Jamie87

3 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

 

It's miles away, but what's called AI is usually just a learning and aggregate algorithms. So it depends what it's learning, if it's told that last night's hand ball was the right decision for example, it'll still make those decisions. 

 

 

 

Not sure it's that far away. Agree there will always be bias in any trained model based on the inputs its trained on, but over 30 years worth of televised football captured and a panel of referees picked from every league would surely reduce its bias. At least it would remove any feeling that a decision was swayed by external factors (conspiracy or otherwise).

What about an AI based VAR?

Longstaff is the best product from our academy in arguably over a decade. He's obviously a massive fan and comes from a Newcastle mad family. He gets a pass from me on making the odd blunder just for that. But when you add in the fact he works harder in that mid 3 than anyone else, covers such a huge amount of grass, and seemingly has an immaculate attitude, I really think he deserves his place in the team currently and some of the criticism is way over the top. He's only 25 and working under a good coach now, he still has head room. Also, it's documented that online criticism and comments in the media caused him to have a bit of a personal crisis recently. We should back him and hope he continues to grow.

4 minutes ago, Sean said:

And he has a record of scoring lots of goals yeah?

https://www.footballmanagerblog.org/2022/01/joao-pedro-fm22-wonderkid-report.html He's an FM22 wonderkid. He's the next Ronaldo. Chill.

The contrast to a Steve Bruce press conference is nuts. He's articulate, intelligent and deliberate in what he's saying. It's so refreshing.

I think it's pretty funny. It's also something we are going to have to get used to. We've been the underdog for so long now, we've got used to cynicism and snarkiness aimed at other clubs, but not us. Now we're "the richest football club in the whole world", we're fair game. Comedians, cartoonists, etc. tend to punch upwards, not downwards. Our potentially elite status is going to bring this kind of stuff. It's a trade I'm happy to make.

13 hours ago, Heron said:

Ignored. 

If that's the case, then I'm sorry.

5 minutes ago, Shearergol said:

 

We've literally got a forum member on the board of NUST whose wishes are being ignored by the Trust

Ingored? Or outvoted?

1 hour ago, ManDoon said:

Well the idea of a democracy is to represent the members, I agree, but as you’ve no doubt read they’ve already taken the stance that they won’t do that? Those tweets last night gave curtailed a lot of the sentiment of the members, I mean literally read the last pages? I certainly don’t want them to tell the club he isn’t popular, you don’t think they already know that? 
 

I want them not to shut down protest at the literal first mention of it? I want them not to dismiss a board members idea so willingly? I don’t care about drink prices at SJP, nobody does. It’s foolish beyond belief to think that any communication with Newcastle United is remotely worth it. They simply don’t care.

 

And no i didnt join precisely for the reasons that showed their head last night. I personally don’t think you can square being a “trust” (which usually infers looking after an asset) with giving money to the person that is destroying said asset. It’s the equivalent of the National Trust giving money to a logging company. 

If you want an organisation to do the things you are talking about, then start one, join one, or become an NUST member with a view to drastically changing its remit. People tried to change NUST into something else, and it failed because they didn't have the backing of a majority of members. Maybe that makes NUST more pedestrian than you want it to be, but it's what the membership, the people who have signed up and paid, want. 

If we're going down the mad analogy route, then your stance is like wanting the National Trust to stop climate change, and then describing them as not fit for purpose.

At the heart of this though, is a fanbase turning in on itself. Which I think is a symptom of fans feeling impotent when going up against Ashley, the club, the league, the FA, the government. I should say, that despite my defence of NUST, I would still support more radical protesting of all those things.

3 minutes ago, ManDoon said:

I’m gonna take a guess that’s either you’re mates with or have a prominent role in the trust because otherwise, this twerking for them seems extremely weird.

Letters? Oh that’s great, that really makes the membership worth it. Literally every other supporters group around has supported protests at one time or the other? What have we got, a prominent member talking down to people on Twitter and effectively pushing out the one guy who was actually doing something. I’m sure Alex can meet Carra and G Nev though so it’s all good, not like we are literally in relegation form. Laughable.

