themanupstairs

starting McLoven with Carroll with Owen behind them you heard it here first

wtf you got Coloccini at LB for?

f***ing riveting. aye i knaa

Haven't seen any of your contributions elsewhere on the board. I'm curious to know what you think of everything that has transpired here as a liverpool fan. I'm quite sure you're quaking in your boots as far as the title goes. Peter Lovenkrands > Fernando Torres lyke

big man??? he isnt even 6 foot, hardly big? You ain't seen him without any pants on. actually i have, when the toon trained at maiden castle i used to work at durham uni, after our lunchtime 5 a sides we used to share the showers with the newcastle sqaud after they had finished training and? is that all you're giving us?

Toon Amy seems to think so

ridiculous question like James! are we just expected to guess? just tell us man!

Dare I say it, I have the impression that the coaching and management set-up, despite big Al's lack of experience, will be more professional than Keegan's. This alone could see consistency brought into the equation. Something we really need if we're going to pick up as many points as possible. Tbh if Shearer gets the team selection and tactics right, with a bit of luck we could go the last 8 games unbeaten. At least that's the over-optimistic view I'm desperate to adopt.

I might get slated for this, but there's a certain twinkle in Shearer's eyes that was missing from Keegan's the 2nd time around. He has a "man on a mission" look about him that's reminded me of Keegan's first press conference sat there beside SJH. Also, the more and more I think of the AS/ID double act, the more it makes sense to me. Dare I say it, and I know I'm jumping the gun big time....but it may have the makings of a dynasty IF and only if we get the situation sorted in the boardroom

He's been here 5 minutes, and already action is being taken. Speaks much louder than words. Much much louder.

He won't be back. I'm certain of it. And if Shearer decides he doesn't want the job, we'll bring someone else in full time next season. I'm quite confident the mistakes Shearer was talking about included Kinnear. I can picture him saying to them in those meetings, "what the hell were you thinking hiring someone with serious health issues, who's been out of the game for so long". They probably said, "he was the only one willing to take it on". To which he would have replied, "well get rid of your controversial set-up, show some humility, and bring in someone who is qualified". Or something to that effect.

Don't think that was him... It wasn't the club photographer? It was certainly Shearer. That certainly wasn't shearer mate Hmm this stream isn't the best quality but it looked like him to me. if you're on about the bloke in a blue shirt and tie, aye I thought so too at first. But it wasnt him

im sure there's a cameraman behind it. it's probably to capture his entrance, then will pan left to the table. chill out people!!

nowt going on now tbh. no one on the conference table yet

Don't think that was him... It wasn't the club photographer? It was certainly Shearer. That certainly wasn't shearer mate

it's onnnnnnnnn mothafuckas :clap2:

The one thing about Shearer is his character. The man's aura precedes him, and he has a gigantic presence. He's just one of those people who were always destined for greatness. This alone might be the deciding factor that could make him a superb manager (we hope). As has been said, when these big ex-players manage their "own" teams, it seems to turn into something special. See: Klinsmann and/or Guardiola

dont be daft mate bottle of yer own broon ale!!!

I'd also like to second that statement. I do think there's only one Alan Shearer, and if there were two Alan Shearers, then I'd be singing there's two Alan Shearers, and life is beautiful and I love you all especially Lee Craig Stewart and I wish I could design websites like him and tell jokes like Billytray. Damn this is some good shiiiit

He also knows that the public up here are happiest and most on-board when the team is playing good flowing football. I don't think he will shy away from attempting to do that. It might not be the case in these final 8 games though, as the results will be what's most important.

He was also club captain. I don't envisage many club captains would come out openly criticizing the manager

