timnufc22

Thats management of a player. Ashley lied to the fans who signed up to 3 year season tickets about Keegan making the decisions, Dennis Wise lied to the fans about his role, and lied to Keegan one minute claiming he had a "great player" for him and the next minute admitting he'd never actually seen him play. "But you going to have him anyway" too. The situation with Ashley & his mates is a little more serious, surley.

www.cafepress.co.uk http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/7808/kitbag3.jpg And the Back: http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/8250/kitbag4.png The best response to this would be as many of those inside SJP as possible the next home game. If some kind of publicity could get going for kitbag as a result of 'renaming' the stadium, then it would hurt Ashley more than anything else. I urge anyone who wanst to give a response to order this t-shirt which takes 2 mins to design.

In what world do you live where a stadium name change correlates to the success of a football club? You already know the answer to that, don't you? If the club increases its income and it spends the money wisely, you increase the chances of success on the field. Having the stadium as Sports Direct Arena will not increase the club's income, nor will it lead to it increasing its income. The name rights were on sale two years ago - nowt has changed, noone is interested. This is what's pissing me off most. Anyone not against this has the argument of 'well, it increases income'. It f***ing isn't. They're not spending a penny on this 'sponsorship'. They're 'advertising' the opportunity another company can have. If no one takes it up, the club isn't getting a penny for this monstrosity. And if it does get taken up, what would be your feelings about that? If we get taken over by a trillionaire and win the league with 11 Geordies in the team, I'll be over the moon. What's your point? My question was - do you want a sponsor to come in and pay £8-10 million per year for the naming rights on the stadium, or don't you? Quite simple. I dont, no.

Its about drawing the line. St. James' Park is what it is - nothing else. SD Arena, Adidas Arena, Aldi Arena, Tesco etc etc I dont want anything else even for money. Because if you keep accepting this crap at some point people will stop and wonder when the hell happened when we have SD on the seats, blue and red trims on the kit, "this substitution is sponsered by... ", Sponser music when we score, sponser on the pitch... not everything should have a price. You can still try for success (look at us the moment, only a start I know), its still possible, and I'd rather support a club with a bit of honour, principle, and identity which is still chasing success.

I can understand people being unhappy about the situation, but now that the proposal is out there, and the club is committed to it, do you want it to succeed or to fail? That's the real question now. It strikes me that the likely consequences of failure would be instability and uncertainty. Its the principle. It should be St. James' Park, anything else is bad form and classless. So that would be the right message to send out imo, in the hope it will 'officially' be SJP again.

At the moment. Will it be within 10 years. I highly doubt it. Its a stadium. In the same place it has been for 119 years. I don't care what it is called as long as the club keeps playing at the same place wearing the same black and white stripes in front of the same Geordies who made me fall in love with the club from the other side of the world with the players and fans showing the same passion for the club that makes the club special. And what if those black and white stripes go as well some day? If a company offered £20 million to redesign the club's home shirt in their colours would you gladly accept that? But that is a different kettle of fish to stadium naming rights. To answer the question no I wouldn't agree with that. Stadium naming rights however have been sold everywhere else in the world and proven to be a successful income for clubs. Again I will reiterate I am annoyed Sports Direct aren't paying money for this. I am not fussed the club are looking to sell naming rights for the stadium. But the poijt is where do you draw the line? Just because othe clubs have done it for money dosent suddenly mean the line in the sand disapears does it? Like someone said, will the black and white stipes being modified be enough for some? That line isnt there for you, fair enough, it is for me. For the 5th time in the last few pages: I WOULD NOT AGREE TO THE CLUB SELLING THE SHIRT DESIGN, CLUB NAME OR MOVING OUT OF NEWCASTLE FOR MONEY. Ok we all understand right? Do I need to put it in bigger letters? Stadium naming rights however is a successful business model practiced all over the world and all EPL and Championship clubs will be doing this in the next 10 years. Your missing the point. If Spurs modified their club colours for a comapny in return for money, and was labelled a succesful business model, would that then become acceptable? Just because of the money? The ground name, after all these years, is very much part of our identity to a lot of people, just like the colours. Its not to you, ok then fair enough, simple as that. Well considering it has worked for other clubs (ie Red Bull New York) and I am not championing the club to do that I am going to go with no here. But If Spurs did modify their club colours for a comapny in return for money, and was labelled a succesful business model, that can easily be classed as something which "worked" for Spurs. But it wouldnt "work" for me, just like changing the ground to Sports Direct Arena dosent work for me. for the 7th time. I would not be happy with or agree with the club changing the jersey, That is completely different to stadium naming rights. FFS people are acting like his moved the club to London. Not in the eyes of a lot of people! Its not far off at least modifying the club colours! Its a massive part of our identity, and its unacceptable to me, money or no money.