 I'm just an ordinary member. Not mates with anyone on the board. I just know what I signed up to. A supporters trust with a democratically elected board, who purpose is to reflect the wishes of its members. If the membership is unhappy with the board and leadership, they will be replaced by the democratic process. I'm not twerking for anyone, but if that thought excites you, bash on. If communicating that Bruce isn't popular isn't enough, then what do you want them to do exactly? And have you joined and voiced this opinion?

1 minute ago, neesy111 said:

Aye, no one is talking about being aggressive.  Just showing to the rest of the footballing world that we want Ashley out still would be a start.

I think even the most passively interested football fan knows that we want Ashley out. The trust have repeatedly reported the dissatisfaction of its members with the running of the club. They write letters (some you might not see) on a regular basis. They petition the appropriate authorities (i.e. the Review of Football Governance).

They are polling their membership for sentiment around Bruce at the moment, and I don't doubt that that will feed into some sort of communication with the club. They have to respect the will of the membership. They can't just shoot from the hip.

1 minute ago, reefatoon said:

 

Way over the top here like. Nobody is asking for "aggressive protest group" FFS. But if they can't even mention the current plight the club is in, the desperate state the useless manager we have in place has us. There has to be some middle ground man, they can't just sit on their hands, flogging jigsaws and hoping if they stay nice, Mike might let them sit at the table. On another point, when people did try to protest, it was clearly derided by certain people of "standing".  Glad you are getting something out of handing your money over though. 

I've handed over £1. The membership has a cost (an extremely low one) as to avoid being spammed by ilegitimate members (i.e. mackems just signing up to mess with polls and surveys). I know we're in a shit time as a country financially, and I don't want to downplay that £1 might be a lot of money to some folk, but it is just £1, a year. So I think I have got something out of my £1. Even if I hadn't, its a democratic system, where the trust are beholden to their membership. If they bow to outside pressure, what exactly is the point in having members? Members clearly do influence decision making in NUST and that is only right. 

NUST can't be an aggressive protest group. It's not within their remit. They are a members driven trust, with a democratically elected board, who have to abide by certain rules to continue being part of the FSA and to be seen as a legitimate entity  when talking to the FA, the Government, the PL etc. They are there to represent the views of their members in the best way they can. If people want an aggressive protest group, unbeholden to rules and decorum, then start a bloody protest group. No one every claimed NUST was that, ever. If you want a group that's going to blockade buses, invade the pitch, throw tennis balls, picket the PL office, bombard media outlets etc, then start or join a group that can be that. I honestly despair at the shit people get for giving up their free time.  They were elected. They are not paid. They are doing what they can out of love for the club. And they get pelters for it. And by the way, other voices on Social media do have a business interest in their "fan advocacy", they literally are making money out of it - but the same brigade calling NUST no good, worship the ground that these "true fans" walk on. Give your head a wobble if you fall into that category.

9 minutes ago, Anon said:

 

I think this is the whole argument about the tribunal process itself - if they are turning down or stalling the takeover for their own interests rather than in good faith that would be anti-competitive. Whether that is the case or not is what the trial would argue.

But their stance is that they've merely applied their own Rules and Regulations, to which NUFC signed up to. There is an agreed process to handle disputes; the arbitration process, to which NUFC also have signed up to. 

The legitimacy of our CAT claim seems to hang on the fact that SJHL (erroneously) didn't sign up to the PL Rules and Regs themselves, but rather NUFC and Mike Ashley did. The fact that NUL, SJHL and MASH sit between those two entities in a legal straight line of hierarchy meant that there was no "horizontal" contract constituting an agreement from SJHL. So our case is reliant on SJHL being legally separate to NUFC and Mike Ashley, and hence no beholden to the rules.

Which seems an oddly inductive state of argument as the whole fucking mess is about the legal separation of PIF, PZ Newco and the KSA state.

