that] in europe ? We won't mention who created that but I'm sorry but punching that weight is what you should be expecting. http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=36320.msg712421#msg712421 http://www.newcastle-online.com/nufcforum/index.php?topic=36320.msg714507#msg714507 Yeah but most of what I posted there about the transfers we are targetting are a cut and paste job on your opinions from 18 months ago. Why the change of heart? mackems.gif Missed this gem!

Said the same thing last year...still very concerned with midfield as i was last year as well.

A little ashamed to admit this but i actually think that Keane is on his way to becoming an excellent manager, i think it was something of a miracle to keep them up with the shit he signed last year; his teams are well drilled and have a good strong mentality, one of their major problem last year was that they signed some real shit and just had dire quality throughout the squad - i just thought that that was a real weakness of Keane but this year he seems to of been able to consistenlty sign a very good calibre of player for thier club which shows that maybe he couldnt manage to attract the talent last year. For the first time in many MANY years i actually think the derby could be an interesting one. The pieces of the jigsaws are definitely there - even the most blinkered fans should be able to see that.

A little off topic here, but did we actually have a confirmed bid for Aimar??

Doesnt this lad play left back as well? To be honest i wasnt bowled over by his performance against Doncaster at CB but if he's more adept at playing LB then he'd be a shrewd squad signing.

He's here, he's there, he;s every fucking where - 46....46!!

You can't address everyone on the forum's opinion in a single post, but I'm sure I haven't been imagining that the vast majority of people on this forum were vociferously anti-shepherd (and still are though some may have mellowed), and certainly most posters in the latter part of this thread have been. Ashley in one season has done a lot of the very same things that Shepherd did and was heavily criticised for (sacking a manager midway though a season without anyone lined up, then appointing an English manager (they're all s*** you know), not getting players in early enough, bringing in poor players and paying them high wages, missing out on transfer targets, making crass comments in the press, etc) and yet gets very little criticism, and indeed is praised for a lot of those very same things (got rid of the terrible Allardyce, brought back KK, Smith was Allardyce's fault, not caving in to mercenaries wage demands, sticking one to the press, etc). IMO in some cases the criticisms are valid and I'd agree that both Shepherd and Ashley were wrong, in other cases the criticisms are not valid and that neither Shepherd nor Ashley could be blamed. The hypocrisy from an awful lot of posters is what gets me, even down to the level of credence given to the press - under Shepherd every negative story, every delayed transfer, every high reported wage was jumped on and criticised. Now, nothing the press says is to be believed at all unless it is pro-Ashley. Targets which were demanded of Shepherd are now unrealistic for Ashley to have to achieve. Noone that I can see is being anti-Ashley at all. People have been critical of certain things at times, yes. What's wrong with that? Also people have debated the merits of certain policies which it has been widely suggested Ashley will follow, that is all. Noone is saying Ashley is/isn't doing so and so, he's s***, we're just saying IF Ashley does/doesn't do so and so, he will be s***. However any criticism of anything which is even attributed to Ashley is being "antagonistic" apparently. You see, i think you are imagining a "majority" anti shepherd element, i genuinely dont think there are alot of people who genuinely believe that he and the last board did a poor job overall. If i was to pose the question you are implying - i.e did the last board to a bad job overall? Then i am very confident that there would be an extreme minority of brainless people who would affirm that question. I find that its people like you and NE5 who seem to jump on peoples optimism for the new board (which may or may not of contradicted a previous views on the old board) and use it as an "ironic stick" to beat people's opinions implying that by proxy we are anti Shepherd, which is rubbish. When people do criticize the old board they are usually pointing to the last 4 years or so after they sacked SBR, which alot of people will recognise as being the turingin point in the fans and board realationship, without wanting to sound ungrateful but there isnt another club in the top 5 or 6 who would back there board had they done the same thing as we had done - irrepsective of what the board had achived previously. Its just the fact of life, and perfectly justified in my opinion. As for this pro Ahsley element - does the fact that this is his first season in charge mean anything to you? Would you think it was acceptable for SJH and Shepherd to recieve the same criticisms in there first season as you are impying that Ashley should recive, i think youwill be (pleasently) surpirsed at how many people will turn agains the boaord if we dont get the people we want in, or if there is proper inclination that keegan in being undermined, for the time being though,people are being open minded about the present and future, and rightly so. Trust me, ill be one of the first to criticise the new board if they dont get anyone in, just like alot of people will as well.

Think WBA will stay up to be honest - Tony Mowbray is an excellent manager, my underdogs for relegation would be Blackburn, think Stoke, Hull and Bolton are on there way down.

millwall in the uefa cup not so long......were they a good team ? do it 7 times in a decade and you may have a point does it mean if you play in europe you're a good team. also out of that 7 was 1 through the intertoto and two after finishing 13th ? it basically means that if you finish 13th or thereabouts, then the powers that be at a club like Newcastle ought to be showing the basic ambition to do a whole lot better. But that depends on the standards you set On the other hand, we could lower our standards, and wait for the 52000 crowds to continue paying to watch the expected mediocrity. what ambition..souness-roeder then allardyce/ it's like me letting my 4 year old daughter do the household finances. rank bad decisions! how many times have i said i'd rather keegan with 20 million than those 3 with 50 million....wouldn't you ? Sorry but I'm talking about qualifying for europe 7 times in a decade. You don't do that if you don't have some sort of ambition. Do you think Ashley is showing this ambition ? what ambition was shown by appointing those managers...none and rank bad decsion making if he thought it was. please for fucks sake read on all the posts i've typed on this about what shepherd HAD done...BUT HE WAS TAKING US BACKWARDS oh dear. The board appoint the managers. Not ONE person. The major shareholders simply don't let a single other person make the most important decision on their own. How many times does this need to be said ? The Halls and Shepherd appointed the managers, between 1992 and 2007. That is Keegan, Dalglish, Gullit, Robson, Souness, Roeder and Allardyce. Understand ? And - in my opinion the ex board understood that to reach the champions league positions, that you need to back their managers, and punch the weight of the club with the 2nd biggest [now 3rd] crowd [and the fanbase to go with it] in the country. They had showed they understood this by actuallly capitalising on it. So why would they not have done it again ? As Chez Given says, all you are spouting is blind optimism that Ashley will match it. He's done nothing or even said anything to give you such optimism, and are using personal dislike to taint your judgement. I've said my piece, and sadly the only thing that will change my mind is Ashley himself, if he starts backing his manager and showing he has the desire to succeed. Is this easy enough to understand ? I dont understand where you get this view that people on this forum are completely pro Ashley and anti shepherd as though they go hand in hand - from my point of view - i see alot of people who seem cautiously optimisitic about the unknown, it just seems like there is an antagonistic minority who seem to belive that being cautiously optimisitc about the new board and being correctly pessimistic about tabloid stories infers that you are automatically anti shepherd and pro Ashley. NE5, serious question here, im not going into the reasons why they didnt sign becasue it's a grey area i know we would never agree on, but had we signed Modric and Woodgate (the only 2 targets we 100% certain of approaching) then what would be your view on Ashley's ambition? A rough calculation would put that and approximately £25m, would that not be a good enough indication of his ambitions?

if u have read my posts, i always say we are bigger than mackems. in fact, my expectation for next seson is just to finish above them. as for other clubs, we are smaller than villa, spurs, portsmouth, man city in terms of player quality and increasingingly so, in pulling power as well. I asked if you thought they were bigger and better, somehow, i get the feeling you knew that though...