At the moment. Will it be within 10 years. I highly doubt it. Its a stadium. In the same place it has been for 119 years. I don't care what it is called as long as the club keeps playing at the same place wearing the same black and white stripes in front of the same Geordies who made me fall in love with the club from the other side of the world with the players and fans showing the same passion for the club that makes the club special. And what if those black and white stripes go as well some day? If a company offered £20 million to redesign the club's home shirt in their colours would you gladly accept that? But that is a different kettle of fish to stadium naming rights. To answer the question no I wouldn't agree with that. Stadium naming rights however have been sold everywhere else in the world and proven to be a successful income for clubs. Again I will reiterate I am annoyed Sports Direct aren't paying money for this. I am not fussed the club are looking to sell naming rights for the stadium. But the poijt is where do you draw the line? Just because othe clubs have done it for money dosent suddenly mean the line in the sand disapears does it? Like someone said, will the black and white stipes being modified be enough for some? That line isnt there for you, fair enough, it is for me. For the 5th time in the last few pages: I WOULD NOT AGREE TO THE CLUB SELLING THE SHIRT DESIGN, CLUB NAME OR MOVING OUT OF NEWCASTLE FOR MONEY. Ok we all understand right? Do I need to put it in bigger letters? Stadium naming rights however is a successful business model practiced all over the world and all EPL and Championship clubs will be doing this in the next 10 years. Your missing the point. If Spurs modified their club colours for a comapny in return for money, and was labelled a succesful business model, would that then become acceptable? Just because of the money? The ground name, after all these years, is very much part of our identity to a lot of people, just like the colours. Its not to you, ok then fair enough, simple as that. Well considering it has worked for other clubs (ie Red Bull New York) and I am not championing the club to do that I am going to go with no here. But If Spurs did modify their club colours for a comapny in return for money, and was labelled a succesful business model, that can easily be classed as something which "worked" for Spurs. But it wouldnt "work" for me, just like changing the ground to Sports Direct Arena dosent work for me.

At the moment. Will it be within 10 years. I highly doubt it. Its a stadium. In the same place it has been for 119 years. I don't care what it is called as long as the club keeps playing at the same place wearing the same black and white stripes in front of the same Geordies who made me fall in love with the club from the other side of the world with the players and fans showing the same passion for the club that makes the club special. And what if those black and white stripes go as well some day? If a company offered £20 million to redesign the club's home shirt in their colours would you gladly accept that? But that is a different kettle of fish to stadium naming rights. To answer the question no I wouldn't agree with that. Stadium naming rights however have been sold everywhere else in the world and proven to be a successful income for clubs. Again I will reiterate I am annoyed Sports Direct aren't paying money for this. I am not fussed the club are looking to sell naming rights for the stadium. But the poijt is where do you draw the line? Just because othe clubs have done it for money dosent suddenly mean the line in the sand disapears does it? Like someone said, will the black and white stipes being modified be enough for some? That line isnt there for you, fair enough, it is for me. For the 5th time in the last few pages: I WOULD NOT AGREE TO THE CLUB SELLING THE SHIRT DESIGN, CLUB NAME OR MOVING OUT OF NEWCASTLE FOR MONEY. Ok we all understand right? Do I need to put it in bigger letters? Stadium naming rights however is a successful business model practiced all over the world and all EPL and Championship clubs will be doing this in the next 10 years. Your missing the point. If Spurs modified their club colours for a comapny in return for money, and was labelled a succesful business model, would that then become acceptable? Just because of the money? The ground name, after all these years, is very much part of our identity to a lot of people, just like the colours. Its not to you, ok then fair enough, simple as that.