Again, I point to the fact that this has become a legal battle of technicalities, which has no moral or emotive reasoning attached to it. Fans are just left in the middle hoping for the best.

I should also say, that on balance, I kind of agreed with the PL, regarding a stay for the CAT case. If arbitration goes in our favour, then why would CAT continue to be an issue. NUFC signed up to the PL Rules and Regs, and part of that is following the arbitration rules. We're trying to sneak out of them by saying "but but but, SJHL didn't technically sign up to them", even though we know they should have. If I wasn't a football fan, and especially an NUFC fan, I'd probably side with the PL on the basis that we are in an arbitration process that needs to be resolved, and we signed up to that process. Don't get me wrong, I think the PL are a corrupt pit of self serving lizards, but I think they have a case to get this thrown out. I hope to high heaven I am wrong. Also, this whole thing has dragged on now so much that I'm starting to be less pro-consortium, on the basis that MA has had (as per reveal in yesterdays proceedings) other "serious offers" on the table. So we are currently swirling the PL toilet bowl with the likely flush of relegation coming, in order to hold out for the consortium who are fighting a legal technicality. At this point, I'd take a new sensible and less wealthy owner, if it meant change came sooner and the long term survival of the club wasn't being risked. I don't think we bounce back from a 3rd relegation, and I don't see KSA buying a Championship club. So I feel like we're putting everything on this takeover - it's oblivion or ascension, no inbetween. That is a shit place to be as a fan. The current NUFC owner is massively responsible for that, the PL are responsible for that, and for me so are the consortium. If they walked away proper, then another buyer can step in. As it stands we are in an enforced limbo as a club, and have become a political football. Fans ultimately are being shown to not matter, to anyone.

So, tragically, I watched the whole legal proceedings and listened pretty closely. It appears to me that something is being misreported in a lot of articles. This notion that the PL wanted to expel us from the league as a retaliatory action seems to have been confused. I think the threat of expulsion came due to SJHL's submission that they weren't beholden to the PL Rules and Regs as they didn't actually sign anything, it was Mike Ashley, as a legal person signing the docs.. To which the PL response was that they should have. The argument being that SJHL were trying to benefit through their own error or misjudgement, in order to snake out of PL R&Rs to make a CAT case applicable. The threat to expel was a result of this "hole" being discovered and the PL insisting that SJHL should have signed (as an owner of NUL and hence NUFC) up to the Rules and Regs - essentially suggesting that SJHL were a Director (with a capital D) that had not been listed as such. SJHL's further retort was to say: if that's true then why didn't you enforce it and throw us out of the league, so clearly SJHL isn't beholden to the rules, otherwise we'd have been expelled. I don't think the suggestion was that because of the Takeover they were going to expel us, but rather because we were using a loophole to try and prove standing for a CAT case. I should say I am not a lawyer, but of all the waffling, that felt like one of the sections that was in relatively plain English, yet the papers have completely skewed it. It does paint the PL as a shower of twats though, so I'm not going to be mailing any Editors for correction. Ha.

2 minutes ago, InspectorCoarse said:

He lives near me , i sometimes drive past him coming up the hill towards Whitehouse farm . He always looks knackered ( been out for a run ) sometimes he can be seen picking blackberries from the bushes at the side of the road - the cheap twat - fucker lives at Tranwell - he can afford to buy them from M&S if he wants - no wonder all his marriages failed

As a boy, I used to live very close to him. Never answered the door on Halloween. To an 11 year old, that was enough to put him on my shitlist for life.

I want Ashley gone.

• I have boycotted the club - not buying a shirt, not attending games, not going to Sports Direct, not paying a fee to watch our games. I support the idea of further boycotting of the club, more people boycotting. I believe this will cause more pressure.
• I also support the idea of fan ownership. Having an NUST presence on the board, even if they don't have a meaningful vote, would mean at least a presence in the decision-making room. I think that's worth a £50 gamble. If it doesn't happen, I've given money to charity. No big loss.