We didn't qualify for the CL though did we. Arguably in part due to spending the Summer budget early and buying Woodgate we had our highest finish under Robson and finished in a CL qualifying round position, but by no means were we guaranteed the money from getting into the CL proper. We lost out in a 2 legged game, didn't qualify, and didn't get the cash bonus that would have paid for the players you are suggesting we bought. Anyone who goes on about not spending that Summer is advocating being far more reckless with the clubs finances than the old board is ever accused of being. What you are saying is that we should have gambled money that the club couldn't budget for without the CL money in the hope that the player(s) bought with that money would make a significant difference in their first couple of competitive games for us (ie would be the difference between losing the tie with the existing established players and winning it with the new one's involvement). That's a ridiculous risk to take. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when it's combined with the surety that doing something differently would have had a positive outcome - if only we'd bought unidentified player X he'd have stopped the Partizan goal/scored the home equaliser/scored the pen that Shearer or Dyer or Woodgate or Hughes missed. Bollocks. New players not fully integrated are as likely to cost you a game as win you one. The hilarious irony is that had we spent more money that Summer in the assumption that we were going to qualify, and had we still lost that tie, you and those like you would be slating the old board (not the manager who would have chosen the player btw, but the board) for spending that money before we were guaranteed the income. What was the official line from Shepherd though? "keeping our powder dry" is what I remember. Nowt about waiting to see if we got into the CL proper, and more of an indication that a crocked Woodgate was the final piece of SBR's jigsaw - a complete and competitive squad with enough depth to cover for injuries, loss of form and suspensions, and push on for successive top 4 finishes regardless of the Partizan game. Risky business? damn right it was, as the squad was nowhere near complete to be competitive. Good post though it is, I can also look at things from the above perspective and critique as I wish. Oh, also, was Shepherd thinking that a reactive appointment like Souness was worth "backing" with 50m quid? Did he really think Souness had the credentials and quality to finish in the top 4? IMO he spent the 50m to pacify the criticism he got for the whole Rooney saga, sale of Woodgate and for undermining Sir Bobby. If I were chairman and truly believed that Souness was worth backing with 50m, I wouldn't have sacked him when Shepherd did, and I would have stuck by him. THAT is what backing a manager really means. You do not back a manager with an obscene amount of money, then sack him a year later for anything other than gross misconduct or breach of contract. do you seriously think a club appoints a manager with the intention not to back him ? Oh wait....... And your point is? Ashley has done it, and so did Shepherd. Shepherd [and the Halls] appointed a manager and decided not to show ambition and back him ? I don't think so. Yes. Souness. Giving him 50m to spend and then sacking him some months later is not called backing your man. Unless they were doing the buying and he was just a puppet...

We didn't qualify for the CL though did we. Arguably in part due to spending the Summer budget early and buying Woodgate we had our highest finish under Robson and finished in a CL qualifying round position, but by no means were we guaranteed the money from getting into the CL proper. We lost out in a 2 legged game, didn't qualify, and didn't get the cash bonus that would have paid for the players you are suggesting we bought. Anyone who goes on about not spending that Summer is advocating being far more reckless with the clubs finances than the old board is ever accused of being. What you are saying is that we should have gambled money that the club couldn't budget for without the CL money in the hope that the player(s) bought with that money would make a significant difference in their first couple of competitive games for us (ie would be the difference between losing the tie with the existing established players and winning it with the new one's involvement). That's a ridiculous risk to take. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially when it's combined with the surety that doing something differently would have had a positive outcome - if only we'd bought unidentified player X he'd have stopped the Partizan goal/scored the home equaliser/scored the pen that Shearer or Dyer or Woodgate or Hughes missed. Bollocks. New players not fully integrated are as likely to cost you a game as win you one. The hilarious irony is that had we spent more money that Summer in the assumption that we were going to qualify, and had we still lost that tie, you and those like you would be slating the old board (not the manager who would have chosen the player btw, but the board) for spending that money before we were guaranteed the income. What was the official line from Shepherd though? "keeping our powder dry" is what I remember. Nowt about waiting to see if we got into the CL proper, and more of an indication that a crocked Woodgate was the final piece of SBR's jigsaw - a complete and competitive squad with enough depth to cover for injuries, loss of form and suspensions, and push on for successive top 4 finishes regardless of the Partizan game. Risky business? damn right it was, as the squad was nowhere near complete to be competitive. Good post though it is, I can also look at things from the above perspective and critique as I wish. Oh, also, was Shepherd thinking that a reactive appointment like Souness was worth "backing" with 50m quid? Did he really think Souness had the credentials and quality to finish in the top 4? IMO he spent the 50m to pacify the criticism he got for the whole Rooney saga, sale of Woodgate and for undermining Sir Bobby. If I were chairman and truly believed that Souness was worth backing with 50m, I wouldn't have sacked him when Shepherd did, and I would have stuck by him. THAT is what backing a manager really means. You do not back a manager with an obscene amount of money, then sack him a year later for anything other than gross misconduct or breach of contract. do you seriously think a club appoints a manager with the intention not to back him ? Oh wait....... And your point is? Ashley has done it, and so did Shepherd.