Thats is what football is about, ultimately.

At the moment. Will it be within 10 years. I highly doubt it. Its a stadium. In the same place it has been for 119 years. I don't care what it is called as long as the club keeps playing at the same place wearing the same black and white stripes in front of the same Geordies who made me fall in love with the club from the other side of the world with the players and fans showing the same passion for the club that makes the club special. And what if those black and white stripes go as well some day? If a company offered £20 million to redesign the club's home shirt in their colours would you gladly accept that? But that is a different kettle of fish to stadium naming rights. To answer the question no I wouldn't agree with that. Stadium naming rights however have been sold everywhere else in the world and proven to be a successful income for clubs. Again I will reiterate I am annoyed Sports Direct aren't paying money for this. I am not fussed the club are looking to sell naming rights for the stadium. But the poijt is where do you draw the line? Just because othe clubs have done it for money dosent suddenly mean the line in the sand disapears does it? Like someone said, will the black and white stipes being modified be enough for some? That line isnt there for you, fair enough, it is for me.

Randy Lerner is cutting costs, trimming the wage bill after heavy spending at the moment. Villa Park is still Villa Park, yes?

Heritage, history, iconic image/name. Some things are worth more than money and there is a line you shouldnt cross. Exactly. So you would rather see the club miss out on a big revenue stream giving an advantage to not only the other clubs in England but also in Europe? If it meant taking away St. James' Park, yes. The words I used actually mean something.

Heritage, history, iconic image/name. Some things are worth more than money and there is a line you shouldnt cross.

http://www.kitbag.com/stores/kitbag/help/help.aspx?hpg=contactus Yes. That and KITBAG.COM on, its the most suitable and most hurtful to him potentially. Something nice and simple like http://bildr.no/view/1022583 , would be great. Positive and clean.

http://www.kitbag.com/stores/kitbag/help/help.aspx?hpg=contactus Sent one, everyone should send one....

http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3065/supersunday.png

hopefully they just don't say where the match is being played They do at the start of the programme.

Ideally people with Sky would ring up and state theyre cancelling their subscription if they display 'Sports Direct Arena' in text when we're on etc, on a mass scale. Highly unlikely I know.

Full marks for ensuring the spelling is correct. No Boycoutt on me

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/2350/kitbag2.jpg http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/5941/kitbag.jpg Something along those lines.

We should litter the city with 'em. Paint it on the road outside the f***ing stadium if we have to. I think a large scale t-shirt campaign would be a good thing, if someone were willing and able to sell them cheap enough. Which company is going to be wanting its potential customers wearing a "Your brand is s***" t-shirt? http://i42.tinypic.com/25hpqib.png Would be worth every penny. I think incorporating a Kitbag ad is a good idea too. Like someone said, I fear that would give him some satisfaction because his name is being put out there even more. Something like Sports Direct with a big cross through then KITBAG.COM in bigger writing would be more appropriate.

Remember - any singing that doesn't fit in with what the regmine want will see you banned from St James..... Then everyone unites together and makes it impossible for them to enforce such a thing. The support inside the ground is already divided and marginalized. The club has seen to that. True. Ideally people need to understand that this sort of behaviour from Ashley is worthy of a response - whatever that response may be.

We should litter the city with 'em. Paint it on the road outside the f***ing stadium if we have to. I think a large scale t-shirt campaign would be a good thing, if someone were willing and able to sell them cheap enough. Which company is going to be wanting its potential customers wearing a "Your brand is s***" t-shirt? It's a good idea. The c*** would see it as good publicity though. 2 in 1. Silent protest against the fat sly c***, and the usual support to the team. I'll travel down if something big gets going. Kitbag.com is nothing to do with him, and would be thrust into the limelight if they were used, which Ashley would not like.

Remember - any singing that doesn't fit in with what the regmine want will see you banned from St James..... Then everyone unites together and makes it impossible for them to enforce such a thing.

This is why we hate him, Pardew. Forget the finances.