I can't see why anyone would have a problem with this. And I can't see why these two approaches are at odds with each other.

1 minute ago, ED209 said:

Then they will have wasted their money because they won’t own the club and will have the same rights as the man who donated a quid. 

I reckon they won't do it then.

Rio Ferdinand suggested doing this right? A whip round to buy the club.

Thrown in £50. Might as well. 

QQ: What if PIF pledge £330m?

As the negotiations have moved to yachts, I can sea a positive outcome.

 

I'm also feeling a wave of optimism alongside all these emoceans

 

Yup, hopefully we can send Bruce back to hull

It's either that or he'll go down with this ship.

Can't believe people are slagging him off and taking the piss.

 

He's doing something, however fruitless it may seem to you.

 

Get fucked.

I agree to a certain extent, but I also think it's worth us all putting our efforts into something meaningful. I've personally found it very cathartic replying to @premierleague posts on Twitter, but it's really just making me feel better and venting. It won't change anything. I'm afraid this letter is a bit like that. I won't say it's childish, or wrong even, but it doesn't lay down the groundwork for a meaningful legal battle with the EPL. It should mention the grounds for litigation at least, rather than just threatening it, i.e. what law has been broken? @redrosemichelle seems to have put forward something more substantive and closer to something in legalese. That said, more power to Gordon and good on him for having a go. I can completely understand anyone that's furious/depressed/despondent at the situation. I also don't want any fellow NUFC fans wasting their time screaming into the void as a lone voice, or potentially getting themselves into trouble (on grounds of liable or harassment).

It's another reason that I think we need further clarity from the consortium. Ms Staveley, PCP et al have unleashed the kraken on the EPL - and we're currently fighting a fight for them - but the latest statement essentially amounted to "thanks, it means a lot". We need clarification that there is something beyond just a (hopefully) moral victory at the end of it, and that our ferocity is equalled by their own. Its another reason why the NUST are more important than ever.

Thank you for contacting me about Newcastle United and the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia.

 

It is my understanding that a proposed takeover bid for Newcastle United FC involving Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund has been withdrawn. 

 

I appreciate that many Newcastle fans were hoping this takeover bid would go ahead and can understand their sense of disappointment. This was entirely a matter for the parties concerned, with no involvement from Government. Ministers did not hold any discussions with sports national governing bodies or sports rights holders on the potential sale of Newcastle United FC. Any sale is a matter for the interested parties, and for the Premier League to assess under its Owners’ and Directors’ Test.

 

I have seen the recent email sent to Newcastle fans from the Independent Football Ombudsman and agree with their conclusion that the Premier League should make a statement on this case. I am pleased that the Ombudsman has committed to advising the Premier League to provide a statement. There must be clarity on why there was a significant delay in a decision being made, and on the reasons why the consortium decided to withdraw their bid.

 

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Boris Johnson MP

 

Is that genuine response that someone's had?

 

Yeah, a screenshot of the actual email has been sent to NUST on Twitter.

Link?

Thank you for contacting me about Newcastle United and the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia.

 

It is my understanding that a proposed takeover bid for Newcastle United FC involving Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund has been withdrawn. 

 

I appreciate that many Newcastle fans were hoping this takeover bid would go ahead and can understand their sense of disappointment. This was entirely a matter for the parties concerned, with no involvement from Government. Ministers did not hold any discussions with sports national governing bodies or sports rights holders on the potential sale of Newcastle United FC. Any sale is a matter for the interested parties, and for the Premier League to assess under its Owners’ and Directors’ Test.

 

I have seen the recent email sent to Newcastle fans from the Independent Football Ombudsman and agree with their conclusion that the Premier League should make a statement on this case. I am pleased that the Ombudsman has committed to advising the Premier League to provide a statement. There must be clarity on why there was a significant delay in a decision being made, and on the reasons why the consortium decided to withdraw their bid.

 

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Boris Johnson MP

Is that genuine response that someone's had?