TheBrownBottle

On present form we won’t finish in the top ten - though finishing outside it wouldn’t see me wanting him sacked. I probably would if we were in that position this time next year, though.

Puts me in mind of the greatest movie title of all time …

NUFC finishing outside the top half is a failure in any context. Which is why Ashley’s time was mostly one of failure.

Yeah, I really thought you raising Spurs and Chelsea was interesting because the outcomes have been so different despite both ousting managers relatively quickly (I had Postecoglu to be sacked first, shows what I know - though that was based on Spurs’ track record). Some big European clubs stick with managers for a while; others hire & fire. Correlation between the rarity of changing of managers and the trophies won by clubs isn’t always all that strong. But Spurs can hardly be happy with their lack of trophies despite the obvious financial strength they have. I agree re it would be good if Howe grows with the club - and I also think he’s done a very good job on the whole (though the last dozen games is pretty much relegation form - I suspect that will change when Pope returns). But I’m not emotionally attached to him in an absolute respect - Keegan is the only one I ever truly was emotionally attached to (also, I was young). If it doesn’t turn around next season then my view on Howe will harden. The club comes ahead of any other considerations.

Yeah, this it. Hopefully Tonali stopped after the ban. It really would be harsh to extend the ban further if he was just betting on football matches generally during that period (and not NUFC).

Perhaps Arsenal finishing 8th behind closed doors saved Arteta then?

Chelsea are the most successful side in England this century - and Spurs are of course a club with one League Cup to their name in that period despite being a ‘Big Six’ club. So the correlation between sticking to manager or not is arguable based on those two clubs. Arteta won the FA Cup in his first season, which would have bought him some time. I don’t really care if we stick with a manger for ten years or have ten managers in ten years - I’ll happily take whatever works if we won trophies. I’d take Chelsea’s last 20 years quite happily, and wouldn’t blink about the number of managers we went through.

I really do think that it would be harsh for additional months to be added if he was betting on football (though if he was punished for it, I also don’t think he could have too much of a complaint). But if he’s bet on any NUFC games, then I think he’ll get a (deserved) extension of his ban. So fingers crossed that he hasn’t done that. Personally, I’d be fucking furious if he’s been betting on our matches. You’re right - it’s both. They would effectively be new charges, as he was only charged with what he did in Italy. Of course - but did any other club’s supporters have much sympathy for Toney? I didn’t notice much.

It would effectively be a worldwide extension of the ban for offences which weren’t known or took place after the ones for which he was charged, which occurred outside the jurisdiction of the country in which he committed the original offences. You’re talking about concurrency for new offences - and bear in mind his punishment was actually reduced from the maximum as he ‘fessed up’. He hadn’t ’fessed up’ to these potential additional charges. If this wasn’t an NUFC player, I do doubt whether or not people would be quite as moved by Tonali’s ‘plight’

We’re talking about offences which took place after the ones for which he was charged. The country he’s playing in has no relevance. So he could still be charged and punished further.

It hasn’t been a year, though

He’d be right to be angry - they did let him down. It’s players, not fans, who get managers the sack, ultimately.

Honestly, I reckon it would be fantastically harsh to punish him for further betting unless he’s bet on NUFC games. If he’s done that, then an extension to his ban seems absolutely reasonable to me. The FA will investigate and punish if necessary (including suspension length) - that ban becomes worldwide under FIFA.

It’s FIFA who issue the ban - it’s the national FA who investigate and deliver the ‘sentence’

You’d hope not - but history points in that direction …

Who would be in our HG quota for UEFA competitions if we flog Longstaff? If it all looks ok it might make sense; but if we’re throwing kids in it would be crazy to sell him.

I agree to an extent - and it really depends on what (if anything) he’s bet on after he moved to England. If he’s just been betting on football generally then I reckon it would be harsh to extend it any further. If he’s bet on Newcastle’s games then I think punishment will be coming.

The club can support and treat him as an addict - that makes perfect sense to me - but the FA are the ones who dish out the punishments. Addiction of any stripe is terrible and can wreck lives, but being addicted doesn’t offer immunity from punishment.

Yep, if he’s a gambling addict that would be the case. We don’t know that he is - not everyone who gambles irresponsibly is immediately an addict.

I can feel sorry for his employers and the fans - ie the club - more than the individual who caused said problem in the first place

I’m with you 100% on this. The credit they’ve been given for the lowest-hanging of fruit is amazing. I think plenty got excited because it looks impressive to talk about increases in commercials from a % point of view, rather than the obvious that we’re now on a par with Everton. I don’t see how they get close to their stated aims either - and I’m also not sure I completely buy them anymore. I don’t see how we get to Staveley’s boasts under the present circumstances - they look like an albatross around the neck at the moment. I really thought that they’d have dynamic plans coming out of their jacksies - the takeover took a year and a half to go through, for starters - but it’s all very, very quiet. At present, it looks like a paint job with slightly higher than would be expected sponsorships for a reasonably competently run NUFC. I know we’ve made a Faustian pact in terms of who the ultimate owners are; but Faustus also didn’t get what Mephistopheles was selling him …

His charges were brought by the Italian FA for offences in Italy. It wouldn’t be ‘time served’. If he’s continued to be an idiot in England I’ve zero sympathy for the lad - but plenty for the club.

Had some responsibility for the 4th, but I thought he looked ok all things considered. Couple of times when he came off his line to clear was definitely good to see - it is what we’ve missed from a GK

If he’s placed bets after joining Newcastle, then he hasn’t done his time. It’s a separate offence - one for which he’d be banned again. Hard to sympathise; it would be his own fault entirely.

They definitely won’t - the idea that we’ll be able to slowly transition isn’t going to happen. We’re close to the practical income limits of what can be achieved by a club of our size without some serious overachievement on the pitch or a radical change (ie a great big new stadium). The adidas deal is a five year deal; the shirt sponsorship is sorted; there’s a few other avenues to explore but ultimately our income is roughly half Spurs’s income.